[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8480-8482]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of S. 2943, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 2943) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2017 for military activities of the Department of 
     Defense, for military construction, and for defense 
     activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military 
     personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other 
     purposes.

  Pending:

       McCain amendment No. 4607, to amend the provision on share-
     in-savings contracts.
       Reed (for Reid) amendment No. 4603 (to amendment No. 4607), 
     to change the enactment date.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I came to the floor yesterday to talk 
about a truly shameful change that is buried away in this bill. It is a 
change that would put us on a path to go back on a promise that we made 
to our servicemembers just 6 months ago and a change, if left unfixed, 
that will pull the rug out for men and women in the Armed Forces who 
are prepared to make the highest sacrifice for the country they love.
  In case any of my colleagues are unaware, a single line in this 
massive Defense bill on page 1,455, buried in the funding chart, would 
zero out a new program that is intended to help men and women in our 
military realize their dream of having a family even if they go on to 
suffer catastrophic injuries when they are fighting on our behalf. I 
don't know how this line got in there, I don't know who thought it was 
a good idea, and I don't know why, but what I do know is this: It is 
wrong and it has to be fixed.
  I just want to tell my colleagues that 6 months ago the Pentagon 
announced a pilot program that would offer servicemembers who are 
getting ready to deploy an opportunity at cryopreservation--in other 
words, freezing their eggs or sperm. This new program gave our 
deploying servicemembers not just the ability to have reproductive 
options in the event they are grievously injured but some deserved 
peace of mind. It took us a step forward in the promise we have made to 
our servicemembers to support them when they

[[Page 8481]]

