[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 8] [Senate] [Pages 10768-10779] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the hour of 3 o'clock having arrived, the Senate will proceed to the consideration of S. 2766, which the clerk will report. [[Page 10769]] The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 2766) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2007 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 for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, if there is no one seeking recognition, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we are now on the bill. Is that correct? The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent if I may depart from the bill to speak as if in morning business regarding our distinguished colleague, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The remarks of Mr. Warner are printed in the Record under ``Morning Business.'') Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, to accommodate Members, we will be on the bill for some period of time. I will be joined by the distinguished ranking member, Mr. Levin, shortly after 5 o'clock today. In the meantime, we are open for statements. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado. Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I appreciate this. I rise today to discuss several noteworthy provisions in the fiscal year 2007 Defense authorization bill. I will provide an overview of a couple of amendments I will offer. First, I commend the managers of this bill, Senators John Warner and Carl Levin, for the work they have put into this legislation. I also recognize in a public way the fine work Chairman Warner has done. I have had an opportunity to work with the chairman both as a member of the Committee on Armed Services, and after leaving that committee to serve on the Committee on Appropriations. I found Senator Warner certainly has been very gracious and helpful on many issues and has certainly kept the men and women of the Armed Forces primary in his mind. It is comprehensive and addresses many of the issues important to our Armed Forces. Indeed, many of the provisions in this bill are essential to the health and well being of our soldiers and are needed in order to defeat terrorism and defend our Nation from future attacks. In the missile defense arena, for example, the Senate Armed Services Committee took several steps to encourage the Department of Defense to focus on near-term missile defense systems over longer-term next generation systems. I support this direction and agree that MDA is not investing enough time and money in those systems that may be able to provide limited defense capability in the near term. I personally believe we need to be conducting more tests within the missile defense mid-course intercept program. Although the Missile Defense Agency will be conducting two flight intercepts later this year, the agency only requested funding for one intercept in fiscal year 2007. This test plan is insufficient in my eyes and should be greatly expanded. We need to conduct many more flight intercepts, much more often. We need to be challenging the system with our tests and working on the areas we need improve upon. I do not expect perfection. In fact, I expect some failures. But, in the context of several missile defense intercepts tests per year, one or two failures only means that we are pushing to find out the real capabilities of the system. They do not mean missile defense is not possible. The bottom line here is that I do expect for the Missile Defense Agency to try. We all know that hit-to-kill technology works. We have used it successfully in the Patriot and Aegis Programs. We now need to further develop the mid-course system and introduce greater capability to that system. Let me turn to another provision in the Senate version of the defense authorization bill that I thought was appropriate and deserved mention. That provision pertained to the Department's request for $127 million for the development and procurement of Trident conventional submarine launched ballistic missiles. Under the Pentagon's proposal, the Navy would equip several of its Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines with Trident missiles tipped with conventional warheads. These missiles are intended to give the President a real option for a responsive, global strike capability in the short term. I support the concept of developing a conventional ballistic missile capable of reaching almost any target in the world in under an hour. In an era when targets of opportunity shift rapidly, there is a real need for systems that can reach these targets within narrow time frames. A conventional ballistic missile is perhaps the best option for this purpose in the near term. That being said, this is still a very new concept, and the Department of Defense has yet to work out all the details. Of particular concern is the fact that the Department is still developing a variety of transparency, confidence building, and operational measures to ensure, there is no confusion about our intentions. The last thing we want is for Russia or China to think we are launching a nuclear strike when we use one of these submarine-launched conventional missiles. To address this concern, the Senate Armed Services Committee included a provision in this bill that prohibits the expenditure of this funding until the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State submit a joint report that discusses potential alternatives, describes the discrimination capabilities of other nations, and states how the United States would work with other nations to prevent an inadvertent nuclear attack by another country. I believe this provision is a reasonable approach to this issue and still allows the Department of Defense to go forward with the development and procurement of this system. I think there might be other less challenging global strike options available, such as land- based conventional ballistic missiles in California or Guam, so I look forward to the Department's discussion about possible alternatives. I next wish to address the Senate Armed Services Committee's decision to increase by $30 million the Department of Defense buffer zone conservation projects account. These projects help military bases around the country address the growing problem of encroachment from residential and industrial development. At Fort Carson, CO, we have seen the fruits of conservation projects such as those funded under this account. Fort Carson's southeastern and southern borders are now protected with money from this account. I believe as more conservation projects come on line, competition for the funding in this account will grow exponentially. We needed extra money to meet this demand, and the funding provided by this bill is a step in the right direction. Now let me turn to another provision in the bill that I think should be highlighted. Section 372 provides the Secretary of Defense with authority to include incentivized clauses in contracts for the destruction of chemical weapons within the U.S. stockpile. To my extreme disappointment, the Department of Defense announced last April that it most likely would not be able to comply with our treaty obligations under the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention. I was displeased by this announcement because the way the Department had managed its chemical demilitarization program virtually assured our Nation's noncompliance. Nevertheless, I still believe if we use the incentivized contracts this section provides, we might be able to complete the destruction of our chemical weapons stockpile earlier than what is currently expected. Those contractors who [[Page 10770]] can meet a more aggressive schedule should be rewarded for their effort. At the same time, I believe that the penalties for safety or environmental violations should also be increased. At Rocky Flats, a former Department of Energy plutonium pit production facility located just outside of Denver, we have seen the value of these contracts. This facility was initially expected to cost as much as $70 billion and take over 30 years to clean up. The Department of Energy was able to find a contractor who was willing to accelerate the contract in return for a huge incentive. I am pleased to tell you today that the contractor safely completed the cleanup of Rocky Flats last December, over a year ahead of schedule and several hundred million dollars under budget. This incentive provision puts the Department of Defense in position to use similar contracts to encourage contractors to finish earlier and cheaper than expected while protecting the environment and ensuring safety. I strongly support it and commend the managers of the bill for including it in the bill before us. The last provision I would like to discuss is section 911. This provision creates an office for the management and acquisition of operationally responsive space capabilities. I support this provision because the Department of Defense has not done enough to investigate the value of operationally responsive space. One of the reasons why this has occurred is because of the absence of a dedicated office to manage our operationally responsive space, known as ORS, efforts. The GAO recently reported that the absence of a strategic direction within the Department on operationally responsive space activities was hindering the program. This provision solves that problem and should encourage the Department to move forward with ORS types of systems. Over the next couple of days, I plan to offer several amendments which I hope will be accepted by the managers of this bill. Most of these amendments should be noncontroversial and helpful but are important to the global war against terror and to helping the families of our servicemembers. I look forward to working with Chairman Warner and Senator Levin so we can get these amendments cleared as quickly as possible. Again, I thank the chairman of the Armed Services Committee for his exceptionally good work on this bill. I know he has put in hours of thought and deliberation on this bill, and his committee, working with him, has done a good job. So, I say to the Senator, I want to recognize that I believe this is your last year as the chairman of the Armed Services Committee because of our term limits, and I am sorry to see you have to step down because I think you have done a tremendous job as chairman. Again, I appreciate the opportunity to work with you as chairman of the Armed Services Committee. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The Senator from Virginia. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, before the Senator parts the floor, I say thank you for your kind remarks. Yes, I do graciously and willingly step down. It is the rules of our caucus, and I respect that. But it has been a marvelous opportunity for me to have this 6 years, and, indeed, a year or 2 before that as chairman. But I want to particularly comment on the long association and continued association of the senior Senator from Colorado with respect to issues of national security. The Senator has served on our committee, I think, about 8 years. How many years? Mr. ALLARD. Six years, I believe, yes. Mr. WARNER. That is correct. And you are distinguished in your steadfastness on the subject of missile defense and how to protect this country. How many times have you taken the floor and asked and received silence from the Senate: Do we have one--one--system that can knock down an intercontinental ballistic missile should we have the misfortune, be it accidental or otherwise, to have it targeted against our country? There has been silence in this Chamber until we started the missile defense program, and you steadfastly fought for that. I say to the Senator, I also commend you for Rocky Flats. Year after year after year, you shepherded through the Senate, in the appropriations cycle, the funds to do that because of not just the importance of Rocky Flats but the importance of the overall program, what we call the cleanup program, the environmental program, in the Department of Defense to clean up a lot of the former military installations and particularly those associated with the production of fissionable material. So I commend the Senator. Mr. ALLARD. I thank the chairman. We do these things by working together as a team, and the Senator is a great team leader. I appreciate all the support of my efforts in trying to get some of these things done. The Chairman has always set a good example for the rest of us by way of his diligence and working through legislation. So I want to thank him publicly for a job well done. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague. Mr. President, it is my privilege to bring forward on behalf of the Armed Services Committee, and now on behalf of all of our colleagues, the annual Defense authorization bill. I do so with my longtime colleague and dear friend of 28 years serving on this committee, the senior Senator from Michigan, Mr. Carl Levin, who is currently the ranking member of the committee. He has been a working partner of mine, and I have been a working partner of his. He was once chairman of this committee. We have always been able to put aside such differences that we may have. I respect his difference of views, and he respects mine. We work as a team on behalf of our committee and all of our colleagues in producing this annual bill, and in all of these 28 years we have been together. I thank all members of the Armed Services Committee. We have one of the larger committees. I thank our senior staff, particularly Mr. Charles Abell, my current chief of staff, and Rick DeBobes, the current chief of staff of the minority, and each and every one of their team, because it is a team effort. Our committee, I think almost more so than any others I know of, relies on this professional staff. It is really a professional staff that we have, in many respects, to put together this bill. The bill before the Senate was unanimously reported out of the committee on May 9 after holding 36 hearings and receiving numerous policy and operational briefings on the President's budget request for fiscal year 2007 and related Defense issues. I commend my colleagues for their hard work and the swift manner in which they contributed to developing and writing this important legislation, not only at the hearings we had but in the subcommittee structure that worked so effectively to produce this bill. Since the Armed Services Committee reported out this legislation, the United States remains engaged in the global war on terrorism, now in its fifth year. Currently, the central battlegrounds in the war on terrorism are in Iraq and Afghanistan. But there are many, many other areas throughout the world where quietly, yet no less effectively, the men and women of the Armed Forces are stationed and joining in this collective effort of all uniformed personnel to perform the duties necessary to let this country remain free and those of our allies in the face of this terrorist threat. It is so important, as we go through this bill, to pay our respects collectively to the men and women in uniform and their many civilian counterparts. There is an enormous cadre of civilians in the Department of Defense and serving elsewhere who are alongside the uniformed men and women throughout the world. But I want to pay particular respect to the Guard and Reserve who have risen to the call far beyond expectations in these conflicts of terrorism and have done their duties time and time again with great honor and distinction. For each of the countries, the road to peace and stability and democracy has [[Page 10771]] been marked by historical milestones, including a referendum in both Iraq and Afghanistan that adopted a constitution, elections that chose a democratically elected representative government, the formation of a unity government, and progress in building security forces capable of protecting their nation's freedom. Those are landmark and historical accomplishments in the course of world history, and they would not have been achievable without the sacrifices--regrettably, the loss of life, the loss of limb--by so many men and women in the Armed Forces and the support their families, by their side, have given them. These accomplishments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on terrorism are a tribute to the dedication and skills of our uniformed men and women who are willing to respond to the call of duty, and to the military leaders who lead them. The successes achieved in Iraq and Afghanistan have come at a great sacrifice, as I said, in life and limb. These sacrifices and service of our men and women in uniform have also removed obstacles to freedom and democracy in regions of the Middle East and elsewhere in Asia. Throughout my many years of service I have never seen--and I repeat, I go back some 60 years, to the closing year of World War II, when I was a young 17, 18-year-old sailor--but I have had the privilege of being associated with the men and women in uniform in these 60-plus years, and we have never as a nation witnessed a finer, more dedicated professional force, both Active and Guard and Reserve, than we have today. As I look back over the history of the U.S. Armed Forces, the challenges and responsibilities have never been greater than those that rest upon the shoulders of today's generation of the military--their leaders, their civilian leaders in the Department of Defense, with the Secretary of Defense and others, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Energy--all of this team that puts together our national security. As such, we must take our responsibilities equally as serious to ensure that those who serve have the resources and authorities they need to win the global war on terrorism. Again, drawing on my modest contribution in active service during World War II and again in Korea and time in the Reserve, I must say, it is so different, in this span of over a half century that I have had the privilege to be associated with these men and women, the challenges that face them today. In World War II we knew precisely who the enemy was. We knew the nations that sponsored the aggression. We knew generally the capabilities of their military, and we knew with greater specificity what we needed to do in America to arm ourselves, first and foremost, with the finest trained men and women--16 million responded in World War II to serve in uniform--and the equipment that they needed. But today's war on terrorism is largely nonstate-sponsored. We do not know the origins of the hatred that is in the minds of those people who proudly claim the role of terrorist, what it is that engenders that hate such that they wish to strike out, often sacrificing their own life to do harm to those who love and cherish freedom. That is a particular challenge that our young men and women face today, unlike any other conflict of the magnitude we are now engaged in in Afghanistan and Iraq principally, unlike any other conflict in the history of our country. Therefore, we ask much of that individual in uniform today. It is our privilege as Members of this venerable and distinguished Senate to, at least once each time every year, and then, of course, in the subsequent appropriations process, provide nothing but the finest equipment obtainable, fair pay and allowances and health care and other requirements that the young men and women and their families of the Armed Forces so richly deserve. What a privilege it is to do that. With our Armed Forces deployed in distant battlefields and countless others standing watch at home, we are committed to providing the necessary resources and authorities for each of them and their families. Accordingly, this bill provides $467.7 billion overall in budget authority for fiscal year 2007--that is an enormous sum of money--an increase of $26.2 billion or 4.1 percent in real terms over the amount authorized by Congress for fiscal year 2006; additionally, $50 billion in emergency supplemental funding for fiscal year 2007 for activities in support of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere in the global war on terrorism. That is a new concept unlike any I have experienced in the early years in this Chamber, where we literally put in a block sum of money. Since we cannot anticipate with full specificity the needs and special requirements that flow from these operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is prudent and a necessary plan. The bill further includes many important legislative provisions that would set forth critical policies for the Department of Defense. I would like to highlight a few provisions that would continue to support the modernization and transformation of the Armed Forces and highlight other provisions that would strengthen interagency operations abroad and at home. The Secretary of Defense, Mr. Rumsfeld, is to be commended. When he first came to office