[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 21979-21983]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006

  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of H.R. 2863, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 2863) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and 
     for other purposes.

  Mr. FRIST. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Virginia is recognized.
  (The remarks of Mr. Warner are printed in today's Record under 
``Morning Business.'')
  (The remarks of Mr. Warner pertaining to the introduction of S. 1810 
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: It is my 
understanding we are on the bill for appropriations for our defense 
purposes under the management of the distinguished Presiding Officer. 
Am I correct?
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator is correct, the Defense 
appropriations bill.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, this is a matter that I have discussed 
with the managers of the bill as well as, on several occasions, our 
distinguished Republican and Democratic leaders. On behalf of Senator 
Levin and myself, I file today the 2006 authorization bill which has 
been prepared by the Committee on Armed Services. It was taken up by 
the Senate some weeks ago but, due to schedule pressures, we did not 
have the opportunity to finish that bill.
  I emphasize that Senator Levin and I jointly are taking this action 
today. We do so having also worked very conscientiously with our two 
leaders to prepare a unanimous consent request, which is still in the 
works, by which our bill can once again be brought up as a freestanding 
measure and the Senate act upon it. I will not dwell at this time on 
the various options we are discussing as to how that UC is drawn up. 
Senator Levin and I believe that it is imperative, on behalf of the men 
and women of the Armed Forces, that this bill be considered in a timely 
fashion. As we continue our work on the UC, I have to seize upon this 
opportunity, together with Senator Levin, to file our bill as a 
proposed amendment to the appropriations bill, together with a 
managers' package, a proposed managers' amendment, of some 80 
amendments that Senator Levin, since the time of the original 
consideration of our bill, and I have looked at, agreed, and would be 
seeking unanimous consent for the incorporation of those amendments in 
our bill.
  The armed services bill was acted on with some 31 amendments at the 
time it was on the floor. So we have the original bill with 31 
amendments which were agreed to in the course of several days of 
deliberation. Again, the Defense authorization act is too important to 
our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, and the national security 
of our country for the Senate not to complete action on it. If we 
cannot achieve unanimous consent prior to the final passage of this 
bill, it is the intent of Senator Levin and myself to urge upon the 
Senate the incorporation of the Defense authorization bill, together 
with at least a first managers' package of 80 amendments. For the 
convenience of Senators, I ask unanimous consent that a list of those 
80 amendments and a brief description and the Senators, some 68 in 
number, who are affected by this managers' package, be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 PROPOSED MANAGER'S AMENDMENT FOR THE FY 2006 DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     No.            Senator             Subject            Comments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...........  Warner............  Tech mil con $      1396
                                   change.
2...........  McCain............  US Naval Reserve..  1438
3...........  Craig.............  Casualty Assurance  1473
4...........  DeWine............  AFIT..............  1356
5...........  Grassley..........  WCFs..............  1481
6...........  Warner............  SARA..............  NEW
7...........  Warner............  Court House.......  1562
8...........  Obama.............  Composite Health..  1362
9...........  Hatch.............  depot maintenance.  1516
10..........  Feinstein.........  NPT...............  1410
11..........  Lieberman.........  DSB Micro.........  1361
12..........  Graham............  Savannah..........  1387
13..........  Martinez..........  Gitmo.............  1885
14..........  Bayh..............  civil relief act..  1334
15..........  Feinstein.........  Milamar...........  1514-milcon
16..........  Nelson, Bill......  aerostat..........  NEW
17..........  Warner............  DNI Flag..........  1567
18..........  Graham............  sec 712--Health...  1358
19..........  Warner............  Highbrite.........  1560-mod; $1.5
                                                       million
20..........  Allard............  land Conveyance...  1355-milcon
21..........  Warner............  Acto Demil........  1559-mod; $1
                                                       million
22..........  Domenici..........  DOEmoney..........  1543
23..........  Lugar.............  Cap Cost..........  1407
24..........  Warner/Levin......  Test Reserve......  NEW
25..........  Vitter............  DSB Study.........  1471
26..........  Conrad............  500 icbm..........  NEW
27..........  Thune.............  Space Radar.......  NEW
28..........  Roberts...........  JPATS.............  NEW; $10 million
29..........  Allard............  Rocky Flats.......  1506-mod; (tuck)
30..........  Santorum..........  Rapid iv pumps....  1329-mod; $1
                                                       million
31..........  Roberts...........  Aging Acft........  NEW; $4 million

[[Page 21980]]

 
32..........  Lieberman.........  HH60..............  1434; $ neutral
33..........  Inouye............  SROTC.............  NEW
34..........  Hutchison.........  NASA R&D..........  NEW
35..........  Santorum..........  Warhead/grenades..  NEW; $1 million
36..........  Reed..............  joint small arms..  1316-mod; $5
                                                       million
37..........  Akaka.............  foreign language    NEW
                                   council.