sacrifice so much for us, and it meant they wouldn't have to worry 
about choosing between defending their country or a chance of having a 
family some day.
  This new program was met with widespread praise and relief. Men and 
women who were getting ready to deploy--many of whom were thinking 
about exploring cryopreservation, using their own money if they could 
afford it--were assured that their country had their back.
  While the pilot program was not groundbreaking, these services have 
long been available in the private sector, and, in fact, fertility 
preservation techniques have been used by the British Armed Forces for 
years. It reflected a basic level of respect for servicemembers who are 
willing to risk suffering catastrophic injuries on our behalf, and it 
sent a clear message that no matter what happens to them on the 
battlefield, we will be ready to stand with them with whatever they 
need.
  I was hoping this new program was a step we could build on, a move in 
the right direction, an important part of our larger work to help our 
warriors who sustained grievous injuries achieve their dream of 
starting a family, which is why I was so upset when I learned this bill 
would move us the other way. It would take this promise we just made to 
our warriors and toss it in the trash. It would be a slap in the face 
to the men and women who serve us proudly and heroically. And honestly, 
it is the wrong thing to do.
  Many people here in the Senate are quick to honor our military with 
their words, but for the men and women who signed up to fight on our 
behalf and are looking ahead to potentially massive sacrifices, we owe 
them so much more than that. We owe them action, respect, and a shot at 
their dream of having a family. We need to fix this bill. We owe them 
that much.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to offer 
Murray amendment No. 4490 relating to fertility treatments and that the 
Senate vote in relation to this amendment with no second-degree 
amendments in order prior to the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I reluctantly have to object, and that is 
because there is an objection on this side, which I have to honor.
  I thank Senator Murray for her advocacy for the people who are 
serving in our military in uniform, and this is at least an important 
aspect of military life, and I thank the Senator for that.
  I also thank Senator Gillibrand, who will speak in a moment on an 
issue that has been of great importance to her for several years now. 
She has been an advocate of this very compelling issue of sexual 
assault in the military.
  Unfortunately, we have an objection to all the amendments, and that, 
in my view, is a great disservice to this body, to the men and women 
serving in the military, and to the American public. It shouldn't 
matter whether I happen to agree or disagree with Senator Gillibrand or 
Senator Murray; they deserve debate and votes, and they are not getting 
them because of these objections.
  I wish to also point out that we are working on amendments by Senator 
Moran, Senator Corker, Senator Gillibrand, and Senator Shaheen.
  I might point out gratuitously that one of the things I have seen in 
recent years is involvement on issues that bring new perspectives from 
people like Senator Gillibrand, Senator Murray, Senator Ayotte, Senator 
McCaskill, Senator Fischer, and Senator Ernst. They have brought 
perspectives to our committee and to this body that have been very 
helpful.
  All I can say is this: Senator Murray, I will continue to fight to 
get a vote on your amendment.
  Mr. President, I reluctantly object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from New York.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for his remarks, 
and I thank the leaders.
  I urge my colleagues to allow a vote on my amendment No. 4310.
  We now know far more about the extent of the military sexual assault 
problem than we did last year. We have more data, we have reviewed more 
case files, we heard from more survivors, and it is clear that very 
little has changed despite the Department of Defense's persistent 
claims that things are getting better and that they are making 
progress.
  When the Department of Defense estimates that 20,000 servicemembers 
were sexually assaulted this year--the same number as in 2010--that is 
not progress. When an estimate of 8 out of 10 military sexual assault 
survivors don't report the crime, that is not progress. When more than 
half of all retaliation cases--58 percent of them--are perpetrated by 
someone in the chain of command of the accuser, that is not progress. 
When the percentage of survivors willing to report openly has declined 
for the past 5 years, that is not progress. When 62 percent of 
survivors have experienced retaliation since 2012 and there has not 
been one prosecution of this enumerated crime, that is not progress. 
When it is confirmed by the Associated Press that the Pentagon 
blatantly misled the Senate in order to skew our debate, this is 
perhaps the ultimate time that they are not making progress.
  Our military justice system is broken. It is failing our men and 
women who so bravely serve. No matter how many small reforms we make, 
as long as commanders with no legal experience are continuing to make 
these important decisions about violent sexual crimes, we are not going 
to solve this problem. Our commanders are great at winning wars and 
training troops. They are not prosecutors. They are not even lawyers. 
They are warfighters, and their job is to keep our country safe, not 
make legal judgments about whether to prosecute a rape.
  Once and for all, let's take this decision to prosecute these crimes 
and instead give it to trained military prosecutors. Let's give our 
servicemembers a justice system that is worthy of their service. This 
is our chance, and I urge everyone to vote yes if we have a vote.
  Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that if cloture is invoked 
for S. 2943, notwithstanding rule XXII, that Gillibrand amendment No. 
4310, the Military Justice Improvement Act, be considered in order 
postcloture, and that it be in order to offer amendment No. 4310, and 
the Senate vote in relation to that amendment with a 60 affirmative 
vote threshold, with no second-degree amendments in order prior to the 
vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, again, it is the same comment I made to 
Senator Murray. It is with profound reluctance because it is not the 
way we are supposed to conduct business here in the U.S. Senate.
  I have reached such a level of frustration that I would even consider 
changing the rules of the Senate that one individual out of 100 can't 
bring everything to a screeching halt, and that is what is taking place 
here over an issue.
  One of the amendments that is being held up is literally putting the 
lives of our interpreters in Afghanistan at risk. That is the view of 
General Petraeus, Ambassador Crocker, General Nicholson, and others. If 
we don't allow these people to come to this country, they are going to 
die. It is that serious. Senator Gillibrand's and Senator Murray's 
amendments are important, and I do not in any way diminish them, but we 
are talking about human lives of people who assisted us in carrying out 
our mission in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that is what is at stake here.
  I reluctantly object, and I want to assure Senator Gillibrand that I 
will do everything in my power--which is not a lot right now when you 
look at the rules of the Senate--to get a vote. I may have some 
differences with Senator Gillibrand, but no one has been more dedicated 
to addressing this issue of a very difficult and frankly embarrassing 
side of the military today, and that is the incidence of sexual 
assaults.
  I reluctantly object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Democratic leader.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have been to a few of these rodeos, and I 
think

