[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 13780-13806]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




       DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005--Continued

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Chair 
lay before the Senate the Defense appropriations bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). Without objection, it is so 
ordered. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 4613) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and 
     for other purposes.


                           Amendment No. 3490

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of the Senator from Montana, Mr. Baucus.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Baucus, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3490.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To set aside an amount for a grant to Rocky Mountain College, 
Montana, for the purchase of aircraft for support of aviation training)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8021. Of the amount appropriated by title III under 
     the heading ``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force'', $880,000 
     shall be available to the Secretary of the Air Force for a 
     grant to Rocky Mountain College, Montana, for the purchase of 
     three Piper aircraft, and an aircraft simulator, for support 
     of aviation training.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment has been agreed to on both 
sides. There may be allocated up to $880,000 for a specific project the 
Senator is interested in. I ask for adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, without 
objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3490) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay 
that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3491

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk for Mr. 
Corzine and ask that it be considered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Corzine, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3491.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for ``Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy'', $4,000,000 for Aviation Data 
                Management and Control System, Block II)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of the Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy'', up to 
     $4,000,000 may be available for Aviation Data Management and 
     Control System, Block II.

  Mr. STEVENS. This amendment is for Senator Corzine, who is seeking an 
earmark for up to $4 million for a specific project. It has been agreed 
upon. I ask unanimous consent that it be adopted.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3491) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move 
to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3492

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk for 
Senators Kennedy, Kerry, Schumer, and Clinton.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Kennedy, Mr. 
     Kerry, Mr. Schumer, and Mrs. Clinton, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3492.

  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 118, insert the following new section on line 5:
       ``Sec. 9006. In addition to amounts otherwise made 
     available in this Act, $50,000,000, is made available upon 
     enactment for `Office of Justice Programs--State and Local 
     Law Enforcement Assistance' for discretionary grants under 
     the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement 
     Assistance Programs for reimbursement to State and local law 
     enforcement entities for security and related costs, 
     including overtime, associated with the 2004 Presidential 
     Candidate Nominating Conventions, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2005: Provided, That from funds provided in 
     this section the Office of Justice Programs shall make grants 
     in the amount of $25,000,000 to the City of Boston, 
     Massachusetts; and $25,000,000 to the City of New York, New 
     York: Provided further, That the entire amount is designated 
     by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to 
     section 502 of H. Con. Res. 95, the concurrent resolution on 
     the budget for fiscal year 2004: Provided further, That the 
     entire amount shall be available only to the extent that an 
     official budget request for $50,000,000, that includes 
     designation of the entire amount of the request as an 
     emergency requirement as defined in H. Con. Res. 95, the 
     concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2004, is 
     transmitted by the President to the Congress.''

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this is an amendment, on an emergency 
basis, to add $25 million for the security at each of the party 
conventions in Boston and New York. It is consistent with past policy, 
and we have agreed to accept this amendment on an emergency basis. I 
ask for consideration of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3492) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move 
to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the Senator from Ohio has an amendment to 
offer.

[[Page 13781]]

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized.


                           Amendment No. 3493

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Ohio [Mr. DeWine] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3493.

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To appropriate funds for the crisis in Darfur and Chad)

       On page 118, between lines 4 and 5, insert the following:

                                TITLE X

                     BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

                  FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

           United States Agency for International Development

              International Disaster and Famine Assistance

       For an additional amount for ``International Disaster and 
     Famine Assistance'', $70,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That funds appropriated by this paragraph 
     shall be available to respond to the humanitarian crisis in 
     the Darfur region of Sudan and in Chad: Provided further, 
     That such amount is designated as an emergency requirement 
     pursuant to section 502 of H. Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress): 
     Provided further, That such amount shall be available only to 
     the extent that an official budget request for a specific 
     dollar amount, that includes designation of the entire amount 
     of the request as an emergency requirement as defined in H. 
     Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress), is transmitted by the 
     President to Congress: Provided further, That funds shall be 
     made available under this heading immediately upon enactment 
     of this Act.

                          Department of State

                    Migration and Refugee Assistance

       For an additional amount for ``Migration and Refugee 
     Assistance'', $25,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That funds appropriated by this paragraph 
     shall be available to respond to the humanitarian crisis in 
     the Darfur region of Sudan and in Chad: Provided further, 
     That such amount is designated as an emergency requirement 
     pursuant to section 502 of H. Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress): 
     Provided further, That such amount shall be available only to 
     the extent that an official budget request for a specific 
     dollar amount, that includes designation of the entire amount 
     of the request as an emergency requirement as defined in H. 
     Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress), is transmitted by the 
     President to Congress: Provided further, That funds shall be 
     made available under this heading immediately upon enactment 
     of this Act.

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, Monday, I came to the floor to outline 
what we needed to see accomplished in Darfur, Sudan, where tens of 
thousands have died, hundreds of thousands are currently in peril, and 
millions more have lost their homes and their livelihoods. My last 
speech focused on what the government of Sudan needed to do. Today I 
want to focus on what we need to do, what the U.S. Government and the 
American people need to do.
  Today, I am offering an amendment to the fiscal year 2005 Department 
of Defense appropriations bill, together with Senators Leahy, 
Brownback, Alexander, Frist, and McCain. This critical amendment will 
provide $95 million in emergency funding to help address the current 
crisis in Darfur and eastern Chad. The House included the same $95 
million in their bill this past Tuesday, and I hope we will do the 
same.
  Specifically, the amendment would add $70 million to USAID's 
International Disaster and Famine Assistance programs in Darfur, as 
well as $25 million to the Department of State for refugee assistance 
in eastern Chad. This type of crisis is exactly why we created these 
accounts. Now we need to use them.
  Mr. President, we simply need to do this. Ten years ago, we failed to 
act when close to a million people were slaughtered in Rwanda. We 
cannot go back now and change that, much as we would like to. But we 
can do something different today. What is occurring today is genocide. 
Hundreds of thousands of people are dying, and we can prevent it. To 
ignore this crisis would be a tragic mistake. To deny this funding 
would be to deny children the right to live and people the right to 
survive. We are not responsible for the genocide, but we will be 
responsible if we do not do something today to prevent these people, 
these children, men and women, from dying.
  Many times, we come to the floor and talk about emergencies. 
Sometimes the word is almost debased. But if ever there was an 
emergency, this truly is an emergency. This truly is a crisis.
  If this situation weren't so serious, we could wait and offer this 
amendment to another bill. Members of the Senate, time does not allow 
us to do that. Time is not on our side. Using this bill as the vehicle 
will make the emergency funding available as soon as we pass it, and it 
is signed into law. That is why we must act on this bill.
  Every major humanitarian organization in the world has recognized 
Darfur as the worst humanitarian crisis in the world today. But a quote 
by the U.N. World Food Program Deputy Director in Chad captures it 
best:

       There will be a tragedy if nothing happens. I don't think 
     any of the children under the age of 5 will make it [if 
     nothing happens], and the pregnant women, too. For those who 
     are under 5, there is no chance. They will simply die from 
     starvation.

  The U.S. Agency for International Development is also increasing 
their mortality figures, their estimates. They now say their original 
estimate that at least 350,000 people could die of disease and 
malnutrition over the next 9 months is conservative. That is because 
the violence that started all of this has not stopped, and because the 
conditions those individuals are facing are getting worse with the 
oncoming rains. Hundreds of thousands are now in shantytowns around the 
regional capitals or in refugee camps in eastern Chad. The conditions 
are quickly deteriorating because aid groups simply cannot accommodate 
the large numbers. The United States is currently meeting about 25 
percent of the food needs. But that means that 75 percent of the food 
needs are not being met; 75 percent of the people face starvation.
  Malnutrition and disease are our biggest enemies in a crisis such as 
this. The polio epidemic hitting Africa has spread to Darfur, and only 
50 percent of the children are immunized. The race against the clock is 
well underway and we need to make sure that USAID and the State 
Department have the money they need to respond, and respond now. I have 
no doubt in my mind that the long-term needs in Darfur and eastern Chad 
exceed what this amendment calls for, but for now at least this will 
allow our aid agencies to begin to meet their immediate needs this 
year. The children cannot wait and, therefore, we cannot delay these 
funds any longer.
  That is why I join my colleagues and ask my colleagues to join me in 
pressing, also, for a U.N. security resolution authorizing peacekeeping 
troops to monitor the cease-fire in Darfur and ensure, by force if 
necessary, that humanitarian aid is not obstructed. According to the 
U.S. Ambassador to Sudan, there is no evidence yet that the Government 
of Sudan is serious about addressing the militias which have caused so 
much of this problem. If the Government of Sudan refuses to address the 
ethnic cleansing that we have seen, then we should make sure the United 
States will.
  Senator Durbin and I have a letter that we are now circulating that 
we will send to Secretary Powell. This letter addresses this issue, and 
I invite my colleagues to sign this letter.
  Finally, I want to alert my colleagues to another crisis that is 
beginning to emerge in Africa. We do not have time today to speak in 
detail about it, but we should watch for this crisis because we will 
have to address this crisis as well, and the world needs to address 
this crisis, and that is the crisis in the Congo.
  Militant groups who escaped from Rwanda after the genocide there are 
now destabilizing the Congo. Mr. President, 3.3 million people are 
without humanitarian aid.
  If we do not pay attention to the Congo, then the Congo is, in a 
short period of time, going to also look like Darfur, and we will have 
failed again and the world will have failed again.

[[Page 13782]]

  The world must pay attention. We must learn to stop these events 
before they become crises. That is why our response to Darfur today in 
this amendment is so important. We need to set the precedent that we 
failed to set in Rwanda: that the U.S. Government will be watching for 
ethnic cleansing and genocide, and no matter where it is found, we will 
respond, and those responsible will be held accountable.
  We simply cannot tolerate crimes against humanity, and we must speak 
out. If we fail in this effort, we doom not only the people of Darfur 
but the victims of future conflicts as well. We need to make ``never 
again'' a promise of the U.S. Government that is enforced by our 
actions. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to support this amendment and 
continue to call attention to what is happening in Darfur.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I join my colleague from Ohio in 
supporting this amendment that will put forward $95 million in 
emergency aid to the Sudan. I thank him for bringing this forward. I 
thank the Chair for holding a hearing on this recently to highlight 
what is taking place. He outlined what is occurring. This is happening 
before our very eyes.
  I associate myself with my colleague's statement that we need to say 
to people around the world that when genocide occurs, we will respond. 
There will be consequences on governments that conduct genocide in 
their nations.
  What we are seeing taking place today is something on a massive scale 
before our very eyes. We had satellite photographs appearing today. We 
see vast sections of communities wiped out, burned out. We see militias 
going in, backed by the government, burning communities, poisoning 
wells, putting dead animals down in the bottom of wells so they are not 
usable.
  This is a marginal region in the first place, where, if you push 
people out of their homes and away from their encampments, it is 
difficult to survive. We now have by estimates about 1 million people 
on the move in this region. We have, by estimates, the capacity to feed 
300,000 people, with 1 million people on the move. One can see that if 
the situation does not improve, we are going to have a large group of 
people who are not going to get fed, housed, and are vulnerable. Many 
will die. Many will perish. We are going into the rainy season in this 
region.
  There are a couple of items we need to do. No. 1, we need to get this 
aid passed. I thank the chairman for allowing us to bring up this 
amendment, and I urge my colleagues to adopt it. We need to get the 
international community engaged with the international observers, the 
African Union, the United Nations, with observers and peacekeepers in 
this region. We need to force the Sudanese Government to stop their 
sponsorship of the Jingaweit. This is the Arab militia that is going 
into the region and burning communities and attacking communities with 
machine guns.
  We need to stop the Sudanese Government from using helicopter gun-
ships for aerial bombardments, from going into these communities and 
driving people out, killing them with bombings or by military attacks. 
We need to speak very clearly and then act decisively.
  Time is of the essence. We need to act now for us to be able to save 
the lives in this region that are so vulnerable and will be lost if we 
do not act.
  I applaud the Secretary of State for announcing today that he will be 
traveling next week to the Darfur region in the Sudan. Congressman Wolf 
and I will be traveling there shortly as well to view this situation 
and to put pressure on the Sudanese Government to stop this and to put 
pressure on the international community to effectively respond.
  We can act, and we can stop this if we act now. Mother Teresa, when 
she came to this country and people were asking her what can they do to 
help the poor, to help those in trouble, responded by saying: We all 
have our Calcuttas. There are things each of us can do. We all have our 
Calcuttas.
  Here is a situation to which we can respond. We can do something. We 
need to adopt this amendment. We need to put pressure on the 
international body and the Sudanese Government, and we can save lives 
by doing so. I urge the adoption of this amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be added as a 
cosponsor of this important amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I particularly wish to thank my colleague, 
Senator DeWine from Ohio, for his leadership, Senator Brownback from 
Kansas, and the Presiding Officer, Senator Alexander, for their 
leadership on this amendment.
  In my hometown of Springfield, IL, my wife and I live next door to 
this family--we have lived in the neighborhood for over 25 years--and 
one of the young women in that family, after serving several years in 
the U.S. Air Force, left to work for the World Food Program, and then 
work for USAID. As we speak, she is in Sudan trying to bring necessary 
relief in this horrible situation.
  It is in Robin May's honor that I am happy to add my name as a 
cosponsor to this important amendment.
  I also acknowledge with gratitude the helpfulness of Senator Stevens 
and Senator Inouye in allowing us to offer this amendment.
  If one reads the history of the last 10 years, one will be struck by 
the fact that at least in the situation of Rwanda, if not in other 
times, we in the United States turned a blind eye to genocide, to the 
massive killing of innocent people. We are not going to let that happen 
in the Sudan and Chad.
  This commitment of funds, though modest in relation to the problems, 
shows that the United States is willing to step up and try to show 
leadership with the rest of the world in helping these poor innocent 
victims.
  We are constantly defining ourselves to the world. Those definitions 
come out many times in photographs that are not complimentary and 
sometimes in photographs that are. I hope the world, in viewing this 
small but important effort, will understand that America does care, and 
cares for those who are suffering in the most remote regions of the 
world and in Africa, of course.
  I am happy to add my name as a cosponsor to this amendment. I hope it 
is adopted with overwhelming support.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. DeWine). The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Ohio and the 
Senator from Illinois for their remarks. The Senator from Kansas has 
spent a great deal of time in Africa and has been a good teacher to the 
rest of us on this subject. The majority leader, Senator Frist, has 
visited the Sudan many times. All of us are deeply concerned about what 
is happening in Darfur. Just at the time when we were starting to 
celebrate the beginning of a solution to a north-south conflict which 
has gone on for years and years, suddenly we are hit, literally in the 
face, with this terrible genocide in the western part of Sudan.
  It is important to this body that we show that in the midst of all of 
the other things that are going on in the world that we recognize this 
situation.
  We recognize the importance of it. We recognize that by our speaking 
out, by our actions, by visits by representatives of our 
administration, and by the Congress, we can make a difference in this 
genocide.
  As the Senator from Ohio remarked, we all look back 10 years to a 
time in Rwanda when we were thinking that we cannot be a policeman 
everywhere in the world, we cannot deal with every problem, but at the 
same time that problem ballooned to such a massive size we are all 
embarrassed about the fact that as a country we did not do more.
  That does not always mean we send troops into a country. It does not 
always mean we send ships nearby a country. But it does mean there are 
a number of things we can do, and with