38..........  Ensign............  point of            NEW; $10 million
                                   maintenance.
39..........  Ensign............  handheld            NEW; $4.5 million
                                   searchlight.
40..........  McCain............  Alt Acquisition...  1555-mod;
41..........  Byrd..............  Iraq and            1568
                                   Afghanistan.
42..........  Durbin............  Acq MDAP..........  1578
43..........  Dole..............  Berry.............  1522-mod;
44..........  Coleman...........  Foreign language..  NEW
45..........  Lott..............  Arrow.............  NEW; $80 million
                                                       tuck
46..........  Bingaman..........  Field Array.......  NEW; $3 million
47..........  Domenici..........  Long wavelength     1544-mod; 6
                                   array.              million
48..........  Smith.............  force protection..  NEW
49..........  Warner............  GPS...............  NEW
50..........  Kennedy...........  Defense business    NEW; $40 million
                                   reserve.
51..........  Clinton...........  Fire protection     1444
                                   services.
52..........  DeWine............  Emergency services  1534
53..........  McCain............  Commercial          NEW
                                   satellites.
54..........  Murray............  local education...  1348-mod
55..........  Nelson, Ben.......  parental leave....  NEW
56..........  Warner............  legal assistance..  NEW
57..........  Akaka.............  Quality of life...  1404
58..........  Biden.............  Vaccines..........  1448
59..........  Boxer.............  DOD mental........  1519
60..........  Hutchison.........  Oral special pay..  1478
61..........  Reed..............  nonstrategic nukes  NEW
62..........  Obama.............  Avian flu.........  1453
63..........  Landrieu..........  PTSD..............  1451
64..........  Dole..............  Mental Health       NEW
                                   counselors.
65..........  Feingold..........  Travel............  1367
66..........  Thomas............  vets objects......  1469
67..........  Sarbanes..........  fed charter korea.  1445
68..........  Clinton/Collins...  financial services  NEW
69..........  Kerry.............  Dependent housing.  1502
70..........  Leahy.............  BAH...............  1424
71..........  Levin.............  BRAC tribes.......  1495
72..........  Byrd..............  chaplain..........  NEW
73..........  Dodd..............  call to service...  NEW
74..........  Santorum..........  home school.......  NEW
75..........  Warner............  tech to NGR.......  NEW
76..........  Conrad............  Predator..........  1548; IFF funds
77..........  McCain............  recruit and         NEW
                                   retention.
78..........  Feingold..........  Foreign language..  NEW
79..........  Kerry.............  Project Sheriff...  NEW
80..........  Allard............  High altitude.....  1362-mod
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Mr. WARNER. By way of historical context, I would like to point out 
the following: There is an unbroken record for the last 45 years of 
Senate history that the Senate has passed an annual Defense 
authorization bill. The Senate and House have come to a conference 
agreement on and the President has signed that conference into law as 
the National Defense Authorization Act. Only once before has the 
chairman of the Armed Services Committee had to resort to the rare 
parliamentary procedure of proposing that that bill, the entire Defense 
authorization bill, be placed upon another legislative matter. That was 
in the year 1988.
  Time is short. We must be reasonable in the amount of time we have 
been debating both the authorization bill and the appropriations bill. 