[[Page 8482]]

the only way we are going to get some fairness here is that we do not 
invoke cloture.
  As I said, I have been through this a number of times. I think if 
that happens, people will understand. We have to have a few votes--not 
a lot of votes but a few votes.
  I was on the floor yesterday when Senator McCain made this emphatic 
statement that, frankly, only he could make. He was talking about how 
people's lives are in jeopardy here, especially with the Shaheen 
amendment.
  We don't have to change the rules of the Senate, but I suggest that 
we do not invoke cloture, give us some time to work out a few 
amendments, and I think that can happen.
  We have two experienced legislators. The chairman of the committee 
and ranking member of the committee, Senator McCain and Senator Jack 
Reed of Rhode Island, are two of the best we have here in the Senate, 
and we should move forward in a way that is expeditious yet productive.
  Earlier this morning I said that a robust amendment process has not 
taken place here. There hasn't been an amendment process. You can blame 
a lot of people, but it hasn't happened.
  I think this is an important piece of legislation. Senator McCain and 
I have worked on this issue for years, and we have been at odds on 
occasion. He was upset that I didn't bring the bill forward quickly 
enough, but I do remember that we always brought it to the floor. I can 
remember on one occasion when he and Senator Levin, who has since 
retired, finished this bill in 2 days, and we had a good bill that came 
out of here. There were no vetoes, no threats of veto, and we worked 
out the problems. So I would hope that we can move forward and get some 
fairness in this bill.
  It is a huge bill. I have some differences in the bill, but it is not 
fair that we don't have a better process than what we have had so far. 
So I would suggest that others vote no on cloture.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Capito). The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. REED. Madam President, I simply want to underscore the importance 
of these amendments that Senator Murray and Senator Gillibrand are 
putting forward. There can be disagreement on the substance, but the 
merits, the importance, and the criticality should be obvious to all of 
us. I would hope to find a way to have votes on these amendments.
  The same logic applies to Senator Shaheen and Senator Moran. They 
have amendments that they have worked tirelessly on for days. They are 
being frustrated, not by the majority of the Senate but by a few 
individuals.
  I think we have reached the point now where we have very little time 
left. If we could come together at least on a good-faith package of 
consents to deal with all of these or a majority of these and then 
continue to work forward for votes on all of them, I think that would 
be the appropriate thing to do.
  So, again, I just want to underscore the fact that the issues that 
Senator Murray and Senator Gillibrand have raised are deserving of a 
vote, and we should have a vote on these issues.
  With that, I yield the floor.


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before 
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on Calendar No. 
     469, S. 2943, a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2017 for military activities of the Department of 
     Defense, for military construction, and for defense 
     activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military 
     personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other 
     purposes.
         John McCain, John Cornyn, Orrin G. Hatch, Tom Cotton, 
           Kelly Ayotte, Deb Fischer, Mike Rounds, Lindsey Graham, 
           John Barrasso, Roger F. Wicker, Joni Ernst, Thom 
           Tillis, Daniel Coats, Chuck Grassley, John Thune, Steve 
           Daines, Mitch McConnell.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on S. 
2943, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2017 
for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, 
to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for 
other purposes, as amended, shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Utah (Mr. Hatch).
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer), 
the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. 
Durbin), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), the Senator from 
Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the 
Senator from Virginia (Mr. Warner), and the Senator from Oregon (Mr. 
Wyden) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 68, nays 23, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 97 Leg.]

                                YEAS--68

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Burr
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Cochran
     Collins
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Daines
     Donnelly
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Flake
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kaine
     King
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Manchin
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Nelson
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Vitter
     Wicker

                                NAYS--23

     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cruz
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Hirono
     Lee
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murray
     Paul
     Reed
     Reid
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Warren
     Whitehouse

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Boxer
     Coons
     Durbin
     Hatch
     Leahy
     Mikulski
     Sanders
     Warner
     Wyden
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 68, the nays are 
23.
  Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
  Mr. THUNE. Madam 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. WICKER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________