[[Page 13783]]

this bipartisan act today in the midst of perhaps the most important 
bill we have to discuss, which is the proper support for the men and 
women who are fighting to defend our country, we are taking a few 
minutes to say there is a terrible event happening in the western part 
of Sudan that could stop immediately if the Government in Khartoum 
would stop it. We ask them to do it in a bipartisan way and we further 
ask the United Nations, which in this case has more of a capacity than 
we do, to influence that government and to get busy and do its job. 
That is what we are asking today. The amendment of the Senator from 
Ohio appropriates $95 million to help in that effort.
  Last week I chaired a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee on the situation in Sudan. The alarm could not have been 
sounded more loudly. I chaired that hearing because I am chairman of 
the African Affairs Subcommittee. One of our witnesses, John 
Prendergast of the International Crisis Group, told the committee the 
first phase of the genocide in Darfur is already complete. The 
Government of Sudan, largely through its Janjaweed militia, has pursued 
an active campaign of ethnic cleansing. Over 30,000--maybe 50,000--have 
already been killed by direct attacks on villages in Darfur. They have 
leveled hundreds of villages. Other Senators have spoken of the 
details, but that is what is happening.
  So now the second phase of the genocide is underway. The Government 
of Sudan and its militias are forcing the starvation and death of 
hundreds of thousands of people. As the Senator from Kansas explained, 
these are people living on the margin. When they are moved away from 
their huts, when dead animals or dead people are thrown down their 
wells, they have very little ability to survive. As the rainy season 
comes, it makes it worse.
  On top of that, the Government of Sudan, in addition to tolerating 
the killing of these people, is putting obstacles in the way of our 
efforts and the efforts of others in the world to provide food and aid 
to people who are starving and dying. It is an unconscionable set of 
actions by that government.
  When we think of Sudan, we usually think of a conflict between a 
Muslim and Arab government, and an African and Christian insurgency. 
That is not the case here. This is Muslim against Muslim, but still 
Arab against African. Ethnicity, not religion, is the primary factor.
  Another of our witnesses, Julie Flint of Human Rights Watch, was 
there writing a report this spring, travelling by horse and camel 
through the area. She talked about refugees who fled to neighboring 
Chad, about 200,000 of them, family members being raped and killed in 
front of loved ones. She said the region is now largely empty. Where 
villages were, only rubble remains. The Sudanese Government claims the 
Janjaweed forces in Darfur are acting on their own and the government 
wants to stop them. The evidence suggests otherwise.
  Our administration has been a strong voice in this case, but the 
international community has failed to respond. The U.N. Human Rights 
Commission, which is supposed to confront flagrant abuses of human 
rights, especially when they occur on such a mass scale, failed to 
adopt a U.S. resolution condemning the atrocities. That body has become 
a travesty, condoning the very activity it was intended to prevent.
  The Bush administration, this Government, has had remarkable success 
in the peace process between the north and the south. We are proud of 
that. Protocols addressing all the major outstanding issues in that 
process were signed in May. Senator Danforth, who was the President's 
special envoy, has been a real leader. Other nations have joined in 
that effort: Great Britain, Norway, Kenya.
  Some of our friends are concerned if we confront the government in 
Khartoum, Sudan, too directly about the atrocities in the west, Darfur, 
that will jeopardize any prospect for lasting peace in southern Sudan. 
They may be right. But if hundreds of thousands of lives are the price 
of peace in southern Sudan, the price is too high.
  So the amendment of the Senator from Ohio, which I am glad to 
cosponsor, will enable the United States to step up to this crisis 
quickly, providing relief to those in need.
  Other nations are also contributing. I hope they will join the United 
States in condemning the actions of the Sudanese government in the U.N. 
Security Council and demand full humanitarian access to Darfur now. I 
congratulate the Senator from Ohio on this amendment. I am proud to 
support it.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise today to lend my strong support to 
the amendment offered by the Senator from Ohio. I would also like to 
recognize the leadership that the Senator from Kansas, Mr. Brownback, 
and the Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. Feingold, have shown on the issue 
of Sudan throughout the years.
  This amendment mirrors efforts in the House of Representatives 
appropriations bill to add $95 million to address the humanitarian 
crisis in Darfur, Sudan and across the border in Chad.
  It is a good start and I commend the chairman and ranking member of 
the Defense Subcommittee for accepting this amendment. However, it is 
only a start, and a modest one at that.
  We should be providing at least double this amount to address what is 
the worst humanitarian crisis that exists in the world today. I hope 
that by the time we conclude debate on this bill the Senate will have 
agreed to additional funds for Sudan.
  The Senate needs to act. The situation is abysmal. The situation is 
horrendous. The situation is intolerable.
  Sudanese military forces and government-backed militia forces have 
left tens of thousands dead, over a million displaced, and hundreds of 
thousands at immediate, urgent risk. USAID has warned that without full 
humanitarian access, 350,000 displaced civilians may die or hunger and 
disease in the coming months.
  The massacres and widespread rapes, the destruction of villages, 
mosques and farms--all of this violence and horror have given rise to a 
second, even more costly wave of suffering, as civilians are left with 
no capacity to sustain themselves as the rainy season approaches.
  On top of this, the Sudan-Chad border is heavily patrolled to keep 
some of the most vulnerable civilians from fleeing to refugee camps in 
eastern Chad.
  What is happening is appalling, it is an affront to all humanity, to 
all faiths, and we cannot stand by and simply watch this unfold.
  The Sudanese government claims to have granted humanitarian access to 
Darfur. This is a sham. The government of Sudan has done virtually 
everything it can to prevent the international community from 
effectively addressing the crisis in Darfur. The government has stalled 
and delayed permission to travel, prevented the use of vehicles and 
radios in certain areas, and looked the other way as militias have 
attacked and threatened humanitarian workers.
  Hundreds of thousands of people are at risk. We have a responsibility 
to act to address this terrible situation. I urge my colleges to 
support the DeWine amendment and I will be looking for ways to do more 
to help the catastrophe unfolding in Sudan.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to express my support for the 
amendment introduced by Senator DeWine to provide humanitarian 
assistance for the refugees in Darfur, Sudan. Of all the places on 
Earth, where killing and deaths are rampant, Darfur, Sudan leads the 
list.
  The DeWine amendment will provide $95 million to respond to the 
crisis, including $70 million for International Disaster and Famine 
Assistance and $25 million for Migration and Refugee Assistance.
  In response to attacks by rebel groups in the Western region of 
Darfur, Arab militias, known as Jangaweed, armed and aided by the 
government of Sudan, launched a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing 
against non-Arab residents, including murder, rape, forced 
displacement, and looting. Over 30,000

[[Page 13784]]

have been killed and more than 2 million displaced.
  The situation is dire. While the United Nations Security Council 
recently endorsed the peace process to end Africa's longest running 
civil war, USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios estimated that 300,000 
refugees from Darfur may perish due to a lack of basic food and 
medicine. He added that that number could reach as high as one million.
  Secretary of State Colin Powell has stated that the Administration is 
currently studying whether or not the rampage in Darfur can legally be 
defined as ``genocide''.
  Whatever the legal conclusion--and in this Senator's mind the 
killings most certainly can be characterized as genocide--the United 
States and the international community have a moral obligation to 
provide assistance to the refugees and compel the government of Sudan 
to put a stop to the death squads.
  It is past time for the U.N. Security Council to pass a resolution 
authorizing a robust monitoring and peacekeeping force and demanding 
that the government of Sudan disarm the Jangaweed and allow 
humanitarian assistance to reach the refugees.
  Sadly, it appears that debate over such a resolution could take weeks 
and put countless lives at risk. Inaction will also threaten the peace 
process that so many people, including the new U.S. Ambassador to the 
United Nations, John Danforth, have worked so long to put in place.
  While the Security Council waits, the U.S. Senate can act now. 
Earlier this month, Mr. Natsios pledged an additional $188.5 million in 
emergency assistance to address the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. 
While this amendment does not match that amount, it is a start and it 
will give the refugees some hope.
  Ten years ago the world remained silent and stood by as the genocide 
unfolded in Rwanda. In the wake of hundreds of thousands of deaths, we 
committed ourselves to not make the same mistake twice.
  The situation in Darfur is now testing the United States and the 
international community's will to fulfill that pledge. We must not fail 
those who are now facing displacement, starvation, and death. We must 
rise to the occasion.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that this amendment be 
temporarily set aside so I can send to the desk an amendment which has 
been agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3497

  Mr. STEVENS. I send an amendment to the desk for the Senator from 
Vermont, Mr. Leahy.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Leahy, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3497.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To set aside an amount for procurement of aircrew bladder 
                          relief (ABRD) kits)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated by title under the 
     heading ``Other Procurement, Air Force'', up to $2,000,000 
     may be used for aircrew bladder relief device (ABRD) kits.

  Mr. STEVENS. I ask for adoption of the amendment. This is an 
amendment earmarking specific funds for a specific project for our 
crews.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 3497) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be 
rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent Senator Dole be added as a 
cosponsor to amendment No. 3493.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I urge Senators to come present their 
amendments.
  We will be pleased to yield the floor to the distinguished Senator 
from South Dakota, the Democratic leader.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, let me again compliment our two managers. 
We want to encourage Senators to come over and offer their amendments. 
I hope over the course of the next couple of hours we can dispose of 
whatever pending amendments there are.
  Mr. President, I understand the pending legislation is an amendment 
offered by the Senator from Ohio regarding Sudan.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the history of the world's response to 
genocide is one of long memory and poor eyesight.
  Each of us have, at one time or another, looked back upon the 
terrible history of the Holocaust and made a commitment, in public or 
in our hearts, not to stay silent should the first signs of a potential 
genocide come into view.
  Every one of President Bush's six immediate predecessors gave voice 
to this common commitment. And yet each saw during their tenure a 
genocide somewhere in the world.
  In the last quarter of the twentieth century, 1.7 million Cambodians 
were murdered by the Khmer Rouge; 100,000 Kurds were massacred by 
Saddam Hussein; 200,000 Bosnia Muslims were killed by Serb militia; and 
800,000 Rwandan Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed at the hands of 
Hutu mobs in just 100 days.
  As these dangers gathered, and the cry for help went out to the 
world, the world stood by, each time.
  Our failure has not been one of moral understanding. Our failure, 
simply, has been one of moral courage.
  Today, a tragedy of all too familiar dimensions appears to be 
gathering in the Darfur region of Western Sudan.
  Armed and protected by the Sudanese military, ethnic Arab militiamen 
have brought a plague of terror down on the African residents of 
Darfur.
  Villages have been razed, crops destroyed, and cattle slaughtered. 
Women have been raped and enslaved.
  More than 15,000 Sudanese men, women, and children have been killed, 
and a million more have been driven from their homes in fear.
  As they torch villages, the Arab militia have been heard to shout, 
``We will not allow blacks here. . . . This land is only for Arabs.''
  On May 6, the Senate passed a resolution condemning the Sudanese 
government's complicity in the terrorizing of the civilian population 
of Darfur and warning of a potential crisis.
  Since then, however, no real progress has been made either to stop 
the bloodshed or to bring sufficient aid to the refugees.
  Humanitarian assistance has not been allowed to reach all of those in 
need.
  Meanwhile, the annual rainy season is now beginning, making 
transportation more difficult, and making the health of the vulnerable 
even more precarious.
  Most ominously, the people of Darfur are about to miss their planting 
season, raising the specter of a famine of epic proportions and 
rendering otherwise productive men and women dependent for at least 
another year.
  Already, USAID predicts 320,000 have been effectively sentenced to 
death. Unless action is taken, 1 million Sudanese men, women, and 
children will die this year alone.

[[Page 13785]]

  I repeat, 1 million people face death in Sudan.
  Let's also be clear on this point. Most of these deaths are 
preventable, but only if the world chooses to act.
  Genocide is a crime against humanity. And all humanity shares a 
common responsibility to respond.
  Our revulsion at genocide joins all people, in all cultures 
throughout the world. Unilateral action in this sense would not be 
sufficient.
  There are few clearer cases for the need to rally the world. America 
has both the opportunity and the obligation to unite the world 
community in trying to prevent yet another genocide.
  My friends from Ohio and Vermont, Senators DeWine and Leahy, are 
urging us to take the first important step in stopping this gathering 
storm. This additional assistance will help thousands of people avert 
hunger.
  But we also must ensure that we do everything possible to end this 
crisis.
  The most effective tool against a potential disaster in Sudan is the 
United Nations.
  The Bush administration must equip our new ambassador to the United 
Nations with the authority and support required to provide effective 
leadership on Sudan.
  The administration should take the following steps in order to make 
sure that Senator Danforth is able to mobilize international action on 
Darfur:
  First, the Administration must insist that Khartoum provide complete, 
unrestricted access for all humanitarian operations and aid workers.
  Second, we must demand that the Sudanese government take verifiable 
steps to ensure that the militia forces are restrained, by allowing for 
the unrestricted movement and operations of observers deployed by the 
African Union.
  In addition, the Sudanese government must stop providing arms and 
logistical support to the Janjaweed militia.
  Third, we should require that Khartoum initiate, with U.N., African 
Union, and regional support and involvement, a dialogue with political, 
rebel, and civil society representatives in Darfur in order to achieve 
a long-term resolution of the political crisis and agreement on a plan 
for disarming militia forces and rebels.
  Fourth, the administration should invest Senator Danforth with the 
authority to start work immediately on a Security Council resolution 
including each of these steps and establishing verifiable benchmarks 
for compliance.
  In the event of noncompliance, we must call for Security Council 
sanctions, including freezing the assets and restricting the travel of 
Sudanese government officials.
  In order to be effective, however, it is vital, that these sanctions 
be multilateral and the world community share fully in their 
implementation.
  Fifth, Senator Danforth should also be empowered to put Khartoum on 
notice, in the strongest terms, that international support for 
implementation of the North-South peace agreement does not represent 
endorsement of Khartoum's actions in Darfur.
  The agreements reached between warring parties in the North and South 
of Sudan, which could not have been accomplished without the leadership 
of Senator Danforth and the administration, are nonetheless just the 
first steps to bringing stability and peace to the entire country.
  In no way does the Sudanese government's commitment to end 
hostilities with rebels in the South justify or compensate for its 
active support for Janjaweed militia in Darfur.
  Sixth, in order to clarify Senator Danforth's authority, the State 
Department should make its final determination on whether the crisis in 
Darfur meets the legal definition of genocide.
  Testimony from the victims in Darfur make it very clear that it does.
  In order to remove any ambiguity or ambivalence from America's moral 
leadership, the State Department should make its determination quickly, 
so that we can bring together an appropriate response from the world 
community.
  Finally, Senator Danforth should be empowered to initiate discussions 
within the Security Council on planning for an intervention force, if 
this should be required to ensure that lives are saved and a genocide 
prevented.
  Consideration should be given to non-U.S. troops including from 
Europe and Africa; the Security Council should consult with the African 
Union.
  The main point here is that the planning must be done now--even if 
the decision is delayed--both to make clear to Khartoum that the 
international community is serious and to be ready if it is necessary 
to intervene.
  The history of genocide teaches us that this crisis needs to be 
addressed on several different levels.
  First, on the humanitarian level, we need to provide immediate aid to 
refugees and to the internally displaced.
  Second, we must insist on full accountability for all perpetrators of 
crimes against humanity.
  In order to keep Sudan from spiraling downward into a cycle of 
retributive violence, all those responsible must be brought to justice.
  Finally, a long-term resolution demands that the world focus on 
bringing about a political solution to the instability and violence of 
Sudan.
  President Bush has spoken with force and eloquence on the need to 
match American action to American words and values.
  Never is that more important than in the case of genocide when the 
lives of hundreds of thousands hang in the balance.
  President Bush, like his predecessors, understands the moral 
imperative to take action to stop genocide.
  Speaking after a tour of the Holocaust Museum in 2001, President Bush 
reaffirmed ``America's commitment to the memory of 6 million who died 
in the Holocaust [and] our commitment to averting future tragedies.''
  The future has arrived. A tragedy stands at the world's doorstep. 
These words are engraved upon the conscience of the world: Never Again.
  In the months ahead, we will learn what they mean to us.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask that amendment No. 3493, which is 
the Sudan amendment, be agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 3493) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. The Senator from Virginia has an amendment, and I 
understand the Senator from South Dakota, the distinguished minority 
leader, wishes to have a discussion.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.


                                Tricare

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I am available for the colloquy.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the Senator from South Carolina is not on 
the Senate floor, but I do not think he would mind, given the fact----
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, he spoke to me about it, and I expressed a 
willingness to indicate to both colleagues that the Senate bill 
contains a provision coauthored by my two distinguished colleagues on a 
subject that is of great importance to the men and women of our 
military. And it is the intention of the Senator from Virginia, as a 
conferee, to support the Senate positions as we proceed through the 
resolution of such differences as the House and the Senate may have.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I appreciate the statement of support 
offered by the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee. 
It had been our intention to offer an amendment to provide full 12-
month funding, on this particular bill, for reservists' TRICARE.
  I thank the distinguished chairman of the committee and our 
remarkable ranking member for their efforts and the acknowledgment of 
the need to address health care concerns among members of our Guard and 
Reserve. They have done so in this bill in a way that allows Guard 
members and reservists to obtain this health care coverage for 5 
months, up until that time next year when we expect a supplemental to 
be brought again before the Senate, which would then afford us an 
opportunity to review the current program and extend it for the balance 
of the

[[Page 13786]]

year. It would be in consultation with Senator Graham.
  We have concluded that a far better and more productive and long-
lasting approach would be to complete our work in the bill where it 
belongs, the Defense authorization bill, the legislation we completed 
just last night, thanks to the able leadership of Chairman Warner.
  Our concern, of course, has been that even though TRICARE for 
reservists enjoyed the support of more than 70 Members, there may not 
be the degree of support in conference that will be required to sustain 
the Senate position. So it is our hope that will happen. The chairman's 
acknowledgment of his interest in protecting the Senate position is 
appreciated, and we will work with him to see that we are successful in 
that effort in committee.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, as always and customary with the 
distinguished Senator from South Dakota, you have spoken to the 
situation factually. Historically, that is the way we have dealt with 
those matters in the Senate. I appreciate you respect my position as a 
conferee. I cannot make ironclad commitments, other than I have always 
gone into a conference to try to support the position as taken by this 
collective body in its decisionmaking process.
  Mr. President, I thank my colleague.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I again thank the chairman. Simply 
stated, it is our expectation that we will succeed in conference this 
year. This issue has overwhelming bipartisan support not only in the 
Senate but the House as well. And, obviously, it will keep coming back 
year after year unless we do resolve it. It would be my hope this would 
be the year we do so successfully.
  So, again, I thank my colleagues, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.


