[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18217-18220]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     MILITARY READINESS CHALLENGES

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, our country is home to some of the finest 
fighting forces in the world, and we can all be very proud of that 
fact. We need our military to be the best trained, the best equipped, 
and the most prepared force on the planet. Tragically, however, the 
President's war in Iraq and his use of extended deployments is 
undermining our military's readiness today.
  The current deployment schedule hurts our ability to respond to 
threats around the world, it causes our servicemembers to leave the 
military service early, it weakens our ability to respond to disasters 
at home, it unfairly burdens family members, and it intensifies the 
combat stress our servicemembers experience.
  We need to rebuild our military, and the first step is giving our 
fighting men and women the time they need at home to prepare and train 
for their next mission.
  Today I rise to address the readiness challenges that threaten our 
military strength and ultimately our Nation's security.
  More than 4 years into the war in Iraq, our troops are stretched 
thin, our equipment is deteriorating, and the patience of our Nation is 
wearing thin. We have seen 3,600 servicemembers die, thousands upon 
thousands more have been injured, and month after month our fighting 
men and women are pushing harder and harder. Troops leave loved ones 
for months and years and put their lives on the line without complaint. 
We owe them the best treatment and the best training possible.
  Unfortunately, the Bush administration has fallen short in those 
areas. One of the major problems for our troops, for their families, 
and their communities is the growing gap between the time troops spend 
in battle versus the time they spend at home. This gap is alarming, it 
is disheartening, and it is a disservice to the brave men and women who 
put themselves in harm's way each and every day.
  Sadly, our forces are being burned out. Many of our troops are on 
their third or even their fourth tour in Iraq and Afghanistan. Months 
ago, the Department of Defense announced that their tours would be 
extended from 12 months to 15 months. And on top of all that, they are 
not receiving the necessary time at home before they are sent back to 
battle.
  Mr. President, that is not the normal schedule. It is not what our 
troops signed up for. And we here in Congress should not simply stand 
by and allow our troops to be pushed beyond their limits. That is why 
here on the Senate floor today we are debating the Webb amendment, and 
that is why we need to pass it this week.

[[Page 18218]]

  Traditionally, Active-Duty troops are deployed for 1 year and then 
they rest at home for 2 years. National Guard and Reserve troops are 
deployed for 1 year and then they rest at home for 5 years. Tragically, 
that is not what is happening today. Today, Active-Duty troops are 
spending less time at home than they are in battle--less time at home 
than they are in battle--and our Guard and Reserve forces are receiving 
less than 3 years' rest for every year in combat.
  With that increasing number and length of deployments, this rest time 
is even more critical for our troops, and they are not receiving the 
break they need, which is increasing the chances that they will burn 
out. This administration--the Bush administration--has decided to go 
the other direction, pushing our troops harder, extending their time 
abroad, and sending troops back time and again to the battlefield.
  In March of this year, a few months ago, Salon.com reported what I 
hope is an extreme example of the length the military is going to get 
our soldiers back to the battlefield, and I want to read an excerpt 
from that story because I think it is really important we all 
understand what is happening to our troops.
  This is from Salon.com:

