Summary:
All articles in Senate section
THE FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001--CONFERENCE REPORT
(Senate - October 12, 2000)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages S10334-
S10394]
THE FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR
2001--CONFERENCE REPORT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will read the conference report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the amendment of the Senate on the bill H.R.
4205, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for
military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for
such fiscal year and for the Armed Forces, and for other
purposes, having met, have agreed that the House recede from
its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate, and agree to
the same with an amendment, and the Senate agree to the same,
signed by a majority of the conferees on the part of both
Houses.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will proceed to the consideration
of the conference report.
(The report was printed in the House proceeding of the Record of
October 6, 2000.)
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it is my privilege as chairman, together
with my distinguished friend and ranking member, Mr. Levin, the Senator
from Michigan, to at long last bring to the Senate the annual
conference report from the authorizing committee in the Senate and the
authorizing committee in the House.
To refresh the recollection of Senators, I will read the time
agreement: 2 hours under the control of the chairman of the Armed
Services Committee, Mr. Warner; 2\1/2\ hours under the control of the
ranking member, Mr. Levin; 1 hour under the control of Senator Gramm;
30 minutes under the control of Senator Wellstone. Following the debate
just outlined, Senator Robert Kerry will be recognized to make a point
of order. The motion to waive the Budget Act will be limited to 2 hours
equally divided in the usual form.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. We hope to yield back some time because I know many of
our colleagues are anxious to make commitments, but this is a very
important piece of legislation. I am certain the Senators who are going
to participate, whom I have identified, will do so in a manner that
fits the importance of this annual piece of legislation.
This is the 39th consecutive authorization bill passed by the
Congress, assuming it passes this Chamber. It passed the House by a
vote of 382-31. That will give some clear indication of the importance
of the legislation and the strong support that it merits and has
merited in the House of Representatives.
Mr. President, the Senate, as I have been with my colleagues here for
the past hour or so for the voting, reflects a very somber note on this
sad day for America--indeed, for all those who, throughout the world,
stand guard for freedom. We have suffered a tragic loss to the U.S.
Navy. This is in parallel with frightful losses taking place elsewhere
throughout the Middle East. It brings to mind that this is a most
dangerous world that faces us every day. Men and women in the Armed
Forces of the United States go forth from our shores, serving in
countries all over the world. They, of course, now are on a high alert
because of the tragic terrorist act inflicted upon one of our
destroyers, the U.S.S. Cole.
First in mind are thoughts for our sailors who have lost their lives,
and most particularly their families and the families who, at this
hour, are still waiting definitive news with regard to the crew of that
ship. The casualties number four dead, approximately 12 missing, and
some 35 to 36 suffering wounds. Still the facts are coming in.
This clearly shows the danger; it shows the risks the men and women
of the Armed Forces are taking--not only in the Middle East region.
This, of course, happened in a port in Yemen. The ship was on a routine
refueling, a matter of hours, as it worked its way up towards the
Persian Gulf to take up its duty station in enforcing the United
Nations Security Council sanctions against Iraq. Because of the
smuggling that is taking place in violation of those sanctions, those
are dangerous tasks and they are being performed every day by men and
women of the U.S. Armed Forces, Great Britain, and other nations. Air
missions are being flown over Iraq every day, and often those missions
are encountering ground fire and other military activity directed
against them. We must be a grateful nation for the risks that are
constantly assumed by the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces and
their families.
The Senate will have an opportunity to get further facts in the
course of the day.
I will now direct my attention to this particular bill, and I see the
distinguished President pro tempore, the former chairman of the Senate
Armed Services Committee. It is my privilege to succeed him. As an
honor to our distinguished former chairman, I ask he lead off the
debate on this bill today.
Mr. THURMOND. Thank you very much. I appreciate your fine work as
chairman.
[[Page
S10335]]
Mr. President, before I discuss the conference report on the Defense
authorization bill, I want to join my colleagues in expressing my
condolences to the families of the sailors killed and wounded in this
morning's attack on the U.S.S. Cole. This heinous attack again
demonstrates the constant peril faced by our military personnel and
reinforces the need for this Nation to maintain its vigilance at all
times.
Mr. President, I join Chairman Warner and Senator Levin, the ranking
member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, in urging my Senate
colleagues to support the conference report to accompany the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001. The
report, which is the culmination of hundreds of hours of work by the
Senate and House Armed Services Committees, is a continuation of the
Congress' efforts to reverse the decline in the readiness of our armed
forces. It increases the President's budget request by more than $4
billion. More important, it directs the additional resources to the
critical areas of procurement, research and development, and improving
the quality of life for our military personnel and their families.
The chairman and ranking member have already highlighted the
significant aspects of this bill. However, I do want to comment on the
comprehensive health care provision for Medicare-eligible military
retirees and the Energy Employees' Occupational Illness Compensation
Program, both of which I consider significant aspects of this
legislation. The health care provision is long overdue legislation that
will ensure our military retirees and their families receive life-long
health care committed to them as a condition of their service. It will
significantly ease the uncertainty regarding health care and financial
burden for thousands of military retirees who have dedicated their
lives to the service of the Nation. The occupational illness
compensation provision provides fair and just compensation to the
thousands of workers who were exposed to dangerous levels of hazardous
material and other toxic substances while they worked on the Nation's
nuclear weapons programs. Although I understand that these benefits
come at a significant financial cost, we must keep in mind our
commitment to these patriots and remember the greatness of a Nation is
not how much gold or wealth it accumulates, but on how it takes care of
its citizens, especially those who serve in the Armed Forces.
As with all conference reports, there are disappointments. I am
particularly disappointed that the provision to increase the survivor
benefit plan basic annuity for surviving spouses age 62 and older was
dropped during the conference. The provision would have increased the
survivor benefit plan annuity for these individuals from 35 percent to
45 percent over the next four years. I understand that despite the
obvious merit of the legislation it was dropped during the conference
because it would have cost $2.4 billion over the next 10 years. I find
this ironic, since there is more than $60 billion in direct spending
attributed to this conference report.
Despite my disappointment regarding the survivor benefit plan
provision, this is a strong defense bill that will have a positive
impact on the readiness of our armed forces. It is also a fitting
tribute to my friend Floyd Spence, the Chairman of the House Armed
Services Committee, to have this bill named in his honor. Floyd has
worked tirelessly for our military personnel throughout his long and
distinguished career in the House of Representatives. Regrettably, due
to the House Rules he will give up the chair of the Armed Services
Committee at the end of this session. Although he will be missed as
chairman, his leadership and concern for our military personnel will
have a lasting legacy in this conference report and Floyd will continue
to serve the people of South Carolina and the Nation as a member of the
House Armed Services Committee.
I congratulate Chairman Warner and Senator Levin on this conference
report and urge my colleagues to give it their overwhelming support.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I believe there is a parliamentary inquiry
from our colleague. I yield for that purpose.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following
the Senator from Virginia and the Senator from Michigan, I be allowed
to speak.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Chair.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, of course, his request is in the unanimous
consent agreement, and, of course, we will observe it.
Today the Senate begins consideration of the conference report to
accompany
H.R. 4205, the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2001.
Before I discuss the provisions of the conference report, I want to
report that my fellow Senators on the conference panel and I
enthusiastically joined the House conferees in naming this bill.
Representative Floyd Spence has served as the chairman of the House
Armed Services Committee for the last six years. His chairmanship,
however, represents only a portion of the almost 30 years
Representative Spence has been a tireless and dedicated supporter of
the military men and women in uniform. As chairman of the committee, in
particular, he has led the committee and the House of Representatives
in addressing the many challenging national security issues that have
confronted our nation in the wake of the cold war. Representative
Spence has accomplished this undertaking with distinction. From this
former Marine captain to a retired Navy captain, I salute him for his
leadership. Under the rules of the House, he will relinquish command of
the committee at the end of this Congress. Representative Spence will
remain a member of the committee, and I look forward to continuing to
work with him in the many years to come.
This legislation will have a profound, positive impact on our
nation's security and on the welfare of the men and women of the Armed
Forces and their families. For the second year in a row, the conference
report before the Senate authorizes a real increase in defense
spending. We have built on the momentum begun last year by authorizing
$309.9 billion in new budget authority for defense for fiscal year
2001--$4.6 billion above the President's budget request. And how have
we allocated this increase? This bill authorizes $63.2 billion in
procurement, which is $2.6 billion above the President's budget
request; $38.9 billion in research, development, test and evaluation,
which is $1.1 billion above the President's request; and $109.7 billion
in operations and maintenance funding, which exceeds the budget request
by $1.0 billion.
It is said that success has a thousand fathers and failure is an
orphan. The majority of credit for the successes in this bill however,
can be attribute to five distinguished and decorated fathers: the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the four service chiefs.
General Shelton, General Shinseki, Admiral Clark, General Jones, and
General Ryan came to Congress repeatedly during this session and
presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee their concerns about
the state of the Armed Forces today. They also shared with us their
observations about the future. They have consistently shared this
information with us in a reasonable, earnest, and nonpartisan manner.
We greatly appreciate their candor and contributions to this process.
We all recognize that our military today is over deployed and under
recourced--both in terms of people and money.
Since the early 1990s, the U.S. military has been sent on operations
overseas at an unprecedented rate; at the same time that force
structure was reduced by a third and defense spending was declining.
From the end of the Viet Nam War until 1989, there were 60 military
deployments. From 1990 to today, there have been 343 deployments--a 571
percent increase. These statistics accurately tell the story. This
trend has increased the risk to our forces and has exacerbated the
recruiting and retention problems in the military. This cannot
continue.
While the rate of military deployments is established by the
President, the Congress, within our constitutional powers, is
continuing to support the Armed Forces by improving the quality
[[Page
S10336]]
of life for the men and women in uniform and their families, by
providing for funding increases to address declining readiness
problems, aging equipment, and recruiting and retention difficulties.
The conference report does this. For the servicemen and women deployed
around the world, and the families at home that wait their return, they
should know that the Congress is steadfastly behind them.
I turn now to what is one of the most important single item in this
conference report--military healthcare, particularly for our retired
personnel and their families. History shows they are the best
recruiters of all.
The conference report before the Senate fulfills an important
commitment of ``healthcare for life'' made by the recruiters--the U.S.
Government--beginning in World War II and continuing through the Korean
war and the Viet Nam war. The goal of making that commitment was to
encourage service members to remain in uniform and become careerists.
Simply put, a commitment of health care for life in exchange for their
dedicated career service.
Again, this convergence report fulfills the promise of healthcare for
life. I am proud of the bipartisan unanimity with which the Senate
Armed Services Committee supported this initiative--an initiative never
taken before by an congressional committee.
Let me describe for my colleagues and for our active and retired
service members around the world the legislation in this conference
report to authorize health care benefits for Medicare-eligible military
retirees and their families, and how we arrived at this outcome.
For as long as I can remember, military recruits and those facing re-
enlistment have been told that one of the basic benefits of serving a
full military career is health care for life. We all know now that this
commonly offered incentive was not based in statute, but was,
nonetheless, freely and frequently made; it is a commitment that we
must honor.
Let me briefly review the history of military health care. Military
medical care requirements for activity duty service members and their
families were recognized as early as the 1700's. Congressional action
in the last 1800's directed military medical officers to attend to
military families whenever possible, at no cost to the family. During
World War II, with so many service members on activity duty, the
military medical system could not handle the health care requirements
of family members. The Emergency Maternal and Infant Care Program was
authorized by Congress to meet this road. This program was administered
through state health agencies.
