To provide for a report on the establishment of a Deputy Secretary of Defense for Management.

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006--Continued

Amendments Nos. 2438 and 2439

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 30 minutes of debate equally
divided between Senator Inhofe and Senator Harkin.
The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, under the previous order, the time between
2:15 and 2:45 is equally divided between the Senator from Oklahoma and
the Senator from Iowa for the purposes of discussing the underlying
amendment by the Senator from Iowa and a second degree that I put on on
behalf of Senator Inhofe. My understanding is that Senator Inhofe will
be here momentarily. But under the order, the Senate is now in session
and open to hear comments on this legislation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, what we have coming up here are two votes,
one at 2:45 on the Inhofe sense-of-the-Senate amendment, to be followed
by a vote on my amendment.
Now, you might say: What harm is it in voting for the Inhofe sense-
of-the-Senate amendment? Well, I thought I might even vote for it
myself, until I read it. Because if you look at the sense-of-the-Senate
amendment by the Senator from Oklahoma, in its findings--in its
findings--it says:

The American Forces Radio and Television Service and the
American Forces Network provide a ``touch of home'' to
members of the Armed Forces [et cetera] by providing the same
type and quality of radio and television programming . . .
that would be available in the continental United States.

Well, when AFRTS provides for 100 percent, under 33 local stations
around the world, of Rush Limbaugh and Dr. Laura and James Dobson and
zero percent on the progressive side, that is hardly ``the same type
and quality'' ``available in the continental United States.'' So right
away, that is a wrong finding.
Another finding is that the:

American Forces Radio and Television Service . . . select
programming that represents a cross-section of popular
American radio and television.

Well, again, if 100 percent is on one side and zero is on the other,
that also cannot be so.
And then in their sense-of-the-Senate amendment it says, it is the
sense of the Senate--according to the Senator from Oklahoma--that:

[T]he programming mission, themes, and practices of the
Department of Defense with respect to its television and
radio programming have fairly and responsively fulfilled
their mission of providing a ``touch of home'' to members of
the Armed Forces. . . .

Well, they have fairly and responsively fulfilled their mission when
it is 100 percent to nothing? I do not think so.
Lastly, the Inhofe amendment says the Secretary of Defense may
appoint an ombudsman--``may''--but it does not say what the ombudsman
is supposed to do.
Now, to be clear, again, what our amendment does is it simply takes
the DOD directive--which says they shall provide a free flow of
political programming, that there should be the same equal opportunity
for balance, and that they should provide them with fairness--and
codifies it. We take that directive and codify it. That is all. We do
not change it, we codify it. Then we set up an ombudsman and spell out
what that ombudsman should do. And we spell that out in my amendment.
So there is quite a bit of difference.
Again, I remind my fellow Senators that a year and a half ago, I
offered a sense-of-the-Senate resolution because I thought if we gently
prodded them and showed them what they were doing, they would follow
their directive. That was 16 months ago. Now, 16 months later, it is
100 percent to nothing. There is zero programing on the progressive
side.
Again, I want to make it clear we are not trying to restrict or in
any way say what they have to carry, but as long as they are carrying
this talk radio, it ought to at least be balanced. Some people say:
Well, Rush Limbaugh has a big audience. He does. I don't deny that. But
they are carrying Dr. Laura, they are carrying a Mark Merrill, whom I
have never heard of. Why don't they carry Howard Stern? Howard Stern
has 8 million listeners. Well, in that case, they said they do not like
the content.