       Last November, Army Specialist Edgar Hernandez, a 
     communications specialist with a unit of the Army's 3rd 
     Infantry Division, had surgery on an ankle he had injured 
     during physical training. After the surgery, doctors put his 
     leg in a cast and he was supposed to start physical therapy 
     when the cast came off six weeks later.
       But two days after his cast was removed, Army commanders 
     decided it was more important to send him to a training site 
     in a remote desert rather than let him stay at Fort Benning, 
     GA, to rehabilitate. In January, Hernandez was shipped to the 
     National Training Center at Fort Irwin, CA, where his unit, 
     the 3,900-strong 3rd Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division, 
     was conducting a month of training in anticipation of leaving 
     for Iraq in March.
       Hernandez says he was in no shape to train for a war so 
     soon after his injury. ``I could not walk,'' he told Salon in 
     an interview. He said he was amazed when he learned he was 
     being sent to California. ``Did they not realize that I'm 
     hurt and I needed this physical therapy?'' he remembered 
     thinking. I was told by my doctor and my physical therapist 
     that this was crazy.
       Hernandez had served two tours in Iraq, where he had helped 
     maintain communications gear in the unit's armored Bradley 
     Fighting Vehicles. But he could not participate in war 
     maneuvers conducted on a 1,000-square-mile mock battlefield 
     located in the harsh Mojave Desert. Instead, when he got to 
     California, he was led to a large tent where he would be 
     housed. He was shocked by what he saw inside. There were 
     dozens of other hurt soldiers. Some were on crutches, and 
     others had their arms in slings. Some had debilitating back 
     injuries. And nearby was another tent housing female soldiers 
     with health issues ranging from injuries to pregnancy.
       Hernandez is one of a dozen soldiers who stayed for weeks 
     in those tents who were interviewed for this report, some of 
     whose medical records were also reviewed by Salon. All of the 
     soldiers said they had no business being sent to Fort Irwin 
     given their physical condition. In some cases, soldiers were 
     sent there even though their injuries were so severe the 
     doctors had previously recommended they should be considered 
     for medical retirement from the Army.
       Military experts say they suspect that the deployment to 
     Fort Irwin of injured soldiers was an effort to pump up 
     manpower statistics used to show the readiness of Army units.

  Clearly, if the military is going to those lengths to pump up 
readiness statistics, we have a huge problem. But these problems are 
only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the effects of the 
administration's rotation policy. The current rotation policy not only 
burns out servicemembers, but it hurts the military's ability to 
respond to other potential threats.
  For the first time in decades, the Army's ``ready brigade,'' which is 
intended to enter troubled spots within 72 hours, cannot do so. All of 
its troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan. The limited period between 
deployments lessens the time to train for other threats.
  Numerous military leaders have spoken to us about this problem. GEN 
James Conway said:

       I think my largest concern, probably, has to do with 
     training. When we're home for that 7, 8, 9 months, our focus 
     is going back to Iraq. And as I mentioned in the opening 
     statement, therefore, we're not doing amphibious training, 
     we're not doing mountain-warfare training, we're not doing 
     combined-arm fire maneuver, such as would need to be the case 
     potentially in another type of contingency.

  That is not me, Mr. President; that is General Conway before the 
Senate Armed Services Committee in February of this year.
  GEN Barry McCaffrey said that because all ``fully combat ready'' 
Active-Duty and Reserve combat units are now deployed in Iraq or 
Afghanistan, ``no fully-trained national strategic reserve brigades are 
now prepared to deploy to new combat operations.''
  The current deployment situation is hurting our troops, and it is 
hurting our troops in another way. It is contributing to a drop in our 
retention rates. Keeping battle-experienced and capable troops in the 
military is essential to our ability to respond to future threats. West 
Point classes of 2000 and 2001 have an attrition rate five times higher 
than pre-Iraq war levels, with 54 percent of the West Point class of 
2000 leaving the Army by the end of last year and 46 percent of the 
West Point class of 2001 leaving the Army by the end of last year. 
Marine Corps Active Forces are losing troops, especially critical 
midgrade noncommissioned officers, and that is despite a bonus for 
those who reenlist.
  Clearly, this policy is not sustainable.
  This deployment schedule we have been talking about is also making us 
less secure here at home. The rotation policy has left our Guard units 
short of manpower and supplies and severely hindered their ability to 
respond to disasters that can occur at any time here at home.
  The recent tornado that destroyed much of Greensburg, KS, is a 
terrible example. After their town was destroyed, Greensburg residents 
needed shelter, they needed food and water, and they needed it fast. 
But because the Kansas National Guard was stretched so thin, it was 
hard for them to respond as fast as was necessary for an emergency 
right here at home. Governor Sebelius and MG Tod Bunting, who is the 
head of the Kansas National Guard, said not only is Guard equipment 
being worn out, but so are its troops, some of whom were in their 
fourth tour in Iraq.
  For years, these problems were the exception, not the rule. But I 
fear that balance is shifting. Last month, USA Today reported that 
National Guard units in 31 States say 4 years of war in Iraq and 
Afghanistan have left them with 60 percent or less of their authorized 
equipment. And last month, LTG Steven Blum said the National Guard 
units have 53 percent of the equipment they need to handle State 
emergencies, and that number falls to 49 percent once Guard equipment 
needed for war, such as weapons, is factored in.
  In fact, Blum said:

       Our problem right now is that our equipment is at an all-
     time low.