I ask for my colleagues' consideration and restraint in offering 
amendments to the appropriations bill, as well as to the authorization 
bill, hopefully, to achieve the unanimous consent agreement, which I 
hope will be offered in the next few days, to enable the authorization 
bill to become a freestanding bill with a designated number of 
amendments, with designated time agreements, and a clear estimate for 
both the Republican and Democratic leaders as to the number of days 
that would be required for completion. That will all be set forth, 
hopefully, in the next few days in a UC request.
  We must be aware of the importance of the measure, the authorization 
bill. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, 
guardsmen, Active Reserve and National Guard, and countless civilians 
who support military, diplomatic, and humanitarian operations are 
serving valiantly in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations to secure 
our national security. This bill would provide them a broad range, 
literally a million-plus individuals in uniform and civilians, with 
better equipment to do their daily jobs and enhanced quality of life 
for themselves and their families through pay raises and benefits and 
the like.
  For example, without this bill being acted upon by the Senate, we 
could not increase the death gratuity to $100,000, which the Senate 
strongly desires, for survivors of military members whose death 
resulted from wounds, injuries, or illnesses incurred under combat-
related conditions or in a combat operation or a combat zone. We could 
not increase TRICARE benefits for the children of survivors. We could 
not provide the military services with the authorities for bonuses and 
other incentives needed to meet the troublesome recruiting situation 
today. We could not implement new assistance to school districts with 
significant enrollment increases in military-dependent students to stop 
troop relocations, creation of new units, and realignments under the 
BRAC Commission and, above all, the annual pay raises which the 
Congress provides for the men and women.
  In addition to the above, the threat reduction program, which is 
designed to keep nuclear materials and expertise away from terrorists, 
would expire. Weapons systems costs would increase because multiyear 
procurement authorities would not be enacted. Special acquisition 
authorities designed to facilitate the rapid procurement of 
technologies to prevent casualties from terrorist roadside bombs, or 
IEDs, would fail to go into effect. Military construction and family 
housing programs would be jeopardized, including over $1.5 billion to 
fund projects in support of communities that will be affected by the 
2005 BRAC round, if that is eventually becoming law. These are a few of 
the essential authorities contained in the legislative provisions of 
this year's bill, something that I am proud to say the Senate Armed 
Services Committee has worked on since January of this year and 
resulted in 278 legislative provisions as contained in this bill.
  I respectfully ask my colleagues to support my efforts and that of 
Senator Levin in bringing the Defense authorization bill to the floor.
  As I said, I rise on behalf of myself and Senator Levin to announce 
that we have taken what I consider extraordinary action by filing two 
amendments to the pending bill. It is with

[[Page 21981]]

great reluctance that I propose these amendments to the Defense 
Appropriations Act. But I do so only with the interests of the men and 
women of our armed forces at heart.
  The first amendment consists of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2006--including not only the version of the bill 
unanimously reported out of the Armed Services Committee on May 17, but 
also 31 amendments added to the bill when it was on the floor in July.
  Senator Levin and I, with our respective leaders, are trying to work 
out a unanimous consent agreement that would return the Defense 
authorization bill to the floor as a stand-alone bill. However, in the 
absence of that agreement, we have to leave open the option of 
including this bill on another legislative vehicle. The Defense 
authorization act is just too important to our soldiers, sailors, 
airmen and Marines and the national security of our country for the 
Senate not to complete action on the bill. If we cannot do this as a 
stand-alone bill, we need to find another way to bring this bill into 
law.
  The second amendment we are offering today contains additional 
amendments that are agreed and ready to be included in a ``managers' 
package'' to the Defense authorization act. I offer this amendment to 
illustrate to my colleagues the significant progress that has been made 
on this bill so far. This new managers' package contains 80 amendments 
on behalf of 67 Senators. Together with the action already taken on 
this bill in July, our colleagues can clearly see that nearly every 
U.S. Senator has made an important contribution to the Defense 
authorization act.
  I am committed to making this ``managers' package'' the first 
amendment to be considered to the Defense authorization bill once it is 
taken up as a separate bill. We are not finished reviewing proposed 
amendments. The committee is still working through a number of 
amendments that I expect would be included in a second managers' 
package.
