Floor Statements
|
|
|
Print this page |
McCAIN STATEMENT HR 4200, THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2005 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
October 9, 2005
Washington DC- Today, U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) submitted for the record the following statement on the Conference Report to the FY05 National Defense Authorization Act:Mr. President, I strongly support passage of the Conference Report on HR 4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. This legislation funds over $420 billion for defense programs, which is a 3.4% increase or $20.9 billion above the amount authorized by Congress last year.
While I am pleased that we are able to act on this legislation prior to adjourning for the elections, I would be remiss if I did not mention that once again, the Defense Appropriations Act has been signed into law prior to final action on the Defense Authorization Act. The responsibilities of authorizors and appropriators are expected to be distinct. The Defense Authorization Act lays out the blueprint for the policies and funding levels for the Department of Defense and its programs. The role of the Appropriations Committee is to allocate funding based on policies provided by authorization bills. In reality however, the Appropriators’ function, has expanded dramatically, and the Appropriations Committee now engages in significant policy decision making and micromanagement, largely usurping the role of the authorizing committees. I hope next year we will succeed in passing the authorization measure prior to the appropriations measure.
The men and women of our nation’s Armed Forces put their lives on the line every day to protect the very freedoms we Americans hold dear. It is our obligation to provide key quality of life benefits to the members of our military. Great strides will be made by this bill towards accomplishing that goal. For example, this Conference Report authorizes a 3.5 percent across-the-board pay raise for all military personnel. It repeals the requirement for military members to pay subsistence charges while hospitalized, and adds $7.8 million for expanded care and services at the Walter Reed Amputee Patient Care Center. Also, included in the Conference Report is a permanent increase in the rate of family separation allowance from $100 per month to $250 per month as well as a permanent increase in the rate of special pay for duty subject to hostile fire or imminent danger from $150 per month to $225 per month.
Mr. President, we continue to be increasingly reliant on the men and women of our Reserve forces and National Guard. In fact, around 40 percent of all the ground troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are composed of National Guard and Reserve forces as well as nearly all of the ground forces in Kosovo, Bosnia, and the Sinai. Many of these soldiers and sailors leave behind friends, families, and careers to defend our nation. Accordingly, it is the responsibility of policy makers to ensure we look after the needs of these patriots. Included in the Conference Report is the authorization for full medical and dental examinations and requisite inoculations when reservists mobilize and demobilize as well as a new requirement for pre-separation physical examinations for members of the reserve component. This provision is critical to maintain and, in some circumstances, increase the readiness of the Total Force.
In the Senate version of this legislation, we passed an important amendment to authorize an increase in the size of our Army by 20,000 and size of our Marine Corps by 3,000. I am very pleased this provision was included in the Conference Report. This increase is absolutely vital in our Army’s ability to carry out its mission in the Global War on Terror. There is no shortage of evidence supporting an increase in Army endstrength. Recently, the Army pulled 3,600 troops out of South Korea to fill critical needs in Iraq. The Department of Defense should be able to move troops around as needed to address critical needs. However, in this case, we are sacrificing our readiness on the Korean peninsula because we do not have enough solders serving in the Army.
After returning home for a short period of time, soldiers and Marines are already making preparations for their second tour in Iraq or Afghanistan in as many years. This is not good for morale, this is not good for retention, this is not good for readiness, and this is not good for the soldier’s families. Eventually, recruitment will be seriously affected by these trends.
Additionally, the Army recently announced a new stop-loss policy. While, I certainly recognize the Army’s authority and necessity to issue stop loss orders, their issuance in this instance is yet another reason why we need to increase the size of the Army. For all the benefits in group cohesion that results from extended tours, the Army will be facing a serious crisis when it comes time for these soldiers to reenlist on their own accord. I am concerned about the effect that these stop-loss orders will have on the morale of our Army. While I still do not believe that we need a draft, we do need to increase the size of the Army to carry out important defense missions.
Once again, I am disappointed that the development of this legislation lent the opportunity for the annual Buy America battle. In a similar fashion as last year, the Senate had to beat back a provision in the house version of the legislation that sought to protect parochial interests at the cost of our defense industry and American jobs. It seems as if every year, we fight the same fight in conference. I am pleased that once again, the Senate prevailed over the protectionist leanings in the House.
As I have stated countless times before, we need to provide American servicemen and women with the best equipment at the best price for the American taxpayer. By following this simple philosophy, we will protect both the men and women in uniform, as well as our domestic defense industry.