we had no way of envisioning the magnitude of the war on terrorism. But he set in place the transformation, particularly of the United States Army but other areas of the Department of Defense. And that same transformation and modernization has gone ahead largely parallel to the efforts that we have undertaken in the actual combat of the world war on terrorism. First of all, my colleagues and I on the committee and others in the Senate remain particularly concerned about the size of the Navy's fleet. In the past 15 years, there has been a declining trend in shipbuilding and a diminishing capacity in the shipbuilding industrial base. The fleet has been reduced to its smallest size since before World War II in terms of number of ships. There are fewer ships today than before World War II. That is an accurate statistic. But it would be incorrect if I didn't say that the smaller number of ships that we have today far exceeds the capabilities of the ships that we had when we entered World War II. So it is not just a numbers game. But it is interesting to point out that statistic in terms of the numbers. The fleet has been reduced as a result of budget necessities and the extraordinary cost of the individual ships. That has dictated fewer ships, regrettably. But the current Chief of Naval Operations and the current Secretary of the Navy are determined to try, together with the support of the Congress, to turn that curve around and begin to increase the number of ships in the Navy. The time has come to reverse that current trend, and I commend the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Navy, Chief of Naval Operations, and all others working to try to reverse the trend. Indeed, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Gordon England, former Secretary of the Navy, has been at the helm in trying to increase the size and number of the United States Navy. Each of those individuals is mindful of what the Constitution says. It is the duty of the Congress to maintain--I repeat, maintain-- at all times a United States Navy, and then an Army and the size of the Army in accordance with what the needs are. We raise that Army depending upon the threats facing the country. But it is interesting that the Framers clearly recognized the importance of this Nation having maritime supremacy, which we do have today. In many respects, we are an island nation--yes, bordered by our friends to the north, Canada, and our neighbors to the south. But nevertheless, with two mighty oceans on either side, it is imperative that this country maintain maritime superiority. So we worked diligently to strengthen the shipbuilding program and the industrial base which provides us those ships. We fund the construction this year of eight warships, one above the President's request, and two new warship classes, the DDX destroyer and LHA(R) [[Page 10772]] amphibious assault ship. We implement a long-range plan for the procurement of three ships of the future aircraft carrier class CVN-21 to improve the affordability of the future aircraft carrier class by authorizing multiple ship material procurements over 4-year increments. So that ship, indeed, is coming to life. The parts are being brought together to build that mighty warship of the future, the CVN-21. We lay the groundwork to increase the submarine build rate to ensure our continued underseas superiority and increase our investment in the National Shipbuilding Research Program. The bill also includes a provision that would increase investment in unmanned systems to provide more flexible capabilities to the warfighter by requiring the Secretary of Defense to develop a departmentwide policy for development and operation of unmanned systems. I am very proud of the record of our committee in encouraging the use here year after year of great numbers of unmanned platforms and to provide the research and development to achieve more new platforms. The recent extraordinary military accomplishment of, at long last, putting to rest the threat from Zarqawi was made possible by the use of an unmanned system in part, together with all elements of our intelligence collection, both military and civilian, and, indeed, finally the execution of a plan with great professionalism by those flying aircraft and those manning ground responsibilities. We will have further to say about that operation as this bill proceeds. The bill further includes a provision that would continue the development and sustainment of the Joint Strike Fighter Program. After holding 2 days of hearings, I remain concerned that relying on a sole engine supplier for single-engine aircraft to do multiple missions for multiple services and multiple nations presents, indeed, a very serious challenge to the industrial base, the designers, and the manufacturers and all involved. I felt that we could not take the risk of this important program by limiting the engine base to but one single consortium of companies; rather, that we should have the two. This concern is not a new one that I share, nor is it a concern of mine alone. Ten years ago, a decade ago, I and other colleagues on the Armed Services Committee expressed concern regarding the lack of engine competition for aircraft. In response to that concern, the committee included a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1996 that directed the Secretary of Defense to ``evaluate at least two propulsion concepts from competing engine companies.'' Now a decade later, my colleagues and I on the committee continue to have that same concern, and we want to have competition for this engine, in the development of this engine and eventually in the manufacture, because competition historically has produced a better product. Competition requires both competitors to constantly try to improve the technology of the engine, constantly to try to find means to reduce the cost of the engine. This is an enormously expensive program. Hopefully, we will procure more than several thousand airframes of different types, some to operate on carriers, some from land, some a mix, some with destall capabilities. It is essential that the magnitude and complexity of this program rest on a solid foundation of propulsion, propulsion provided by two very competent and capable industrial base consortiums competing not only in cost but the continuing competition of design to perfect the best engine man and woman can make for this complicated aircraft. I am proud of what the committee has achieved on this program. Therefore, the bill includes a provision that would add $400.8 million--that is not in the President's budget but in the committee's mark, now the bill before the Senate--for the development of the interchangeable engine during fiscal year 2007. Two models will continue to strongly compete, one by one consortium, another by a second consortium of manufacturers. Indeed, I think by doing that we better serve those nations which have signed up and committed their dollars to the development of this aircraft, nations that are dependent upon this aircraft being designed and built and at a cost that they can afford. We direct the Secretary of Defense to continue the development and sustainment of the Joint Strike Fighter Program with two competitive propulsion systems throughout the life of the aircraft or enter into a one-time, firm-fixed price contract for a single propulsion system throughout the life of the aircraft. In addition to modernizing and transforming the Armed Forces to meet current and future threats, we must also strengthen interagency operations abroad and at home. The challenges posed by the Second World War led to increasingly more joint and combined operations within the U.S. military. Now operations have become more interagency and coalition in nature and will be for the foreseeable future. The success of the U.S. efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the global war on terrorism will depend on coordinating all instruments of our national power to achieve peace and security in troubled regions around the world. This will include deploying civilian personnel of each agency of our Government with expertise in the areas of rule of law and administration of justice, economic development, and civil administration to partner with U.S. military forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations to secure hard-won military successes and to preserve peace and freedom. To strengthen interagency operations and to provide greater flexibility in the U.S. Government's ability to partner with nations in fighting terrorism, the bill includes provisions that would require the President to develop a plan to establish interagency operating procedures for Federal agencies to plan and conduct stabilization and reconstruction operations; provide to the heads of all executive branch agencies the same authorities the Secretary of State has with respect to providing allowances, benefits, and death gratuities for Foreign Service or civilian personnel serving in Iraq and Afghanistan; expand authorities for geographic combatant commanders to train and equip foreign military forces, and to provide urgent humanitarian relief and reconstruction assistance to foreign nations; expand authority to the Department to lease or lend equipment for personnel protection and survivability to our allies and coalition partners; and expand authority to provide logistics support, supplies, and services to our allies and coalition partners. With the increased role of the Armed Forces in homeland security, I also remain concerned about whether current authorities on the use of the Armed Forces are adequate to deal with a serious or widespread breakdown in public order caused by a terrorist attack or natural disaster. The bill includes a provision that would update the provision in title 10 known as the Insurrection Act to clarify the President's authority to use the Armed Forces to restore order and enforce Federal laws in cases where, as a result of a terrorist attack, epidemic, or natural disaster, public order has broken down beyond the ability of local law enforcement or the State Guard, or a combination thereof, to effectively bring about law and order. To more effectively support local, state, Federal agencies in response to manmade or natural disasters, the bill includes provisions that would authorize the Secretary of Defense to approve the deployment of Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams to Canada and Mexico, if requested. We have perfectly equipped teams--at least one for each State--to deal with these problems. We should share them with our neighbors to the north and to the south, if so requested. It would expand the types of emergencies for which the Secretary of Defense may prepare or employ Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams; and add $13.5 million to provide for the training and equipment of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams. [[Page 10773]] They were a concept developed in the Armed Services Committee, and I am very proud. It has taken us many years to get the funding stream to provide these teams so they cover adequately the best we can equally all 50 States. These are just a few of the essential authorities among the more than 300 provisions included in this year's bill. I believe the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2007 sustains the advances made in recent years, and provides the necessary investments to prepare for the security of our Nation in the future. I urge my colleagues to debate this bill in a constructive manner and to bring forth those amendments which you believe would further strengthen this bill. They will be fairly considered, I assure you. Therefore, I am anxious that this bill be established and passed by the Senate, having been amended where it is necessary. It has been the tradition of the Senate for 45 years to pass this bill each year. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise today to offer opening remarks on the 2007 National Defense Authorization bill. Chairman Warner and Ranking Member Levin, as well as the entire committee, worked very hard during the markup process to produce a bill that would support our troops and would provide what our military needs to fight and win the global war on terrorism, and I am pleased to say this bill does just that. This bill provides our service men and women with the resources necessary to continue the war on terrorism, keep our country safe, and will greatly improve the quality of life for our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, as well as their families. Despite what one reads or hears in the news sometimes, it is absolutely clear to me that we are winning this war on terrorism; specifically, that we are winning the war in Iraq. I have heard recently from soldiers of the Third Infantry Division at Fort Benning, GA, about the great progress they made during their recent deployment to Diyala Province in Iraq. Over the course of their year there, the security situation in Diyala Province improved dramatically, as did the rule of law and the presence and capability of Iraqi security forces and police. As we all know today, Diyala Province was where U.S. forces found and killed the leader of the anti-Iraqi insurgence, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and I believe it was the hard work that the Third ID did in improving the security and developing relationships with the Iraqis in Diyala Province that allowed for the intelligence and network of information that allowed our forces to track Zarqawi down. I am very proud of the situation of the members of the Third ID in that effort. We need to realize this is hard work that all of our troops are doing in Iraq and that successes often take a long time. But if we stick with it and follow the course we are on, that success will come, and this operation against Zarqawi proves this is the case. Mr. President, having been briefed in the Intelligence Committee at the end of last week on the takedown of Zarqawi, I think it is one of the great successes, without question, we have seen in this war. Military operations are often sophisticated. The planning is very detailed, and that was exactly the case in this situation. It was a perfectly executed plan that was carried out by our military that allowed Zarqawi--one of the meanest, nastiest killers ever to inhabit this Earth--to be taken down. We absolutely must stay the course and finish the job because the future of the Middle East, as well as our own future security, lies in the balance. I believe there might be some amendments filed to this bill that seek to immediately withdraw troops or set a timetable for troop withdrawal. Clearly, both these approaches are extremely unwise, and I hope my colleagues will join me in voting down those amendments overwhelmingly. Related to some specific issues in the bill, I have received numerous letters and phone calls from both Active-Duty soldiers and retirees who are concerned with the proposed increases in TRICARE premiums. So I am pleased to see that the Senate bill does not approve DOD's proposed increases in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees. In my home State of Georgia, there are a large number of military personnel and retirees living in rural areas where quality health care is often not as readily available as in more urban areas. This bill will help to improve health care access for those individuals by authorizing incentive payments for civilian health care providers who provide services to TRICARE beneficiaries in rural and medically underserved areas. This is a good provision, and I commend the chairman and ranking member for its inclusion. This legislation will authorize $45 million in supplemental education funding for local school districts that are heavily impacted by the presence of military personnel and families, including $30 million for impact aid, $5 million for educational services to severely disabled children, and an additional $10 million for districts experiencing rapid increases in the number of students due to rebasing, activation of new military units, or base realignment and closure. This provision is of particular importance to my State. As a result of the 2005 base closure and realignment round, Fort Benning and the school systems in the surrounding area will experience an influx of approximately 10,000 students into their school systems over the next several years as new troops arrive. This funding will ensure that areas such as Fort Benning have the facilities and teachers in place to provide the children of our Armed Forces members with a top-notch education when they do arrive. This bill also requires DOD to report to Congress on their plan for working with other Federal agencies and local school districts to accommodate this growth. Unfortunately, DOD has been slow to recognize the burden that such unprecedented growth places on small communities, and it is important that DOD do the necessary planning and coordination in advance to ensure that military families are taken care of when they move to a new installation. During the war in Iraq, our intra- and inter-theater airlift assets have gone above and beyond the call of duty and have been used at a much greater rate than we ever planned to use them. These airplanes played the critical role of airlifting supplies, vehicles, and other equipment to our troops. In order to recapitalize some of the losses and overuse of these airlift assets, this bill authorizes $2.6 billion for strategic airlift capability, including an increase of two C-17 aircraft above the budget request and advance procurement for continued C-17 production. These are superb airplanes and have proven to be extremely reliable and, along with the C-130, have become the backbone of the airlift fleet. This bill also provides a well-deserved pay raise of 2.2 percent for all military personnel effective January 1, 2007, and approves targeted pay raises for midcareer and senior enlisted personnel and warrant officers effective April 1, 2007. I have heard directly from troops in the field and personnel at Georgia military installations about how important these targeted pay raises are to retaining our men and women in uniform in the service and taking advantage of their hard-to-replace skills. So I commend the chairman and ranking member for including this provision in the bill. In order to clarify the role and use of the Armed Forces for domestic use during natural disasters or other events, the bill also includes a provision that would update the Insurrection Act to make explicit the President's authority to use the Armed Forces to restore order and enforce Federal law in cases where public order has been broken. In light of Hurricane Katrina and other [[Page 10774]] hurricanes along the gulf coast last year, this provision is especially important in clarifying the role that Federal troops have in these situations. I am also pleased that the committee adds $1.4 billion for the F-22A aircraft in order to fully fund procurement of 20 aircraft, as well as fully fund the C-130J multiyear contract which this committee has worked so hard to support, even as the contract is restructured from a commercial to a traditional contract. This is a good bill that the Chairman and ranking member have crafted with the needs of our troops and the national security of our Nation foremost in their minds. I hope my colleagues will join me in expeditiously considering this legislation so that our men and women in uniform can get the equipment, the benefits, and the support they need and deserve. (The remarks of Mr. Chambliss and Mr. Warner are printed in today's Record under ``Morning Business.'') Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to comment on the F-22. It is a magnificent aircraft. It is absolutely essential for our inventory of weapons. Stop to think that any use of our Armed Forces, wherever they may be in the world, is dependent on air superiority. The United States has that air superiority, but there are nations night and day trying to fashion airplanes or instruments that could take away that air superiority. This Nation is banking its future on that aircraft. I am very pleased that our committee has marked up a strong bill on that issue. The Senator from Georgia may have some additional thoughts on it, which we will turn to in the course of the deliberations on this bill. I salute the Senator from Georgia, Mr. Chambliss, for doing everything he can to ensure that the United States of America maintains its air superiority so that the men and women of the other Armed Forces, be they at sea, on the land--wherever they may be--have the sense of confidence that the skies above will not become some instrument of war in harm's way to them. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for his comments and for his leadership. It is a pleasure to serve with him in this body. It is a pleasure to serve with him as a member of the Armed Services Committee. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, we have before the Senate the extremely important Defense authorization bill, led in the Armed Services Committee by my friend, the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, and the Senator from Michigan, Mr. Levin. I look forward to these next several days debating this issue. I commend them, as we begin this debate, for the way they considered the various recommendations and suggestions that have been made by the members of the committee in developing this bill. I ask unanimous consent to proceed for a few minutes in morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The remarks of Mr. Kennedy are printed in today's Record under ``Morning Business.'') The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico. Mr. DOMENICI. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President: Is it appropriate that I ask for 5 minutes as in morning business? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The remarks of Mr. Domenici are printed in today's Record under ``Morning Business.'') The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized. Mr. LEVIN. I am pleased, once again, to join the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner, in bringing the National Defense Authorization Act to the Senate floor. This bipartisan bill was favorably reported by unanimous vote of the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 4, 2006, as our distinguished Presiding Officer is well aware, since he had an important role bringing this bill to the floor. This is the sixth Defense authorization bill that Senator Warner has brought to the Senate floor as chairman of our committee. Under the 6- year term limitation imposed on committee chairmen under the Republican Conference, it will also be his last. Senator Warner served this country as an enlisted man in the Navy in World War II, as an officer in the Marine Corps in the Korean war, and as Secretary of the Navy during the Vietnam war. He has continued that service as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee since his election to the Senate in 1978. As Senator Warner has pointed out on many occasions, he and I came to the Senate together. We have now served side by side on the Senate Armed Services Committee for more than 27 years. As chairman of our committee, Senator Warner is unfailingly patient, courteous, and thoughtful. He has always been willing to listen. He has always tried to work out constructive solutions to even the most difficult problems. And when he is unable to work out those solutions, he is always up front and is always protecting the opposition's procedural rights. Senator Warner has consistently shown his dedication to providing the resources that are needed for our national defense and meeting the needs of our men and women in uniform. Senator Warner has served in the finest tradition of our committee, a tradition of bipartisan dedication to the national defense established by previous giants such as Richard Russell, John Stennis, and Sam Nunn, and we thank him for it. He is now and will, hopefully for a long time, be on that list of giants--but after this year and after this bill, not as chairman of our committee. Every Senator in this body trusts John Warner. Perhaps this is the highest of all the tributes that one can pay. The unanimous vote of the committee on the bill we bring before the Senate today is a fitting statement about Senator Warner's chairmanship. This bill contains many important provisions that will improve the quality of life of our men and women in uniform. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I wish to say with a deep sense of humility how much I appreciate his comments. To the extent I have had achievements as chairman of this committee, and before that as ranking member, it was largely due to the long-term friendship and confidence we share in each other's decisions. Mr. LEVIN. Again, we all thank the Senator. His service on the committee is not over, and his service as chairman is not over. We still have a long way to go, through the floor of the Senate and through conference, but we have no doubt about the outcome of either the floor debate or the conference. He will pull this bill through again, as he invariably has. This bill contains many important provisions that will improve the quality of life of our men and women in uniform. It will provide needed support and assistance to our troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world, and make the investments that we need to meet the challenges of the 21st century. First and foremost, the bill before us continues the increases in compensation and in quality of life that our service men and women and their families deserve as they face the hardships that are imposed by continuing military operations. For example, the bill contains provisions that would prohibit increases proposed by the administration in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees and require the Comptroller General to conduct a comprehensive analysis of Department of Defense health care costs and savings proposals. The bill rejects cuts proposed by the administration for the National Guard budget, ensuring that National Guard end strength will be fully funded. The bill would repeal provisions of the Survivor Benefit Plan that reduces military retirement payments by amounts received for dependency and indemnity compensation, and the bill would require an audit of pay accounts of wounded soldiers and actions to correct erroneous payments, including a toll-free hotline for military personnel [[Page 10775]] and next-of-kin who are experiencing pay problems. The bill also includes important funding authorities needed for our continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and our efforts to secure our Nation against terrorism. For example, the bill contains provisions that would authorize over $2 billion for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund to facilitate the rapid development of new technology and tactics and the rapid redeployment of equipment to counter the IED threat. The bill authorizes an additional $950.5 million for force protection equipment including $559.8 million for up-armored High Mobility Multi- purpose wheeled vehicles and $100.0 million for counter-IED engineer vehicles: The bill provides $115.2 million over the President's budget request for combating terrorism and enhancing domestic preparedness: The bill authorizes $50.0 billion supplemental to cover the cost of ongoing military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and the global war on terrorism in fiscal year 2007, and it provides expanded authorities for regional combatant commanders to train and equip foreign military forces, provide logistics support, supplies and services to allies and coalition partners, and lease or lend equipment for personnel protection and survivability to foreign forces participating in combined military operations with U.S. forces. I am pleased that the bill contains a provision requiring that Congress be provided a coordinated U.S. Government legal opinion on whether certain specified interrogation techniques would constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment under the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and other applicable provisions of law. This provision is necessary because the administration has refused to provide Congress existing legal opinions on the conduct of interrogations and detainee operations and failed to live up to its responsibility to provide clear guidance to our troops in the field on these issues. Finally, the bill contains a number of provisions that will help improve the management of the Department of Defense and other Federal agencies. For example, the bill contains provisions that would improve the management of major defense acquisition programs by increasing the authority and responsibility of program managers and linking the payment of award and incentive fees directly to program outcomes; help identify and address problems with major information technology programs by establishing cost, schedule and performance requirements similar to those applicable to the acquisition of major weapon systems; ensure that the public receive accurate information on the department's budget requirements by prohibiting the ``parking'' of funds in one budget account when the funds are intended for a different purpose; continue the committee's oversight of interagency contracting by extending the current series of joint DOD inspector general audits to include interagency contracts managed by the National Institutes of Health and the Veterans' Administration; and address abusive contracting practices by requiring the Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations prohibiting excessive pass-through fees charged on contracts and subcontracts: For example, recent press articles have described a process in which work was passed down from the Army Corps of Engineers to a prime contractor, then to a subcontractor, then to another subcontractor-- with each company charging the government for profit and overhead before finally reaching the company that would actually do the work. In one such case, the Army Corps reportedly paid a prime contractor $1.75 per square foot to nail plastic tarps onto damaged roofs in Louisiana. The prime contractor paid another company 75 cents per square foot to do the work; that subcontractor paid a third company 35 cents per square foot to do the work; and that subcontractor paid yet another company 10 cents per square foot to do the work. In other words, we paid the prime contractor $1.75 per square foot for their work. He used a sub, who used a sub, who used a sub, who ended up paying the people who actually did the work 10 cents per square foot to do the work that we and the taxpayers paid $1.75 per square foot to accomplish. In a second such case, the Army Corps reportedly paid prime contractors $28 to $30 per cubic yard to remove debris. The companies that actually performed the work were paid only $6 to $10 per cubic yard. A representative of one of the companies was quoted as saying: Every time it passes through another layer, $4 of $5 is taken off the top. These others are taking out money, and some of them aren't doing anything. We have many important issues to address as we consider this bill over the next few days. For example, I am sure that we will deal with amendments addressing the way forward for our forces in Iraq. My own