                           Amendment No. 3498

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Warner, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3498.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

    (Purpose: To increase amounts for certain Navy shipbuilding and 
   conversion programs, projects, and activities; and to provide an 
                                offset)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. (a) Of the amounts appropriated by title III 
     under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy''--
       (1) the amount provided under that heading specifically for 
     the Carrier Replacement Program (AP) is hereby increased by 
     $140,900,000;
       (2) the amount provided under that heading specifically for 
     CVN Refuelings (AP) is hereby increased by $110,000,000; and
       (3) the total amount provided under that heading is hereby 
     increased by $250,900,000.
       (b) The amount of the reduction provided in section 8062(a) 
     is hereby increased by $250,900,000.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I state to the Senate that this amendment 
has been cleared on both sides, and it is revenue neutral, as I 
understand it.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished managers of the 
bill. I appreciate that. This is a matter that is of great importance 
to the U.S. Navy. I am happy to do it.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator 
Allen of Virginia be added as a cosponsor to the amendment.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I join in that request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, has the amendment been adopted?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3498) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3499

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Roberts and ask that it be considered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Roberts, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3499.

  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for ``Research, 
  Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force'', $6,000,000 for the 
  Science, Mathematics, And Research for Transformation (SMART) Pilot 
                          Scholarship Program)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force'', 
     up to $6,000,000 may be available for the Science, 
     Mathematics, And Research for Transformation (SMART) Pilot 
     Scholarship Program.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment would make available up to 
$6 million for a program that the Senator seeks to have considered. I 
urge its adoption. It has been cleared on both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3499) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3500

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment on behalf 
of Senator Santorum and ask that it be considered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Santorum, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3500.

  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for ``Operation 
 and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'', $5,000,000 for Department of Defense 
   Education Activity for the upgrading of security at Department of 
                      Defense dependents schools)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title II of this Act under the heading 
     ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'', up to $5,000,000 
     may be available for Department of Defense Education Activity 
     for the upgrading of security at Department of Defense 
     schools.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment on behalf of the Senator 
from Pennsylvania would make available up to $5 million for a project 
the Senator supports. It has been cleared on both sides. I urge 
adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The 
amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3500) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3501

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of the Senator from Pennsylvania, Mr. Santorum, and I ask for its 
consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Santorum, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3501.

  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for ``Research, 
   Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army'', $3,000,000 for Medical 
      Advanced Technology for the Intravenous Membrane Oxygenator)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this

[[Page 13787]]

     Act under the heading ``Research, Development, Test, and 
     Evaluation, Army'', up to $3,000,000 may be available for 
     Medical Advanced Technology for the Intravenous Membrane 
     Oxygenator.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment would make available up to 
$3 million for another project that the Senator from Pennsylvania 
supports. I urge its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3501) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I state to the Senate that we have 
several Senators who have indicated they have amendments. I urge they 
come to the floor. We have business to conduct today following 
completion of this bill. We do hope we can complete this bill as early 
as possible. We do urge that Senators come to the floor.
  Mr. President, I believe our distinguished colleague from West 
Virginia is here to offer an amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished friend, the 
chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.


                           Amendment No. 3502

  Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Byrd] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3502.

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate on budgeting and funding 
                of ongoing military operations overseas)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. It is the sense of the Senate that--
       (1) any request for funds for a fiscal year for an ongoing 
     military operation overseas, including operations in 
     Afghanistan and Iraq, should be included in the annual budget 
     of the President for such fiscal year as submitted to 
     Congress under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States 
     Code; and
       (2) any funds provided for such fiscal year for such a 
     military operation should be provided in appropriations Acts 
     for such fiscal year through appropriations to specific 
     accounts set forth in such Acts.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, last year, the Senate overwhelmingly 
approved an amendment that I offered to urge the President to budget 
for ongoing military operations. Mr. President, 81 Senators agreed that 
the administration should include in its budget request, which is sent 
to Congress in February each year, an estimate of the funds needed to 
support our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  The sense-of-the-Senate amendment that I authored was included in the 
fiscal year 2004 Defense Appropriations Act, as signed into law by the 
President on September 30, 2003. But there was no request for funds for 
our troops deployed overseas in the budget that came to Congress on 
February 2, 2004. That budget was stone-cold silent about our troops in 
Iraq and in Afghanistan.
  It was as if the White House had no plan for how to pay our troops 
overseas, or how to pay for their fuel and ammunition. We sometimes 
hear Korea described as the forgotten war, but the President's budget 
forgot about the wars ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  Senators on both sides of the aisle realized the folly of ignoring 
the massive costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In an act of 
fiscal responsibility, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee 
included in his mark of the fiscal year 2005 budget resolution an 
additional $30 billion reserve fund for the costs of the wars. The 
House of Representatives went even further by including a $50 billion 
reserve fund in its version of the budget resolution. Again, these 
funds were not requested by the President, but Congress decided to 
include them for the sake of fiscal sanity.
  The Defense appropriations bill before the Senate today includes $25 
billion to pay for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. The White House 
requested these funds literally at the last minute. The Armed Services 
Committee had completed its markup of the Defense authorization bill 
the week before the administration submitted its request for these 
moneys. Talk about hiding the ball, the administration stiff-arms 
Congress by not making any budget estimate for Iraq and Afghanistan 
until after the markup of the Defense authorization bill is completed.
  Does anyone think this $25 billion will cover the cost of the wars 
for the next 12 months? Not a chance, Mr. President. According to the 
Department of Defense, the cost of operations in Iraq now averages $4 
billion per month. The cost of operations in Afghanistan is up to $900 
million-plus per month. At that rate of spending, the President's $25 
billion reserve fund will not even last half a year.
  Talk about short-changing our troops.
  That is why, for better or worse, the White House is planning on 
springing a supplemental budget request of $50 billion or more on 
Congress and the American taxpayer sometime next year.
  Tragically, all of these funds are being financed by deficit 
spending. Since the administration refuses to send Congress an estimate 
of how much the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will cost, much less any 
plan for how to pay for those costs, each last-minute emergency request 
for funds that the President sends to Congress sends our country deeper 
into red ink.
  Congress has already devoted $122 billion to Iraq, and every single 
dollar of that amount is going to have to be paid off by the sweat and 
toil of our children and grandchildren for decades to come, because it 
is the taxes the future generations will pay that will be used to 
finance the deficit spending of today. What kind of wars are we running 
when we saddle our children, and their children yet to be born, with 
the responsibility of paying for them?
  I have heard all of the tired excuses about why the administration 
does not want to estimate the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
I wish I had a nickel for every time I have heard someone say that the 
cost of the war is ``unknowable.''
  For example, on July 9, 2003, at a hearing of the Armed Services 
Committee, I asked Secretary Rumsfeld for an estimate of how much is 
being spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. His response? ``I would not want 
to venture a guess and be wrong.'' I wouldn't accept that answer. I 
told Secretary Rumsfeld to go call the Pentagon and find out. That's 
exactly what he did, and he finally reported back that we were spending 
$4.8 billion in Iraq and Afghanistan every month.
  That's why I just don't buy it when the administration says it has no 
idea what it might cost to finance ongoing military operations. It is 
an open secret that the Defense Department is well able to produce an 
estimate of the cost of its operations. The only problem is that 
Congress has been continually stiff-armed in our attempts to learn 
about those estimates.
  I have also heard time and again that the United States never budgets 
for the cost of wars in advance. That is just not true. The 
Congressional Research Service does state that ``since 1990, Congress 
generally has funded combat operations with supplemental 
appropriations.'' However, the Congressional Research Service also 
concludes that as military operations become more predictable, such as 
in peacekeeping operations, Congress begins to fund those operations by 
a combination of regular budget appropriations and supplemental 
appropriations and, eventually, by regular appropriations alone.
  Aside from the last decade, there is a long history of Presidents 
requesting funds in regular appropriations bills for ongoing military 
operations. CRS has reported that President Roosevelt requested regular 
appropriations for the

[[Page 13788]]

conduct of World War II in fiscal years 1943, 1944, 1945, and 1946. 
Presidents Johnson and Nixon received funding for the Vietnam War in 
every Defense Appropriations Act from fiscal year 1966 through 1973. In 
fact, there were no supplemental appropriations bills for the Vietnam 
War after 1969.
  Even in more modern times, ongoing military operations in Bosnia, 
Kosovo, and the patrol of the no-fly zones over Iraq were made part of 
the regular budget and appropriations process. The amendment that I 
offer to urge the President to budget for the wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan isn't a break with how our government pays for wars. My 
amendment says that the President should stick with historical 
precedent and fiscal responsibility in budgeting for the wars that we 
are now in.
  The amendment that I offer today is precisely the same amendment that 
I offered to last year's Defense Appropriations bill, which was 
supported by 81 Senators. The amendment simply states the sense of the 
Senate that the President should request funds for ongoing military 
operations in his regular budget request, and that such funds should be 
appropriated in regular accounts.
  The administration's practice for paying for the ongoing wars in Iraq 
and Afghanistan must change. This week, Deputy Defense Secretary 
Wolfowitz acknowledged to a House committee that our troops could be in 
Iraq for years to come. If that is true--and I hope that it is not--now 
is the time for Congress to get serious about making the President 
figure out a budget plan for paying for the massive cost of a long-term 
military presence in Iraq.
  The alternative is to continue with the current administration 
policy: more last minute spending requests, more reports that our 
troops are running out of money, and more deficit spending. This is a 
recipe for a fiscal disaster. Current White House policy on paying for 
the war perpetuates an ongoing budgetary crisis for our troops 
overseas: rather than planing for their needs, we force our troops to 
bounce from one stop-gap spending measure to another. This is just 
plain wrong.
  Congress should not allow itself to be streamrolled. It should not 
allow the President to send up an emergency supplemental, and then 
demand immediate action by the Congress. That is now mistakes are made. 
Last year, the President failed to request sufficient funds for body 
armor for our troops. Last year, the President failed to request 
sufficient funds for armor for Humvees. Last year, the President failed 
to request sufficient funds for locating and destroying conventional 
weapons in Iraq. Now all Americans know what tragic mistakes those 
were. Congress must insist on receiving a detailed budget request for 
the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan so that mistakes like those are not 
repeated.
  The Byrd amendment tells the President that he should budget for the 
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is a simple, common-sense approach 
that promotes fiscal responsibility. The Senate already endorsed this 
approach last year in an overwhelming vote, and I urge my colleagues to 
support my amendment again.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we would be pleased to recommend the 
adoption of the amendment offered by Senator Byrd. I believe, if he 
would permit, we would be willing to adopt it on a voice vote. It was 
adopted last year, the same amendment, as the Senator said, by a 
substantial number of Senators. We see no reason not to support the 
amendment this year. If the Senator wishes to offer it, we would be 
pleased to have it.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished friend. I really 
wish to have a rollcall vote on this amendment. It was a very popular 
amendment last year. I thank the distinguished chairman for his 
willingness to proceed on a voice vote.
  Mr. STEVENS. We would be happy to have a vote, but could we agree to 
a later time? There are a series of Senators in committee meetings 
right now, and they asked not to be disturbed for at least another half 
hour.
  Mr. BYRD. Yes.
  Mr. STEVENS. Could we ask for the yeas and nays and have a time 
agreed upon between yourself and the two managers of the bill?
  Mr. BYRD. That would be very satisfactory.
  Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to request 
the yeas and nays on this amendment at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. The yeas and nays are ordered?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays are ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators 
Biden, Corzine, and Feingold be added as original cosponsors of 
amendment No. 3493.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, for Members of the Senate, we are very 
close to the end of the amendments that we know of, and we would 
probably be proceeding to third reading after the Byrd amendment, 
unless Members come forward and offer their amendments.


                           Amendment No. 3503

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have an amendment from the two Senators 
from Mississippi, Senators Lott and Cochran. I ask that it be presented 
to the Senate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Lott and Mr. 
     Cochran, proposes an amendment No. 3503.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To express the sense of Congress on the expansion of the 
Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration Program to include forward deployed 
 forces of the Navy and the Marine Corps in the United States Central 
                      Command area of operations)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. It is the sense of the Senate that--
       (1) the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration Program should 
     be expanded to include the participation of forward deployed 
     forces of the Navy and the Marine Corps in the area of 
     responsibility of the Commander of the United States Central 
     Command; and
       (2) the Secretary of the Navy should compile the lessons 
     learned in the conduct of the demonstration program 
     specifically in that area of responsibility and incorporate 
     those lessons into the ongoing activities of the 
     demonstration program for the development of concepts of 
     operations.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, it is a sense of the Senate concerning 
the Global Hawk.
  Mr. INOUYE. No objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3503) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3504

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment on behalf 
of Senator Reed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Reed of 
     Rhode Island, proposes an amendment 3504.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for Research, 
 Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, $3,000,000 to establish the 
 Consortium of Visualization Excellence for Underseas Warfare Modeling 
                         and Simulation (COVE))

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy'', up to 
     $3,000,000 may be available to establish the Consortium of 
     Visualization Excellence for Underseas Warfare Modeling and 
     Simulation (COVE).
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this would make available up to $3 
million for a project Senator Reed supports. We have cleared it and ask 
that it be agreed to.

[[Page 13789]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3504) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay 
that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3505

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment on behalf 
of Senator Bayh.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Bayh, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3505.

  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated by title under the 
     heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', up to 
     $21,900,000 may be used for M1A2 Tank Transmission 
     Maintenance.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment would make available up to 
$21.9 million for a project the Senator supports. We have cleared the 
amendment. I ask that it be agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3505) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3506

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Reed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Reed, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3506.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for Research, 
   Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, $2,000,000 to conduct a 
     demonstration of a prototype of the Improved Shipboard Combat 
                          Information Center)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy'', up to 
     $2,000,000 may be available to conduct a demonstration of a 
     prototype of the Improved Shipboard Combat Information 
     Center.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I would like to compliment my friend, 
Senator Stevens. He has been a tireless advocate for our Nation's 
military and has ensured that our service members receive the highest 
quality training possible. Senator Stevens has also not forgotten that 
it is the families of our service members who play a vital role in 
supporting our troops and Congress has a important responsibility to 
lighten this heavy load. Therefore, I rise to ask the Senator's 
thoughts about the Navy's determination to revolutionize its training 
and leadership program curriculum.
  Mr. STEVENS. I thank my colleague for his kind words. Improving the 
already-high quality of training is one of the Committee's highest 
priorities and, of course, this includes the Navy's training and 
leadership programs. As the Navy seeks to determine the best system in 
order to facilitate this modernization, the Committee encourages the 
service to evaluate thoroughly the potential effectiveness of a 
`character-based, principle-centered program' designed to teach 
personnel how to efficiently focus and execute key priorities.
  Mr. HATCH. I thank the Senator. I also hoped the Senator might share 
his thoughts on how we might better support our service members 
families?
  Mr. STEVENS. The Committee continues to express concern about the 
plight of Army families who must deal with extended deployments of a 
spouse or a parent. These continued deployments place a significant 
burden on the modern military family. I hope it will reassure the 
Senator, who is concerned about military families, as am I, that the 
Committee encourages the Department of the Army to evaluate different 
training programs which can assist families in this critical time of 
need.
  Mr. HATCH. I thank my friend, the distinguished Chairman.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment would make available up to 
$2 million for a project the Senator supports. We have cleared the 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3506) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I state to the Senate that Senator Inouye 
and I have cleared the amendments presented to us. We have rejected 
several. We ask that Members come to the Senate floor and indicate if 
they intend to pursue the amendments they have suggested they might 
raise. We are currently clearing with leadership the time of 4 o'clock 
for the time Senator Byrd's amendment will come back.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum 
call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3507