  Since January 1961, the Senate has passed an annual Defense 
authorization bill. Each and every year, for 45 years, the Senate and 
the House have come to a conference agreement on and the President has 
signed into law a National Defense Authorization Act. Only once before 
has the chairman of the Armed Services Committee had to resort to the 
rare parliamentary procedure of proposing to put the entire defense 
authorization bill on another bill. This occurred in 1988. As the 
custodian of this important piece of legislation, I find I am left with 
very few options this year to ensure Congress can adequately support 
our troops by passing this bill.
  I, with my friend Carl Levin, am willing to do whatever it takes to 
pass this bill. Time is short and we must be reasonable in the amount 
of time we spend debating this bill. I ask for my colleagues' 
consideration and restraint in offering additional amendments to this 
bill and to support a unanimous consent agreement to limit the number 
of contentious amendments that may require time to debate on the floor. 
At the same time, Senator Levin and I pledge to work with Senators to 
accept as many amendments as possible in a managers' package.
  Our responsibility to consider and pass the Defense authorization 
bill goes beyond statutory requirements, floor schedules, and 
historical precedent. We must also be aware of the importance of this 
measure to our men and women in uniform around the world. Hundreds of 
thousands of soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen--
active, reserve, and National Guard--and, countless civilians who 
support military, diplomatic and humanitarian operations are serving 
valiantly in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations to secure hard-won 
military successes and to preserve peace and freedom. This bill will 
provide them with better equipment to do their daily jobs, and an 
enhanced quality of life for themselves and their families. Together we 
can and must complete this bill for them.
  Without this bill, DoD could not, for example, increase the death 
gratuity to $100,000 for survivors of military members whose death 
resulted from wounds, injuries, or illnesses incurred under combat-
related conditions or in a combat operation or a combat zone; increase 
TRICARE benefits for the children of survivors; provide the military 
services the authorities and pays needed to enhance recruitment and 
retention in the active and reserve forces; and implement new 
assistance to school districts with significant enrollment increases in 
military dependent students due to troop relocations, creation of new 
units and realignments under BRAC.
  In addition, authorities related to the Cooperative Threat Reduction 
Program which is designed to keep nuclear materials and expertise away 
from terrorists would expire. Weapon systems costs would increase 
because multiyear procurement authorities would not be enacted. Special 
acquisition authorities designed to facilitate the rapid procurement of 
technologies to prevent casualties from terrorist roadside bombs or 
IEDs would not go into effect. Military construction and family housing 
programs would be jeopardized, including over $1.5 billion to fund 
projects in support of the 2005 BRAC round.
  These are just a few of the essential authorities contained in the 
278 legislative provisions in this year's bill.
  So I ask my colleagues to support Senator Levin's and my efforts to 
bring the Defense authorization bill to the floor. We are all mindful 
of the risks members of the U.S. Armed Forces face every day and of the 
sacrifices made by the families and communities that support them. Our 
men and women in uniform have been asked to do much in the past year, 
and they have responded in the finest traditions of the generations of 
Americans that preceded them. The American people are proud of their 
Armed Forces for what they have accomplished, and for the manner in 
which they represent American values and the generosity of America. It 
is time for us in the Senate to do our part.
  With the understanding that the two bills are filed, I yield the 
floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cornyn.) The amendments will be filed for 
the Record.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I join the Chairman of the Senate Armed 
Services Committee in filing the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2006, as an amendment to this bill. I also join the 
chairman in filing a managers' amendment incorporating many of the 
amendments that Members are offering to our bill. We and our staffs are 
working hard, and hope to clear more amendments as we move forward.
  This is not our preferred approach to this issue. We have always 
brought up and completed action on the Defense authorization bill as a 
freestanding bill in the past, and we would prefer to do so this year. 
Indeed, we have made and are continuing to make every effort to do so. 
I remain optimistic that we will be able to reach agreement to proceed 
to and complete action on the Defense authorization bill and that it 
will not be necessary to take up this amendment.