The international considerations of Buy America provisions are immense. Isolationist, go-it-alone approaches have serious consequences on our relationship with our allies. Our country is threatened when we ignore our trade agreements. Currently, the U.S. enjoys a trade balance in defense exports of 6-to-1 in its favor with respect to Europe, and about 12-to-1 with respect to the rest of the world. We don’t need protectionist measures to insulate our defense or aerospace industries. If we enact laws that isolate our domestic defense industry, our allies will retaliate and the ability to sell U.S. equipment as a means to greater interoperability with NATO and non-NATO allies would be seriously undercut. Critical international programs, such as the Joint Strike Fighter and missile defense, would likely be terminated as our allies reassess our defense cooperative trading relationship.
The Senate also successfully defeated an amendment during Senate consideration and again in Conference aimed at crippling the upcoming BRAC round. BRAC has taken on a new significance in the War against Terror. There has not been a time in recent memory when it has been more important not to waste money on non-essential expenditures. To continue to sustain an infrastructure that exceeds our strategic and tactical needs will make less funding available to the forces that we are relying on to destroy the international network of terrorism. I am once again pleased that the Senate put the good of the Department of Defense over parochial interests and protected the upcoming BRAC round.
The Department of Defense has come out with very fair and reasonable criteria used to select what bases are chosen for BRAC. I have every confidence the Secretary of Defense will carry out this round of BRAC in a just and consistent manner. Sooner or later surplus bases must be closed. Delaying or canceling BRAC would only make the process more difficult and painful than necessary. The sooner the issue is addressed, the greater will be the savings that will ultimately go toward defense modernization and better pay and benefits for our hard working service members.
Mr. President, I understand that some of my colleagues are concerned about the potential negative effects a base closure may have on their local economy. But let me point out that previous base closure rounds have had many success stories. For example, after England Air Force Base closed in 1992, Alexandria, Louisiana, benefitted from the creation of over 1,400 jobs -- nearly double the number of jobs lost. Across the U.S., about 60,000 new jobs have been created at closing military bases. At bases closed more than 2 years, nearly 75 percent of the civilian jobs have been replaced. This is not to say that base closures are easy for any community, but it does suggest that communities can and will continue to thrive.
Another issue of considerable diverse views during Conference deliberations concerned the aerial refueling tanker lease program. I would be remiss if I did not take the opportunity to praise the leadership of Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Warner and Ranking Member Levin for their steadfast vigilance during the three-year odyssey on the Air Force’s failed Boeing 767 tanker program. I remind my colleagues, again, that three out of the four defense committees that were required to approve the original proposal to lease 100 tankers, did so without so much as reading the contract for the $30 billion procurement proposal. It was the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee that put the brakes on that costly and misguided misadventure. And lest one thought otherwise, the Boeing 767 tanker investigations in the Department of Justice, Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General and the U.S. Senate are continuing and expanding.
Under Section 133 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, the Air Force may not enter into a sole-source multiyear contract for the lease or purchase of Boeing 767s. Indeed, the Conference Report makes clear that, at the end of the day, the Air Force's plan to modernize or update its fleet must be subject to full and open competition and the traditional budget, procurement and authorization track. The Conference Report brings the Air Force's plan back to square one.
The bottom line here is this. The aerial refueling tanker provision in the defense authorization bill does much to inject much needed sunlight in a program that has largely been insulated from public scrutiny. In so doing, this provision, that was adopted, directs the Air Force to begin anew–from the beginning--in its program to modernize its tanker fleet. The Air Force will have to now fully consider the Congress’ direction, prohibiting the retirement of KC-135E tanker aircraft, as a worthwhile alternative to updating tankers through KC-135E to R conversions. The tanker legislation in this bill ensures that any effort by the Air Force to modernize and replace its fleet of tankers is done responsibly. We should expect no less from the Air Force. That having been said, the final chapter on the failed tanker lease program cannot be closed until those among Air Force leadership who engaged in misconduct, are held accountable.
I also would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member, as well as Senators Dodd, DeWine, and Hollings for their assistance in reauthorizing the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program through Fiscal Year 2009. This program uses a competitive, merit-based review process to give grants directly to local fire departments for equipment, training, and fire prevention programs. Our nation’s firefighters must be prepared to respond to a myriad of threats, and this legislation will help ensure that they are adequately trained and equipped to meet them.
Mr. President, Americans are blessed with nearly limitless freedoms and liberties. In exchange for all our country gives to us, it does not demand much in return. Yet throughout our history, millions of people have volunteered to give back to their nation through military service. The selfless acts of courage and sacrifice made by the men and women in our armed services have elevated our nation to the greatness we enjoy today.
America is defined not by its power but by its ideals. One of the great strengths of the American public is the desire to serve a cause greater than our own self interest. All too often, our younger generations are accused of selfishness and an unwillingness to sacrifice. I disagree. I see generations of people yearning to serve and help their fellow citizens. Each year, thousands of our young Americans decide to dedicate a few years or even a full career to protecting the rights and liberties of others. They often do this with very real risks to their lives. They volunteer to do this not for profit, nor for self promotion, but out of a sense of duty, service, and patriotism.
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
|