The earliest reference in statute defining the health care benefit
for military retirees was in 1956 when, for the first time, the
Dependent's Medical Care Act specified that military retirees were
eligible for health care in military facilities on a space-available
basis. In 1966, this Act was amended to create the Civilian Health and
Medical Program of the Uniformed Services, CHAMPUS, to supplement the
care provided in military facilities. This legislation, in 1966,
specifically excluded from coverage military retirees who were eligible
for Medicare--a program which had been enacted by the Congress one year
earlier, in 1965.
The exclusion of over age 65, Medicare-eligible military retirees
from guaranteed care from the military health care system was masked
for many years because the capacity of military hospitals an the
military medical system exceeded that required to care for active duty
service members; therefore, many Medicare-eligible retirees were able
to receive treatment, on a space-available basis, at military
facilities. In the 1990s, we began to reduce the size of our military
services and the base realignment and closure, BRAC, rounds began to
close bases--and military hospitals--all across the Nation. The
combined effect of fewer military medical personnel to provide care and
the closure of over 30 percent of the military hospitals eliminated the
excess capacity that had been so beneficial to military retirees. Also
during this decade the retiree population grew dramatically, adding
pressure to the military health care system. The true magnitude of the
problem was finally exposed.
All of us have heard from military retirees who served a full career
and, in so doing, made many sacrifices. Many times the sacrifices these
heroic veterans made resulted in serious medical conditions that
manifested themselves at the time in their lives when they were pushed
out of the military health care system. As a nation, we promised these
dedicated retirees health care for life, but we were ignoring that
promise.
On February 23, 2000, I introduced a bill,
S. 2087, that provided for
access to mail order pharmaceuticals for ALL Medicare-eligible military
retirees, for the first time. The legislation also would improve access
to benefits under TRICARE and extend and improve certain demonstration
programs under the Defense Health Program.
On May 1, 2000, I introduced
S. 2486, which added a retail pharmacy
component to the previous legislation, providing for a full pharmacy
benefit for all retirees, including those eligible for Medicare.
On June 6, Senator Tim Hutchinson and I introduced
S. 2669, a bill
that would extend TRICARE eligibility to all military retirees and
their families, regardless of age. Later that same day, I amended the
defense authorization bill to add the text of
S. 2669. This legislation
provided uninterrupted access to the Military Health Care System, known
as TRICARE, to all retirees.
While the Senate bill extended TRICARE eligibility to all military
retirees and their families regardless of age, the defense
authorization bill passed by the House of Representatives took a
different approach. The House bill expanded and made permanent the
Medicare subvention program. Medicare subvention is a program that is
currently being tested in ten sites across the country. Under Medicare
subvention, the Health Care Financing Agency of the Department of
Health and Human Services reimburses the Department of Defense for
providing health care to Medicare-eligible military retirees in
military hospitals.
There are several problems with Medicare subvention. First, the
amount of the reimbursement from Medicare to DOD falls well short of
the actual cost of providing that care, causing DOD to absorb a loss
for each retiree covered by the program. Second, expanding Medicare
subvention nationwide would provide access to health care only for
those beneficiaries living in proximity to the remaining DOD medical
facilities. In contrast, the Senate bill covered 100 percent of the
Medicare-eligible military retirees, regardless of where they live.
As many of you know, since the defense authorization conference began
in late July, Senate and House conferees have been working toward the
mutual goal of adopting legislation which would provide comprehensive
health care to all military retirees, regardless of age. I am pleased
to announce that the conference report to accompany the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 includes a permanent
health care benefit for retirees--modeled on the Senate bill. I am
delighted that we have honored the commitment of health care for life
that was made to those who proudly served this nation. This is long
overdue.
It had always been my intent to make this health care benefit
permanent. In fact, when I originally introduced my legislation in
February, with the support of many in the Senate, there was no time
limit on the benefits contained in my amendment. During Senate floor
consideration, a discussion arose about whether a budget point of order
could be made against the bill due to the mandatory costs of the
amendment. At that point, I made the decision to limit the provision to
a preliminary 2-year period to ensure that there would be no point of
order against the authorization bill. We knew of Senators who had a
legitimate interest in raising such a point of order, and I did not
want to put the bill at risk.
All through this process, I have made clear my commitment to work to
make these benefits permanent at the earliest opportunity.
During the defense authorization conference we had an opportunity to
make my retiree health care provisions permanent by converting the
benefit to an entitlement and creating an accrual account in the
Treasury. This conversion to an entitlement would not occur until
fiscal year 2003.
[[Page
S10337]]
Let me describe how funding the health care benefit through an
accrual account would work. Accrual method of financing is more of an
accounting mechanism than a change in funding. Using an accrual method
of financing does not, in itself, increase the costs of a program.
Accrual funding is commonly used in entitlement programs; one example
of an accrual account is the military retirement account. The
Department of Defense would annually deposit such funds, as determined
by the actuarial board, into the accrual account in the Treasury. The
Treasury, which would absorb the liability for certain costs attributed
to providing health care, would also make an annual deposit to the
accrual account. The costs of the health care benefit would than be
paid from the accrual account.
The net effect of funding this important program as an entitlement
would be similar to funding it from within the discretionary accounts
of the Department of Defense. While a significant portion of the burden
of funding this program is moved from the Department of Defense budget,
there is little net cost to the federal government.
Permanently funding the military retiree health care benefit will be
seen by retirees, active duty service members and potential recruits as
the nation keeping it's commitment of health care for life to military
retirees. Those serving today and those who are joining the military
will see that the promise of a lifetime of health care, in return for
serving a full career, will be honored in perpetuity.
Two weeks ago, in testimony before both the Senate Armed Services
Committee and the House Armed Services Committee, General Hugh Shelton,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and each of the service chiefs
strongly supported making this benefit permanent and using the accrual
account method of financing. The Joint Chiefs have repeatedly testified
that failing to honor the commitment to our retirees has been
detrimental to their recruiting and retention efforts.
During our conference we made many tough decisions on issues that are
very important to many Senators. I resisted every proposal that would
potentially generate a point of order against the conference report.
The accrual funding mechanism and the direct spending associated with
the retiree health care benefit will make our conference report
vulnerable to a motion to raise a point of order against our bill which
would require a 60 vote majority to overcome. It is any Senator's
legitimate right to take such an action. While I respect the right of
any Senator to raise a point of order, I am urging my colleagues to
consider the benefits of the health care provisions in this bill, which
are fully justified. We would not want to leave our over-65 military
retirees in doubt about our intentions with respect to their medical
care. They must make critical decisions regarding their medical
insurance plans and medical care. By making this health care plan a
permanent entitlement, we are truly fulfilling the commitment made to
all those who have completed a career in uniform.
If such a point of order is sustained, then the Defense authorization
conference report will have to be recommitted to a new conference.
There is simply not enough time in this Congress to commence a new
conference.
If the Defense authorization conference report is not passed, there
will be no health care benefit for Medicare-eligible military retirees.
If the defense authorization conference report is not passed, this
would be the first time in 38 years that the Congress has not passed a
Defense authorization bill. That would be a tragedy. What a terrible
signal to send to our brave men and women in uniform defending freedom
around the world.
In addition to restoring our commitment to our retirees, the
conference report also includes a number of important initiatives for
active and reserve men and women in uniform today. The conferees
authorized a 3.7 percent pay raise for military personnel effective
January 1, 2001 and a revision of the basic pay tables to give
noncommissioned officers an additional pay increase, effective July 1,
2001. I cannot understate the importance of providing our
noncommissioned officers with this support. They are our career
soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines; tried and true, they are the
backbone of our military and are more than deserving of this pay raise.
We included a provision to reduce the number of military personnel on
food stamps. The conference report would provide up to $500 per month
in an additional, special pay for military personnel who are eligible
for food stamps. By our estimates, this provision should reduce the
6,000 military personnel estimated by DOD to be on food stamps today by
about half. To further assist our most needy service members, the
conferees agreed to eliminate the requirement that service members pay
15 percent of their housing costs out of their own pocket and directed
implementation of the Thrift Savings Program of active and reserve
service members.
The conference report extends current and authorizes additional
recruiting and retention bonuses and special pays. If the bill is not
enacted into law, all of these bonuses will expire on December 31,
2000. If the services are not able to offer the recruiting and
reenlistment bonuses, their recruiting and retention progress of this
past year will be for naught.
Also important to improving the quality of life for servicemen and
women and their families is our continuing support for the
modernization, renovation, and improvement of aging military housing.
This conference report contains $8.8 billion for military construction
and family housing, an increase of $788.0 million above the
administration's request. More than $443.0 million of this amount is
for the construction of 2,900 family housing units--800 more homes than
last year. The conference report also provides more than $585.0 million
to renovate and upgrade critical barracks space for unaccompanied
military personnel and more than $660.0 million for vital military
construction projects for reserve components.
This conference report also supports a group of dedicated men and
women, who, while not in uniform, provided an equally important
contribution to the defense of the Nation. The conference report
establishes a new program to compensate Department of Energy, DOE,
employees and DOE contractor employees who were injured due to exposure
to radiation, beryllium, or silica while working at certain DOE
defense-related nuclear facilities. This new program is intended to
compensate those employees who, for the past 50 years, have performed
duties uniquely related to nuclear weapons production and testing.
Eligible employees would receive a lump sum payment of $150,000 and
payment for all future medical costs related to the covered illness.
At this point, I recognize the important contributions of Senators
Thompson, Voinovich, McConnell, and DeWine and their staff in crafting
the final conference outcome on DOE workers compensation. Although they
were not conferees, they were involved every step of the way as we
negotiated this important issue with the House. They are to be
commended for their tireless efforts on behalf of DOE workers.
I will now briefly highlight just a few of the important measures in
this bill which support modernization and operations of our land, sea,
and air forces, and which support our continuing efforts to identify
and counter the emerging threats--information warfare or the use of
weapons of mass destruction.
The conference report:
Increases funding by over $888.0 million for the primary military
readiness accounts for ammunition, spare parts, equipment maintenance,
base operations, training funds, and real property maintenance. While
the additional funds that the conferees have provided will help with
some of the most critical shortages in these areas, further efforts
will be required over the next several years if we are to restore the
Armed Forces to appropriate levels of readiness;
Supports the Army's transformation efforts by: authorizing an
additional $750.0 million for this initiative; directing the Army to
provide a plan that charts a clear course toward the fielding of an
objective force in the 2012 time frame; and requiring an evaluation of
equipment alternatives for Interim Brigade Combat Teams;
Adds $560.0 million to the President's budget request for ship
construction;
[[Page
S10338]]
Adds $15.7 million for five additional Weapons of Mass Destruction
Civil Support Teams, WMD-CST, which will result in a total of 32 WMD-
CSTs by the end of fiscal year 2001. WMD-CSTs, formerly known as Rapid
Assessment and Initial Detection, RAID; Teams, are comprised of 22
full-time National guard personnel who are specially trained and
equipped to deploy and assess suspected nuclear, biological, chemical,
or radiological events in support of local first responders in the
United States.
Includes a provision that would designate one Assistant Secretary of
Defense as the principal civilian advisor to the Secretary for
Department of Defense activities for combating terrorism. This
provision--which is critically needed--ensures that there is a single
individual within the Department responsible for providing a focused,
comprehensive and well-funded DOD policy for combating terrorism.