view, consistent with the long-held advice of our senior military commanders, is that there will be no military solution to the violence in Iraq and no way to defeat the insurgency until a political solution is achieved and accepted by the Iraqis themselves. And we must find ways to press the Iraqis to make those political accommodations. The good news that we received about the death of Abu Musab al- Zarqawi, and perhaps the more important news that the Iraqi parliament had approved the nominees for ministers of defense, national security, and the interior will hopefully foster greater cooperation among the various Iraqi parties. The Iraqis must now turn to the difficult but critical task of making their constitution a unifying and inclusive document. The administration needs to be pressing the Iraqis to complete this essential task within the timeline which is provided by the constitution itself. Only the Iraqis can reach a political settlement that unifies their country. Among the amendments that we will deal with in the coming days is one I intend to offer to reduce funding provided in the bill for ballistic missile interceptors and related deployment sites for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense--GMD--program. The GMD system has yet to have a single successful intercept test, yet this bill would provide funding for the final 10 operational interceptors requested by the Department of Defense. The flight tests that have occurred to date have shown the program to be immature and developmental in the test failures and numerous problems remaining to be solved, The Department's proposal to complete the acquisition of operational missiles before these missiles have been successfully tested puts us at risk of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on the deployment of a system that may not work. I look forward to debating these and other issues as we move forward with this bill over the next few days. As of today, more than 130,000 U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are engaged in taking on an aggressive insurgency and helping the Iraqi security forces to prevent civil war in Iraq, almost 20,000 remain in harm's way in Afghanistan, and tens of thousands more are supporting the war effort through deployments thousands of miles from home. Our Armed Forces have also played a critical role in responding to the devastation left by Hurricane Katrina and other disasters both at home and overseas. Senate action on this bill will improve the quality of life of our men and women in uniform. It will give them the tools that they need to remain the most effective fighting force in the world. Most important of all, it will send an important message that we, as a nation, stand behind them and appreciate their service--and that is true regardless of one's position on the wisdom of our Iraq policy. I again congratulate our chairman, Senator Warner, for bringing forth this bill in a unanimous way, as he has and always does. I look forward to working with our colleagues to pass this important legislation as promptly as possible. [[Page 10776]] I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I again thank my long-time friend, the ranking member of this committee. We shall now be available for amendments. The bill is open for amendment. I intend to remain here for a while this evening. I think there is a strong likelihood that I will have an amendment to be offered on behalf of colleagues on our side very shortly relating to the military operation which resulted in the extinguishing of the life of al-Zarqawi. Mr. LEVIN. We look forward to that amendment. I am sure there will be a lot of support for that operation on both sides of the aisle. We haven't seen the language, but I am sure we will support it. Mr. WARNER. I anticipate that. The Senator from Michigan will have it as soon as it is in final form. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Voinovich). Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to address the Senate as in morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The remarks of Mr. Isakson are printed in today's Record under ``Morning Business.'') Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. Mr. CORNYN addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator from Georgia withdraw his suggestion of the absence of a quorum? Mr. ISAKSON. I withdraw my suggestion of the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas. Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, thank you. Mr. President, I express my gratitude to the Senator from Georgia for his remarks. Mr. President, I rise to speak on the National Defense Authorization Act for 2007, the bill that is on the floor. Passage of the bill is critical to ensuring that our military has the resources necessary to accomplish the demanding missions we have asked them to undertake around the globe. I am privileged to chair, on the Senate Armed Services Committee, the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, and to work closely with my colleague on the other side of the aisle, the ranking member, Senator Jack Reed. Together, we ensured that this year's National Defense Authorization Act would make a number of important contributions in the areas of combating terrorism, homeland defense, nonproliferation, and investments in defense science and technology. I want to spend a few minutes highlighting the subcommittee's work as part of this larger Defense authorization bill. But before addressing those specifics, I commend Chairman Warner for his outstanding leadership of the Armed Services Committee in the time I have been in the Senate. This markup, as has already been noted, is his last markup as chairman of the committee. But I am confident that Senator Warner will continue to contribute in many ways and play a key role in the work of the committee, even after he no longer is chairman. We are fortunate to have his expertise in the Senate, particularly on the Senate Armed Services Committee. And I congratulate him for a job well done. This bill builds on the President's budget request of $11.1 billion for science and technology by adding $362 million in authorization language to these important programs. This year's additional science and technology investment is focused on unmanned systems, energy and power, information assurance, combat medicine, force protection, transformational technologies, and basic research. The bill sustains the committee's investment in research and technology to defeat improvised explosive devices, otherwise known as IEDs, that are having such a devastating effect on our troops and civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq. Reflecting a focus on transformational technologies, the bill directs the Secretary of Defense to develop a Department-wide unmanned systems policy, and to give preference to unmanned systems and vehicles in development of these new systems. The bill also directs the Secretary of Defense to establish a joint technology office to coordinate, integrate, and manage hypsersonic research, development and demonstration projects and budgets. To support the Department's commitment to combat terrorism and to protect our homeland, this bill authorizes nearly $150 million above the President's budget request in this area. The bill adds $13.5 million for homeland defense research, equipment and operations, and $17.3 million to meet unfunded priorities of the Northern Command responsible for the area, including the continental United States. The bill provides additional resources and authorities for the Weapons of Mass Destruction--Civil Support Teams, including adding $8.5 million for the development of a sustainment training program for the 55 congressionally authorized WMD-CSTs--Weapons of Mass Destruction-- Civil Support Teams--and an additional $5 million to address equipment upgrades for the first 32 of those teams to ensure standardization of equipment for all teams. The bill authorizes the Secretary of Defense to approve the deployment of these teams to Canada and Mexico, with the consent of appropriate authorities in each of those countries, and expands the types of emergencies for which the Secretary may prepare or employ these civil support teams. The recent arrests of terrorists in Canada make it all too easy to imagine a circumstance in which we might want to employ these Weapons of Mass Destruction--Civil Support Teams beyond our borders when requested by our neighbors either to the north or to the south. Reflecting the importance the committee places on information assurance and cyber-security, the bill requires the Department to report to Congress on progress in addressing a list of identified deficiencies in the area of cyber-security, information assurance, and network protection. In recognition of the critical and growing role of Special Operations Forces in the global war on terrorism, this bill adds $102.4 million for Special Operations Command to address unfunded priorities, and includes a provision to enhance acquisition oversight for the Special Operations Command to make sure the dollars it does spend are spent well. Our troops must be prepared for the possibility of a chemical or biological attack by terrorists at home or on the battlefield. Accordingly, the bill adds $68 million for chemical-biological defense, including $30 million to procure equipment to address shortfalls in National Guard units for chemical agent detection equipment and monitors, and $38 million for chemical and biological defense research, development, test, and evaluation programs to counter the threat of chemical and biological weapons. In the area of nonproliferation and weapons of mass destruction threat reduction, this bill fully supports the President's budget request, authorizing $1.7 billion for the Department of Energy nuclear nonproliferation programs and more than $372 million for the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. These important programs are preventing weapons of mass destruction from getting into the hands of terrorists. Finally, the bill includes several provisions to extend and expand the Department of Defense counterdrug authorities, including those relating to support of Colombian efforts against terrorist organizations involved in narcotics activity; DOD support of the counterdrug activities of other U.S. Government agencies; and Department of Defense support of the counterdrug activities of other countries. [[Page 10777]] Before I conclude, I would like to