  This bill was unanimously reported out of the Armed Services 
Committee all the way back in May. It was brought to the Senate floor 2 
months later, at the end of July. In the last week before the August 
recess, we attempted to enter a unanimous consent agreement which would 
have concluded debate on the bill in less that 2 days. Unfortunately, 
the Republican leadership rejected this proposal and pulled the bill 
off the floor before action could be completed, so that the Senate 
could instead consider the gun manufacturers' liability bill.
  Since that time, we have made every effort to bring the bill back up 
as a freestanding measure, but without success. We have repeatedly 
asked the Republican leadership for floor time. We have offered to 
enter into agreements regarding the relevance of amendments, and the 
number of amendments, so as to limit the amount of time that would be 
taken by debate. So far, none of these efforts have borne fruit.
  Mr. President, more than 4 months have now passed since this bill was 
reported out of the Armed Services Committee. The fiscal year covered 
by the

[[Page 21982]]

bill began last week. The Senate truly needs to consider this bill, and 
if bringing it to the floor as an amendment is the only way to get that 
consideration, we have an obligation to try.
  At a time when members of our Armed Forces are performing heroically, 
both at home and overseas, to make our country safer and stronger, our 
military both needs and deserves all of the support that this Congress 
can provide. More than 70,000 active duty and National Guard troops 
have been sent to the gulf coast to assist in the recovery from 
Hurricane Katrina. These troops are playing a critical role in 
conducting search and rescue missions, evacuating displaced persons, 
providing security in impacted areas, delivering essential food, water 
and medicine, and rebuilding damaged infrastructure throughout the 
region.
  At the same time, roughly 138,000 U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and 
marines are engaged in taking on an aggressive insurgency in Iraq, 
another 17,000 remain in harm's way in Afghanistan, and tens of 
thousands more are supporting the war effort through deployments 
thousands of miles from home. Our Armed Forces also continue to bear 
the brunt of the continuing effort to keep the peace in Kosovo and the 
Sinai, and contain the threat of North Korea--while remaining prepared 
to execute other missions in support of the national military strategy.
  Some of these troops deployed overseas are from the gulf coast area. 
Some will soon return home to find that Katrina has damaged or 
destroyed their homes. Some will have nothing left. Passage of the 
national Defense bill will improve their quality of life while they 
remain on active duty and when serving on hurricane recovery duty. It 
will send an important message to them and to their families that we, 
as a nation, understand their loss and appreciate their service. 
Failure to pass the Defense bill would send the opposite message.
  At a time when members of our Armed Forces are performing heroically, 
both at home and overseas, to make our country safer and stronger, it 
would be unconscionable to give the Defense authorization bill less 
than top legislative priority. Our military both needs and deserves all 
of the support that this Congress can provide.
  First and foremost, the Defense authorization bill would support our 
troops by improving compensation and quality of life for our service 
men and women and their families as they face the hardships imposed by 
continuing military operations within the United States and around the 
world. For instance, the bill would provide funding for a 3.1 percent 
across-the-board pay raise for military personnel; a $70 million 
increase in childcare and family assistance services for military 
families; and $50 million in supplemental educational aid to local 
school districts affected by the assignment or location of military 
families.
  The bill would also provide needed funding for the continuation of 
our military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. For example, the bill 
would authorize a $50 billion supplemental for continued operations in 
Iraq and Afghanistan, add hundreds of millions of dollars to the 
President's budget needed for force protection gear, up-armored 
vehicles, and a Joint Improvised Explosive Device Task Force, increase 
the Army's active-duty end strength by 20,000, and authorize the 
continuation of the Commanders' Emergency Response Program.
  If we fail to enact this bill in a timely manner, we will hurt our 
men and women in uniform. The military's authority to pay bonuses and 
special pays to our men and women in uniform would expire, exacerbating 
an already troublesome problem we are facing with recruitment and 
retention. The enhanced death gratuity of $100,000 and the increased 
life insurance benefits that we enacted for servicemembers earlier this 
year would lapse and substantially lower benefits would be reinstated. 