Provides additional funding to address several of the Department of
Defense's most critical shortfalls in combating cyber-warfare threats.
The conference report adds $15.0 million to create an information
Security Scholarship Program to address shortages in skilled DOD
information assurance personnel by providing essential training and
education in exchange for a service commitment, and $5.0 million to
establish an Institute for Defense Computer Security and Information
Protection to conduct critical research and development that is
currently not being done by DOD or the private sector, and to
facilitate the exchange of information regarding cyberthreats and
related issues;
Adds $146.0 million to accelerate technologies leading to the
development and fielding of unmanned air combat vehicles by 2010 and
unmanned ground combat vehicles by 2015. This initiative will allow the
Department to exploit the opportunities created by the rapid pace of
technological development to provide our men and women in uniform with
the most advanced weaponry and leverage these developments in a way
that minimizes the risk to those deployed in harm's why;
Authorizes a net increase of $391.8 million for ballistic missile
defense programs including a $129.0 million increase for National
Missile Defense risk reduction, an $85.0 million increase for the
Airborne Laser program, and an $80.0 million increase for the Navy
Theater Wide missile defense program;
Reduces the congressional review period from 180 days to 60 days for
changes proposed by the administration on the export control levels of
high performance computers;
Ensures service contractors receive prompt and timely payment from
the Department of Defense by requiring a plan for the electronic
submission of supporting documents for contracts and the payment of
interest for service contracts for payments more than 30 days late;
Authorizes $470.0 million in federal assistance to the Nation's
firefighters over the next two years. The conference report also
establishes a framework for the review and reauthorization of the
program at the end of that time.
I would now like to take a few moments to address a provision which
is not in the final conference report--the Warner-Kasich amendment on
Kosovo.
As my colleagues know, I started the legislative effort to get our
European allies to live up to the commitments they have made to provide
assistance to the peacekeeping operation in Kosovo shortly after
returning from a trip to the region in January. I was greatly troubled
by what I saw in Kosovo--a U.N. peacekeeping mission that was out of
money; a civil implementation effort that had barely begun, almost
seven months after the war had ended; and U.S. and other NATO troops
having to make up for shortfalls on the civilian side by performing a
variety of non-military missions, from performing basic police
functions to running towns and villages, to acting as judges and
juries. I could not allow this situation to continue without reviewing
the issue with our allies and bringing it to the attention of my
colleagues.
The United Sates bore the major share of the military burden for the
air war on behalf of Kosovo--flying almost 70 percent of the strike and
support sorties, at a cost of over $4.0 billion to the U.S. taxpayer
and great personal risk to our aviators. In return, the Europeans
promised to pay the major share of the burden to secure the peace.
European nations and institutions quickly volunteered billions in
assistance and thousands of personnel for the effort to rebuild Kosovo.
Unfortunately, as I discovered in January, these resources and
personnel were not making their way to Kosovo--commitments were simply
not becoming realities.
I introduced legislation that had a very clear and simple purpose: to
tell our European allies that we would not allow the commitment of U.S.
military personnel to Kosovo to drift on endlessly because of the
failure of the Europeans to live up to their commitments. My
legislation would have done no more than hold our allies accountable
for the pledges and commitments they freely made.
For a variety of reasons, a form of the legislation that I originally
sponsored failed in the Senate on a close vote. However, Congressman
Kasich, after consulting with me, pursued similar legislation as an
amendment to the defense authorization bill in the House of
Representatives. The Kasich amendment passed the House by an
overwhelming margin--over 100 votes. It was this amendment that we
addressed during our conference.
I believe that the legislation Congressman Kasich and I jointly
pursued this year has had a very positive effect. Money and personnel
for civil implementation efforts are now flowing into Kosovo. Our
allies are making credible progress in fulfilling their commitments.
The civil implementation effort in Kosovo is now moving forward. While
more clearly needs to be done, it was the feeling of a majority of the
conferees--myself included--that the Kosovo legislation had largely
achieved its purpose, and keeping this legislation in the final
conference report could have a negative impact on relations with our
allies and, perhaps, developments in Kosovo.
In place of the Kasich language, the conferees included a provision
which requires the President to submit semiannual reports to the
Congress, beginning in December of this year, on the progress being
made by our allies in fulfilling their commitments in Kosovo. Such
reports will allow the Congress to keep track of developments in this
important area. If these reports reveal that progress again lags, it is
the intention of this Senator to pursue legislation in the future
designed to ensure greater burden sharing by our European allies in
this crucial venture.
In conclusion, I want to thank all of the members and staff of the
Senate and House Armed Services Committee for their hard work and
cooperation. This bill sends a strong signal to our men and women in
uniform and their families that Congress fully supports them as they
perform their missions around the world with courage and dedication.
I am confident that enactment of this conference report will enhance
the quality of life for our service men and women and their families,
strengthen the modernization and readiness of our Armed Forces, and
begin to address newly emerging threats to our security. I strongly
urge my colleagues to adopt the recommendations of the conference
committee.
Mr. President, I especially thank my distinguished friend and ranking
member for the cooperation he has given me. This is the 22nd year we
have served together in the Senate. We have been partners all these
many years. We are proud to have the joint responsibility of the
leadership of the committee that tries at every juncture to exert
wisdom and decisions reflecting bipartisanship and, as in the famous
words of another Senator, we check politics at the water's edge,
particularly as it relates to the forward-deployed troops of our Armed
Forces.
We are proud of that record. We have worked together very well. There
was unanimous signing of the conference report which is presently
before the Senate. I am very proud of the participation of all members
of our committee and, indeed, the superb staffs of both the majority
and minority.
I join my distinguished colleague, the President pro tempore and
former chairman, in recognizing this bill is named for Floyd Spence,
the chairman
[[Page
S10339]]
of the House committee. Chairman Spence has served many years. He was a
World War II veteran in the Navy and rose to the rank of captain. He
has had a distinguished public service record in the United States. It
is most fitting that this bill be named in his honor.
Mr. President, I see the presence of our distinguished colleague from
Alabama. Perhaps he would like to follow the Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. SESSIONS. If that is appropriate, I will be honored to follow the
Senator.
Mr. WARNER. Senator Wellstone, to be correct. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent he be recognized following Senator Wellstone.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, unless the managers, Mr. Levin or myself,
for some reason need to be recognized.
For the second year in a row, the conference report before the Senate
authorizes a real increase in defense spending. We have built on the
momentum of last year by authorizing $309.9 billion in new budget
authority for Defense for the fiscal year 2001, $4.6 billion above the
request of the President of the United States.
That additional funding over and above the President's request was
the result of the actions of many Senators, most particularly our
Senate leadership, Republican and Democratic, the Budget Committee
chairman, Senator Domenici, the ranking member, and others, and I
certainly had a strong hand in it. We had a record to take before the
Senate to justify that increase, and that record, in large measure, was
put together by the Joint Chiefs of Staff; specifically, the Chiefs of
the Services who have periodically come before the Congress and, in
accordance with the clear understanding between the Congress and the
Service Chiefs, to give us their opinions with regard to the needs for
their respective military departments and, indeed, the other
departments. They give us those professional opinions, even though
those opinions at times are at variance with the statements of the
President, the Secretary of Defense, and possibly even the Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The Service Chiefs have come forward repeatedly and told us about the
needs over and above budget requests. Therefore, at this time, I
specifically thank them for their service and thank them also for
standing up for those in uniform and their families in their respective
military departments.
When you are down there, whether it is an enlisted man or junior
officer, looking up to those four-stars, it is a long way, but they are
the leaders and they are the most trusted of all, the most unbiased.
When it comes to politics, there is not a trace. They are there for the
interest of our Nation and most specifically for those who every day
follow their orders. I thank them.
They confirmed what we all know: That today, the U.S. military is
overdeployed and underresourced, resource in terms of people, dollars,
procurement, and O funds. I will go into detail about them in the
course of this debate.
Since early 1990, the U.S. military has been sent on operations
overseas at an unprecedented rate. At the same time, that force
structure was reduced by a third and defense spending was declining
every year up until 2 years ago. From the end of the war in Vietnam
until 1989, the records of the Pentagon show there were 60 military
deployments.
From basically 1989 until today, there have been 343 deployments in
sharp contrast to the 60 in the preceding period. This represents over
a 500-percent increase in our deployments. These statistics tell the
story.
I am not suggesting in any way that most of these deployments were
absolutely essential. Many were in the vital security interests of the
United States. As I think quite properly, those contending for the
Presidency today, both Republican and Democrat, have pointed out that
they will watch very carefully what has been brought to the attention,
largely by the Congress and the Chiefs, that they are overdeployed and
underresourced. Those are the statistics of this period basically from
1989 until today.
While the rate of military deployments is established by the
President, the Congress, with our constitutional powers, is continuing
to support the Armed Forces by improving the quality of life for the
men and women in uniform and their families, and the President, in his
budget submissions, has done that. But each time in the past 3 years,
the Congress has gone above the President's request to add what we can,
given the budget constraints, to further improve the quality of life of
the men and women in the Armed Forces, to further increase procurement,
to further increase O funds because we are highly aware of that
theme--overdeployed and underresourced.
The conference report takes great strides in the direction to
improve, over and above that requested by the President, the quality of
life of our men and women and, I may say, the retirees.
I am proud of our committee. The Senate Armed Services Committee, the
records show, is the first committee in the Senate to recognize the
need for revising the health care program for career military retirees.
Basically, that is 20 years or, in the case of those who have medical
retirement, earlier than 20, but the career military have long been
neglected.
I want to credit the many organizations and many individuals who
approached this chairman, who approached, I believe, every Member of
the Senate, and brought to their attention the need for correction.
That correction, I am proud to say, is incorporated in this conference
report and will be given in great detail.
Basically, these retirees, in my judgment, have been entitled to this
for many years. In my judgment, they were promised this. At a later
point in this debate, I will go into the specifics because I have
researched it way back. And now, at long last, in this 2001
appropriations, we make the start for a health care program to have the
care for those retirees which they deserve and to which they have been
entitled for many years. One of the most important single items in this
conference report is this military health care.
History shows that our military retirees are the best recruiters of
all. One of the direct consequences of our military being overdeployed
and underresourced--I will use that refrain over and over again--has
been the difficulty in recruiting the needed personnel, the difficulty
in retaining the middle grade officers primarily, and the middle grade
enlisted, particularly those with skills that are in direct competition
with our ever-burgeoning economy in the private sector, who know full
well that to get a military person--trained in computers, trained in
electronics--they know they get a well-trained, well-disciplined,
reliable employee.
That is quite a lure to these young men and women who are
overdeployed, who suffer so much family separation. There has been an
over 500-percent increase in these military deployments in the past
decade or so. So that is the reason we are having difficulty in meeting
our recruiting goals.
But we are beginning to put a fix in to take care of the retirees, so
once again they can go out, as they have done in the past--I am not
suggesting they withstood recruiting, but certainly some of the
incentive has been lacking because they have not been treated fairly--
and, once again, they will be in the forward vanguard of recruiting.
They are the best recruiters of all.
I have to say on a personal note, my father served in World War I. I
am very proud of his service and believe he recruited me in World War
II by simply saying: It is your duty, son. Although I had very modest
service at the conclusion of, the end of that war, fathers like him all
throughout the country--and some mothers--were the recruiters long
before we got to the recruiting station.