  This is deeply concerning to all of us who worry about a national 
disaster in our States, especially out in the West as we now face fires 
in our forests that are threatening homes and families and lives, and 
we fear extreme devastation.
  This problem is more than about equipment, it is more than about 
retention rates, it is about real people and about real families. We 
all know military life can be tough on troops and their families. They 
go for months--sometimes years--without seeing each other. While troops 
are away fighting for all of us, sons and daughters are born, sons and 
daughters grow up without their moms and dads present, husbands and 
wives don't see each other for years, fathers die, mothers die, and 
family members become sick. Our troops need adequate time at home to 
see their newborns, to be a part of their children's lives, to spend 
time with their spouses, and to see their parents. The current rotation 
policy decreases dramatically the time families are together, and that 
places a tremendous strain on everyone.
  Our troops facing these early deployments and extended tours have 
spoken out. When the tour extensions and early deployments were 
announced, our troops themselves expressed their displeasure.

[[Page 18219]]

  In Georgia, according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

       Soldiers of a Georgia Army National Guard unit were hoping 
     to return home in April. Instead, they may be spending 
     another grueling summer in the Iraqi desert. At least 4,000 
     National Guard soldiers may spend up to four extra months in 
     Iraq as part of President Bush's troop increase announced 
     last month. SGT Gary Heffner, spokesman for the 214th, said 
     news of the extension came as a ``little bit of a shock'' to 
     the Georgians.

  The 1st Cavalry Division, according to the Dallas Morning News:

       Eighteen months after their first Iraqi rotation, the 2nd 
     Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment and the last of the Fort 
     Hood, Texas-based 1st Cavalry Division returned to Iraq in 
     mid-November.

  Those troops, according to this article, were deeply concerned about 
that. And here in my home State, in Tacoma, WA, just this past weekend, 
there was an article from the Tacoma News Tribune of soldiers going 
once again.
  These soldiers are talking about the tremendously difficult time they 
are having being redeployed.
  So, Mr. President, I rise today to speak out for the Webb amendment. 
It is an amendment that supports our troops. It supports our troops by 
requiring that regular forces be at home for as long as they are 
deployed. It requires that our National Guard and Reserve forces be 
home for at least 3 years for every year deployed. Those seem to me to 
be basic commonsense requirements.
  I applaud our colleague from Virginia for being a champion for our 
troops and for crafting the bipartisan measure of which he and I think 
the entire Senate can be proud.
  Our troops have sacrificed so much for us. We have to institute a 
fair policy for the health of our troops, for the health and well-being 
of their families, and for our Nation's security and the ability to 
respond to disasters here at home. The Webb amendment does all of that, 
and I urge the Senate to adopt it.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
the full Salon.com article and the article from the Tacoma News 
Tribune.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                    [From salon.com, Mar. 26, 2007]

                 Army Deployed Seriously Injured Troops

                           (By Mark Benjamin)