[[Page S12480]]

So it is not just ratings, it is also content. They are keeping the
Armed Forces personnel from listening to Howard Stern. So it is not
just ratings. Don't fall for that line. It is not because Limbaugh and
these people have high ratings. Howard Stern has high ratings, but they
won't let him on.
So I hope Senators will oppose the Inhofe amendment and support our
amendment to codify it and to set up an ombudsman who would report to
the Secretary of Defense and report to us every year on how they are
meeting their requirements of fair and balanced programming.
With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor, suggest the absence of a
quorum, and I ask unanimous consent that the time be run on both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. 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.
The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, in consultation with the ranking member, I
say that there are three amendments in which, speaking for the
majority, I would yield back time in our possession in the hopes we
could move to the amendments for voting purposes.
The first one, of course, would be the amendment, as I just discussed
with the distinguished Senator from Michigan, regarding the desire to
have a Presidential commission regarding the detainee issues. I ask the
Chair to inform the Senate as to the amount of time that is under the
control of the majority and minority on that amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Amendment No. 2427?
Mr. WARNER. A little louder, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Amendment No. 2427?
Mr. WARNER. Amendment No. 2430.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, how much time is there on each side, if we
could inquire of the Chair.
Mr. WARNER. That is the question before the Chair on amendment No.
2430.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The opposition has 10 minutes. Senator Levin
has 3 minutes.
Mr. WARNER. Fine. Then we would like to move to the amendment by the
Senator from Rhode Island, Mr. Reed, regarding missile defense. Again,
I would inquire as to how much time is remaining on the amendment,
which is amendment No. 2427.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The opposition has 8 minutes. Senator Reed has
19 minutes.
Mr. WARNER. Well, I am prepared to yield back time on that if we can
get some indication from Senator Reed as to his desire. I am hopeful we
will have that vote up.
Then there is an amendment by the distinguished Senator from Maine,
Ms. Snowe, amendment No. 2436. Will the Chair advise the Senate as to
the time remaining on that amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senator Snowe has 3 minutes, and the
opposition has 13 minutes.
Mr. WARNER. Well, with regard to the time in opposition, I am opposed
to the amendment, but I am prepared to yield back the time on that
amendment. This, hopefully, alerts Senators that any one and hopefully
all three of those amendments could be up for votes very shortly.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. WARNER. Yes.
Mr. LEVIN. I am wondering if we have the time on the Nelson of
Florida amendment. I do not have the number.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, 2424 is the number on that amendment.
If the Senator will withhold for a minute.
The inquiry is in to the desk as to the time left on the Nelson
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senator Nelson has 16 minutes, and the
opposition has 30 minutes.
Mr. WARNER. I thank the Presiding Officer.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I inquire as to the regular order and the
time remaining on both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma has 10\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. INHOFE. On both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa has 9 minutes.
Mr. INHOFE. All right, then. And the second-degree amendment No. 2439
to amendment No. 2438 is the order?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is now a first-degree amendment, and it is
the pending amendment.
Mr. INHOFE. Amendment No. 2439?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes. That is correct.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I had an opportunity prior to the break to
talk a little bit about my amendment to the Harkin amendment. There is
criteria that has been used, and used successfully, for a long period
of time. There are two criteria. One is, it must be a syndicated type
of a program. The program has to be syndicated. No. 2, it has to have
at least a million listeners by the ratings.
Now, there are some other exceptions, when they are extreme things.
Obviously, there are some things that anyone making any evaluation
would not want to have our people subjected to. But by and large that
is the way it has worked.
Now, for a long period of time it just happens that the conservative
programs have been asked for by our troops over there, so they have
received them. However, if I were to stand here and say I am happy with
the programming as it has been, I would not be.
Right now I guess the name you hear more often than anybody else is
Rush Limbaugh. His is the second most highly requested program. They
want all 3 hours, although only some of the 33 stations give him 1
hour. No one gives him more than 1 hour. So that is not as much as I
would like to have them go and as much as I think the market demands.
I think it has worked well. I would think it would be very bad policy
for us to believe we should sit here in this august body of the Senate
and make the determination as to what we think--what we think--our
troops should be watching and listening to.
I believe this is true: I have been to Iraq more than any other
Member. I have gone just about every month. I have yet to hear the
first complaint over the programming as it has been, nor have I ever
received a communication in any of our offices either in Washington or
in the State.
I retain the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I wonder if the Senator from Oklahoma
could advise this Senator as to where in the directive--perhaps there
is someplace I haven't found--it says that radio programs that are
carried by American Forces Radio around the world have to be syndicated
and have a million listeners.
Mr. INHOFE. That is the policy they have been using. It is not
mandated. It is a policy they have stated has been their policy, and
the programming has reflected that that is the case.
Mr. HARKIN. With all due respect, I asked the Senator, can he show me
anywhere where that is written down?
Mr. INHOFE. No. This has been the policy. By the way, I remind the
Presiding Officer, this is on the time of Senator Harkin.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, what we have is a policy that is not
written down--we can find it nowhere, and today is the first time I
ever heard of it--that somehow before American Forces Radio airs a
program, No. 1, it has to be syndicated and, No. 2, it has to have a
million listeners. I never heard of this before. All of a sudden, it
has come up.
Mr. INHOFE. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. HARKIN. Since I am on my time, the Senator can get his own time
to respond.
That is why we need to codify it. I think the Senator has put his
finger on it. That is why our amendment is necessary. It takes the DOD
directive, what is in writing, and codifies it and makes it law. That
way there won't be any confusion. That way we will know whether they
are living up to their own words. Secondly, putting in an ombudsman--
not ``may,'' what the Senator says in his amendment--will do the
following: That person will be appointed by the Secretary of Defense;
not engage in any censorship; conduct reviews of integrity, balance,
and fairness; respond to program issues raised