The conference report before the Senate fulfills an important
commitment of health care for life, as we have determined because in
World War II, history shows, and continuing through the Korean war, and
indeed through Vietnam, the goal of making that commitment was to
encourage service members to remain in uniform and become careerists.
Simply put, there was the commitment of health care for life in
exchange for their dedicated career service.
Let me describe for my colleagues and for our active and retired
service
[[Page
S10340]]
members around the world the legislation in this conference report to
authorize health care benefits for Medicare-eligible military retirees
and their families. First, our committee, we were in the forward
vanguard of this. Then we were joined by the House. But let me describe
what we have done in this bill jointly--Senate and House--in this
conference report.
Military medical care requirements for active duty service members
and their families were recognized as early as the 1700s. That is how
far back in the history of our country it goes--George Washington's
Continental Army. Congressional action in the late 1800s directed
military medical officers to tend to military families, whenever
possible, at no cost to the family.
During World War II, with so many service members on active duty, the
military medical system could not handle the health care requirements
of many family members. The Emergency Maternal and Infant Care Program
was authorized by Congress to meet that need in that wartime period.
This program was administered through State health agencies. The
earliest reference in statute defining the health care benefit for
military retirees was in 1956, when for the first time, the Dependent's
Medical Care Act specified that military retirees were eligible for
health care in military facilities on a space-available basis.
In 1966, a decade later, this act was amended to create the Civilian
Health and Medical Care Program of the Uniformed Services, called
CHAMPUS, to supplement the care provided in military facilities. This
legislation, in 1966, specifically excluded from coverage military
retirees who were eligible for Medicare, a program which had been
enacted by the Congress 1 year earlier, in 1965.
All of us have heard from military retirees who served a full career
and in so doing made many sacrifices. Many times the sacrifices these
heroic retirees made resulted in serious medical conditions that
manifested themselves in a time in their lives when they were pushed
out of the military health care program. As a nation, we promised these
dedicated retirees health care for life, but at that period we were
ignoring that promise of America.
On February 23, 2000, I introduced a bill,
S. 2087, that provided for
access to mail-order pharmaceuticals for all Medicare-eligible military
retirees. This was the first time that has ever been done. The
legislation would also improve access to benefits under TRICARE and
extend and improve certain demonstration programs under the Defense
Health Program.
On May 1, 2000, I introduced
S. 2486, which added a retail pharmacy
component to the previous legislation, providing for a full pharmacy
benefit for all retirees, including those eligible for Medicare.
Now, I staged this purposely because throughout this period I was in
consultation with the many veterans groups who came forward in that
period, experts who had studied this for a long time and brought to my
attention the added requirements in the legislation.
While I and other members of the Senate Armed Services Committee were
working on this legislation, we were doing so in consultation regularly
with those organizations representing the retired military and the
Department of Defense. It is interesting, Secretary Cohen had some
difficulty, understandably, because of his budget constraints. But I
know in his heart of hearts he was concerned about the military
retirees, as were the Chiefs. But the time came when the Chiefs had the
opportunity to express their opinions, which, as I say, were at
variance with those of the Secretary of Defense and, indeed, the
President. They told us about the need for this legislation.
So while I thank the Senate and most particularly our committee for
pioneering this effort for the first time in the history of the
Congress, we owe a debt of gratitude to so many others who helped us,
gave us the encouragement, and, indeed, showed us the path to follow.
On June 6, Senator Tim Hutchinson and I introduced
S. 2669, a bill
that would extend TRICARE eligibility to all military retirees and
their families regardless of age. Later that same day, I amended the
Defense authorization bill to add the text of
S. 2669. This legislation
provided uninterrupted access to the military health care system, known
as TRICARE, to all retirees.
While the Senate bill extended TRICARE eligibility to all military
retirees and their families regardless of age, the Defense
authorization bill passed by the House of Representatives took a
different approach. I respect their approach, but it was different from
ours.
The House bill expanded and made permanent the Medicare subvention
program. Medicare subvention is a program that is currently being
tested in 10 sites across the country. Under Medicare subvention, the
Health Care Financing Agency of the Department of Health and Human
Services reimburses the Department of Defense for providing health care
to Medicare-eligible military retirees in military hospitals.
There were two significant problems with Medicare's subvention in the
judgment of the Senate, and particularly the conferees, when we got to
conference.
First, the amount in the reimbursement from Medicare to DOD falls
well short of the actual cost of providing that care, causing DOD to
absorb a loss for each retiree covered by the program.
Second, expanding Medicare subvention nationwide would provide access
to health care only for those beneficiaries living in proximity to the
remaining DOD medical facilities. In contrast, the Senate bill covered
100 percent of the Medicare-eligible military retirees, regardless of
where they live.
This is important; I emphasize that. Many of the military retirees
live under very modest circumstances and have sought places in our
Nation for their retirement homes which cost less and, therefore, very
often are not co-located with large military facilities and military
medical hospitals. They are scattered. It has been a burden on some of
those people through the years to travel considerable distances to
avail themselves of such medical assistance as was afforded to them
prior to this bill.
Since the Defense authorization conference began in late July, Senate
and House conferees have been working towards the mutual goal of
adopting legislation which would provide comprehensive health care to
all military retirees regardless of age. I am pleased to announce that
the conference report to accompany the National Defense Authorization
Act for fiscal year 2001 includes a permanent health care benefit for
retirees modeled on the Senate's original version to have it permanent.
I am delighted that we have honored the commitment of health care for
life that was made to those who proudly served the Nation on a
permanent basis.
I acknowledge the strong participation by the House conferees;
indeed, the Speaker of the House and the chairman of the House
Subcommittee on Personnel, and Chairman Spence, Chairman Stump. I could
mention many who worked on this. That was a subject of some concern in
the conference because Senator Levin and I, when we had our bill on the
floor with provisions which would, in an orderly way, have enabled us
to have permanency to this program, were going to be challenged on a
point of order. That may occur again today. Frankly, I would rather
have it occur today than when this bill first was on the floor 2 months
or so ago for various reasons.
So the conferees made the decision--a bold one--that they would make
this permanent, and we now present that to the Senate. It had always
been my intent to make this health care permanent. In fact, when we
originally introduced the legislation in February, with the support of
many in the Senate, there was no time limit on the benefits contained
in the early Senate bills and amendments. I have covered the history of
how we have gotten where it is now permanent.
The net effect of funding this important program as an entitlement
would be similar to funding it from within the discretionary accounts
of the Department of Defense. There is little net cost to the Federal
Government. Permanently funding the military retiree health care
benefit will be seen by retirees, active duty service members, and
potential recruits, both enlisted
[[Page
S10341]]
and officers, as the Nation keeping its commitment to health care for
life to military retirees. Those serving today and those who are
joining the military will see that the promise of a lifetime of health
care in return for a career will be honored by America.
Two weeks ago in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee
and the House Armed Services Committee, Gen. Hugh Shelton, Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and each of the Service Chiefs strongly
supported making this benefit permanent and using the accrual account
methods of financing. While I respect the right of any Senator to raise
a point of order, I am urging my colleagues to consider the benefits of
the health care provisions of this bill which are fully justified. We
would not want to leave our over-65 military retirees in doubt about
our intentions with respect to their future medical care.
This issue is on the 1 yard line, ready to be carried across for a
touchdown by the Senate, hopefully within a matter of hours.
These retirees must make critical decisions regarding their medical
insurance plans and medical care. By making this health care plan a
permanent entitlement, we are truly fulfilling the commitment made to
all those who have completed a career in uniform and to those
contemplating a career in the future.
I am going to yield the floor at this time so as to move along. I
will return to my remarks at a later point.
I yield the floor to my distinguished colleague. Again, I thank
Senator Levin for his untiring efforts on our behalf to create this
historic piece of legislation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, first let me congratulate Senator Warner,
our chairman, for his distinguished service, as always, for his total
commitment to the men and women in the military, for trying to produce
a bipartisan product which we have produced again this year. Without
his leadership, this would not be possible. I, first and foremost,
thank my good friend John Warner for again coming through with a really
good bill that I think will command the large number of votes which
will be forthcoming.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my colleague. I know he would wish
to share, with me, such credit for this legislation with all members on
both sides of the aisle of the Armed Services Committee. We have a
great team.
Mr. LEVIN. That was indeed the next point. We are blessed with a
committee which operates on a bipartisan basis. The members of the
committee work well together. The chairmen of our subcommittees work
well. Our staffs work well together. We have many blessings to count
being able to serve in this body and to serve our Nation, but surely
one of our great blessings is being on a committee which is able to
operate on such a bipartisan basis.
I echo Chairman Warner's comments about the tragedy in Yemen this
morning that involved the Navy ship, the U.S.S. Cole. Our hearts and
prayers go out to the families of those who have been lost in this
despicable act of terrorism. Our hearts and prayers go out to the
sailors who have survived who are now struggling for life. Our hearts
and prayers go out to their families. We are in, as we surely
understand, for a long battle against terrorist acts.
I notice my good friend from Kansas on the floor, chairman of the
subcommittee that addresses new threats we face. The terrorist threat
which was exemplified this morning in Yemen has been repeatedly pointed
out by him and other members of the subcommittee and of the Senate as
being the type of threat that we face. That kind of terrorist act is a
real world threat which is here and now.
That was not a weapon of mass destruction, but it was a weapon that
caused massive injury, massive death. We must put our brains and our
resources together with allies to try to prevent these kinds of actions
from occurring and, when they do occur, to bring the perpetrators to
justice.
The Senator from New York has requested that I yield 5 minutes to him
so he may make a statement at this time. The order that we had
established by unanimous consent was that after my opening statement
the Senator from Minnesota would be recognized, and then the Senator
from Alabama would be recognized. I want someone on the other side of
the aisle to hear this, but I ask unanimous consent that that be
modified at this time so I may defer my opening statement to yield to
the Senator from New York 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from New York.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I thank my friend, the Senator from
Michigan. He is gracious as always, and I appreciate the opportunity to
briefly interrupt this proceeding. I also compliment him and Senator
Warner on the bill they have put together. As was mentioned, the whole
Chamber admires the bipartisan way in which the Senators from Michigan
and Virginia have worked together.
I rise today to say I am stunned and saddened by the violence which
has erupted in the Middle East. I am saddened by the loss of four
innocent and brave American sailors, victims of malicious, malevolent,
maddening terrorism that has no rationale, no justification.
My prayers and thoughts are with their families, as well as with
those who have been injured and those who are missing, and their
families as well. Terrorism can strike anywhere at any time. We have to
be doing all we can in this Chamber to deal with it.
I am stunned also that after 7 years of good faith negotiations all
too many Palestinians still see violence as the means to achieve their
ends. The violent pictures we saw of the two Israeli reservists being
thrown from a window and brutally beaten is enough to turn anyone's
stomach. Pictures such as that and so many other pictures that we have
seen are not only very disturbing to us, but it lessens the chances for
peace in the Middle East.
I am disappointed and sad that Chairman Arafat has failed to stop or
even condemn the violence. Yasser Arafat says he is for peace and he
has signed agreements for peace. Yet violence has erupted in the Middle
East and not only has he failed to stop it, you don't hear a word of
condemnation. Instead, one may feel that he misguidedly thinks violence
is a means to an end. I am saddened that a peace process which saw the
courage and sacrifice of leaders such as Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak
may be crumbling before our eyes. The prospect for peace, at least in
the near future, has been shattered by today's events.