       Washington.--Last November, Army Spc. Edgar Hernandez, a 
     communications specialist with a unit of the Army's 3rd 
     Infantry Division, had surgery on an ankle he had injured 
     during physical training. After the surgery, doctors put his 
     leg in a cast, and he was supposed to start physical therapy 
     when that cast came off six weeks later.
       But two days after his cast was removed, Army commanders 
     decided it was more important to send him to a training site 
     in a remote desert rather than let him stay at Fort Benning, 
     Ga., to rehabilitate. In January, Hernandez was shipped to 
     the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., where his 
     unit, the 3,900-strong 3rd Brigade of the 3rd Infantry 
     Division, was conducting a month of training in anticipation 
     of leaving for Iraq in March.
       Hernandez says he was in no shape to train for war so soon 
     after his injury. ``I could not walk,'' he told Salon in an 
     interview. He said he was amazed when he learned he was being 
     sent to California. ``Did they not realize that I'm hurt and 
     I needed this physical therapy?'' he remembered thinking. ``I 
     was told by my doctor and my physical therapist that this was 
     crazy.''
       Hernandez had served two tours in Iraq, where he helped 
     maintain communications gear in the unit's armored Bradley 
     Fighting Vehicles. But he could not participate in war 
     maneuvers conducted on a 1,000-square-mile mock battlefield 
     located in the harsh Mojave Desert. Instead, when he got to 
     California, he was led to a large tent where he would be 
     housed. He was shocked by what he saw inside: There were 
     dozens of other hurt soldiers. Some were on crutches, and 
     others had arms in slings. Some had debilitating back 
     injuries. And nearby was another tent, housing female 
     soldiers with health issues ranging from injuries to 
     pregnancy.
       Hernandez is one of a dozen soldiers who stayed for weeks 
     in those tents who were interviewed for this report, some of 
     whose medical records were also reviewed by Salon. All of the 
     soldiers said they had no business being sent to Fort Irwin 
     given their physical condition. In some cases, soldiers were 
     sent there even though their injuries were so severe that 
     doctors had previously recommended they should be considered 
     for medical retirement from the Army.
       Military experts say they suspect that the deployment to 
     Fort Irwin of injured soldiers was an effort to pump up 
     manpower statistics used to show the readiness of Army units. 
     With the military increasingly strained after four years of 
     war, Army readiness has become a critical part of the debate 
     over Iraq. Some congressional Democrats have considered plans 
     to limit the White House's ability to deploy more troops 
     unless the Pentagon can certify that units headed into the 
     fray are fully equipped and fully manned.
       Salon recently uncovered another troubling development in 
     the Army's efforts to shore up troop levels, reporting 
     earlier this month that soldiers from the 3rd Brigade had 
     serious health problems that the soldiers claimed were 
     summarily downgraded by military doctors at Fort Benning in 
     February, apparently so that the Army could send them to 
     Iraq. Some of those soldiers were among the group sent to 
     Fort Irwin to train in January.
       After arriving at Fort Irwin, many of the injured soldiers 
     did not train. ``They had all of us living in a big tent,'' 
     confirmed Spc. Lincoln Smith, who spent the month there along 
     with Hernandez and others. Smith is an Army truck driver, but 
     because of his health issues, which include sleep apnea (a 
     breathing ailment) and narcolepsy, Smith is currently barred 
     from driving military vehicles. ``I couldn't go out and do 
     the training,'' Smith said about his time in California. His 
     records list his problems as ``permanent'' and recommend that 
     he be considered for retirement from the Army because of his 
     health.
       Another soldier with nearly 20 years in the Army was sent 
     to Fort Irwin, ostensibly to prepare for deployment to Iraq, 
     even though she suffers from back problems and has 
     psychiatric issues. Doctors wrote ``unable to deploy 
     overseas'' on her medical records.
       It is unclear exactly how many soldiers with health issues 
     were sent to the California desert. None of the soldiers 
     interviewed by Salon had done a head count, but all agreed 
     that ``dozens'' would be a conservative estimate. An Army 
     spokesman and public affairs officials for the 3rd Infantry 
     Division did not return repeated calls and e-mails seeking 
     further detail and an explanation of why injured troops were 
     sent to Fort Irwin and housed in tents there during January.
       The soldiers who were at Fort Irwin described a pitiful 
     scene. ``You had people out there with crutches and canes,'' 
     said an Army captain who was being considered for medical 
     retirement himself because of serious back injuries sustained 
     in a Humvee accident during a previous combat tour in Iraq. 
     ``Soldiers that apparently had no business being there were 
     there,'' another soldier wrote to Salon in an e-mail. 
     ``Pregnant females were sent to the National Training Center 
     rotation'' with the knowledge of Army leaders, she said.
       One infantry sergeant with nearly 20 years in the Army who 
     had already fought in Iraq broke his foot badly in a 
     noncombat incident just before being sent to Fort Irwin. ``I 
     didn't even get to put the cast on,'' before going, he said 
     with exasperation. He said doctors put something like an 
     ``open-toed soft shoe'' on his foot and put him on a plane to 
     California. ``I've got the cast on now. I never even got a 
     chance to see the [medical] specialist,'' he claimed. The 
     infantry sergeant said life in the desert was tough in his 
     condition. ``I was on Percocet. I couldn't even concentrate. 
     I hopped on a plane and hobbled around NTC on crutches,'' he 
     said. He added, ``I saw people who were worse off than I am. 
     I saw people with hurt backs and so on. I started to think, 
     `Hey, I'm not so bad.'''
                                  ____