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment sponsored 
by Senators Biden, Lugar, Inouye, and myself.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for himself, Mr. 
     Biden, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. Inouye, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3507.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To provide certain authorities related to the transfer of 
                           defense articles)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. (a)(1) Notwithstanding section 514 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321h), the 
     President may transfer to Israel, in exchange for concessions 
     to be negotiated by the Secretary of Defense, with the 
     concurrence of the Secretary of State, any or all of the 
     items described in paragraph (2).
       (2) The items referred to in paragraph (1) are armor, 
     artillery, automatic weapons ammunition, missiles, and other 
     munitions that--
       (A) are obsolete or surplus items;
       (B) are in the inventory of the Department of Defense;
       (C) are intended for use as reserve stocks for Israel; and
       (D) as of the date of enactment of this Act, are located in 
     a stockpile in Israel.
       (b) The value of concessions negotiated pursuant to 
     subsection (a) shall be at least equal to the fair market 
     value of the items transferred. The concessions may include 
     cash compensation, services, waiver of charges otherwise 
     payable by the United States, and other items of value.
       (c) Not later than 30 days before making a transfer under 
     the authority of this section, the President shall transmit a 
     notification of the proposed transfer to the Committees on 
     Foreign Relations and Armed Services of the Senate and the 
     Committees on International Relations and Armed Services of 
     the House of Representatives. The notification shall identify 
     the items to be transferred and the concessions to be 
     received.
       (d) No transfer may be made under the authority of this 
     section more than 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       Sec. 8122. Section 514(b)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act 
     of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321h(b)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``for fiscal year 
     2003'' and inserting ``for each of fiscal years 2004 and 
     2005''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``for fiscal year 
     2003'' and inserting ``for a fiscal year''.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment pertains to the drawdown 
authority of the State of Israel for defense stocks, and it is a 
technical amendment that has been cleared on both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3507) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Again, we have disposed now of all of the amendments

[[Page 13790]]

brought to the attention of the committee on both sides.
  We will have a vote, we believe, at 4 o'clock. We will announce that 
soon. I urge Senators to notify us if they intend to offer any 
amendments to the bill. If not, we will move to third reading following 
the Byrd amendment.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, after further consultation, I ask 
unanimous consent that the vote on the Byrd amendment occur at 4 p.m. 
today.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be no 
second-degree amendments in order to Senator Byrd's amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


        measurement and signatures intelligence research program

  Mr. BINGAMAN. I would like to engage the ranking member, Senator 
Inouye, in a colloquy regarding the Measurement and Signatures 
Intelligence Research Program. Is the Senator aware of this program and 
how critical it is to the development of our next generation of MASINT 
sensors?
  Mr. INOUYE. Yes, I believe that the program is important to future 
innovations for the MASINT community.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Would the Senator also agree that the MASINT Research 
Program has been a great success in bringing together some of the best 
thinking on this issue in Government, the private sector and our 
Nation's leading colleges and universities?
  Mr. INOUYE. Yes, I would.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Finally, wouldn't you agree that the valuable work that 
the Measurement and Signatures Intelligence Research Program has done 
should be continued in Fiscal Year 2005 by retaining the funding level 
included in the House of Representatives' Defense Appropriations bill?
  Mr. INOUYE. I would agree with the Senator from New Mexico, and I 
commend him for his hard work in support of this program.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3516

  Mr. STEVENS. I have an amendment on behalf of Senator Mikulski and 
Senator Sarbanes. I send it to the desk and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Ms. Mikulski, 
     for herself and Mr. Sarbanes, proposes an amendment numbered 
     3516.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for ``Research, 
 Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force'', $7,000,000 for AN/APG-
              68(V)10 radar development for F-16 aircraft)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. (a) Availability of Amount for Research, 
     Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, for Radar 
     Development.--Of The amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force'', 
     $7,000,000 may be available for AN/APG-68(V)10 radar 
     development for F-16 aircraft.
       (b) Construction of Amount.--The amount available under 
     subsection (a) for the purpose specified in that subsection 
     is in addition to any other amounts available in this Act for 
     that purpose.

  Mr. STEVENS. This makes available funds available for a stated amount 
on a project the Senator supports. We have cleared the amendment and 
ask for its immediate adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3516) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move 
to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3517

  Mr. STEVENS. I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator 
Bill Nelson and ask that it be considered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Nelson of 
     Florida, proposes an amendment numbered 3517.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       In the appropriate place in the bill insert the following:
       Of the amount appropriated in title IV under the heading 
     ``OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE'' up to $5,000,000 
     may be made available for the Joint Test and Training Rapid 
     Advanced Capabilities (JTTRAC) Program.''

  Mr. STEVENS. This amendment provides up to $5 million for a project 
the Senator supports. It has been cleared by both sides. I ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3517) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3518

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Shelby and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Shelby, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3518.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
  At the appropriate place, insert the following:

       Sec.   . (a) Public Law 108-199 is amended in Division F, 
     title I, section 110(g) by striking ``Of the'' and inserting 
     ``Prior to distributing''; striking ``each'' every time it 
     appears and inserting ``the''; striking ``project'' every 
     time it appears and inserting ``projects''.
       (b) The limitation under the heading ``Federal-aid highways 
     (Limitation on Obligations) (Highway Trust Fund)'' in Public 
     Law 108-199 is increased by such sums as may be necessary to 
     ensure that each State receives an amount of obligation 
     authority equal to what each State would have received under 
     section 110(a)(6) of Public Law 108-199 but for the amendment 
     made to section 110(g) of Public Law 108-199 by subsection 
     (a) of this section: Provided, That such additional authority 
     shall remain available during fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

  Mr. STEVENS. This is a technical amendment to clarify the 
availability of funds in the 2004 appropriations bill. It has been 
cleared on both sides of the aisle. I ask for its adoption.

[[Page 13791]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3518) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote and lay that motion on the 
table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                             Amendment 3502

  Mr. STEVENS. The hour of 4 has arrived. The yeas and nays have been 
ordered on the Byrd amendment?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. This is a sense of the Senate amendment that the Senator 
offered on the bill last year that was adopted by the Senate, and the 
yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. 
The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I announce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Lugar) 
is necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) 
is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 89, nays 9, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 147 Leg.]

                                YEAS--89

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ensign
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (FL)
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wyden

                                NAYS--9

     Bunning
     Cornyn
     Dole
     Enzi
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Thomas

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Kerry
     Lugar
       
  The amendment (No. 3502) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. AKAKA. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. In a few minutes we will have a series of amendments 
which have been cleared and we may have one more amendment that is 
coming. That is all we know.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Craig). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, the Republican manager, the chairman of the 
committee, suggested that I move forward with my amendment, which will 
not take long at all. I can do this in less than 5 minutes.


                           Amendment No. 3520

  Mr. President, I send my amendment to the desk and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Delaware [Mr. Biden] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3520.

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To appropriate funds for bilateral economic assistance)

       On page 118, between lines 4 and 5, insert the following:

                                TITLE X

                     BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

                  FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

           United States Agency for International Development

              International Disaster and Famine Assistance

       For an additional amount for ``International Disaster and 
     Famine Assistance'', $188,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That funds appropriated by this paragraph 
     shall be available to respond to the humanitarian crisis in 
     the Darfur region of Sudan and in Chad: Provided further, 
     That such amount is designated as an emergency requirement 
     pursuant to section 502 of H. Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress).

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I know it is getting late in this process, 
and I will try to make this as quick as possible. There has already 
been a significant amount of discussion on this floor, in this town, 
and actually, quite frankly, this morning in the meetings some of us 
had with the President of the United States on the situation in Darfur 
in the Sudan.
  I want to begin by saying I respect the effort made by my friend, 
Senator DeWine. I understand the managers are going to accept a 
proposal for $90 million or thereabouts to deal with this problem. 
There are already as many as 30,000 dead. Mr. President, 1.2 million 
people have been chased from their homes, and 200,000 refugees have 
fled to Chad. The civilians have been bombed from planes and 
helicopters by the Government of Sudan. And there are continued reports 
of systematic rape, murder, and torture by the Sudanese Government as 
well as by allied militia troops.
  Now, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights issued a report in 
which the U.N. investigators indicate they believe that crimes against 
humanity have been committed in Darfur.
  Secretary of State Colin Powell has said that the State Department is 
contemplating whether Khartoum is engaged in the genocide. I think when 
they, in fact, finish they will conclude clearly that it is.
  The Agency for International Development and its leader, Andrew 
Natsios, as well as U.N. officials, have said that what has happened in 
Darfur is the ``worst humanitarian crisis in the world today.''
  They point out that under the best circumstances--not the worst, the 
best circumstances--according to Mr. Natsios, 320,000 people will die. 
That is the best they hope for. If everything turns around, there are 
going to be 320,000 dead. And he made that public statement on June 3. 
He said ``more resources are desperately needed.''
  Now, to have to respond in a manner that is commensurate with the 
suffering seems to me to be our obligation. The President of the United 
States said he brought this to the attention of the G-8. We had this 
discussion this morning in the Cabinet Room, and he, quite frankly, 
indicated that he was not getting the kind of response that was 
warranted. Some of us suggested--and I was not one because others spoke 
first--that this is of an urgent need, and we have to lead.
  Now, I know that my friend from Ohio has called our attention to this 
and, in fact, has gotten roughly $90 million appropriated or agreed to. 
But the fact is, Mr. Natsios pledged, in Geneva, in the first week in 
June, that the United States would come up with $188 million. That is 
the pledge this administration made in Geneva in June.
  Now, the reason I bother to mention that is, the President pointed 
out this morning that the G-8 nations and the rest of the world do not 
seem seized with the same sense of urgency as we are, and that we have 
to lead.
  If we have announced we are going to do $188 million, and we are 
trying to get the rest of the world in on the deal, and then we come 
out of here with less than half of that, it seems to me it undercuts 
the very point that is trying to be made by the President of the United 
States.
  Now, I am not speaking for the President and implying that he is for 
or

[[Page 13792]]

against this $188 million. I do not know. I assume he must have been 
for it or the head of his AID, under his administration, would not have 
pledged $188 million.
  Now, this is $188 million as emergency money in this fiscal year. 
Most of the money Natsios pledged was 2005 money that has yet to be 
appropriated. In other words, he pledged money he does not have and may 
not get for quite some time for what he calls the ``worst humanitarian 
crisis in the world today,'' where, if things go well, 320,000 will 
die.
  The House bill gives less than half the money, only $70 million. I 
understand that--again, I am not being critical of my friend from Ohio, 
but as he said to me, he got what he could. That is good. It is better 
than nothing.
  But keep in mind, the $188 million pledge was made, according to AID 
officials, in advance of the U.N.--in advance of the U.N.--issuing the 
revised numbers about how many people will be affected. Those numbers 
have increased.
  So the House bill provides less than half of what might be an 
inadequate pledge to begin with.
  I was asked not to offer this amendment because we give about half. 
Apparently that is going to be agreed to by the managers. But the 
Senate has the power to do a lot more than that. So let's give the 
administration what it said it will need to provide an emergency 
response in Darfur. If we do not, make no mistake about it, no one else 
is going to step to the plate.
  Mr. LEAHY. Will the Senator yield for a request?
  Mr. BIDEN. I would be happy to.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be added as 
a cosponsor. This is a good amendment.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my friend from 
Vermont, Senator Leahy, be added as a cosponsor of my amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I might add, this is an unusual position to 
be in. I do not usually come to the floor on matters and try to lead an 
initiative on which I am not the guy who has done the most work. I have 
not done the most work on it. There are others, including Senator Leahy 
and others, who have been out in front on this issue. But I do not want 
to see us go through this wrap-up without us actually facing up to the 
facts.
  Let's know what we are doing. Mr. President, $90 million is better 
than nothing, but it is not the $188 million, which is probably too 
little anyway, that we already pledged. I am worried about the impact 
that will have on the rest of the world as we try to generate support 
because we need support.
  Now, look, our former colleague, Senator Danforth, who we just 
confirmed today, played a leading role in the Sudan in helping settle 
one of the real difficult issues, which was the north-south problem. 
Now we have an east-west problem.
  The fact is, he got the international community to step up and come 
forward in order to deal with this incredibly humanitarian crisis. It 
seems to me that notwithstanding the fact Mr. Natsios was forced to 
make the pledge for money to get the first piece done, the north-south 
piece, it is not going to inspire any contributions from our partners 
and donor communities. The Congress has to provide these emergency 
funds. This money will not stop the attacks. It will not do all we need 
to do. But it will give essential assistance to the victims of 
Khartoum's atrocities.
  How many times have we stood around this floor, those who have been 
here for the better part of the last decade, and lamented our failure 
to act in the last catastrophic African crisis with the Hutus and the 
Tutsis? How many times have we talked about it? Bill Clinton writes 
about it: We wish we had done more. President Bush talks about it.
  Let's not do this. Let's not step back. Let's not be here 5 years 
from now, 10 years from now saying: If we only had acted.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. At the 
appropriate time, I will ask for the yeas and nays. The chairman of the 
committee indicated he had a very important commitment that required 
him to be off the floor but wanted me to make my statement and get it 
moved on. I will not engage in anymore debate on this issue.
  At the appropriate time, when the chairman or whoever is going to 
respond to this amendment makes that response, I am ready for a vote.
  In the meantime, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Smith). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                    Amendment No. 3520, As Modified

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I am going to send a modification to the 
desk in a moment. I will take 60 seconds to explain it. My staff had 
drafted the amendment for $188 million, which was a pledge by Mr. 
Natsios, before Mr. DeWine's $90 million was accepted. So I am not 
asking for $188 million on top of that. The amendment I am sending to 
the desk asks for an additional $118 million above the 90 which, in 
fact, apparently the committee has already accepted.
  So I send a modification to the desk and ask unanimous consent that 
the amendment be so modified to say $118 million instead of $188 
million.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is so 
modified.
  The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

   (Purpose: To appropriate funds for bilateral economic assistance)

       On page 118, between lines 4 and 5, insert the following:

                                TITLE X

                     BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

                  FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

           United States Agency for International Development

              International Disaster and Famine Assistance

       For an additional amount for ``International Disaster and 
     Famine Assistance'', $118,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That funds appropriated by this paragraph 
     shall be available to respond to the humanitarian crisis in 
     the Darfur region of Sudan and in Chad: Provided further, 
     That such amount is designated as an emergency requirement 
     pursuant to section 502 of H. Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress).

  Mr. BIDEN. I thank the Chair and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I ask that I be permitted 15 minutes to 
speak as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Mr. Akaka are printed in today's Record under 
``Morning Business.'')
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask that this amendment be temporarily 
set aside so I can take care of some amendments we are prepared to 
offer. We will come right back to this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3522

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Dodd, and I ask that it be considered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Dodd, for 
     himself, and Mr. Lieberman, proposes an amendment numbered 
     3522.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.

[[Page 13793]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, $10,000,000 for the Broad Area 
       Unmanned Responsive Resupply Operations aircraft program)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``research development, test, and evaluation, army'', up to 
     $5,000,000 may be available for the Broad Area Unmanned 
     Responsive Resupply Operations aircraft program.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this is an amendment that provides up to 
$5 million for a program the Senator supports. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Voinovich). Without objection, the 
amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3522) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that 
motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3523

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Nickles and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Nickles, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3523.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To make available from amounts appropriated for ``Research, 
  Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy'', $2,000,000 for Handheld 
                          Breath Diagnostics)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated by title under the 
     heading ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, 
     Navy'', up to $2,000,000 may be used for Handheld Breath 
     Diagnostics.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment provides up to $2 million 
for a program supported by the Senator. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3523) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3524

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Landrieu and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Ms. Landrieu, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3524.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To set aside an amount for the Joint Logistics Information 
           System program for the automated scheduling tool)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated by title IV under the 
     heading ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, 
     Navy'', up to $1,800,000 may be used for the Joint Logistics 
     Information System program for the automated scheduling tool.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks up to $1.5 
million of funds under the bill, and I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the agreement is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3524) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3525

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Bunning and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Bunning, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3525.

  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To set aside an amount for the Anti-Sniper Infrared Targeting 
                                System)

       At the end of Title VIII, insert the following:
       Sec.  . Of the amount appropriated in Title IV under the 
     heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy'', 
     up to $4,000,000 may be used for the Anti-Sniper Infrared 
     Targeting System.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment provides up to $4 million 
in funds available in the bill. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that 
motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3526

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of the distinguished Senator from Ohio, Mr. Voinovich, and ask for its 
consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Voinovich, 
     for himself, and Mr. DeWine, proposes an amendment numbered 
     3526.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for Research, 
 Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army, $3,500,000 for Laser Peening 
                         for Army helicopters)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army'' and 
     available for End Item Industrial Preparedness Activities, up 
     to $3,500,000 may be available for Laser Peening for Army 
     helicopters.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks funds available 
in the bill for projects supported by the current occupant in the 
chair, and I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3526) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that 
motion on the table.


                           Amendment No. 3527

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk another amendment on 
behalf of the Senator from Ohio, Mr. Voinovich, and ask for its 
consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Voinovich, 
     for himself, and Mr. DeWine, proposes an amendment numbered 
     3527.

  The amendment is as follows:

      (To make available, from amounts appropriated for Research, 
   Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, $2,000,000 for All 
                      Composite Military Vehicles)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force'', 
     up to $2,000,000 may be available for Composites for Unmanned 
     Air Vehicles.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks up to $2 million 
from funds available under the bill, and I ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that 
motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3528

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment on behalf 
of Senator Boxer, and I ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mrs. Boxer, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3528.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for Research, 
    Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide, $4,500,000 for 
  development of the Suicide Bomber Detection System Using a Portable 
           Electronic Scanning Millimeter-Wave Imaging RADAR)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:

[[Page 13794]]

       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-
     Wide'', up to $4,500,000 may be available for development of 
     the Suicide Bomber Detection System Using a Portable 
     Electronic Scanning Millimeter-Wave Imaging RADAR.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks up to $4.5 
million from funds available in the bill, and I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3528) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that 
motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3529

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of the Senator from Montana, Mr. Burns, and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Burns, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3529.