I have been a supporter of the Oslo peace process because I truly
believe that peace is the only realistic, l
Major Actions:
All articles in Senate section
THE FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001--CONFERENCE REPORT
(Senate - October 12, 2000)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages S10334-
S10394]
THE FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR
2001--CONFERENCE REPORT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will read the conference report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the amendment of the Senate on the bill H.R.
4205, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for
military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for
such fiscal year and for the Armed Forces, and for other
purposes, having met, have agreed that the House recede from
its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate, and agree to
the same with an amendment, and the Senate agree to the same,
signed by a majority of the conferees on the part of both
Houses.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will proceed to the consideration
of the conference report.
(The report was printed in the House proceeding of the Record of
October 6, 2000.)
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it is my privilege as chairman, together
with my distinguished friend and ranking member, Mr. Levin, the Senator
from Michigan, to at long last bring to the Senate the annual
conference report from the authorizing committee in the Senate and the
authorizing committee in the House.
To refresh the recollection of Senators, I will read the time
agreement: 2 hours under the control of the chairman of the Armed
Services Committee, Mr. Warner; 2\1/2\ hours under the control of the
ranking member, Mr. Levin; 1 hour under the control of Senator Gramm;
30 minutes under the control of Senator Wellstone. Following the debate
just outlined, Senator Robert Kerry will be recognized to make a point
of order. The motion to waive the Budget Act will be limited to 2 hours
equally divided in the usual form.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. We hope to yield back some time because I know many of
our colleagues are anxious to make commitments, but this is a very
important piece of legislation. I am certain the Senators who are going
to participate, whom I have identified, will do so in a manner that
fits the importance of this annual piece of legislation.
This is the 39th consecutive authorization bill passed by the
Congress, assuming it passes this Chamber. It passed the House by a
vote of 382-31. That will give some clear indication of the importance
of the legislation and the strong support that it merits and has
merited in the House of Representatives.
Mr. President, the Senate, as I have been with my colleagues here for
the past hour or so for the voting, reflects a very somber note on this
sad day for America--indeed, for all those who, throughout the world,
stand guard for freedom. We have suffered a tragic loss to the U.S.
Navy. This is in parallel with frightful losses taking place elsewhere
throughout the Middle East. It brings to mind that this is a most
dangerous world that faces us every day. Men and women in the Armed
Forces of the United States go forth from our shores, serving in
countries all over the world. They, of course, now are on a high alert
because of the tragic terrorist act inflicted upon one of our
destroyers, the U.S.S. Cole.
First in mind are thoughts for our sailors who have lost their lives,
and most particularly their families and the families who, at this
hour, are still waiting definitive news with regard to the crew of that
ship. The casualties number four dead, approximately 12 missing, and
some 35 to 36 suffering wounds. Still the facts are coming in.
This clearly shows the danger; it shows the risks the men and women
of the Armed Forces are taking--not only in the Middle East region.
This, of course, happened in a port in Yemen. The ship was on a routine
refueling, a matter of hours, as it worked its way up towards the
Persian Gulf to take up its duty station in enforcing the United
Nations Security Council sanctions against Iraq. Because of the
smuggling that is taking place in violation of those sanctions, those
are dangerous tasks and they are being performed every day by men and
women of the U.S. Armed Forces, Great Britain, and other nations. Air
missions are being flown over Iraq every day, and often those missions
are encountering ground fire and other military activity directed
against them. We must be a grateful nation for the risks that are
constantly assumed by the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces and
their families.
The Senate will have an opportunity to get further facts in the
course of the day.
I will now direct my attention to this particular bill, and I see the
distinguished President pro tempore, the former chairman of the Senate
Armed Services Committee. It is my privilege to succeed him. As an
honor to our distinguished former chairman, I ask he lead off the
debate on this bill today.
Mr. THURMOND. Thank you very much. I appreciate your fine work as
chairman.
[[Page
S10335]]
Mr. President, before I discuss the conference report on the Defense
authorization bill, I want to join my colleagues in expressing my
condolences to the families of the sailors killed and wounded in this
morning's attack on the U.S.S. Cole. This heinous attack again
demonstrates the constant peril faced by our military personnel and
reinforces the need for this Nation to maintain its vigilance at all
times.
Mr. President, I join Chairman Warner and Senator Levin, the ranking
member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, in urging my Senate
colleagues to support the conference report to accompany the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001. The
report, which is the culmination of hundreds of hours of work by the
Senate and House Armed Services Committees, is a continuation of the
Congress' efforts to reverse the decline in the readiness of our armed
forces. It increases the President's budget request by more than $4
billion. More important, it directs the additional resources to the
critical areas of procurement, research and development, and improving
the quality of life for our military personnel and their families.
The chairman and ranking member have already highlighted the
significant aspects of this bill. However, I do want to comment on the
comprehensive health care provision for Medicare-eligible military
retirees and the Energy Employees' Occupational Illness Compensation
Program, both of which I consider significant aspects of this
legislation. The health care provision is long overdue legislation that
will ensure our military retirees and their families receive life-long
health care committed to them as a condition of their service. It will
significantly ease the uncertainty regarding health care and financial
burden for thousands of military retirees who have dedicated their
lives to the service of the Nation. The occupational illness
compensation provision provides fair and just compensation to the
thousands of workers who were exposed to dangerous levels of hazardous
material and other toxic substances while they worked on the Nation's
nuclear weapons programs. Although I understand that these benefits
come at a significant financial cost, we must keep in mind our
commitment to these patriots and remember the greatness of a Nation is
not how much gold or wealth it accumulates, but on how it takes care of
its citizens, especially those who serve in the Armed Forces.
As with all conference reports, there are disappointments. I am
particularly disappointed that the provision to increase the survivor
benefit plan basic annuity for surviving spouses age 62 and older was
dropped during the conference. The provision would have increased the
survivor benefit plan annuity for these individuals from 35 percent to
45 percent over the next four years. I understand that despite the
obvious merit of the legislation it was dropped during the conference
because it would have cost $2.4 billion over the next 10 years. I find
this ironic, since there is more than $60 billion in direct spending
attributed to this conference report.
Despite my disappointment regarding the survivor benefit plan
provision, this is a strong defense bill that will have a positive
impact on the readiness of our armed forces. It is also a fitting
tribute to my friend Floyd Spence, the Chairman of the House Armed
Services Committee, to have this bill named in his honor. Floyd has
worked tirelessly for our military personnel throughout his long and
distinguished career in the House of Representatives. Regrettably, due
to the House Rules he will give up the chair of the Armed Services
Committee at the end of this session. Although he will be missed as
chairman, his leadership and concern for our military personnel will
have a lasting legacy in this conference report and Floyd will continue
to serve the people of South Carolina and the Nation as a member of the
House Armed Services Committee.
I congratulate Chairman Warner and Senator Levin on this conference
report and urge my colleagues to give it their overwhelming support.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I believe there is a parliamentary inquiry
from our colleague. I yield for that purpose.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following
the Senator from Virginia and the Senator from Michigan, I be allowed
to speak.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Chair.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, of course, his request is in the unanimous
consent agreement, and, of course, we will observe it.
Today the Senate begins consideration of the conference report to
accompany
H.R. 4205, the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2001.
Before I discuss the provisions of the conference report, I want to
report that my fellow Senators on the conference panel and I
enthusiastically joined the House conferees in naming this bill.
Representative Floyd Spence has served as the chairman of the House
Armed Services Committee for the last six years. His chairmanship,
however, represents only a portion of the almost 30 years
Representative Spence has been a tireless and dedicated supporter of
the military men and women in uniform. As chairman of the committee, in
particular, he has led the committee and the House of Representatives
in addressing the many challenging national security issues that have
confronted our nation in the wake of the cold war. Representative
Spence has accomplished this undertaking with distinction. From this
former Marine captain to a retired Navy captain, I salute him for his
leadership. Under the rules of the House, he will relinquish command of
the committee at the end of this Congress. Representative Spence will
remain a member of the committee, and I look forward to continuing to
work with him in the many years to come.
This legislation will have a profound, positive impact on our
nation's security and on the welfare of the men and women of the Armed
Forces and their families. For the second year in a row, the conference
report before the Senate authorizes a real increase in defense
spending. We have built on the momentum begun last year by authorizing
$309.9 billion in new budget authority for defense for fiscal year
2001--$4.6 billion above the President's budget request. And how have
we allocated this increase? This bill authorizes $63.2 billion in
procurement, which is $2.6 billion above the President's budget
request; $38.9 billion in research, development, test and evaluation,
which is $1.1 billion above the President's request; and $109.7 billion
in operations and maintenance funding, which exceeds the budget request
by $1.0 billion.
It is said that success has a thousand fathers and failure is an
orphan. The majority of credit for the successes in this bill however,
can be attribute to five distinguished and decorated fathers: the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the four service chiefs.
General Shelton, General Shinseki, Admiral Clark, General Jones, and
General Ryan came to Congress repeatedly during this session and
presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee their concerns about
the state of the Armed Forces today. They also shared with us their
observations about the future. They have consistently shared this
information with us in a reasonable, earnest, and nonpartisan manner.
We greatly appreciate their candor and contributions to this process.
We all recognize that our military today is over deployed and under
recourced--both in terms of people and money.
Since the early 1990s, the U.S. military has been sent on operations
overseas at an unprecedented rate; at the same time that force
structure was reduced by a third and defense spending was declining.
From the end of the Viet Nam War until 1989, there were 60 military
deployments. From 1990 to today, there have been 343 deployments--a 571
percent increase. These statistics accurately tell the story. This
trend has increased the risk to our forces and has exacerbated the
recruiting and retention problems in the military. This cannot
continue.
While the rate of military deployments is established by the
President, the Congress, within our constitutional powers, is
continuing to support the Armed Forces by improving the quality
[[Page
S10336]]
of life for the men and women in uniform and their families, by
providing for funding increases to address declining readiness
problems, aging equipment, and recruiting and retention difficulties.
The conference report does this. For the servicemen and women deployed
around the world, and the families at home that wait their return, they
should know that the Congress is steadfastly behind them.
I turn now to what is one of the most important single item in this
conference report--military healthcare, particularly for our retired
personnel and their families. History shows they are the best
recruiters of all.
The conference report before the Senate fulfills an important
commitment of ``healthcare for life'' made by the recruiters--the U.S.
Government--beginning in World War II and continuing through the Korean
war and the Viet Nam war. The goal of making that commitment was to
encourage service members to remain in uniform and become careerists.
Simply put, a commitment of health care for life in exchange for their
dedicated career service.
Again, this convergence report fulfills the promise of healthcare for
life. I am proud of the bipartisan unanimity with which the Senate
Armed Services Committee supported this initiative--an initiative never
taken before by an congressional committee.
Let me describe for my colleagues and for our active and retired
service members around the world the legislation in this conference
report to authorize health care benefits for Medicare-eligible military
retirees and their families, and how we arrived at this outcome.
For as long as I can remember, military recruits and those facing re-
enlistment have been told that one of the basic benefits of serving a
full military career is health care for life. We all know now that this
commonly offered incentive was not based in statute, but was,
nonetheless, freely and frequently made; it is a commitment that we
must honor.
Let me briefly review the history of military health care. Military
medical care requirements for activity duty service members and their
families were recognized as early as the 1700's. Congressional action
in the last 1800's directed military medical officers to attend to
military families whenever possible, at no cost to the family. During
World War II, with so many service members on activity duty, the
military medical system could not handle the health care requirements
of family members. The Emergency Maternal and Infant Care Program was
authorized by Congress to meet this road. This program was administered
through state health agencies.