More than $6.0 billion in military construction and family housing 
projects to improve the conditions in which our servicemembers work and 
live would be unable to proceed.
  The Senate obviously has a lengthy agenda for the rest of the year. 
Some of the items on this agenda are undoubtedly important, but we 
should not pursue them at the expense of our men and women in uniform. 
If we truly value the contribution that our Armed Forces have made and 
continue to make every day at home and abroad, we should take up and 
pass a Defense authorization bill--preferably as a freestanding bill 
but, if not, as an amendment to the pending legislation.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the Senator from Hawaii and I understand 
full well the problems facing the chairman and ranking member of the 
Armed Services Committee. We want to work with them to the maximum 
extent possible. However, as we have informed the chairman, the Senator 
from Virginia, we feel that bringing that bill here without a time 
agreement, to call it up without a time agreement, would mean that we 
would face some 100 to 200 amendments, as the chairman and ranking 
member of the Armed Services Committee have faced in the past. In my 
conversations with Department of Defense officials, particularly the 
uniformed members of that Department, it is clear that we must have 
this bill to the President and signed before the middle of November. 
The Appropriations Committee had a series of reprogramming of 2006 
moneys, done just before September 30, to assure that liquidity was 
there to maintain our forces in the field. Under the continuing 
resolution, we have no such flexibility now.
  The flexibility that comes from having a full year's bill out in 
front of the Department is absolutely necessary at this time. We are at 
war. We are involved in a global war on terror. If anyone heard General 
Abizaid's briefing for us and the one that was done publicly, we have 
to realize that we are facing what looks like the beginning of a new 
crusade by militant terrorists of the Islamic world. We cannot afford 
to delay this bill.
  I say to my good friend--and it is not just a word of art here on the 
floor; we have been friends for many years--we cannot take on this 
burden unless we get a time agreement. The Senator's bill, as an 
amendment to our bill, is subject to a point of order. We will not 
raise that point of order because it should be before us. And the 
Senate should know it is possible to complete both of these bills by 
Friday, if we would work together. But we need to complete this bill by 
Friday in order that when we are not in session, due to the holidays of 
the following week, our staffs can pull together the conference report 
documents and be ready to go to conference when we come back on October 
17 or 18 of this month. It will take some time to conference just the 
Appropriations subcommittee bill. I am certain it will take substantial 
time to conference the Armed Services bill in conference.
  What worries me is, if that Armed Services bill becomes part of our 
conference, then we have an extremely difficult time if the House and 
Senate Armed Services Committee cannot complete their conferences in 
the same period of time that we would complete the conference on the 
appropriations bill. But we are all in this together. We know that 
there are provisions in the appropriations bill that require 
authorization. A substantial part do not. A substantial part are under 
general authority of appropriations for people in the field, for the 
armed services and for the operation and maintenance items that are in 
the bill and also those that are involved with continuing 
authorizations for various types of acquisitions and equipment.
  We look forward to working with the Senator from Virginia. He does an 
excellent job as chairman of the Armed Services Committee. We are 
delighted that he is pressing hard for his bill because it is 
necessary. For instance, the size of the pay raise, the size of the 
COLA, the size of various adjustments made between the various 
functions of the Department, all are necessary.
  The annual items in this bill require authorization. Those that are a 
continuing part of defense operations, we can and should fund, 
notwithstanding the Armed Services bill might not have passed by the 
time we get this bill to the President to sign.

[[Page 21983]]

  Above all, money for Afghanistan and Iraq is a supplemental attached 
to our bill. It is within our bill. It is $50 billion that is 
absolutely necessary to continue our operations there at a very 
critical time with the election coming up over there to approve their 
constitution and then, following that, the election of their officials. 
We have had to send additional people over there--not as many as we did 
for the first election over there, but there has been a flow of people 
over there. That money will come out of the $50 billion that is in this 
bill for operations for the future in regard to Iraq and Afghanistan 
and that portion of the war on terror.
  I do believe the Senator from Virginia understands our situation.