  The amendment is as follows:
       On page 161 of the Senate report:
       ``Of the funds available in Research, Development, Test and 
     Evaluation, Navy, up to $3 million may be made available for 
     the `Mobile On-Scene Sensor Aircraft Intelligence Command, 
     Control and Computer Center'.''

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks up to $3 million 
in funds in the bill. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3529) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3530

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send another amendment on behalf of 
Senator Burns to the desk and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Burns, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3530.

  The amendment is as follows:
       On page 147 of the Senate report:
       ``Of the funds available in Research, Development, Test and 
     Evaluation, Army, up to $2 million may be made available for 
     `Care of Battlefield Wounds'.''

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks $2 million for 
research concerning battlefield wounds from funds available in the 
bill. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3530) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3531

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of the Senator from Kansas, Mr. Roberts, and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Roberts, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3531.

  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for ``Research, 
 Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army,'' $3,000,000 for the United 
 States Army Intelligence and Security Command's Information Dominance 
                                Center)

       At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
       Sec.   . Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title __ of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Army,'' up to 
     $3,000,000 may be available to establish redundant systems to 
     ensure continuity of operations and disaster recovery at the 
     United States Army Intelligence and Security Command's 
     Intelligence Dominance Center.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks funds available 
in the bill up to $3 million for the project the Senator supports. I 
ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3531) was agreed to.
  Mr STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3532

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment on behalf 
of Senator Kyl and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Kyl, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3532.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To specify the availability of amounts for the Subterranean 
                     Target Identification Program)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amounts appropriated by title IV under 
     the heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
     Army'' and available for electronic warfare technology, up to 
     $2,000,000 may be made available for the Subterranean Target 
     Identification Program.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks $2 million from 
funds available in the bill, and I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3532) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3533

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send another amendment to the desk on 
behalf of Senator Kyl and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Kyl, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3533.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To specify the availability of amounts for the Program for 
                        Intelligence Validation)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amounts appropriated by title IV under 
     the heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
     Army'' and available for Defense Research Sciences, up to 
     $2,000,000 may be made available for the Program for 
     Intelligence Validation.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment earmarks up to $2 million 
from research funds in the bill. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3533) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3534

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment on behalf 
of Senator Kyl and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Kyl, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3534.

  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To express the sense of Congress on the continued development 
 of an end-to-end point of care clinical diagnostic network to combat 
                               terrorism)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. It is the sense of the Senate that--
       (1) funds appropriated by title IV under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' 
     for chemical and biological defense programs should be made 
     available for the continued development of an end-to-end 
     point of care clinical diagnostic network to combat 
     terrorism; and

[[Page 13795]]

       (2) such funds should be distributed to partnerships that 
     combine universities and non-profit organizations with 
     industrial partners to ensure the rapid implementation of 
     such clinical diagnostic network for clinical use.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment pertains to earmarking 
funds throughout a whole area of the Department. It does not provide 
additional funds. It specifies where the funds should be allocated, and 
we believe it is necessary. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment will be 
agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3534) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3535

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send another amendment to the desk on 
behalf of Senator Kyl and ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Kyl, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3535.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To specify the availability of amounts for the Versatile, 
                  Advanced Affordable Turbine Engine)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amounts appropriated by title IV under 
     the heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air 
     Force'' and available for aerospace propulsion and 
     technology, up to $3,000,000 may be made available for the 
     Versatile, Advanced Affordable Turbine Engine.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment pertains to earmarking 
funds for the turbine engine from funds available in the bill. We 
believe it is necessary. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3535) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3536

  Mr. STEVENS. I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator 
Talent and ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Talent, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3536.

  The amendment is as follows:

  Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for Research, 
  Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, $5,000,000 for X-43C 
                              development

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force'', 
     up to $5,000,000 may be available for X-43C development.

  Mr. STEVENS. This earmarks up to $5 million for research and 
development. We believe it is a proper amendment, and I ask for its 
adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3536) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3537

  Mr. STEVENS. I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator 
Pryor and ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Pryor, for 
     himself, Mrs. Dole, and Mrs. Lincoln, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3537.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To make available from amounts appropriated for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide, $5,000,000 for medical 
            equipment and combat casualty care technologies)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-
     Wide'', up to $5,000,000 may be available for medical 
     equipment and combat casualty care technologies.

  Mr. STEVENS. This amendment earmarks up to $5 million in the bill. It 
is acceptable to the managers of the bill. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3537) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3538

  Mr. STEVENS. I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator 
Sununu and ask that it be adopted.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Sununu, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3538.

  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:
       Of the funds appropriated, up to $2,000,000 may be 
     available for the Advanced Composite Radome Project.

  Mr. STEVENS. This amendment earmarks up to $2 million for a Radome 
project, and we are prepared to accept the amendment. I ask for its 
adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3538) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3539

  Mr. STEVENS. I send to the desk an amendment on behalf of Senator 
Levin pertaining to Wurtsmith Air Force Base.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Levin, 
     proposes an amendment No. 3539.

  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To authorize the demolition of facilities and improvements on 
 certain military installations approved for closure under the defense 
                 base closure and realignment process)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of the Air Force may, using funds available to the 
     Air Force, demolish or provide for the demolition of any 
     facilities or other improvements on real property at the 
     former Wurtsmith Air Force Base.

  Mr. STEVENS. This directs that funds available to the Department be 
used for certain proposals on that Air Force base. We have examined it, 
and we are prepared to recommend the adoption of that amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3539) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3540

  Mr. STEVENS. I send to the desk an amendment on behalf of Senator 
Conrad and ask that it be adopted.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Conrad, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3540.


[[Page 13796]]


  The amendment is as follows:

      (Purpose: To set aside an amount for F-16 Theater Airborne 
                    Reconnaissance System upgrades)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated by title III under 
     the heading ``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force'', up to 
     $7,000,000 may be available for F-16 Theater Airborne 
     Reconnaissance System upgrades.

  Mr. STEVENS. This earmarks up to $7 million for a project the Senator 
supports from funds available within the bill. It does not increase 
funds. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3540) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator 
Burns be added as an original cosponsor of amendment 3490.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3541

  Mr. STEVENS. I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator 
Kohl, which relates to authorizing the reprogramming of funds available 
to the Secretary for industrial technical services and ask that it be 
considered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Kohl, for 
     himself, and Mr. Reed, proposes an amendment numbered 3541.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To ensure the availability of sufficient fiscal year 2004 
  funding for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program of the 
            National Institute of Standards and Technology)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. For the purposes of applying sections 204 and 
     605 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the 
     Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2004 
     (division B of Public Law 108-199) to matters in title II of 
     such Act under the heading ``National Institute of Standards 
     and Technology'' (118 Stat. 69), in the account under the 
     heading ``industrial technology services'', the Secretary of 
     Commerce shall make all determinations based on the 
     Industrial Technology Services funding level of $218,782,000 
     for reprogramming and transferring of funds for the 
     Manufacturing Extension Partnership program and may submit 
     such a reprogramming or transfer, as the case may be, to the 
     appropriate committees within 30 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3541) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                    Amendment No. 3520, as Modified

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, with the exception of two items we may 
receive, that is the last of the amendments that have been called to 
our attention. I would inquire whether it would be in order for the 
managers of the respective sides of the aisle to return to the Biden 
amendment now and ask for a vote on the Biden amendment.
  Is there any impediment to having a vote now, may I inquire of staff?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is now pending.
  Mr. STEVENS. Is the amendment now pending?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. STEVENS. Today, the Senate approved $70 million for disaster 
assistance and $25 million for refugee assistance, a total of $95 
million to Sudan. This is an amount the House approved and the level 
the State Department informed our staff was necessary to carry the much 
needed food and other support for Darfur through spring of next year. 
This is the amount they efficiently execute and use in this year. In 
the spring, the State Department, with USAID and the U.N., will 
reassess the situation and determine if additional emergency funds are 
requested.
  We have already declared an emergency for Sudan for $95 million. If 
we approved Senator Biden's amendment, this will be above the $188 
million that State and USAID have already pledged for the 2005 funds. 
These funds will be allocated in the 2005 Foreign Operations bill, not 
this bill. In other words, we have added $95 million for disaster 
assistance from this Defense appropriations bill on an emergency basis 
to the Sudan. There already are requests before our Appropriations 
Committee under the Foreign Operations bill, a request for $188 
million, which will come before the Senate in due course.
  It is my request to our colleagues to stand by the $95 million we 
have added to the disaster assistance and refugee assistance provisions 
of our basic funding for the State Department. We have added to it 
already in the Defense bill. We approved that today. That is the amount 
that is in the House bill, and I do not believe we should go beyond the 
emergency level we have already agreed to, which was supported by both 
of our leaders.
  I point out further that the U.N. appeal for Darfur for 2004 has led 
to $307 million as of June 3 of this year. That is now being revised 
upward to an estimated $349 million available. Excluding the U.S. 
Government, other donors pledged $134 million in Geneva. The U.S. 
Government pledge was for the remainder of fiscal year 2004 and 2005, 
and we have already exceeded that pledge. There is $245 million pledged 
from all the above donors, in addition to the contribution of the 
United States.
  We have an enormous program going on on behalf of our Government. We 
have added $95 million to the $188 million. We are already ahead of the 
rest of the world, and we think we should not go further on this bill. 
If there are further emergency funds that are necessary, they should be 
added to the foreign assistance bill or the State Department bill when 
those bills come before the Senate but not to the Defense bill. This 
Defense bill is already amended at the request of both the majority 
leader and minority leader, the Senator from Ohio, and many others, to 
add $95 million. It is my position that we should not go further at 
this time. We should wait for the consideration of the other bills as 
far as additional emergency funds, if they are needed.
  These funds cannot be needed before we will consider the supplemental 
after the first of 2005. Besides that, we still have to consider the 
2005 regular bill for both State-Justice-Commerce and the foreign 
assistance bill. This is no place for this item. It is not an emergency 
to go beyond $95 million.
  Does the Senator from Hawaii wish to make any statement?
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
  Mr. INOUYE. I wish to associate myself with the statement of the 
Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to table the Biden amendment, and 
I ask that we have a time for other Senators to become aware of the 
fact that we will have a vote. I ask unanimous consent that the vote 
commence at 5:30.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at this time 
for me to have the yeas and nays on my motion to table this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page 13797]]




                           Amendment No. 3542

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have been informed there is another 
amendment that has been cleared. This is an amendment on behalf of 
Senator DeWine, pertaining to a report on mental health services 
available to the armed services. I ask this amendment be considered at 
this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is 
set aside.
  The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. DeWine, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3542.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To require reports on mental health services available to 
 members of the Armed Forces of the United States and their dependents)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. (a)(1) Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to Congress a report on mental health services 
     available to members of the Armed Forces and their 
     dependents.
       (2) The report required under paragraph (1) shall include 
     the following:
       (A) A comprehensive review of mental health services that 
     are available--
       (i) to members of the Armed Forces who are deployed in 
     combat theaters;
       (ii) to members of the Armed Forces at any facilities in 
     the United States; and
       (iii) to dependents of members of the Armed Forces during 
     and after deployment of members overseas.
       (B) Data on the average number of service days since 
     September 11, 2001, on which members of the Armed Forces were 
     absent or excused from duty for mental health reasons.
       (C) A description of the current procedures for reducing 
     the negative perceptions among members of the Armed Services 
     that are often associated with mental health counseling.
       (D) A description of--
       (i) the mental health services available to members of the 
     Armed Forces, including members of the reserve components, 
     and their dependents; and
       (ii) the barriers to access to such services.
       (E) An analysis of the extent to which the Secretary of the 
     Army has implemented the recommendations on mental health 
     services that were made by the Mental Health Advisory Team of 
     the Army on March 25, 2004.
       (F) A plan for actions that the Secretary determines 
     appropriate for improving the delivery of appropriate mental 
     health services to members of the Armed Forces and their 
     dependents.
       (b) Not later than 360 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
     Congress a report that describes--
       (1) the actions taken to implement the plan submitted under 
     subsection (a)(2)(F); and
       (2) the reasons why actions in the plan have not been 
     completed, if any.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3542) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask no second-degree amendments be in 
order to the Biden amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3543

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have another amendment. It is on behalf 
of Senator Feinstein. I ask unanimous consent that the pending 
amendment be set aside temporarily so we might consider Senator 
Feinstein's amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mrs. Feinstein, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3543.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To make available, from amounts appropriated for Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy, $5,000,000 for support of the 
                    TIGER pathogen detection system)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by title IV of this Act under the heading 
     ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy'', up to 
     $5,000,000 may be available for support of the TIGER pathogen 
     detection system.

  Mr. STEVENS. This pertains to the earmarking of funds for pathogen 
research. We support that amendment and ask that it be adopted.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3543) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3544

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I send to the desk a technical amendment 
on behalf of Senator Byron Dorgan and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Inouye], for Mr. Dorgan, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3544.

  The amendment is as follows:

    (Purpose: To provide funds for the North Dakota State School of 
      Science, Bismarck State College, and Minot State University)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. __. FUNDING FOR NORTH DAKOTA STATE SCHOOL OF SCIENCE, 
                   BISMARCK STATE COLLEGE, AND MINOT STATE 
                   UNIVERSITY.

       (a) Rescission.--There is rescinded an amount equal to 
     $795,280 from the amount appropriated to carry out part B of 
     title VII of the Higher Education Act of 1965, in title III 
     of division E of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004 
     (Public Law 108-199; 118 Stat. 3). This amount shall reduce 
     the funds available for the projects specified in the 
     statement of the managers on the Conference Report 108-401 
     accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004 
     (Public Law 108-199; 118 Stat. 3).
       (b) Disregard Amount.--In the statement of the managers on 
     the Conference Report 108-401 accompanying the Consolidated 
     Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108-199; 118 Stat. 3), 
     in the matter in title III of division E, relating to the 
     Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education under the 
     heading ``Higher Education'', the provision specifying 
     $800,000 for Wahpeton State School of Science and North 
     Dakota State University to recruit, retain and train pharmacy 
     technicians shall be disregarded.
       (c) Appropriation.--There is appropriated an amount equal 
     to $795,280 to the Department of Labor, Employment and 
     Training Administration for ``Training and Employment 
     Services,'' available for obligation for the period from July 
     1, 2004, through June 30, 2005, of which--
       (1) $200,000 shall be made available to the North Dakota 
     State School of Science to recruit, retain, and train 
     pharmacy technicians;
       (2) $297,640 shall be made available to Bismarck State 
     College for training and education related to its electric 
     power plant technologies curriculum; and
       (3) $297,640 shall be made available for Minot State 
     University for the Job Corps Fellowship Training Program.

  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, this is to correct certain errors that 
were in the original bill.
  Mr. STEVENS. I am familiar with this amendment. We are prepared to 
accept the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3544) was agreed to.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3545

       Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment 
     and ask for its immediate consideration.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

  The Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Inouye] proposes an amendment numbered 
3545.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To set aside an amount for small business development and 
                              transition)

       On page 112, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 8121. Of the amount appropriated by title IV under the 
     heading ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, 
     Army'', up to $2,500,000 may be used for small business 
     development and transition.

  Mr. INOUYE. This amendment is to earmark some of the $2.5 million for 
research and development for the Department of Defense. It has been 
cleared on both sides.

[[Page 13798]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3545) was agreed to.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following 
the vote on the Biden amendment, no further business other than a 
colloquy or colloquies that I have to offer for the Record be in order, 
and that the Senate immediately go to third reading and final passage 
of this bill.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask the chairman's request be modified: Or 
whatever the two managers agree on? Because there may be something.
  Mr. STEVENS. Very well, I will amend that request: Unless there are 
other matters offered based on unanimous consent approved by both 
managers, that we immediately go to third reading and final passage of 
the bill following the Biden amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. I ask it be in order to get the yeas and nays on passage 
of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to 
be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum for 3 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. It has been requested I ask this vote commence 
immediately. I ask unanimous consent that we start the vote on the 
Biden amendment. This is a motion to table the Biden amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion. The 
yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I announce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Lugar) 
is necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) 
is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chambliss). Are there any other Senators 
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 45, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 148 Leg.]

                                YEAS--53

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Kyl
     Lott
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--45

     Akaka
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham (FL)
     Harkin
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Kerry
     Lugar
       
  The motion was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. NICKLES. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.