The earliest reference in statute defining the health care benefit
for military retirees was in 1956 when, for the first time, the
Dependent's Medical Care Act specified that military retirees were
eligible for health care in military facilities on a space-available
basis. In 1966, this Act was amended to create the Civilian Health and
Medical Program of the Uniformed Services, CHAMPUS, to supplement the
care provided in military facilities. This legislation, in 1966,
specifically excluded from coverage military retirees who were eligible
for Medicare--a program which had been enacted by the Congress one year
earlier, in 1965.
The exclusion of over age 65, Medicare-eligible military retirees
from guaranteed care from the military health care system was masked
for many years because the capacity of military hospitals an the
military medical system exceeded that required to care for active duty
service members; therefore, many Medicare-eligible retirees were able
to receive treatment, on a space-available basis, at military
facilities. In the 1990s, we began to reduce the size of our military
services and the base realignment and closure, BRAC, rounds began to
close bases--and military hospitals--all across the Nation. The
combined effect of fewer military medical personnel to provide care and
the closure of over 30 percent of the military hospitals eliminated the
excess capacity that had been so beneficial to military retirees. Also
during this decade the retiree population grew dramatically, adding
pressure to the military health care system. The true magnitude of the
problem was finally exposed.
All of us have heard from military retirees who served a full career
and, in so doing, made many sacrifices. Many times the sacrifices these
heroic veterans made resulted in serious medical conditions that
manifested themselves at the time in their lives when they were pushed
out of the military health care system. As a nation, we promised these
dedicated retirees health care for life, but we were ignoring that
promise.
On February 23, 2000, I introduced a bill,
S. 2087, that provided for
access to mail order pharmaceuticals for ALL Medicare-eligible military
retirees, for the first time. The legislation also would improve access
to benefits under TRICARE and extend and improve certain demonstration
programs under the Defense Health Program.
On May 1, 2000, I introduced
S. 2486, which added a retail pharmacy
component to the previous legislation, providing for a full pharmacy
benefit for all retirees, including those eligible for Medicare.
On June 6, Senator Tim Hutchinson and I introduced
S. 2669, a bill
that would extend TRICARE eligibility to all military retirees and
their families, regardless of age. Later that same day, I amended the
defense authorization bill to add the text of
S. 2669. This legislation
provided uninterrupted access to the Military Health Care System, known
as TRICARE, to all retirees.
While the Senate bill extended TRICARE eligibility to all military
retirees and their families regardless of age, the defense
authorization bill passed by the House of Representatives took a
different approach. The House bill expanded and made permanent the
Medicare subvention program. Medicare subvention is a program that is
currently being tested in ten sites across the country. Under Medicare
subvention, the Health Care Financing Agency of the Department of
Health and Human Services reimburses the Department of Defense for
providing health care to Medicare-eligible military retirees in
military hospitals.
There are several problems with Medicare subvention. First, the
amount of the reimbursement from Medicare to DOD falls well short of
the actual cost of providing that care, causing DOD to absorb a loss
for each retiree covered by the program. Second, expanding Medicare
subvention nationwide would provide access to health care only for
those beneficiaries living in proximity to the remaining DOD medical
facilities. In contrast, the Senate bill covered 100 percent of the
Medicare-eligible military retirees, regardless of where they live.
As many of you know, since the defense authorization conference began
in late July, Senate and House conferees have been working toward the
mutual goal of adopting legislation which would provide comprehensive
health care to all military retirees, regardless of age. I am pleased
to announce that the conference report to accompany the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 includes a permanent
health care benefit for retirees--modeled on the Senate bill. I am
delighted that we have honored the commitment of health care for life
that was made to those who proudly served this nation. This is long
overdue.
It had always been my intent to make this health care benefit
permanent. In fact, when I originally introduced my legislation in
February, with the support of many in the Senate, there was no time
limit on the benefits contained in my amendment. During Senate floor
consideration, a discussion arose about whether a budget point of order
could be made against the bill due to the mandatory costs of the
amendment. At that point, I made the decision to limit the provision to
a preliminary 2-year period to ensure that there would be no point of
order against the authorization bill. We knew of Senators who had a
legitimate interest in raising such a point of order, and I did not
want to put the bill at risk.
All through this process, I have made clear my commitment to work to
make these benefits permanent at the earliest opportunity.
During the defense authorization conference we had an opportunity to
make my retiree health care provisions permanent by converting the
benefit to an entitlement and creating an accrual account in the
Treasury. This conversion to an entitlement would not occur until
fiscal year 2003.
[[Page
S10337]]
Let me describe how funding the health care benefit through an
accrual account would work. Accrual method of financing is more of an
accounting mechanism than a change in funding. Using an accrual method
of financing does not, in itself, increase the costs of a program.
Accrual funding is commonly used in entitlement programs; one example
of an accrual account is the military retirement account. The
Department of Defense would annually deposit such funds, as determined
by the actuarial board, into the accrual account in the Treasury. The
Treasury, which would absorb the liability for certain costs attributed
to providing health care, would also make an annual deposit to the
accrual account. The costs of the health care benefit would than be
paid from the accrual account.
The net effect of funding this important program as an entitlement
would be similar to funding it from within the discretionary accounts
of the Department of Defense. While a significant portion of the burden
of funding this program is moved from the Department of Defense budget,
there is little net cost to the federal government.
Permanently funding the military retiree health care benefit will be
seen by retirees, active duty service members and potential recruits as
the nation keeping it's commitment of health care for life to military
retirees. Those serving today and those who are joining the military
will see that the promise of a lifetime of health care, in return for
serving a full career, will be honored in perpetuity.
Two weeks ago, in testimony before both the Senate Armed Services
Committee and the House Armed Services Committee, General Hugh Shelton,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and each of the service chiefs
strongly supported making this benefit permanent and using the accrual
account method of financing. The Joint Chiefs have repeatedly testified
that failing to honor the commitment to our retirees has been
detrimental to their recruiting and retention efforts.
During our conference we made many tough decisions on issues that are
very important to many Senators. I resisted every proposal that would
potentially generate a point of order against the conference report.
The accrual funding mechanism and the direct spending associated with
the retiree health care benefit will make our conference report
vulnerable to a motion to raise a point of order against our bill which
would require a 60 vote majority to overcome. It is any Senator's
legitimate right to take such an action. While I respect the right of
any Senator to raise a point of order, I am urging my colleagues to
consider the benefits of the health care provisions in this bill, which
are fully justified. We would not want to leave our over-65 military
retirees in doubt about our intentions with respect to their medical
care. They must make critical decisions regarding their medical
insurance plans and medical care. By making this health care plan a
permanent entitlement, we are truly fulfilling the commitment made to
all those who have completed a career in uniform.
If such a point of order is sustained, then the Defense authorization
conference report will have to be recommitted to a new conference.
There is simply not enough time in this Congress to commence a new
conference.
If the Defense authorization conference report is not passed, there
will be no health care benefit for Medicare-eligible military retirees.
If the defense authorization conference report is not passed, this
would be the first time in 38 years that the Congress has not passed a
Defense authorization bill. That would be a tragedy. What a terrible
signal to send to our brave men and women in uniform defending freedom
around the world.
In addition to restoring our commitment to our retirees, the
conference report also includes a number of important initiatives for
active and reserve men and women in uniform today. The conferees
authorized a 3.7 percent pay raise for military personnel effective
January 1, 2001 and a revision of the basic pay tables to give
noncommissioned officers an additional pay increase, effective July 1,
2001. I cannot understate the importance of providing our
noncommissioned officers with this support. They are our career
soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines; tried and true, they are the
backbone of our military and are more than deserving of this pay raise.
We included a provision to reduce the number of military personnel on
food stamps. The conference report would provide up to $500 per month
in an additional, special pay for military personnel who are eligible
for food stamps. By our estimates, this provision should reduce the
6,000 military personnel estimated by DOD to be on food stamps today by
about half. To further assist our most needy service members, the
conferees agreed to eliminate the requirement that service members pay
15 percent of their housing costs out of their own pocket and directed
implementation of the Thrift Savings Program of active and reserve
service members.
The conference report extends current and authorizes additional
recruiting and retention bonuses and special pays. If the bill is not
enacted into law, all of these bonuses will expire on December 31,
2000. If the services are not able to offer the recruiting and
reenlistment bonuses, their recruiting and retention progress of this
past year will be for naught.
Also important to improving the quality of life for servicemen and
women and their families is our continuing support for the
modernization, renovation, and improvement of aging military housing.
This conference report contains $8.8 billion for military construction
and family housing, an increase of $788.0 million above the
administration's request. More than $443.0 million of this amount is
for the construction of 2,900 family housing units--800 more homes than
last year. The conference report also provides more than $585.0 million
to renovate and upgrade critical barracks space for unaccompanied
military personnel and more than $660.0 million for vital military
construction projects for reserve components.
This conference report also supports a group of dedicated men and
women, who, while not in uniform, provided an equally important
contribution to the defense of the Nation. The conference report
establishes a new program to compensate Department of Energy, DOE,
employees and DOE contractor employees who were injured due to exposure
to radiation, beryllium, or silica while working at certain DOE
defense-related nuclear facilities. This new program is intended to
compensate those employees who, for the past 50 years, have performed
duties uniquely related to nuclear weapons production and testing.
Eligible employees would receive a lump sum payment of $150,000 and
payment for all future medical costs related to the covered illness.
At this point, I recognize the important contributions of Senators
Thompson, Voinovich, McConnell, and DeWine and their staff in crafting
the final conference outcome on DOE workers compensation. Although they
were not conferees, they were involved every step of the way as we
negotiated this important issue with the House. They are to be
commended for their tireless efforts on behalf of DOE workers.
I will now briefly highlight just a few of the important measures in
this bill which support modernization and operations of our land, sea,
and air forces, and which support our continuing efforts to identify
and counter the emerging threats--information warfare or the use of
weapons of mass destruction.
The conference report:
Increases funding by over $888.0 million for the primary military
readiness accounts for ammunition, spare parts, equipment maintenance,
base operations, training funds, and real property maintenance. While
the additional funds that the conferees have provided will help with
some of the most critical shortages in these areas, further efforts
will be required over the next several years if we are to restore the
Armed Forces to appropriate levels of readiness;
Supports the Army's transformation efforts by: authorizing an
additional $750.0 million for this initiative; directing the Army to
provide a plan that charts a clear course toward the fielding of an
objective force in the 2012 time frame; and requiring an evaluation of
equipment alternatives for Interim Brigade Combat Teams;
Adds $560.0 million to the President's budget request for ship
construction;
[[Page
S10338]]
Adds $15.7 million for five additional Weapons of Mass Destruction
Civil Support Teams, WMD-CST, which will result in a total of 32 WMD-
CSTs by the end of fiscal year 2001. WMD-CSTs, formerly known as Rapid
Assessment and Initial Detection, RAID; Teams, are comprised of 22
full-time National guard personnel who are specially trained and
equipped to deploy and assess suspected nuclear, biological, chemical,
or radiological events in support of local first responders in the
United States.
Includes a provision that would designate one Assistant Secretary of
Defense as the principal civilian advisor to the Secretary for
Department of Defense activities for combating terrorism. This
provision--which is critically needed--ensures that there is a single
individual within the Department responsible for providing a focused,
comprehensive and well-funded DOD policy for combating terrorism.