          [From the (Tacoma, WA) News Tribune, July 10, 2007]

``It's Tough'' To Leave Families Again Medical Troops Off To Iraq--Many 
                          For Their Third Tour

                           (By Steve Maynard)

       Buoyed by praise and cheers, about 400 soldiers from the 
     62nd Medical Brigade at Fort Lewis got ready Monday to deploy 
     to Iraq.
       The Army brigade of medics, nurses, doctors, ambulance 
     drivers and other medical personnel will make its third tour 
     of duty in the Middle East, where they will be spread across 
     several locations in Iraq.
       The first wave of soldiers leaves Saturday for 15 months--
     longer than their previous tours. This spring, the Pentagon 
     extended most combat deployments from 12 to 15 months. While 
     some are going to the war zone for the first time, this will 
     be the third trip for Staff Sgt. Benjamin Hernandez.
       ``It's tough, especially leaving my family again,'' said 
     Hernandez, 33. He and his wife, Julieanna, have a daughter, 
     5, and a son, 7.
       His children are older now and realize the dangers of 
     combat. ``They're more cognizant of what's going on,'' 
     Hernandez said.
       During Monday's ceremony at the Soldier's Field House, the 
     maroon colors of the brigade were cased, or covered. They'll 
     be uncased when the first soldiers arrive in Iraq.
       Members of the brigade will be leaving through the end of 
     November. The headquarters will be at Camp Victory near 
     Baghdad.
       During the 35-minute ceremony, an audience of several 
     hundred family members and other soldiers broke into applause 
     repeatedly.

[[Page 18220]]

       The crowd was quick to cheer when Brig. Gen. Sheila Baxter 
     asked for a round of applause for ``these great soldiers.''
       ``The mission going forward is still complex and the enemy 
     is still dangerous,'' said Baxter, commander of Madigan Army 
     Medical Center. ``We are certain of your success and we are 
     grateful for your brave service.''
       ``We pray for your safety,'' Baxter said.
       Sgt. Kelly Perryman, 26, and her husband, Sgt. 1st Class 
     Tremayne Perryman, 30, will both be going to Iraq, but the 2 
     medics don't know if they'll be based near each other.
       Kelly Perryman summed up her feelings for her second trip 
     to Iraq in one word: nervous.
       Their 4-month-old baby boy, Jeffrey, will stay with her 
     mother in Detroit.
       ``This will be our first time being apart,'' Kelly Perryman 
     said about her baby. ``That's kind of scary.''
       Sgt. Derek Trubia, 32, said he was ready for his first tour 
     in Iraq.
       ``I have no problem,'' Trubia said. ``I expected it.''
       The brigade, which served in Iraq in 2003 and Kuwait in 
     2004-05, plays a life-saving role for U.S. and Iraqi soldiers 
     through trauma care and surgery.
       Among its other specialties are dental health, preventive 
     medicine and stress control.
       In his invocation, Chaplain Maj. Mark Mitera prayed for 
     ``healing and hope for those they treat.''
       He offered thanks ``for supplying these soldiers with 
     strength for war and skill for battle.''
       Col. Patrick Sargent, brigade commander, noted in an 
     interview that U.S. soldiers are more spread out in Iraq, and 
     the numbers of casualties and injuries are rising. Besides 
     treating physical wounds, the brigade will care for the 
     mental health of injured soldiers and its own members who 
     witness trauma, he said.
       ``We will face adversity, danger,'' Sargent told the crowd.
       But he said the brigade is fully trained and will prevail.
       ``The soldiers standing before you today embody the essence 
     of patriotism,'' Sargent said.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that immediately 
following my remarks, the Senator from Hawaii, Mr. Akaka, might be 
recognized for such time as he may consume.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. And I would like to thank the Senator from Hawaii for his 
patience and his courtesy.

                          ____________________