                             CHANGE OF VOTE

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I beg the indulgence of the Chair. If 
I may, on rollcall No. 148, I voted ``aye''. It was my intention to 
vote ``nay''. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to 
change my vote since it will not affect the outcome.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator 
Burns be removed as a cosponsor of amendment No. 3490.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have a list of the members of the 
subcommittee staff for the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee who have 
worked so hard on this bill. So often, Senator Inouye and I as the 
cochairmen of the committee get credit for what is done, but I think we 
have the hardest working staff in the Congress. They have done an 
admirable job, and we have a fair and balanced bipartisan bill. I ask 
unanimous consent that the list of their names be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                       Defense Subcommittee Staff

       Charlie Houy, Betsy Schmid, Nicole Diresta, Kraig Siracuse, 
     Tom Hawkins, Alycia Farrell, Lesley Kalan, Jennifer 
     Chartrand, Brian Wilson, Brian Potts, Kate Kaufer, Mazie 
     Mattson, Janelle Treon, Steve Wacakaski, Bob Henke, and Sid 
     Ashworth.


                   funding embassy-baghdad operations

  Mr. HAGEL. I understand the State Department expects to fund the 
Embassy-Baghdad operations using emergency spending in Fiscal Year 
2005. It is also my understanding that Senate Appropriations Committee 
agrees with the State Department on this issue.
  The House version of the Fiscal Year 2005 Defense Appropriations bill 
includes $665 million in emergency spending for the Department of State 
to fund Embassy-Baghdad operations, IT costs, logistical support, and 
security requirements. Chairman Stevens and Senator Gregg, and I 
understand that the Senate Defense Appropriations Committee will accept 
the House position on funding Embassy-Baghdad operations, IT costs, 
logistical support, and security requirements during the upcoming 
conference. I appreciate the support from Chairman Stevens and Senator 
Gregg on this matter.
  Mr. STEVENS. I agree with the Senator from Nebraska. The State 
Department has traditionally administered the funds necessary for 
embassy operations. Although the Senate bill does not allocate the 
funds to the State Department, we will do our most to support the House 
language in conference on this matter to ensure the State Department 
retains the authority to obligate the subject funds.
  Mr. GREGG. I agree with Chairman Stevens. We will do our most to 
support the House language. We are both aware of the significant 
funding needs the State Department is facing in the construction of a 
U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. I hope the Secretary of State will act 
expeditiously to address this funding need.


                         RAPID equipping force

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I commend the chairman and the committee 
staff for their outstanding work in bringing this legislation to the 
Senate for consideration.
  Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Senator for his kind comments.
  Mr. COCHRAN. I note that the committee included funding in the 
Defense Appropriations bill to address the

[[Page 13799]]

threat of Improvised Explosive Devices, IEDs, in the Iraq theater. 
Specifically, I am referring to the inclusion in Title IX of the bill 
which appropriates $25,000,000 for a force protection initiative using 
the Rapid Equipping Force concept.
  Mr. STEVENS. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. COCHRAN. It is my understanding that the money is to be used to 
help our deployed soldiers fight the current IED threat that we hear so 
much about in the war in Iraq.
  Mr. STEVENS. That is the purpose of the appropriation.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Would this money also be used to address the force 
protection issues of counter-fire and detection techniques that exist 
in the technology base, such as sensor technologies that have 
demonstrated real-time detection, classification and location of enemy 
fire?
  Mr. STEVENS. The Senator's understanding is correct. These funds are 
also envisioned to be used for these types of force protection 
initiatives.
  Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Senator for his clarification of this issue.


                      m1a2 sep tank modernization

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to 
thank Chairman Stevens for his leadership in ensuring the rapid 
modernization of our land combat forces both in the FY 2005 Defense 
Appropriations bill as well as the Contingent Emergency Reserve Fund. I 
would also like to take a moment to address the urgent need to fund 
continued modernization of the M1 Abrams main battle tank fleet.
  It is encouraging that this Committee has taken a leadership role in 
resourcing the modernization of the Army's armored forces with the M1A2 
SEP tank, the most modern battle tank in the world. As proven in its 
deployment to Iraq, the M1A2 SEP is designed for decisive combat and 
net-centric warfare; indeed, it represents a revolution in armored 
warfare. Is the Chairman aware of the capabilities afforded by the M1A2 
SEP tank?
  Mr. STEVENS. I am aware of the M1A2 SEP and its capabilities.
  Mr. SPECTER. We have encouraged the Army to pure fleet its first-to-
fight armored units with M1A2 SEP tanks primarily to ensure 
overwhelming lethality and survivability but also to reduce the 
logistics burden on our soldiers. However, it has come to my attention 
that the Army does not intend to pure fleet its armored forces with 
M1A2 SEP tanks. In fact, under the Army's current plan, the 3rd 
Infantry Division--which spearheaded Operation Iraqi Freedom--will 
continue to cope with M1A1 tanks that were produced 20 years ago. Is 
the Chairman aware of this fact?
  Mr. STEVENS. I am.
  Mr. SPECTER. I thank the Senator. I would also point out that 3rd 
Infantry Division is the first division to transform to a new force 
structure the Army calls modularity and also is likely to be called 
upon to return to Iraq within the next year. It strikes me as ironic 
that the Army's premier armored unit lacks the combat punch and network 
capability of the rest of the Army's major armored forces. Finally, 
there is the issue of the tank industrial base. In the next few months, 
the last Abrams Upgrade tank will roll off the production line, 
representing the end of significant tank work in this country. In late 
2006, the last M1A2 SEP Retrofit tank--a less complex upgrade--will be 
produced for the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. Absent funding in FY 
2005 for continued tank production, the U.S. tank industrial base will 
cease to exist. We ignore the implications of this action at our own 
peril.
  Mr. President, I urge the Chairman to consider the modernization of 
the 3rd Infantry Division with M1A2 SEP tanks.


                      future tactical truck system

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, today we have before us S. 2559, the Fiscal 
Year 2005 Defense Appropriation bill. Included in this bill is 
important funding for a variety of tactical wheeled vehicle programs 
including the Future Tactical Truck System, FTTS. FTTS is an important 
program supported by the Army's National Automotive Center that will 
develop technologies that can increase the range, durability and 
survivability of our military tactical wheeled vehicle fleet. These 
advances will ensure that as the Army transforms itself it will have a 
technologically advanced tactical wheeled vehicle fleet that can best 
meet our Nation's security needs. I would ask my good friend, the 
Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, if he is aware of this 
important program?
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I join my good friend from Michigan in 
his support for this program and the National Automotive Center. I 
understand the Army and the Office of the Secretary of Defense have 
confirmed that the FTTS program is on track and possesses a transition 
pathway that will enable the insertion of new technologies into the 
Army's tactical wheeled vehicle fleet. These technologies will enable 
the Army to field a lighter, more mobile and more effective fighting 
force.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank my friend from Alaska, and agree with his 
characterization. I believe that this program is making important 
technical advances that will greatly benefit the Army. I am 
particularly appreciative of the committee's recommendation to increase 
the investment in the Army's Heavy Tactical Vehicles program, in order 
to support the transition of these types of technologies into Army 
systems, consistent with the Army's Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Strategy. 
However, I am concerned that the bill we are considering this program 
by $5 million. Such a cut would undermine this program and hinder 
efforts to further develop revoluntary technologies while defining the 
future scope of this program.
  Mr. STEVENS. I concur with the Senator from Michigan. This is an 
important program, and I support investing in the FTTS science and 
technology efforts at the National Automotive Center at the level 
requested by the President. I assure him that I will work in conference 
to fund this program at the President's Budget request.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the distinguished Chairman for this support.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, the Department of Defense appropriations 
bill for FY 2005, S. 2259, as reported by the Senate Committee on 
Appropriations, provides $384.012 billion in budget authority and 
$401.785 billion in outlays in FY 2005 for the Department of Defense. 
Of these totals, $239 million is for mandatory programs in FY 2005.
  Additionally, the bill provides $7.158 billion in budget authority 
and $7.054 billion in outlays in FY 2005, which are designated as 
emergency requirements.
  The bill further provides $25 billion in budget authority in FY 2004, 
which is also designated as an emergency requirement. This budget 
authority generated $18.798 billion in outlays in FY 2005.
  The bill provides total discretionary budget authority in FY 2005, 
including emergencies, of $390.931 billion. This amount is $1.684 
billion less than the President's request and equal to the 302(b) 
allocation adopted by the House of Representatives.
  I commend the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee 
for bringing this legislation before the Senate, and I ask unanimous 
consent that a table displaying the Budget committee scoring of the 
bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

[[Page 13800]]



                S. 2559, 2005 DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS--SPENDING COMPARISONS--SENATE-REPORTED BILL
                                         [Fiscal year 2005, $ millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      General
                                                                      purpose        Mandatory         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate-reported bill:\1\
    Budget authority............................................         383,773             239         384,012
    Outlays.....................................................         401,546             239         401,785
House 302(b) allocation:\2\
    Budget authority............................................         390,931             239         391,170
    Outlays.....................................................         415,987             239         416,226
2004 enacted:
    Budget authority............................................         431,218             226         431,444
    Outlays.....................................................         423,935             226         424,161
President's request:
    Budget authority............................................         392,615             239         392,854
    Outlays.....................................................         418,639             239         418,878
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Senate-Reported bill compared to:
House 302(b) allocation:
    Budget authority............................................          -7,158               0          -7,158
    Outlays.....................................................         -14,441               0         -14,441
2004 enacted:
    Budget authority............................................         -47,445              13         -47,432
    Outlays.....................................................         -22,389              13         -22,376
President's request:
    Budget authority............................................          -8,842               0          -8,842
    Outlays.....................................................         -17,093               0         -17,093
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Totals adjusted for consistency with scorekeeping
  conventions.
\1\In addition to the amounts shown above, the bill includes $18.798 billion in emergency outlays in 2005
  flowing from the $25 billion supplemental for 2004 (Title IX). The bill contains other emergencies for 2005
  totaling $7.158 billion in budget authority and $7.054 billion in outlays. Including all emergencies, the bill
  totals $416.170 billion in budget authority and $427.657 billion in outlays in 2004 and 2005.
\2\This table compares Senate action to the House 302(b) allocation for information purposes only, not for
  budget enforcement purposes. The House has deemed 302(b) allocations for 2005 based on the 302(a)
  appropriations allocation set out in the conference agreement on S. Con. Res. 95, the 2005 budget resolution,
  which the House has passed.

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, breast cancer is the second leading cause 
of cancer death in the United States today, and about 40,000 women will 
die from the disease this year. It is important that we maintain 
funding in 2005 for the Department of Defense's Breast Cancer Peer 
Reviewed Research Program.
  The program has funded groundbreaking research, including the 
discovery of the drug Herceptin, which prolongs the lives of women with 
a particularly aggressive type of advanced breast cancer. This drug 
could not have been developed without research that was funded in part 
by the DOD Breast Cancer Research Program. This is a program, I should 
add, in which 90 percent of the funds go directly to research.
  An overwhelming, bipartisan majority in the Senate supports this 
program every year. This year 66 Senators signed a letter to 
appropriators urging the continuation of the DOD Breast Cancer Peer 
Reviewed Research Program earmark at a funding level of $150 million 
for FY '05.
  Mr. President, as we proceed to conference on the Department of 
Defense Appropriations bill, I urge my colleagues to maintain this 
level of funding for breast cancer research.
  Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to bring attention to an 
important program that could be facing fiscal shortfalls if we do not 
make necessary corrections. I am referring to my support for the 
Department of Defense Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program. 
This program is a proven success and I support a $150 million earmark 
for the DOD Peer Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program for fiscal 
year 2005.
  The American Cancer Society estimates that in 2004 there will be 
668,470 women diagnosed with cancer. Of this overall estimate of cases, 
32 percent will be breast cancer. The 2004 estimated deaths from breast 
cancer will be 15 percent. These statistics only reemphasize the 
importance of cancer research, and our continued need to fund efforts 
that will ultimately eliminate the number of deaths from breast cancer.
  Department of Defense Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program is 
a one-of-a-kind research program that uses an innovative grants 
structure which brings scientists and consumers together to make key 
policy decisions about breast cancer research. Since its inception 12 
years ago, this far-reaching, influential program has literally changed 
the way breast cancer research is done. The program has funded ground-
breaking research, including the discovery of the drug Herceptin, which 
prolongs the lives of women with a particularly aggressive type of 
advanced breast cancer. This drug could not have been developed without 
research that was funded in part by the DOD Peer Reviewed Breast Cancer 
Research Program. New approaches and innovations in research, such as 
these, are the keys to finding a cure.
  Not only is this program on the cutting edge of breast cancer 
research, but also is extremely streamlined. Every penny spent by this 
program and the researchers who receive funding are accounted for at a 
public meeting every 2 years. Ninety percent of the funds go directly 
to research and only 10 percent are used for administrative costs. I 
applaud this type of fiscal efficiency and hope that more research 
programs will be able to learn from the structure of this program.
  An overwhelming, bipartisan majority in the Senate supports this 
program every year. This year, 66 Senators, including myself, signed a 
letter addressed to the Senate Appropriations Committee urging the 
continuation of the DOD Breast Cancer Peer Review Research Program 
earmark with level funding of $150 million for FY '05.
  Unfortunately, the language in the Senate Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005 threatens the funding and 
unique structure of the Breast Cancer Peer Reviewed Research Program. 
The Senate bill combines all of the congressionally directed cancer 
research programs into one account and reduces the total funding 
available to all.
  As written, the Senate bill seriously threatens the integrity of the 
DOD breast cancer research program and will dismantle its one-of-a-kind 
peer review process involving patients and consumers that makes the 
program so successful and unique. The proposal will force cancer groups 
to compete with one another for reduced funding. And, a particularly 
dangerous component of the proposal is that it transfers funding to 
other cancer projects that are not recommended by a scientific peer 
reviewed process.
  Mr. President, we cannot afford to cut any cancer research programs, 
especially when the President's budget is planning to only increase the 
National Institutes of Health by $728 million, and increase the 
National Cancer Institute budget by only $100 million, which both fall 
short of previous years' requests. In addition the President's budget 
cuts funding to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by $408 
million. This proves troublesome for CDC programs, such as the National 
Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program which assists in 
funding State programs that help uninsured women undergo screenings for 
breast and cervical cancer. These inadequate funding requests fall 
drastically short of what the Institutes and CDC need in

[[Page 13801]]