spend just a couple minutes on a section of the bill with which I strongly disagree. The committee bill recommends a 1-year delay in the production of the Joint Strike Fighter. I share my colleagues' concerns and commitment to acquisition reform, and I am pleased that the committee bill contains many provisions to improve our acquisition process. We have to get acquisition costs under control if we are going to be able to procure the weapons systems our Nation needs to meet the threats of the 21st century. But I am deeply concerned that the committee's recommendation will undermine the Joint Strike Fighter Program in terms of cost increases and schedule slips. The Joint Strike Fighter Program is the largest acquisition program in the history of the Department of Defense. There are legitimate questions regarding the level of concurrency between research and development and procurement in this program that have been subject to criticism by the General Accounting Office. The committee recommendations closely follow those recent GAO reports on the Joint Strike Fighter. But I would note that the GAO recommendations have not been subject to a business-case analysis. In fact, implementation of the General Accounting Office recommendations could likely cost more and result in further delays of the program. In short, I am concerned that the committee recommendation of a 1- year production delay may be penny-wise and pound-foolish. For example, do we know how the proposed 1-year delay in production will affect the overall cost of the Joint Strike Fighter program? Do we know how the proposed 1-year delay in production will affect the Initial Operational Capability of the Joint Strike Fighter? And, finally, do we know how the proposed 1-year delay in production will affect our international partners? These are questions raised at the committee level and I think still are deserving of good, solid answers. I strongly believe we need the answers to these questions before undertaking major changes in this important program. I am hopeful that as we move forward we can get the answers Congress needs in order to help, and not hurt, this important program. I have highlighted those elements of the fiscal year 2007 national Defense authorization bill that were developed by the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities. There are, of course, many other important provisions in this bill which my colleagues on the committee will have the opportunity to describe. I urge all Senators to support the legislation and, in doing so, send a resounding signal of support to our men and women in uniform. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii is recognized. Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, before I begin talking about the legislation before us today, I would like to thank Chairman Warner and Ranking Member Levin who have continued their tradition of strong bipartisan leadership of the Senate Armed Services Committee. In particular, I want to commend my dear friend and colleague, Senator John Warner, for his service to this distinguished committee. As chair, he has been a true statesman and shown how Congress should work. He understands the issues that come before this committee are ones that should not be caught in party bickering. It has truly been an honor to work with him to ensure that our men and women in the armed services have the tools necessary to successfully meet the challenges of today and into the future. While this will be the last Defense Authorization bill that he will oversee as the chairman of the committee, it surely will not be the last one where his expertise will be felt. Again, I thank him and look forward to working with him in the future on issues before this committee. This bill exemplifies what can be achieved through the spirit of bipartisan cooperation to address a number of important defense priorities. For example, this bill makes sure the Department of Defense has the resources it needs to combat terrorism by authorizing an additional $115.2 million over the President's budget request. And it includes a number of provisions designed to protect the quality of life of our service members. But I have several concerns related to this bill. First and foremost, I am concerned that the administration continues to fund this war through emergency supplemental appropriations. While I support our soldiers currently serving overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan and I am pleased that this committee has authorized an additional $81.9 billion for ongoing operations, I believe that the administration's current policy is fiscally irresponsible. Unlike true national emergencies and natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, the funds required for these ongoing operations can be assessed, identified and included in the regular budget process. It is time for this administration to make the true cost of war transparent to both the Congress and the American public. Just today, I returned from Iraq where I had an opportunity to meet and speak with our brave men and women in the Armed Forces in Iraq. They are truly doing an excellent job in a difficult and often dangerous environment. Thanks to the efforts of our soldiers, the people of Iraq are better equipped to begin the task of self- governance. During this trip, I spoke to the new Iraqi Minister of Defense and Iraq's National Security Advisor who are both optimistic about Iraq's progress toward democracy. I, myself, witnessed the advances made by the Iraqi people who are building a strong democratic foundation for the future of their nation. However, more needs to be done. While I do not believe that we should leave before the Iraqi people are equipped with the tools necessary to support a stable democratic society, we must ensure that the progress already started with the recent election of the Iraqi Minister of Defense and the Minister of Interior continues. At the same time, whether we leave Iraq tomorrow, or in 6 months, or longer, it is important for the President to inform Congress and the American people as to when and how our troops will be coming home. I am also disappointed that this year's authorization bill reduced the amount of funding for corrosion prevention and control programs. Corrosion is a costly problem. In fact, it is one of the largest costs in the life cycle of weapons systems. In addition, corrosion reduces military readiness as the need to repair or replace corrosion damage increases the downtime of critical military assets. Consequently, I firmly believe that cohesive corrosion control programs are integral to maintaining military readiness. This critical maintenance activity increases the life of multimillion dollar weapons systems and ensures their availability during times of crisis. Effective corrosion control should be made a key component of the Department of Defense's resetting strategy and funds should be allocated accordingly. Despite these concerns, I feel that this year's authorization includes a number of significant provisions that will greatly benefit our military personnel. I am particularly pleased to see provisions that address issues related to the quality of life of military members and their families. I believe that it is our responsibility, as Government leaders, to guarantee that our men and women in uniform are appropriately compensated. Consequently, I support the committee's approval of a 2.2 percent pay raise for all military personnel and targeted pay raises for mid-career and senior enlisted personnel and warrant officers. I am also encouraged that the committee prohibited increases in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees in fiscal year 2007 and authorized $10 million for pilot projects related to the treatment of post traumatic stress disorder. In addition, I am glad to see a number of provisions that directly benefit the children of our Nation's soldiers such as the authorized $45 million in supplemental education aid to local school districts that are affected by a large increase of students due to base realignments or the activation of new military units. I also support a 3-year [[Page 10778]] pilot education program on parent education to promote early childhood education for military children who have been affected by their parent's deployment or relocation. As the ranking member of the Readiness Subcommittee, my colleagues and I included a number of provisions in the bill that are vital to the near-term readiness of our Armed Forces. Most notably, this bill includes several provisions designed to address problems related to the DOD's acquisitions policies. One key provision would give DOD program managers more authority while at the same time holding them accountable for results--a best practice currently employed in the private sector. A provision requiring DOD officials to certify that the cost estimate for programs are reasonable and funding is available prior to initiating a major defense acquisition program was included as well. This bill also makes provisions that address DOD contracting policies and practices. For example, the DOD would be required to track and report cost overruns and schedule delays on major information technology purchases. I am also encouraged by our ability to provide support for programs and projects funded through the operation and maintenance account which directly impact the readiness of our troops. These include an additional $52.9 million for force protection, including combat clothing and field medical equipment and $97.3 million for training resources. In addition, the Readiness Subcommittee included an increase of $400 million for critical military construction projects that were identified by military installation commanders as top priorities. I am pleased that the bill also contains my legislation to establish a National Language Council to develop a long-term and comprehensive language strategy and oversee the implementation of that strategy. In 2004 the Department of Defense hosted a conference on foreign language education and the development of such a council and strategy was the number one recommendation of those in attendance--including administration officials. Without a comprehensive strategy addressing all of our language needs, combined with a real investment in language education, the strength and security of the United States remains at risk. It is imperative that our education system produce individuals in a broad spectrum of occupations who are able to effectively communicate and understand the cultures of the people with whom they interact. This includes scientists, lawyers, doctors, and educators, in addition to diplomats, law enforcement officers, and intelligence analysts. Moreover, I believe that we must focus on more than just the languages deemed ``critical'' today. Rather, we should learn all languages in order to develop long-term relationships with people all across the world. To do this, we need a cross-cutting and comprehensive plan that states where we are today, where we want to be, and how we are going to get there. My legislation that establishes a National Language Council goes a long way toward providing a national language strategy that reflects the views of all stakeholders--academia, industry, language associations, heritage communities, and governments at all levels-- because this is an issue that impacts every segment of society and is too big for only one sector to handle. I believe that the Senate Armed Services Committee has created a bill that will provide the necessary funds required to support our servicemen and women and that allows the military to continue to meet our Nation's future defense needs. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, by previous agreement between the distinguished majority leader and the Democratic leader, the chairman and ranking member of the committee will, for the remainder of this evening, as well as tomorrow morning, follow this protocol. I will put forth an amendment momentarily on behalf of myself, Mr. Frist, Mr. Reid, and Mr. Levin, and it is a joint, hopefully bipartisan, accepted amendment to be debated further in the morning. The military operation that resulted in the death of Zarqawi was a stunning accomplishment for U.S. forces. It displayed the precision, perseverance and professionalism of our Armed Forces supported by a sophisticated and superb intelligence apparatus that included U.S, Iraqi, and Coalition intelligence organizations. Behind the details that were made public, I can tell you, were months of coordinated, hard work by analysts, human intelligence operatives, and military planners. The death of Zarqawi will hopefully lessen, but not end the violence in Iraq, but it is certainly a significant blow to the terrorist network in Iraq, to Osama bin Laden, and the al-Qaida organization. Zarqawi was the most prominent insurgent in Iraq and the most active of bin Laden's affiliates. While bin Laden hides in mountain caves, capable of making occasional audio tapes, Zarqawi was working to trigger a civil war, disrupt the democratic process of the new unity government in Iraq, and then use Iraq as a base to launch attacks throughout the region. There is proof of that intent. He had eluded capture for 3 years, he was indeed cruel, cunning, and cagey--and now gone. I proudly salute the brave and professional work of our military forces as well as the formidable efforts of our military, civilian, and allied intelligence operations. This success is one that the entire intelligence community should find very satisfying. The combined efforts of the Directorate of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, and all of our defense intelligence capabilities, and our military forces in Iraq, collaborated on this effort. I believe this success displays that reforms are working. Amendment No. 4208 Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, this amendment is regarding the successful operation by our military forces, the coalition forces, the civilian and military intelligence both abroad in Iraq, as well as those teams here in the United States, in the successful elimination of what is regarded as the No. 1 terrorist in all Iraq, Zarqawi. He is no longer able to operate as he once did. At this time, I send this amendment to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner], for Mr. Frist, for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Warner, and Mr. Levin, proposes an amendment numbered 4208. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: (Purpose: To express the sense of Congress that the Armed Forces, the intelligence community, and other agencies, as well as the coalition partners of the United States and the Security Forces of Iraq should be commended for their actions that resulted in the death of Abu Musab al- Zarqawi, the leader of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization in Iraq and the most wanted terrorist in Iraq) At the end of subtitle I of title X, insert the following: SEC. 1084. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE COMMENDABLE ACTIONS OF THE ARMED FORCES. (a) Findings.--Congress finds that-- (1) on June 7, 2006, the United States Armed Forces conducted an air raid near the City of Baquba, northeast of Baghdad, Iraq, that resulted in the death of Ahmad Fadeel al- Nazal al-Khalayleh, better known as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of the al-Qaeda in Iraq terrorist organization and the most wanted terrorist in Iraq; (2) Zarqawi, as the operational commander of al-Qaeda in Iraq, led a brutal campaign of suicide bombings, car bombings, assassinations, and abductions that caused the deaths of many members of the United States Armed Forces, civilian officials of the United [[Page 10779]] States Government, thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, and innocent civilians of other nations; (3) Zarqawi publicly swore his allegiance to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda in 2004, and changed the name of his terrorist organization from the ``Monotheism and Holy War Group'' to ``al-Qaeda in Iraq''; (4) in an audiotape broadcast in December 2004, Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda's worldwide terrorist organization, called Zarqawi ``the prince of al-Qaeda in Iraq''; (5) 3 perpetrators confessed to being paid by Zarqawi to carry out the October 2002 assassination of the United States diplomat, Lawrence Foley, in Amman, Jordan; (6) the Monotheism and Holy War Group claimed responsibility for-- (A) the August 2003 suicide attack that destroyed the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad and killed the United Nations envoy to Iraq Sergio Vieira de Mello along with 21 other people; and (B) the suicide attack on the Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf that occurred less than 2 weeks later, which killed at least 85 people, including the Ayatollah Sayed Mohammed Baqr al-Hakim, and wounded dozens more; (7) Zarqawi is believed to have personally beheaded American hostage Nicholas Berg in May 2004; (8) in May 2004, Zarqawi was implicated in a car bombing that killed Izzadine Salim, the rotating president of the Iraqi Governing Council; (9) in November 2005, al-Qaeda in Iraq attacked 3 hotels in Amman, Jordan, killing at least 67 innocent civilians; (10) Zarqawi and his terrorist organization were directly responsible for numerous other brutal terrorist attacks against the American and coalition troops, Iraqi security forces and recruits, and innocent Iraqi civilians; (11) Zarqawi sought to turn Iraq into a safe haven for al- Qaeda; (12) to achieve that end, Zarqawi stated his opposition to the democratically elected government of Iraq and worked to divide the Iraqi people, foment sectarian violence, and incite a civil war in Iraq; and (13) the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, the intelligence community, and other agencies, along with coalition partners and the Iraqi Security Forces, should be commended for their courage and extraordinary efforts to track down the most wanted terrorist in Iraq and to secure a free and prosperous future for the people of Iraq. (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that Congress-- (1) commends the United States Armed Forces, the intelligence community, and other agencies, along with coalition partners, for the actions taken through June 7, 2006, that resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of the al-Qaeda in Iraq terrorist organization and the most wanted terrorist in Iraq; (2) commends the United States Armed Forces, the intelligence community, and other agencies for this action and their exemplary performance in striving to bring freedom, democracy, and security to the people of Iraq; (3) commends the coalition partners of the United States, the new government of Iraq, and members of the Iraqi Security Forces for their invaluable assistance in that operation and their extraordinary efforts to secure a free and prosperous Iraq; (4) commends our civilian and military leadership for their continuing efforts to eliminate the leadership of al-Qaeda in Iraq, and also commends the new government of Iraq, led by Prime Minister Jawad al-Maliki, for its contribution to that achievement; (5) recognizes that the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is a victory for American and coalition forces in the global war on terror and a blow to the al-Qaeda terrorist organization; (6) commends the Iraqi Prime Minister Jawad al-Maliki on the finalization of the new Iraqi cabinet; (7) urges the democratically elected government in Iraq to use this opportunity to defeat the terrorist enemy, to put an end to ethnic and sectarian violence, and to achieve a free, prosperous, and secure future for Iraq; and (8) affirms that the Senate will continue to support the United States Armed Forces, the democratically elected unity government of Iraq, and the people of Iraq in their quest to secure a free, prosperous, and democratic Iraq. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this be the pending business, with the understanding that it be laid aside tomorrow, in the morning, for such time as the distinguished ranking member seeks to gain recognition for the purpose of introducing an amendment from his side. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate resumes debate on the Defense authorization bill on Tuesday, the time between then and 12:15 be equally divided between the chairman and ranking member or their designees; provided further, that at 12:15, the Senate proceed to vote on amendment No. 4208, with no amendments in order to the amendment. That is the amendment I just introduced. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the matters with regard to this bill are concluded for tonight. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized. (The remarks of Mr. Levin are printed in today's Record under ``Morning Business.'') Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________