[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6854-6855]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, whatever one's point of view on the war 
in Iraq, on whether we should be involved or not in the competition for 
influence in that region, the incontrovertible fact is, there are men 
and women in the U.S. Armed Forces who are there trying to protect our 
interests, carry out the orders of their superiors, and safeguard and 
defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And 
they are in danger of running short of equipment and supplies and the 
other means necessary to succeed in this conflict because requests for 
supplemental appropriations are languishing in the House and Senate 
Appropriations Committees, with no certain schedule for reporting out 
the bills that must be passed, the bills that must be passed to support 
our troops and replenish the accounts that have been depleted in this 
conflict.
  Mr. President, I am growing increasingly concerned about the status 
of the President's fiscal year 2008 request to provide supplemental 
funding to support our ongoing efforts in Afghanistan

[[Page 6855]]

and Iraq. The President submitted the bulk of his request in February 
of 2007 in conjunction with his regular fiscal year 2008 budget 
submission. He did so largely because Congress clearly expressed its 
desire for a full year estimate of war costs. Yet Congress did not 
appropriate a full year's funding.
  At the end of last year, Congress approved only a $70 billion 
``bridge fund'' to support our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan until 
this spring. Enacting even that amount required a protracted struggle 
between the House, the Senate, and the President. As a result, the 
Department of Defense had to issue furlough notices, make a series of 
inefficient transfers and reprogrammings, and generally function in 
ways that could only detract from its primary duties.
  We find ourselves today facing a very similar situation, more than 14 
months after the submission of the President's request. We have not 
appropriated, approved, or otherwise acted on some $108 billion of the 
President's request. The personnel, operations, and maintenance 
accounts that support our activities in Iraq and Afghanistan are 
running low. And by May or June, those accounts will run out of money. 
Soon the Department of Defense will once again have to issue furlough 
notices, initiate transfers and reprogrammings, and take other 
inefficient and demoralizing actions that simply should not be 
necessary.
  I have no doubt that Congress will someday approve a funding bill. 
While individual Senators have different views about what our policies 
should be in Iraq and Afghanistan, I am confident that each of my 
colleagues wants ultimately to provide our Armed Forces and our 
diplomatic corps with the resources they need to implement the policies 
of the U.S. Government.
  My concern is, when will we act? And how will we act? Every day, I 
read stories speculating about action on the supplemental. Last week, 
the Appropriations Committee held a hearing on the supplemental with 
Office of Management and Budget Director Nussle as the witness from the 
administration. It seemed as though we might mark up the bill this 
week, but that has not occurred. I had hoped that by now a markup would 
be definitely scheduled for next week. But that hasn't occurred either. 
Hopefully, a markup will occur before we lose yet another week.
  But I grow more concerned with each passing day. In the other body, 
it appears the majority will bypass the committee altogether and take a 
bill straight to the House floor. Why they would choose to forfeit the 
detailed knowledge and expertise of the relevant committee of 
jurisdiction is beyond me, but that is their decision to make. In the 
Senate, I am not entirely comfortable that a similar procedure isn't 
under consideration. I know very well that it would not be Chairman 
Byrd's preference, but I recognize that such decisions are sometimes 
made by leadership and not by the chairman.
  I am also concerned that the process by which Congress will consider 
the supplemental will again be through a series of messages between the 
House and the Senate. The House will neither hold a committee markup 
nor generate an original bill for consideration. As such, it appears 
there will be no conference committee to reconcile differences between 
the House and Senate. Rather, the committee leadership, as well as the 
majority leadership in the House and Senate, will retire behind closed 
doors to produce a final product for our consideration. The minority 
will be part of the discussion to varying degrees, but there will be no 
conference meeting to attend, there will be no conference votes to 
decide items of disagreement, and there will be no conference report 
for Members to sign or not to sign.
  None of these procedures are without precedent. The Republican 
majority at times employed similar tactics to move legislation. But I 
fear that in the appropriations realm, we are making a habit of these 
procedures--a bad habit. Processing bills by exchanging messages with 
the House is becoming the norm rather than the exception. Formal 
conference committees are becoming rare. It seems that committee 
markups may be the next part of the regular order to go by the boards. 
This trend should be of concern to all Members of the Senate, not just 
the members of the Appropriations Committee.
  I get the sense that the majority is struggling mightily to develop a 
unified, bicameral course of parliamentary action that is most 
advantageous for their party and which minimizes the chances of 
unexpected legislative outcomes. I can understand that desire. It is 
extraordinarily difficult to guide a bill as significant as this 
supplemental through the legislative process, particularly in an 
election year.
  But in meeting and striving to engineer all uncertainty out of the 
process, the majority is losing valuable time--time that, in my view, 
would be better spent marking up the bill, moving it to the floor, and 
processing amendments in the regular order. Let's not forget those who 
are depending upon the outcome for their livelihood, their ability to 
defend themselves and protect the security interests of our great 
country. They are the ones who are awaiting our action.
  Let the Congress work its will. Let the President make a decision 
whether to sign the bill, and let Congress respond, if necessary. Not 
to make light of the Senate schedule over the past 2 weeks, but we 
should be using this window of time that appears to be available to us. 
In the increasingly political atmosphere in which Congress operates, 
sometimes we have to remind ourselves of our core responsibilities as 
Members of this body. In the context of this war supplemental, I think 
our core responsibility is to give the men and women of our Armed 
Forces and diplomatic corps the resources they need to succeed in the 
mission they have been assigned by their Government, and to do so 
without undue delay
  We have had the President's request for 14 months--14 months. We have 
held hearings. Members and staff have had numerous meetings with 
administration officials and other interested parties to discuss the 
details of the need. We have received an updated report from General 
Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker.
  Mr. President, it is time to act.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. DORGAN. 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. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________