order to carry out their cancer research and assistance. This only 
reiterates why we must preserve critical programs such as the 
Department of Defense Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program. I 
therefore call upon conferees to support the language passed in the 
House version of the Fiscal Year 2005 Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Department 
of Defense, DOD, Peer Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program. Almost 
12 years ago, when I looked into the issue of breast cancer research, I 
discovered that barely $90 million in Federal funds was spent on breast 
cancer research. So I joined with Senator Alfonse D'Amato, R-NY, on 
legislation to dedicate specific money from the DOD budget for breast 
cancer research. The legislation passed and overnight it doubled 
Federal funding for breast cancer research. Since then, funding for 
breast cancer research has been included in the Defense Department 
budget every year.
  Unfortunately, the language in the Senate Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005 threatens both the existing 
funding and the current structure of the Breast Cancer Peer Reviewed 
Research Program. The Senate bill combines all of the congressionally 
directed cancer research programs into one account and then reduces the 
total funding available. This will inevitably lead to a major cut in 
funding for this important program.
  The DOD Peer Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program has been an 
unqualified success in providing innovative approaches to breast cancer 
prevention, detection and treatment. Over the past several years, we 
have made a great deal of progress against breast cancer, but there is 
still a long way to go.
  More than 258,000 women are expected to be diagnosed with breast 
cancer and another 40,000 deaths are likely to result from this deadly 
cancer. Now is not the time to jeopardize a successful program that is 
critical to winning the battle against breast cancer.
  As the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005 
goes to conference, I plan to work to preserve the current structure 
and funding for this critical breast cancer research program. I urge my 
colleagues to support the language passed in the House and support a 
$150 million earmark for the DOD Peer Reviewed Breast Cancer Research 
Program for fiscal year 2005.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I support the Department of Defense, DoD, 
Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program. This program is a proven 
success and I support a $150 million earmark for the DoD Peer Reviewed 
Breast Cancer Research Program for fiscal year 2005.
  This one-of-a-kind research program uses an innovative grants 
structure that brings scientists and consumers together to make key 
policy decisions about breast cancer research. Since its inception 12 
years ago, this far-reaching, influential program has literally changed 
the way breast cancer research is done. It has become a model that 
other research programs have sought to replicate.
  The program has funded groundbreaking research, including the 
discovery of the drug Herceptin, which prolongs the lives of women with 
a particularly aggressive type of advanced breast cancer. This drug 
could not have been developed without research that was funded in part 
by the DoD Breast Cancer Research Program.
  Not only is this program on the cutting edge of breast cancer 
research, but also is extremely streamlined. Every penny spent by this 
program and the researchers who receive funding are accounted for at a 
public meeting every 2 years. Ninety percent of the funds go directly 
to research and only 10 percent are used for administrative costs. This 
kind of efficiency and prudence in spending is unheard of in other 
federally funding research programs.
  An overwhelming, bipartisan majority in the Senate supports this 
program every year. This year, 66 Senators signed the letter addressed 
to appropriators urging the continuation of the DoD Breast Cancer Peer 
Review Research Program earmark with level funding of $150 million for 
fiscal year 2005.
  Unfortunately, the language in the Senate Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005 threatens the funding and 
unique structure of the Breast Cancer Peer Reviewed Research Program. 
The Senate bill combines all of the congressionally Directed Cancer 
Research Programs into one account and reduces the total funding 
available to all.
  Because the Senate version lumps all the cancer programs into one 
pot, rather than maintaining separate earmarks, the proposal will have 
multiple, negative outcomes. As written, the Senate bill seriously 
threatens the integrity of the DoD breast cancer research program and 
will dismantle its one-of-a-kind peer review process involving patients 
and consumers that makes the program so successful and unique. The 
proposal will force cancer groups to compete with one another for 
reduced funding. And, a particularly dangerous component of the 
proposal is that it transfers funding to other cancer projects that are 
not recommended by a scientific peer reviewed process.
  We should ensure that all of the DoD's cancer research programs are 
fully funded. These programs play a critical role in the development of 
treatments and potential cures for cancer.
  As the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005 
goes to conference, I urge my colleagues to support the language passed 
in the House and preserve this critical program for breast cancer 
research.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the tradition 
of line-item funding for cancer research programs in the Department of 
Defense, DOD, appropriations bill. This practice has been abandoned in 
the fiscal year 2005 legislation before us now, and I fear that this 
could do great damage to the advances in cancer treatment that our 
scientists are working so hard to achieve every day.
  The DOD Peer-Reviewed Research Programs provide funding for critical, 
life-saving research on breast cancer, prostate cancer, and ovarian 
cancer. Each of these is a devastating illness that challenges hundreds 
of thousands of new patients and their families every year. The Peer-
Reviewed Research Programs are essential to bringing these families 
hope and new opportunities in cancer treatments.
  The prostate cancer research program uses an innovative grants 
structure that brings scientists and consumers together to make key 
policy decisions about prostate cancer research. Since its inception 8 
years ago, this far-reaching, influential program has literally changed 
the way prostate cancer research is done. It has become a model that 
other research programs have sought to replicate.
  In recent years, the DOD breast cancer program funded groundbreaking 
research, such as the discovery of the drug Herceptin, which prolongs 
the lives of women with a particularly aggressive type of advanced 
breast cancer. This drug could not have been developed without research 
that was funded in part by the DOD breast cancer research program.
  Like its counterparts for prostate cancer and breast cancer, the 
Ovarian Cancer Research Project fosters collaborative efforts and long-
term institutional commitments to ovarian cancer research focusing on 
prevention and early detection, which are key to the development of a 
sustained commitment to ovarian cancer research.
  Not only am I deeply disturbed by the cuts to these programs in the 
Senate bill, but it is my belief that given the Department of Defense's 
proven track record in conducting effective, efficient research to 
combat cancers and find new cures, the Department's efforts should 
instead be expanded to include desperately-needed research on other 
forms of the disease, including kidney cancer.
  For a disease that has received very little research funding to date, 
kidney cancer affects a surprisingly large number of people. In 2003, 
36,000 new cases were diagnosed, an increase of 12 percent over the 
previous year, while more than 12,000 individuals died of the disease. 
Supplementing current kidney

[[Page 13802]]

cancer research funding with additional money from the Department of 
Defense would be a significant step toward providing meaningful 
treatments for kidney cancer patients.
  My colleagues on both sides of the aisle have shown broad support for 
these programs in the past, urging the Senate to continue its support 
of each individual program. Many of us signed letters requesting that 
each program continue to receive at least the same amount of funding it 
received last year, which would have been consistent with the bill 
passed earlier this week by the House of Representatives.
  The House language is not ideal. It funds each of the three Peer-
Reviewed Research Programs at last year's levels, ignoring inflation 
and the increased cost of research. However, the House provision is far 
superior to a Senate version that forces cancer research programs to 
compete for a decreased amount of funding.
  As the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005 
goes to conference, I urge my colleagues to support the language passed 
in the House and preserve the integrity of each of these critical Peer-
Reviewed Research Programs.
  (At the request of Mr. Daschle, the following statement was ordered 
to be printed in the Record.)
 Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, as ranking democrat on the Committee 
on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I want to discuss two 
amendments that were included in the Defense Department Fiscal Year 
2005 authorization bill, which passed yesterday. These amendments will 
ensure that small businesses are included in the analysis of policies 
that affect the procurement strategies or affect the technology and 
industrial base of this Nation. Before I discuss these amendments, 
however, I would like to thank the committee's chair, Senator Olympia 
Snowe, for her leadership, and for working hand-in-hand with me on 
these amendments that are vital to ensuring that small businesses 
continue to have a voice in the Federal procurement arena.
  The Department of Defense is the largest purchaser of goods and 
services in the Federal Government. As a result, they are the driving 
force behind Federal agencies' ability to meet the Government-wide 
small business contracting goal of 23 percent. The Defense 
Authorization Act of 2004 included a provision requiring the 
administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, OFPP, to 
establish an advisory panel to review the laws and regulations 
regarding the use of commercial practices, performance-based 
contracting, the performance of acquisition functions across agency 
lines, and the use of Government-wide acquisition contracts, also known 
as GWACS.
  Many small businesses have contacted my office regarding the negative 
impact these GWACS have been having on their ability to compete for 
Federal contracts. They are concerned that GWACS are being 
disproportionately awarded to larger firms, denying small business 
their fair share of contracts. The amendment, offered by Senators 
Snowe, Coleman and myself, expands the authority of the advisory panel 
to include a report on the impact these tools have on small business 
concerns. It also allows the panel to offer recommendations regarding 
laws, regulations and policies they believe would afford small 
businesses increased opportunities to participate in the Federal 
procurement arena.
  With respect to the second amendment, I want to commend Senator Byrd 
for taking the initiative to develop an amendment to ensure that small 
businesses have a voice with respect to Federal Government work on the 
future of the national technology and industrial base.
  The DoD Authorization bill includes a provision establishing a 
Commission on the Future of the National Technology and Industrial 
Base. The duties of this 12-member, Presidentially-appointed commission 
include studying the issues associated with the future of the national 
technology and industrial base in the global economy. This study is 
particularly important with respect to the effect of our national 
technology and industrial base on United States national security and 
for assessing the future ability of meeting the objectives outlined in 
the bill. This amendment adds a provision to the study that will 
require that the role of small business concerns in strengthening the 
national technology and industrial base is incorporated in the report, 
due no later than March 1, 2007.
  Small businesses have proved time and time again that they can 
provide the goods and services needed by the Federal Government, often 
more efficiently and more cost effectively than their large 
competitors. Unfortunately, they are consistently treated as an 
afterthought or completely ignored when the Federal Government 
considers procurement policies outside of the Small Business 
Administration. While the SBA is essential for providing access to 
capital, training and counseling, and for assistance in gaining access 
to the Federal marketplace, the vast majority of contracts for goods 
and services come from other agencies, such as the Department of 
Defense.
  Small businesses should be provided the greatest opportunity to 
compete. When our national defense is in the process of regeneration 
and transitioning into a military of the future, as it is now, small 
businesses should be tapped to maximize the innovation, cost savings 
and efficiency they can contribute to the effort. Small businesses are 
critical to maintaining and strengthening the overall economy of the 
Nation and are the cornerstone of the Government's policy of ensuring a 
diverse supplier base. They should be included when the Government is 
developing industrial policy and considered in the analysis of policies 
that affect the procurement strategies or affect the technology and 
industrial base of this Nation. These amendments do just that. Again, I 
thank Senators Snowe and Byrd for their leadership and my colleagues 
for their support for this Nation's small businesses. I would also like 
to thank Chairman Warner and my colleague on the Senate Committee on 
Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Senator Levin, the Ranking Member 
of the Senate Committee on Armed Services for working closely with us 
and for making these amendments a part of this legislation.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, it is well recognized that mail sent from 
families and loved ones to U.S. forces based overseas has a tangible 
effect on troop morale. Concomitantly, mail that is delayed 
unnecessarily undermines morale and furthermore endangers the ability 
of absentee military voters to have their votes counted. Additionally, 
voting assistance programs that are ineffective undermine the ability 
of the absentee military voter to cast a vote. In an effort to improve 
these respective programs I have encouraged the Department of Defense 
to evaluate the effectiveness of the Military Postal Service Agency and 
the Voting Assistance Program to determine if these programs are 
sufficient in scope to resolve the problems that have been identified 
repeatedly in past reports and audits.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, late last night, after several weeks of 
floor debate, the Senate completed action on the Defense Authorization 
Act. Both that legislation and the pending measure, S. 2559, the 
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005, will enable us to make 
great strides towards providing our men and women in uniform with the 
equipment, benefits, and programs they need to carry out their critical 
missions. I would like to applaud the efforts of both committees to 
ensure that these brave men and women are provided for.
  Even though it passed just last night, the Appropriations Committee 
worked to provide funding levels that are generally commensurate with 
the authorization bill. This is very important, and it will enable us 
to continue to meet our obligations to support service members in the 
fight against terror. The bill includes many critical funding 
provisions to which I lend strong support, such as the funding to 
increase Army end strength by 20,000 soldiers.
  Unfortunately, and not surprisingly, the bill also includes a large 
number of unauthorized and unrequested provisions. I hope that the 
sponsors will carefully reconsider these damaging

[[Page 13803]]

provisions as the bill works its way through the legislative process. 
While I appreciate the hard work and the laudable intentions of the 
members of the Committee, we must all be alarmed at these 
appropriations earmarks. They limit the ability of our Defense 
Department to expend needed resources according to its funding 
priorities.
  With Americans deployed across the globe fighting terror, and with 
looming budget deficits at home, the Senate faces some tough choices. 
We must find a way to maintain our fiscal responsibility while fully 
providing for our military needs. The costs that go along with the 
conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq demand now, more than ever, a new 
fiscal sanity in approaching our appropriations bills. A half-a-
trillion dollar budget deficit means we simply cannot afford business 
as usual. We simply cannot continue the binge of pork barrel spending 
that consumes an ever growing proportion of our Federal budget. While 
the cost of an individual project may get lost in the fine print of 
lengthy bills, together, they all do real damage. Collectively, these 
earmarks significantly burden American taxpayers.
  Not surprisingly, along with the growth in deficit spending over the 
past few years, there also has been a significant growth in earmarks 
and pork barrel spending. In fact, according to information compiled by 
the Congressional Research Service, the total number of earmarks has 
grown from 4,126 in Fiscal Year 1994 to 14,040 in FY 2004. That's an 
increase of 240 percent in 10 years. In dollar terms, the earmarking 
has risen from $26.6 billion to $47.9 billion over the same period.
  Mr. President, based on the calculations of my office, the Fiscal 
Year 2002 Defense Appropriations Act contained $3.7 billion in pork. 
The conference report to the Fiscal Year 2003 Defense Appropriations 
Act contained $8.1 billion in pork, while the Senate version included 
$5.2 billion. The Fiscal Year 2004 Senate-passed Defense Appropriations 
Act contained well over $4 billion of pork. This year $6.9 billion was 
added in the bill and the report, a number which is much greater than 
last year's Senate version of the legislation. This is real money. 
Every year, countless important military and domestic programs go 
unfunded or underfunded. I find it hard to understand why we find the 
money to pay for member add ons, but then have to battle to fund 
important programs such as AmeriCorps.
  Projects that appear on the Defense Appropriations Member Add-ons 
List are items that are requested by Senators but were not included in 
the President's budget request. They did not appear on the Joint 
Chiefs' Unfunded Priority List, and they were not authorized in the 
Defense Authorization bill. These criteria have been useful in 
ferreting out programs of questionable merit, and in determining the 
relative priority of projects requested by members for strictly 
parochial reasons, often at the expense of the readiness of our armed 
forces. But, the fact remains that throughout the years in which I have 
been identifying these add-ons, no offsets have been provided for any 
project. In a time when some of our soldiers and sailors still receive 
food stamps, or live in inadequate housing, we somehow found a way to 
provide over $4 billion in unnecessary spending to the Defense 
Appropriations bill. For example, the Joint Chiefs provided a list of 
critical requirements above what was provided for in the President's 
Budget Request. That list totaled nearly $18 billion for fiscal year 
2005. We should provide additional funding for defense for items and 
programs which the Joint Chiefs need, not for programs that are 
important because of the state that they come from or because of the 
seniority of the Member of Congress.
  Mr. President, this is an election year and, once again, the members 
of the Appropriations Committee are touting their earmarks on their 
websites and in their press releases. One committee member listed 
$102.6 million in earmarks spread over 16 different projects, while 
another member lauds funding for the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial. What 
is missing from these releases is the story about the authorized 
programs that will not receive full funding because there is not enough 
money to go around. Wouldn't it be more responsible to spend this money 
on pay raises or other important morale boosters instead of on 
parochial interests?
  Earlier this week, I spoke at length on the Boeing 767 Tanker Lease 
Program so I will not take up much more of the Senate's time again now, 
except to say, that the amendment that was passed by the Senate in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 is critical 
because Congressional guidance is needed. The Air Force's conduct on 
its Tanker Lease Program has, to date, been unacceptable. With regards 
to the Boeing 767 Tanker Lease Program, the Department of Defense and 
the Air Force leadership have obfuscated, delayed, and withheld 
information from Congress and the taxpayers.
  Equally as unacceptable, the Appropriations Committee added $110 
million in this report in--a table, under the heading ``Tanker 
Replacement, Advance Procurement.'' There was no money for the tanker 
program in the President's defense budget submitted to Congress in 
February. The Senate Armed Services Committee did not authorize any 
funding for tanker recapitalization for fiscal year 2005. The Chief 
Staff of the Air Force, General John P. Jumper, USAF, did not request 
advance procurement for tanker replacement in his ``Fiscal Year 2005 
Unfunded Priority List,'' which he submitted to Congress in March 2005. 
The reason is simple--tanker replacement money is not needed NOW.
  This latest procurement earmark is disturbingly similar to the $30 
billion line item included in the Fiscal Year 2002 Defense 
Appropriations Act which gave rise to this entire controversy to begin 
with. The Air Force's proposal to acquire 100 Boeing KC-767A tankers 
was flawed from the beginning. Everything, including a complete 
investigation of possible Air Force misconduct, should be done to 
assure that this doesn't happen again.
  Aspects of that deal, ranging from how the original proposal passed 
through Congress to the improper conduct of senior executives at the 
Boeing Company, have been exhaustively reviewed and fundamentally 
criticized by the Senate Committee on Armed Services; the Senate 
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation; the Department of 
Justice; the Defense Department's Office of the Inspector General; the 
Defense Science Board; the Congressional Budget Office; the General 
Accounting Office; the Congressional Research Service; the Office of 
Management and Budget; the Defense Department's Office of Programs, 
Analysis and Evaluation; the Institute for Defense Analyses; the 
Industrial College of the Armed Forces, National Defense University and 
others. Notably, White House Chief of Staff Andy Card and former 
Defense Department Comptroller General Dov Zakheim have also weighed in 
with serious concerns about various aspects of the tanker program.
  Critically, the Defense Science Board task force found ``there is no 
compelling material or financial reason to initiate a replacement 
program prior to the completion of the Analysis of Alternatives, AoA, 
and the Mobility Capabilities Study, MCS.'' Moreover, the task force 
observed that the Air Force overstated both the amount of corrosion 
throughout the KC-135 fleet and the KC-135's operation and support cost 
growth. It also found that the KC-135E can fly to 2040. In other words, 
the `dominating rationale' cited by the Air Force to Congress for 
having taxpayers pay billions of dollars more for leasing Boeing's KC-
767A tankers than they would for buying them outright, has been 
conclusively shown to be without merit. The Air Force's representations 
on this issue remains a matter of continuing investigative concern. The 
likelihood that the analysis of alternatives, AOA, and mobility 
capabilities study, MCS, if done properly, will recommend an 
acquisition method for these tankers now known to be wholly unsuitable 
here, is probably minimal. So, the Secretary's decision appears fatal 
to at least the lease component of the proposal.