Provides additional funding to address several of the Department of
Defense's most critical shortfalls in combating cyber-warfare threats.
The conference report adds $15.0 million to create an information
Security Scholarship Program to address shortages in skilled DOD
information assurance personnel by providing essential training and
education in exchange for a service commitment, and $5.0 million to
establish an Institute for Defense Computer Security and Information
Protection to conduct critical research and development that is
currently not being done by DOD or the private sector, and to
facilitate the exchange of information regarding cyberthreats and
related issues;
Adds $146.0 million to accelerate technologies leading to the
development and fielding of unmanned air combat vehicles by 2010 and
unmanned ground combat vehicles by 2015. This initiative will allow the
Department to exploit the opportunities created by the rapid pace of
technological development to provide our men and women in uniform with
the most advanced weaponry and leverage these developments in a way
that minimizes the risk to those deployed in harm's why;
Authorizes a net increase of $391.8 million for ballistic missile
defense programs including a $129.0 million increase for National
Missile Defense risk reduction, an $85.0 million increase for the
Airborne Laser program, and an $80.0 million increase for the Navy
Theater Wide missile defense program;
Reduces the congressional review period from 180 days to 60 days for
changes proposed by the administration on the export control levels of
high performance computers;
Ensures service contractors receive prompt and timely payment from
the Department of Defense by requiring a plan for the electronic
submission of supporting documents for contracts and the payment of
interest for service contracts for payments more than 30 days late;
Authorizes $470.0 million in federal assistance to the Nation's
firefighters over the next two years. The conference report also
establishes a framework for the review and reauthorization of the
program at the end of that time.
I would now like to take a few moments to address a provision which
is not in the final conference report--the Warner-Kasich amendment on
Kosovo.
As my colleagues know, I started the legislative effort to get our
European allies to live up to the commitments they have made to provide
assistance to the peacekeeping operation in Kosovo shortly after
returning from a trip to the region in January. I was greatly troubled
by what I saw in Kosovo--a U.N. peacekeeping mission that was out of
money; a civil implementation effort that had barely begun, almost
seven months after the war had ended; and U.S. and other NATO troops
having to make up for shortfalls on the civilian side by performing a
variety of non-military missions, from performing basic police
functions to running towns and villages, to acting as judges and
juries. I could not allow this situation to continue without reviewing
the issue with our allies and bringing it to the attention of my
colleagues.
The United Sates bore the major share of the military burden for the
air war on behalf of Kosovo--flying almost 70 percent of the strike and
support sorties, at a cost of over $4.0 billion to the U.S. taxpayer
and great personal risk to our aviators. In return, the Europeans
promised to pay the major share of the burden to secure the peace.
European nations and institutions quickly volunteered billions in
assistance and thousands of personnel for the effort to rebuild Kosovo.
Unfortunately, as I discovered in January, these resources and
personnel were not making their way to Kosovo--commitments were simply
not becoming realities.
I introduced legislation that had a very clear and simple purpose: to
tell our European allies that we would not allow the commitment of U.S.
military personnel to Kosovo to drift on endlessly because of the
failure of the Europeans to live up to their commitments. My
legislation would have done no more than hold our allies accountable
for the pledges and commitments they freely made.
For a variety of reasons, a form of the legislation that I originally
sponsored failed in the Senate on a close vote. However, Congressman
Kasich, after consulting with me, pursued similar legislation as an
amendment to the defense authorization bill in the House of
Representatives. The Kasich amendment passed the House by an
overwhelming margin--over 100 votes. It was this amendment that we
addressed during our conference.
I believe that the legislation Congressman Kasich and I jointly
pursued this year has had a very positive effect. Money and personnel
for civil implementation efforts are now flowing into Kosovo. Our
allies are making credible progress in fulfilling their commitments.
The civil implementation effort in Kosovo is now moving forward. While
more clearly needs to be done, it was the feeling of a majority of the
conferees--myself included--that the Kosovo legislation had largely
achieved its purpose, and keeping this legislation in the final
conference report could have a negative impact on relations with our
allies and, perhaps, developments in Kosovo.
In place of the Kasich language, the conferees included a provision
which requires the President to submit semiannual reports to the
Congress, beginning in December of this year, on the progress being
made by our allies in fulfilling their commitments in Kosovo. Such
reports will allow the Congress to keep track of developments in this
important area. If these reports reveal that progress again lags, it is
the intention of this Senator to pursue legislation in the future
designed to ensure greater burden sharing by our European allies in
this crucial venture.
In conclusion, I want to thank all of the members and staff of the
Senate and House Armed Services Committee for their hard work and
cooperation. This bill sends a strong signal to our men and women in
uniform and their families that Congress fully supports them as they
perform their missions around the world with courage and dedication.
I am confident that enactment of this conference report will enhance
the quality of life for our service men and women and their families,
strengthen the modernization and readiness of our Armed Forces, and
begin to address newly emerging threats to our security. I strongly
urge my colleagues to adopt the recommendations of the conference
committee.
Mr. President, I especially thank my distinguished friend and ranking
member for the cooperation he has given me. This is the 22nd year we
have served together in the Senate. We have been partners all these
many years. We are proud to have the joint responsibility of the
leadership of the committee that tries at every juncture to exert
wisdom and decisions reflecting bipartisanship and, as in the famous
words of another Senator, we check politics at the water's edge,
particularly as it relates to the forward-deployed troops of our Armed
Forces.
We are proud of that record. We have worked together very well. There
was unanimous signing of the conference report which is presently
before the Senate. I am very proud of the participation of all members
of our committee and, indeed, the superb staffs of both the majority
and minority.
I join my distinguished colleague, the President pro tempore and
former chairman, in recognizing this bill is named for Floyd Spence,
the chairman
[[Page
S10339]]
of the House committee. Chairman Spence has served many years. He was a
World War II veteran in the Navy and rose to the rank of captain. He
has had a distinguished public service record in the United States. It
is most fitting that this bill be named in his honor.
Mr. President, I see the presence of our distinguished colleague from
Alabama. Perhaps he would like to follow the Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. SESSIONS. If that is appropriate, I will be honored to follow the
Senator.
Mr. WARNER. Senator Wellstone, to be correct. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent he be recognized following Senator Wellstone.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, unless the managers, Mr. Levin or myself,
for some reason need to be recognized.
For the second year in a row, the conference report before the Senate
authorizes a real increase in defense spending. We have built on the
momentum of last year by authorizing $309.9 billion in new budget
authority for Defense for the fiscal year 2001, $4.6 billion above the
request of the President of the United States.
That additional funding over and above the President's request was
the result of the actions of many Senators, most particularly our
Senate leadership, Republican and Democratic, the Budget Committee
chairman, Senator Domenici, the ranking member, and others, and I
certainly had a strong hand in it. We had a record to take before the
Senate to justify that increase, and that record, in large measure, was
put together by the Joint Chiefs of Staff; specifically, the Chiefs of
the Services who have periodically come before the Congress and, in
accordance with the clear understanding between the Congress and the
Service Chiefs, to give us their opinions with regard to the needs for
their respective military departments and, indeed, the other
departments. They give us those professional opinions, even though
those opinions at times are at variance with the statements of the
President, the Secretary of Defense, and possibly even the Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The Service Chiefs have come forward repeatedly and told us about the
needs over and above budget requests. Therefore, at this time, I
specifically thank them for their service and thank them also for
standing up for those in uniform and their families in their respective
military departments.
When you are down there, whether it is an enlisted man or junior
officer, looking up to those four-stars, it is a long way, but they are
the leaders and they are the most trusted of all, the most unbiased.
When it comes to politics, there is not a trace. They are there for the
interest of our Nation and most specifically for those who every day
follow their orders. I thank them.
They confirmed what we all know: That today, the U.S. military is
overdeployed and underresourced, resource in terms of people, dollars,
procurement, and O funds. I will go into detail about them in the
course of this debate.
Since early 1990, the U.S. military has been sent on operations
overseas at an unprecedented rate. At the same time, that force
structure was reduced by a third and defense spending was declining
every year up until 2 years ago. From the end of the war in Vietnam
until 1989, the records of the Pentagon show there were 60 military
deployments.
From basically 1989 until today, there have been 343 deployments in
sharp contrast to the 60 in the preceding period. This represents over
a 500-percent increase in our deployments. These statistics tell the
story.
I am not suggesting in any way that most of these deployments were
absolutely essential. Many were in the vital security interests of the
United States. As I think quite properly, those contending for the
Presidency today, both Republican and Democrat, have pointed out that
they will watch very carefully what has been brought to the attention,
largely by the Congress and the Chiefs, that they are overdeployed and
underresourced. Those are the statistics of this period basically from
1989 until today.
While the rate of military deployments is established by the
President, the Congress, with our constitutional powers, is continuing
to support the Armed Forces by improving the quality of life for the
men and women in uniform and their families, and the President, in his
budget submissions, has done that. But each time in the past 3 years,
the Congress has gone above the President's request to add what we can,
given the budget constraints, to further improve the quality of life of
the men and women in the Armed Forces, to further increase procurement,
to further increase O funds because we are highly aware of that
theme--overdeployed and underresourced.
The conference report takes great strides in the direction to
improve, over and above that requested by the President, the quality of
life of our men and women and, I may say, the retirees.
I am proud of our committee. The Senate Armed Services Committee, the
records show, is the first committee in the Senate to recognize the
need for revising the health care program for career military retirees.
Basically, that is 20 years or, in the case of those who have medical
retirement, earlier than 20, but the career military have long been
neglected.
I want to credit the many organizations and many individuals who
approached this chairman, who approached, I believe, every Member of
the Senate, and brought to their attention the need for correction.
That correction, I am proud to say, is incorporated in this conference
report and will be given in great detail.
Basically, these retirees, in my judgment, have been entitled to this
for many years. In my judgment, they were promised this. At a later
point in this debate, I will go into the specifics because I have
researched it way back. And now, at long last, in this 2001
appropriations, we make the start for a health care program to have the
care for those retirees which they deserve and to which they have been
entitled for many years. One of the most important single items in this
conference report is this military health care.
History shows that our military retirees are the best recruiters of
all. One of the direct consequences of our military being overdeployed
and underresourced--I will use that refrain over and over again--has
been the difficulty in recruiting the needed personnel, the difficulty
in retaining the middle grade officers primarily, and the middle grade
enlisted, particularly those with skills that are in direct competition
with our ever-burgeoning economy in the private sector, who know full
well that to get a military person--trained in computers, trained in
electronics--they know they get a well-trained, well-disciplined,
reliable employee.
That is quite a lure to these young men and women who are
overdeployed, who suffer so much family separation. There has been an
over 500-percent increase in these military deployments in the past
decade or so. So that is the reason we are having difficulty in meeting
our recruiting goals.
But we are beginning to put a fix in to take care of the retirees, so
once again they can go out, as they have done in the past--I am not
suggesting they withstood recruiting, but certainly some of the
incentive has been lacking because they have not been treated fairly--
and, once again, they will be in the forward vanguard of recruiting.
They are the best recruiters of all.
I have to say on a personal note, my father served in World War I. I
am very proud of his service and believe he recruited me in World War
II by simply saying: It is your duty, son. Although I had very modest
service at the conclusion of, the end of that war, fathers like him all
throughout the country--and some mothers--were the recruiters long
before we got to the recruiting station.