[[Page S12481]]

by the audience; make suggestions regarding ways to correct imbalances;
and, most importantly, prepare and present an annual report to the
Secretary of Defense and Congress on whether American Forces Radio is
satisfying its mandate to provide fair and balanced political
programming.
The Senator, by his own words, shows why this is necessary. All of a
sudden we hear there is a policy. It is not written down. We have never
heard of it before. Yet we know what is happening.
I repeat for emphasis: On the 33 stations around the world, we have
100 percent Rush Limbaugh and Dr. Laura and James Dobson, and zero
percent of any kind of progressive radio. I don't care how you cut it,
slice it, dice it, or excuse it, this is unfair. This is censorship.
This is propagandizing our troops. They deserve better than that.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I believe this policy has been adhered
to--on his own time, if the Senator from Iowa knows of any time it has
not been adhered to, I would be glad to listen--the criteria of having
to be syndicated and, No. 2, at least 1 million listeners, which has
been the policy all along. If he questions that this should be the
policy or believes it should be in the future, I would be glad to
change my amendment just to say that it should be based on those two
criteria. That is not a problem at all. It is not necessary because it
has used that criteria in the past.
To clearly demonstrate that 1 million listeners is one of the
criteria, when the time came that Franken and Ed Schultz reached 1
million, all of a sudden they were programmed. It further demonstrates
it is something that has worked in the past for liberal or conservative
messages.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, this is very interesting, I say to my
friend from Oklahoma. The Senator from Virginia got up earlier before
our lunch break and said something about Ed Schultz and Al Franken
being on American Forces Radio. I just checked with them. I had my
office call both of their programmers. Neither Mr. Franken nor Mr.
Schultz has been notified, as of 2 hours ago, that they are ever going
to be on American Forces Radio. They have never been notified. So now
we hear today that somehow all of a sudden they are going to be on.
Maybe the Senator has some inside knowledge of how they operate. As of
2 hours ago, neither Mr. Schultz nor Mr. Franken has been notified when
they are going to be on, how often, or how long.
The second thing I say to my friend from Oklahoma, he says they have
this policy of syndication and 1 million listeners and even though it
is not written down anywhere they have followed it. I say to my friend
from Oklahoma, if that is the case, then why don't they carry Howard
Stern? Howard Stern has over 8 million listeners. He is syndicated. Yet
American Forces Radio will not carry Howard Stern. So I say to my
friend from Oklahoma, there must be some other criteria other than
syndication and a million listeners or else they certainly would have
Howard Stern.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, we are trying to find out something
specific that Howard Stern has said or promoted on his programs. The
problem is, there is nothing I can say on the Senate floor because it
is so basically lewd. It is the type of thing that if the Muslim world
were to listen to, it would be something very bad. There is not a
Senator on this floor who would want that type of language used,
profanity. I said this in my opening remarks. There are some cases
where programming could be so extreme, whether it is liberal or
conservative, it would not be acceptable.
As far as Al Franken and Ed Schultz, the liberal programming, it was
published on the Web site of American Forces that states which ones
meet the two criteria. It was not on their Web site in 2004. It is on
their Web site currently.
I can't spoon-feed them and go up and say: Are you aware? You need to
read the Web site. They should have been aware of that.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I have no case to make for Howard Stern.
The Senator said it is syndication and numbers in the millions. I
pointed out that Howard Stern has 8 million. The Senator responds that
Howard Stern is lewd and too much--I didn't hear all the words he used.