[[Page 13804]]

  Now what matters is that the AOA and MCS are conducted properly and 
objectively, and a new validated capabilities document, ORD, is 
completed that reflects, for the first time, the requirements of the 
warfighter. The Air Force's conduct to date in this matter has been 
egregious. The participation of the Air Force's FFRDC in the AOA is 
problematic. RAND has recently been receiving as much as $50 million 
per year from the Air Force and apparently prejudged the AOA in a 
recent report. Therefore, both should be disqualified from the process. 
The process going forward will remain an issue of continuing interest 
to me.
  The bottom line here is this. The amendment adopted in the Fiscal 
Year 2005 National Defense Authorization Act will do much to inject 
needed sunlight on a program whose development has been largely 
insulated from public scrutiny. The tanker amendment attempts to make 
sure that any effort by the Air Force to replace its fleet of tankers 
is done responsibly. We should expect no less from the Air Force.
  Some of the egregious examples of Defense pork for FY 2005, either in 
the bill or in the accompanying report, include:
  Section 8063 of the General Provisions. The text states that, ``each 
contract awarded by the Department of Defense during the current fiscal 
year for construction or service performed in whole or in part in a 
State which is not contiguous with another State and has an 
unemployment rate in excess of the national average rate of 
unemployment as determined by the Secretary of Labor, shall include a 
provision requiring the contractor to employ, for the purpose of 
performing that portion of the contract in such State that is not 
contiguous with another State, individuals who are residents of such 
State and who, in the case of any craft or trade, possess or would be 
able to acquire promptly the necessary skills.'' I am not making this 
text up. Let's call a spade a spade. This provision directly protects 
the jobs of only Hawaiians and Alaskans.
  As previously mentioned, $1.8 million, for the Lewis and Clark 
Bicentennial celebration. You don't need to have the exploration skills 
of Lewis and Clark to see that this is a path to higher deficits.
  $120 million for the Advanced Procurement of F-15s. The Air Force has 
decided to procure the F-22 to replace the F-15. Yet this earmark keeps 
the F-15 production line open, so I question the necessity of the F-22 
procurement in the numbers of aircraft and at the funding levels 
requested by the Air Force. Apparently we just decided to pay for both.
  $1 million for the Center for Political Logic Devices. I am the first 
one who would pay for logic if we could insert some into our political 
process, but this earmark won't do it.
  $11 million for the Chameleon Miniaturized Wireless System. 
Chameleons change colors, but one thing does not change is the 
unrequested provisions in this bill.
  $2 million for the Air Battle Captain program at the University of 
North Dakota. This provision sends students from West Point to North 
Dakota for their flight lessons. Instead of letting flight schools 
compete for the ability to train these cadets, we have earmarked their 
training to North Dakota. We are putting parochial interests over the 
necessity to provide the best training possible for the best price to 
our Army cadets.
  $6 million for the LISA inspector. Who is this Lisa, and why does it 
cost $6 million to inspect her?
  $4 million dollars for Project Albert. Hey Hey Hey. Seems like Albert 
could get pretty fat off all the pork in this bill.
  $4 million for Hibernation Genomics. Looking around the Senate, I see 
a few tired people, so maybe we a little hibernation is in order. But 
I'd prefer not to pay $4 million for it.
  $5.5 million for the C-135 Improved Waste Removal System. We need to 
improve the way we remove waste from this bill.
  $700,000 for the United States Army Reserve Citizen Soldier Memorial 
Park.
  Mr. President, I use humor in describing these earmarks, but the 
damage they do is deadly serious. They pull money away from legitimate 
funding priorities and they waste taxpayer dollars. Each year, many of 
the same earmarks appear in appropriations legislation, and each year I 
come to the floor and point them out to my colleagues. Some of the 
appropriators' perennial favorite projects include:
  $5 million for the Smart Truck. This provision, which directly lines 
the pockets of the auto industry in Detroit, is not exactly smart.
  $10 million for the 21st Century Truck. This program has been around 
for years and not once has the Department of Defense requested funding 
for it. While I'm sure we all would love to jump into a truck that 
could be in a James Bond movie, I'm not sure it is appropriate for the 
Department of Defense to pay for it.
  $8.0 million for the New England Manufacturing Supply Chain. This is 
above and beyond the $14 million earmarked for them over the last two 
years.
  $9 million for the Medical Free Electron Laser. The electrons might 
be free, but the laser sure isn't. This project was developed by the 
scientists at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee. The budget 
justification used by the DoD in previous years spelled out the plan to 
have this program funded through NIH by FY2003. Why hasn't this 
happened yet?
  $44 million for the Maui Space Surveillance System. Arizona is home 
to the Lowell Observatory. Why should we provide $44 million to Maui, 
when there are many observatories in the United States, such as Lowell, 
that offer many of the same benefits as the Maui site?
  $1 million for the Brown Tree Snakes. Once again, the brown tree 
snake has slithered its way into our defense appropriation bill. I'm 
sure the snakes are annoying--maybe even frightening to children and 
adults alike, but this funding does not belong in the Defense 
Appropriations Act.
  Mr. President, there are many earmarks that funnel dollars to worthy 
programs, such as breast cancer research, but there is no compelling 
national defense reason for these items to be on this piece of 
legislation. This type of critical research should be funded through 
the Labor/HHS Appropriations bill. Our soldiers and sailors need to be 
provided with the best equipment, housing, and support possible. Scarce 
defense dollars should be used for these defense purposes, not others. 
Some examples of these inappropriate earmarks include:
  $200 million for Peer Reviewed Cancer Research Program.
  $50 million Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program.
  $25 million for Hawaii Federal Health Care Network.
  $2.5 million for the Alaska Federal Health Care Network.
  $5 million for Pacific Island Health Care Referral.
  I could go on and on--and on and on and on--listing all of the 
examples of pork in this legislation. We simply need to reassess our 
priorities.
  This year's bill also includes a number of ``Buy America'' 
provisions. For example, it prevents the foreign purchase of welded 
shipboard anchor and mooring chain four inches in diameter and under. 
Another provision ensures that all carbon, alloy or steel plates are 
produced in the United States. Whew. I know we'll sleep better at night 
knowing that all of our carbon plates are manufactured in the U.S. Yet 
another section prohibits the Department of Defense from purchasing 
supercomputers from a foreign source.
  Mr. President, I continue to be very concerned about the potential 
impact on readiness of our restrictive trade policies with our allies. 
Every year, Buy America restrictions cost the Department of Defense and 
the American taxpayers $5.5 billion. From a philosophical point of 
view, I oppose these types of protectionist policies, and from an 
economic point of view they are ludicrous. Free trade is both an 
important element in improving relations among nations and essential to 
economic growth. From a practical standpoint, ``Buy America'' 
restrictions could seriously impair our ability to compete freely in 
international markets and also could result in the loss of

[[Page 13805]]

existing business from long-standing trade partners.
  Some legislative enactments over the past several years have had the 
effect of establishing a monopoly for a domestic supplier in certain 
product lines. This not only adds to the pressure for our allies to 
``Buy European'' but it also raises the costs of procurement for DoD, 
and cuts off access to potential state-of-the-art technologies. In 
order to maintain our troop strength and force readiness, the DoD must 
be able to be equipped with the best technologies available, regardless 
of country of origin. This would ensure both price and product 
competition.
  Defense exports improve interoperability with friendly forces--
increasingly necessary as we operate in coalition warfare and 
peacekeeping missions. These exports also increase our influence over 
recipient country actions, and, in a worse case scenario, allow the 
U.S. to terminate them. Exports lower the unit costs of systems to the 
U.S. military, and provide the same economic benefits to the U.S. as 
all other exports--well paying jobs, improved balance of trade, and 
increased tax revenue. These are really issues of acquisition policy, 
not appropriations matters. We had a floor debate on this a few days 
ago during consideration of the Defense Authorization Act. There is no 
justification for including these provisions in the Appropriations Act.
  Finally, one of the more egregious ``Buy America'' provisions in this 
legislation is a section in which we dictate that we must buy only 
American seafood. While this provision has been included in a previous 
year's funding, I must ask: What is the compelling Department of 
Defense need to protect the American seafood industry? Why is an entire 
industry singled out for protection?
  Mr. President, this bill spends money on Lewis and Clark and funnels 
cash to a center on ``political logic devices.'' It protects the 
mooring chain industry and ensures that we only buy American seafood. 
If there is any food that should be mentioned in this bill, Mr. 
President, it is that Other White Meat. There is enough pork in this 
bill to feed an army--if only that we used our defense appropriations 
to do that. I suppose it is more important to pay Project Albert.
  I wish it were not necessary for me to come to the Senate floor with 
every appropriations bill to criticize the amount of unrequested 
spending in the legislation. I do so because I believe it is critical 
for American taxpayers to understand where the money in their pockets 
is really going. I urge my colleagues to stop ``porking up'' our 
appropriations bills. In a time of huge spending deficits and scarce 
dollars, it is long past time to stop feeding at the trough.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, last week, the Senate by a vote of 94 to 3, 
passed the Reed-Hagel-McCain amendment to increase the Army's end 
strength by 20,000.
  This overwhelming vote was an acknowledgement that the administration 
has consistently underestimated and tried to avoid publicly admitting 
the real number of troops needed to win the peace in Iraq. That 
amendment was one step to bring our Iraq policy in line with the 
realities of Iraq.
  However, the Defense authorization bill and the Defense 
appropriations bill before us today both continue to sidestep the 
budgetary realities of our military involvement in Iraq. Just 2 days 
ago, Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz testified that ``it's entirely 
possible'' that U.S. troops could be stationed in Iraq for years.
  If a long-term deployment of U.S. troops is ``entirely possible'', 
then the administration and Congress have a duty to properly budget for 
it.
  When we know we are adding more troops and we know that we have 
significant commitments in Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea, Colombia, and 
elsewhere, we should put those costs into the annual Defense 
appropriations bill, not a supplemental appropriations bill or a 
contingency fund as the administration calls it.
  By making these known costs subject to supplemental appropriations, 
we not only pretend that these costs are not long term, we also create 
an ongoing budget problem for the Army. This situation is all the more 
shocking when one considers the consistent claims from both sides of 
the aisle that we will provide our military with whatever it needs to 
win the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Indeed, since the Iraq war began, 
the Army has had to continuously cobble together the resources to pay 
for more troops out of its regular budget. So instead of replacing or 
repairing destroyed equipment, buying HUMVEEs or body armor, or 
fulfilling other obligations, the Army has had to eat its seed corn.
  It is true that the Army has also gotten supplemental funds on 
occasion to pay for additional soldiers, but only after it has 
exhausted all of the reprogramming options I just mentioned.
  In the short run, reprogramming and supplemental appropriations are 
an option, but Iraq, Afghanistan and Korea are not options. They are 
real, and the pressure on the Army's budget is real. Unless, we 
increase the size of the Army's regularly appropriated budget to 
include the costs of the Army's real personnel levels, I fear that the 
Army will continue to delay needed expenditures, put off necessary 
investments, all so the administration can attempt to minimize the 
costs of the war on terror.
  I want to be clear, this is not the fault of the Appropriations 
Committee. It has done its job well and has continually worked to make 
the Army whole. But, the committee and the bill before us are 
constrained by the administration's inflexibility and demands that 
known, long-term costs must be hidden in contingency reserve accounts 
and other budgetary maneuvers.
  It would be my desire to increase the size of the Army's personnel 
budget by moving the $2 billion in supplemental funds for this very 
purpose into the Army's annual fiscal year 2005 appropriation. I 
believe it would be more appropriate to take the $2 billion we know 
we'll spend out of the supplemental section of this bill and put it 
into the Army's regular budget just like all of the Army's other long 
term costs.
  In deference to the chairman and ranking member and the fact that 
such a proposal would likely require waiving the Budget Act as well as 
the Senate's endorsement of my amendment and Senator Levin's amendment 
that calls on the administration to put the true costs of Army end 
strength in its fiscal year 2006 budget request, I did not offer this 
amendment.
  However, if the administration persists in trying to sweep these 
costs under the rug, Congress must act to include these funds in the 
regular budget of the Army.
  I am also concerned that this year's bill has consolidated the Peer 
Reviewed Cancer Research Program under a single line item. While the 
peer review programs are united in their goal of improving detection, 
treatment and hopefully one day, prevention of deadly diseases such as 
leukemia, prostate, ovarian and breast cancer, they are each unique in 
their design, focus and stage of development. However, there is a valid 
concern that placing these programs under a single line item may 
inevitably pit them against one another. The fledgling Ovarian Cancer 
Research Program, which was only established in 1997 and has been level 
funded at $10 million per year, will be competing with the much larger 
breast cancer program that has been in operation for over 12 years and 
is funded at a healthy $150 million.
  I hope that I and other Senators can work with the Chairman and 
ranking member to find a way to protect the critical and specific 
health research on cancer that the Department of Defense has been able 
to support in the past.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Department 
of Defense--DOD--Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program. This 
program is a proven success and I support a $150 million earmark for 
the DOD Peer Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program for Fiscal Year 
2005.
  This one-of-a-kind research program uses an innovative grants 
structure that brings scientists and consumers together to make key 
policy decisions about breast cancer research. Since its inception 12 
years ago, this far-reaching, influential program has literally

[[Page 13806]]

changed the way breast cancer research is done. It has become a model 
that other research programs have sought to replicate.
  The program has funded ground-
breaking research, including the discovery of the drug Herceptin, which 
prolongs the lives of women with a particularly aggressive type of 
advanced breast cancer. This drug could not have been developed without 
research that was funded in part by the DOD Peer Reviewed Breast Cancer 
Research Program.
  Not only is this program on the cutting edge of breast cancer 
research, but also is extremely streamlined. Every penny spent by this 
program and the researchers who receive funding are accounted for at 
public meeting every 2 years. Ninety percent of the funds go directly 
to research and only 10 percent are used for administrative costs. This 
kind of efficiency and prudence in spending is unheard of in other 
federally funding research programs.
  An overwhelming, bipartisan majority in the Senate supports this 
program every year. This year, 66 Senators, including myself, signed 
the letter addressed to appropriators urging the continuation of the 
Department of Defense Breast Cancer Peer Review Research Program 
earmark with level funding of $150 million for fiscal year 2005.
  Unfortunately, the language in the Senate Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005 threatens the funding and 
unique structure of the Breast Cancer Peer Reviewed Research Program. 
The Senate bill combines all of the Congressionally Directed Cancer 
Research Programs into one account and reduces the total funding 
available to all.
  Because the Senate version lumps all the cancer programs into one 
pot, rather than maintaining separate earmarks, the proposal will have 
multiple, negative outcomes. As written, the Senate bill seriously 
threatens the integrity of the Department of Defense breast cancer 
research program and will dismantle its one-of-a kind peer review 
process involving patients and consumers that makes the program so 
successful and unique. The proposal will force cancer groups to compete 
with one another for reduced funding. And, a particularly dangerous 
component of the proposal is that it transfers funding to other cancer 
projects that are not recommended by a scientific peer reviewed 
process.
  I have heard the success stories that have manifested as a result of 
research that has come out of this program. I regularly meet with women 
and men alike, from my Commonwealth of Virginia, who commend the 
positive and innovative advances that this program produces. Just last 
month, I met with the Virginia Breast Cancer Foundation. Let me tell 
you, I believe Virginia is a model for other States on many issues, but 
I must say that the Virginia Breast Cancer Foundation is a leader in 
its advocacy for this issue.
  As the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005 
goes to conference, I urge my colleagues to support the language passed 
in the House and preserve this important program for breast cancer 
research. I understand that we are fighting a war on terror, but many 
individuals on our home front are fighting for their lives. I yield the 
floor.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask for third reading of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the engrossment of the 
amendments and third reading of the bill.
  The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a 
third time.
  The bill was read a third time.
  Mr. STEVENS. We have already ordered the yeas and nays. This is final 
passage, Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the 
question is, Shall the bill pass? The yeas and nays have been 
previously ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I announce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Lugar) 
is necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) 
is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 98, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 149 Leg.]

                                YEAS--98

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Cornyn
     Corzine
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (FL)
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Kerry
     Lugar
       
  The bill (H.R. 4613), as amended, was passed.
  (The bill will be printed in a future edition of the Record.)
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, on behalf of my good friend and co-
chairman, I thank the Senate for coming together so quickly behind this 
enormous bill. This is the largest Defense appropriations bill in 
history, but it takes into account the needs of our men and women in 
uniform throughout the world. As I said, some 120 different countries 
have our men and women in uniform. It takes care of the great problems 
for those men and women in harm's way.
  We thank all of our colleagues for their support and for their 
confidence in this bill. I again thank the staff.
  I am overawed by the fact that it is a unanimous vote on this 
unanimous bill. I think it is a symbol to the country that we are 
willing to come together in times of crisis.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate insist on its 
amendment, request a conference with the House on the disagreeing 
votes, and the Chair then appoint conferees on the part of the Senate.
  There being no objection, the Presiding Officer (Mr. Chambliss) 
appointed Mr. Stevens, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Specter, Mr. Domenici, Mr. 
Bond, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Gregg, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Burns, 
Mr. Inouye, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Dorgan, 
Mr. Durbin, Mr. Reid, and Mrs. Feinstein.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I congratulate Chairman Stevens and the 
ranking member of the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee on the 
passage of the bill. It is my understanding this is one of the fastest, 
if not the fastest, Defense appropriations bills ever considered in the 
Senate. I thank them. I will have more to say a little bit later 
tonight about this.

                          ____________________