  Does the Senator from Hawaii wish to make any comments? I think we 
are in agreement on this position. We welcome the Senators' initiative 
and hope it works.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, there are no two individuals in the Senate 
today that have a finer reputation for Senatorial courtesy and for the 
need for our national defense legislation than the two managers of the 
appropriations bill, the Senators from Alaska and Hawaii, both of whom 
have had such distinguished careers in the uniform of the country in 
which we all take such pride.
  Both of these individuals have conferred with my colleague, Senator 
Levin, and with me about the measures I have taken today. Senator 
Stevens very carefully pointed out to me exactly what he has said--his 
grave concern, understandable concern, and proper concern about the 
imperative need of the passage of the appropriations bill. In no way is 
it the intention of this Senator or Senator Levin to try to unduly 
delay that bill.
  We will see whether a time agreement is achievable, either for 
consideration of our bill for a brief period of time, on the 
appropriations bill, or by virtue of a UC as a freestanding bill. I 
urge we try and do it on this bill.
  The Senator pointed out the exigencies of conferences. In my 
research, there are several options on how to conduct a conference on 
these two bills. I am sure we can work out a method to do so. For 
example, it may be possible to split off the authorization bill prior 
to final passage of the appropriations bill in order to facilitate two 
separate conference reports. If that is not possible, the chairman of 
the subcommittee on appropriations could decide to hold what would be 
basically two conferences--one of the authorizers, one of the 
appropriators. But nevertheless, the appropriators would have overall 
control and only one conference report would be voted on by the Senate. 
I think either of these options could be achieved here. Certainly, I 
know Senator Levin and I would work to these ends. But I also bring to 
the attention of the managers, we all know full well there are several 
amendments--I shall not try to characterize them other than to say 
there are several amendments that are to be brought against the 
authorization bill which, I am inclined to believe, will be brought 
against the appropriations bill should we not move ahead with the 
authorization bill so those amendments can be authorized on this bill.
  There is a strong conviction among a number of my colleagues--I don't 
agree, but I respect them--to have a commission to study how this 
country deals with its detainees and other commissions that are in the 
minds of others.
  I don't think, unless there is clarity as to what is going to happen 
to the authorization bill, that you can rule out the possibility that 
one or more of these amendments might be directed in the next few days 
against this bill, with the best of intentions, and those would be 
time-consuming matters, I assume.
  Mr. STEVENS. Will the Senator yield, Mr. President?
  Mr. WARNER. Yes, of course.
  Mr. STEVENS. It is not for a question but for a statement.
  Mr. WARNER. I yield the floor, Mr. President.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the Senator from Hawaii and I have 
opposed filing cloture on the Defense appropriations bill in the past. 
It has not been necessary. As a matter of fact, in the past years, this 
bill has taken from 3 to 5 hours on the floor because it is a 
bipartisan bill. It is a bill that comes out of our subcommittee and 
the full Committee on Appropriations unanimously. Our staffs work 
tirelessly to make sure we cover every single possible objection or 
concern.
  But this year, it appears to me, because of the timeframe I have 
mentioned, I am constrained to consult with my friend from Hawaii to 
seek the filing of cloture on Wednesday because if we do not vote by 
Friday, we are going to be into November before we even get this bill 
off the floor. We just cannot do that now.
  I hope the Armed Services Committee members and all those who have 
amendments will keep in mind the timeframe. The way these holidays are 
coming at us, and because of the schedule, we must get this bill to the 
House for conference before the first of November. It is going to be 
very difficult to do unless we finish the bill by October 7.
  I want the Senate to know, despite a longstanding policy of opposing 
cloture on the Defense bill, the timeframe that is involved in the 
consideration of this bill now, because of many things that are not 
under the control of anybody--two vacancies on the Supreme Court and 
various other matters that we have taken up that have taken prolonged 
time on the floor--we are very late in considering this bill.
  I know the Senate understands the problem of funding when we have men 
and women who are overseas, particularly in a time of war. There is no 
way we can possibly consider taking off on Friday and not coming back 
until a week from the following Monday if this bill has not been 
passed. I urge the Senator to keep that in mind.
  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.

                          ____________________