The conference report before the Senate fulfills an important
commitment of health care for life, as we have determined because in
World War II, history shows, and continuing through the Korean war, and
indeed through Vietnam, the goal of making that commitment was to
encourage service members to remain in uniform and become careerists.
Simply put, there was the commitment of health care for life in
exchange for their dedicated career service.
Let me describe for my colleagues and for our active and retired
service
[[Page
S10340]]
members around the world the legislation in this conference report to
authorize health care benefits for Medicare-eligible military retirees
and their families. First, our committee, we were in the forward
vanguard of this. Then we were joined by the House. But let me describe
what we have done in this bill jointly--Senate and House--in this
conference report.
Military medical care requirements for active duty service members
and their families were recognized as early as the 1700s. That is how
far back in the history of our country it goes--George Washington's
Continental Army. Congressional action in the late 1800s directed
military medical officers to tend to military families, whenever
possible, at no cost to the family.
During World War II, with so many service members on active duty, the
military medical system could not handle the health care requirements
of many family members. The Emergency Maternal and Infant Care Program
was authorized by Congress to meet that need in that wartime period.
This program was administered through State health agencies. The
earliest reference in statute defining the health care benefit for
military retirees was in 1956, when for the first time, the Dependent's
Medical Care Act specified that military retirees were eligible for
health care in military facilities on a space-available basis.
In 1966, a decade later, this act was amended to create the Civilian
Health and Medical Care Program of the Uniformed Services, called
CHAMPUS, to supplement the care provided in military facilities. This
legislation, in 1966, specifically excluded from coverage military
retirees who were eligible for Medicare, a program which had been
enacted by the Congress 1 year earlier, in 1965.
All of us have heard from military retirees who served a full career
and in so doing made many sacrifices. Many times the sacrifices these
heroic retirees made resulted in serious medical conditions that
manifested themselves in a time in their lives when they were pushed
out of the military health care program. As a nation, we promised these
dedicated retirees health care for life, but at that period we were
ignoring that promise of America.
On February 23, 2000, I introduced a bill,
S. 2087, that provided for
access to mail-order pharmaceuticals for all Medicare-eligible military
retirees. This was the first time that has ever been done. The
legislation would also improve access to benefits under TRICARE and
extend and improve certain demonstration programs under the Defense
Health Program.
On May 1, 2000, I introduced
S. 2486, which added a retail pharmacy
component to the previous legislation, providing for a full pharmacy
benefit for all retirees, including those eligible for Medicare.
Now, I staged this purposely because throughout this period I was in
consultation with the many veterans groups who came forward in that
period, experts who had studied this for a long time and brought to my
attention the added requirements in the legislation.
While I and other members of the Senate Armed Services Committee were
working on this legislation, we were doing so in consultation regularly
with those organizations representing the retired military and the
Department of Defense. It is interesting, Secretary Cohen had some
difficulty, understandably, because of his budget constraints. But I
know in his heart of hearts he was concerned about the military
retirees, as were the Chiefs. But the time came when the Chiefs had the
opportunity to express their opinions, which, as I say, were at
variance with those of the Secretary of Defense and, indeed, the
President. They told us about the need for this legislation.
So while I thank the Senate and most particularly our committee for
pioneering this effort for the first time in the history of the
Congress, we owe a debt of gratitude to so many others who helped us,
gave us the encouragement, and, indeed, showed us the path to follow.
On June 6, Senator Tim Hutchinson and I introduced
S. 2669, a bill
that would extend TRICARE eligibility to all military retirees and
their families regardless of age. Later that same day, I amended the
Defense authorization bill to add the text of
S. 2669. This legislation
provided uninterrupted access to the military health care system, known
as TRICARE, to all retirees.
While the Senate bill extended TRICARE eligibility to all military
retirees and their families regardless of age, the Defense
authorization bill passed by the House of Representatives took a
different approach. I respect their approach, but it was different from
ours.
The House bill expanded and made permanent the Medicare subvention
program. Medicare subvention is a program that is currently being
tested in 10 sites across the country. Under Medicare subvention, the
Health Care Financing Agency of the Department of Health and Human
Services reimburses the Department of Defense for providing health care
to Medicare-eligible military retirees in military hospitals.
There were two significant problems with Medicare's subvention in the
judgment of the Senate, and particularly the conferees, when we got to
conference.
First, the amount in the reimbursement from Medicare to DOD falls
well short of the actual cost of providing that care, causing DOD to
absorb a loss for each retiree covered by the program.
Second, expanding Medicare subvention nationwide would provide access
to health care only for those beneficiaries living in proximity to the
remaining DOD medical facilities. In contrast, the Senate bill covered
100 percent of the Medicare-eligible military retirees, regardless of
where they live.
This is important; I emphasize that. Many of the military retirees
live under very modest circumstances and have sought places in our
Nation for their retirement homes which cost less and, therefore, very
often are not co-located with large military facilities and military
medical hospitals. They are scattered. It has been a burden on some of
those people through the years to travel considerable distances to
avail themselves of such medical assistance as was afforded to them
prior to this bill.
Since the Defense authorization conference began in late July, Senate
and House conferees have been working towards the mutual goal of
adopting legislation which would provide comprehensive health care to
all military retirees regardless of age. I am pleased to announce that
the conference report to accompany the National Defense Authorization
Act for fiscal year 2001 includes a permanent health care benefit for
retirees modeled on the Senate's original version to have it permanent.
I am delighted that we have honored the commitment of health care for
life that was made to those who proudly served the Nation on a
permanent basis.
I acknowledge the strong participation by the House conferees;
indeed, the Speaker of the House and the chairman of the House
Subcommittee on Personnel, and Chairman Spence, Chairman Stump. I could
mention many who worked on this. That was a subject of some concern in
the conference because Senator Levin and I, when we had our bill on the
floor with provisions which would, in an orderly way, have enabled us
to have permanency to this program, were going to be challenged on a
point of order. That may occur again today. Frankly, I would rather
have it occur today than when this bill first was on the floor 2 months
or so ago for various reasons.
So the conferees made the decision--a bold one--that they would make
this permanent, and we now present that to the Senate. It had always
been my intent to make this health care permanent. In fact, when we
originally introduced the legislation in February, with the support of
many in the Senate, there was no time limit on the benefits contained
in the early Senate bills and amendments. I have covered the history of
how we have gotten where it is now permanent.
The net effect of funding this important program as an entitlement
would be similar to funding it from within the discretionary accounts
of the Department of Defense. There is little net cost to the Federal
Government. Permanently funding the military retiree health care
benefit will be seen by retirees, active duty service members, and
potential recruits, both enlisted
[[Page
S10341]]
and officers, as the Nation keeping its commitment to health care for
life to military retirees. Those serving today and those who are
joining the military will see that the promise of a lifetime of health
care in return for a career will be honored by America.
Two weeks ago in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee
and the House Armed Services Committee, Gen. Hugh Shelton, Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and each of the Service Chiefs strongly
supported making this benefit permanent and using the accrual account
methods of financing. While I respect the right of any Senator to raise
a point of order, I am urging my colleagues to consider the benefits of
the health care provisions of this bill which are fully justified. We
would not want to leave our over-65 military retirees in doubt about
our intentions with respect to their future medical care.
This issue is on the 1 yard line, ready to be carried across for a
touchdown by the Senate, hopefully within a matter of hours.
These retirees must make critical decisions regarding their medical
insurance plans and medical care. By making this health care plan a
permanent entitlement, we are truly fulfilling the commitment made to
all those who have completed a career in uniform and to those
contemplating a career in the future.
I am going to yield the floor at this time so as to move along. I
will return to my remarks at a later point.
I yield the floor to my distinguished colleague. Again, I thank
Senator Levin for his untiring efforts on our behalf to create this
historic piece of legislation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, first let me congratulate Senator Warner,
our chairman, for his distinguished service, as always, for his total
commitment to the men and women in the military, for trying to produce
a bipartisan product which we have produced again this year. Without
his leadership, this would not be possible. I, first and foremost,
thank my good friend John Warner for again coming through with a really
good bill that I think will command the large number of votes which
will be forthcoming.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my colleague. I know he would wish
to share, with me, such credit for this legislation with all members on
both sides of the aisle of the Armed Services Committee. We have a
great team.
Mr. LEVIN. That was indeed the next point. We are blessed with a
committee which operates on a bipartisan basis. The members of the
committee work well together. The chairmen of our subcommittees work
well. Our staffs work well together. We have many blessings to count
being able to serve in this body and to serve our Nation, but surely
one of our great blessings is being on a committee which is able to
operate on such a bipartisan basis.
I echo Chairman Warner's comments about the tragedy in Yemen this
morning that involved the Navy ship, the U.S.S. Cole. Our hearts and
prayers go out to the families of those who have been lost in this
despicable act of terrorism. Our hearts and prayers go out to the
sailors who have survived who are now struggling for life. Our hearts
and prayers go out to their families. We are in, as we surely
understand, for a long battle against terrorist acts.
I notice my good friend from Kansas on the floor, chairman of the
subcommittee that addresses new threats we face. The terrorist threat
which was exemplified this morning in Yemen has been repeatedly pointed
out by him and other members of the subcommittee and of the Senate as
being the type of threat that we face. That kind of terrorist act is a
real world threat which is here and now.
That was not a weapon of mass destruction, but it was a weapon that
caused massive injury, massive death. We must put our brains and our
resources together with allies to try to prevent these kinds of actions
from occurring and, when they do occur, to bring the perpetrators to
justice.
The Senator from New York has requested that I yield 5 minutes to him
so he may make a statement at this time. The order that we had
established by unanimous consent was that after my opening statement
the Senator from Minnesota would be recognized, and then the Senator
from Alabama would be recognized. I want someone on the other side of
the aisle to hear this, but I ask unanimous consent that that be
modified at this time so I may defer my opening statement to yield to
the Senator from New York 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from New York.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I thank my friend, the Senator from
Michigan. He is gracious as always, and I appreciate the opportunity to
briefly interrupt this proceeding. I also compliment him and Senator
Warner on the bill they have put together. As was mentioned, the whole
Chamber admires the bipartisan way in which the Senators from Michigan
and Virginia have worked together.
I rise today to say I am stunned and saddened by the violence which
has erupted in the Middle East. I am saddened by the loss of four
innocent and brave American sailors, victims of malicious, malevolent,
maddening terrorism that has no rationale, no justification.
My prayers and thoughts are with their families, as well as with
those who have been injured and those who are missing, and their
families as well. Terrorism can strike anywhere at any time. We have to
be doing all we can in this Chamber to deal with it.
I am stunned also that after 7 years of good faith negotiations all
too many Palestinians still see violence as the means to achieve their
ends. The violent pictures we saw of the two Israeli reservists being
thrown from a window and brutally beaten is enough to turn anyone's
stomach. Pictures such as that and so many other pictures that we have
seen are not only very disturbing to us, but it lessens the chances for
peace in the Middle East.
I am disappointed and sad that Chairman Arafat has failed to stop or
even condemn the violence. Yasser Arafat says he is for peace and he
has signed agreements for peace. Yet violence has erupted in the Middle
East and not only has he failed to stop it, you don't hear a word of
condemnation. Instead, one may feel that he misguidedly thinks violence
is a means to an end. I am saddened that a peace process which saw the
courage and sacrifice of leaders such as Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak
may be crumbling before our eyes. The prospect for peace, at least in
the near future, has been shattered by today's events.
I have been a supporter of the Oslo peace process because I truly
believe that peace is the only re