But there are other criteria that have to do with content.
Whether one agrees with whatever Howard Stern says, I might object
strenuously--and I think a lot of Americans would object--to someone
who said that what is good for al-Qaida is good for the Democratic
Party in this country today. Rush Limbaugh said that. That went to all
of our troops in Iraq. I think that is lewd. I think that is obscene. I
will bet you there are a lot of people who think that is obscene. I
don't mean just Democrats, anybody would think that is obscene. Or
saying that what happened at Abu Ghraib was like a fraternity prank, or
saying that the pictures of homoeroticism look like standard, good-old
American pornography. Rush Limbaugh said that. It was broadcast to our
troops in Iraq.
We voted last week 90 to 9 on the McCain amendment to say: No. What
happened at Abu Ghraib does not represent good-old American
pornography, as Rush Limbaugh says.
If the Senator objects to Howard Stern, fine. I think a lot of people
object to the obscenities of Rush Limbaugh, also.
What we are talking about is not taking somebody off the air. We are
talking about ideas and discussion and debate. It seems to me that what
we want are more ideas and more discussion and more debate. I think our
debate is pretty darn good, as a matter of fact. Why don't they have
that on American Forces Radio rather than this one-sided type of thing?
They need this kind of debate, this kind of discussion. More ideas,
more discussion, more debate is much better than less. That is what I
believe our amendment would provide.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I would like to inquire as to the time
remaining.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma has 3\1/2\ minutes.
The Senator from Iowa has 20 seconds.
Mr. INHOFE. Let me say that I think with any program, in the case you
mentioned of Rush Limbaugh, you mentioned two things you found to be
offensive and you questioned whether they were appropriate. The service
people requested all 3 hours every day. They ended up with some
stations giving them 1 hour, nobody giving them more than 1 hour. So if
you take 1 hour for some of these stations every day and you can find
two instances of something that in, your interpretation, is lewd, and
you compare that to Howard Stern whose programming is based on this
type of thing--the profanity and the things that we find offensive and
would not want to be throughout the world, the Arab world, or the rest
of the world--then I think that is a real stretch.
The bottom line is, we have an opportunity. Right now it is working
well. As I say, I don't know how many times the Senator from Iowa has
been to Iraq. In his last 20 seconds, he might mention how many times
he has been there. I have been there almost every month. I carry on a
dialog with these people. I know they tell me the type of programming
they want, the complaints they have. We have yet to receive any
complaints saying they think the current system of programming is wrong
in any way.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the time remaining on behalf of the
distinguished Senator from Oklahoma is?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is 1 minute 20 seconds, and the time
remaining for the Senator from Iowa is 20 seconds.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senator from Iowa talked about the two
programs which I discussed earlier, Ed Schultz and Al Franken. He
mentioned that his check indicated they

[[Page S12482]]

haven't been contacted. I immediately went back and checked with the
Department of Defense. The Department of Defense, I assure the Senator
from Iowa, is taking steps to implement the inclusion of those
programs. The Department is dealing with the agents who presumably
control the time. Therefore, the proffer that I made earlier about
these two programs being included, it may be just a question of the
tense of the verb, but I am assured by the Department that they are now
taking steps to implement the inclusion or option to include these two
programs throughout the American Forces Network.
Mr. HARKIN. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. WARNER. Yes.
Mr. HARKIN. I just respond by saying they said that 16 months ago.
They said it 16 months ago, and nothing has happened.
Mr. WARNER. Well, I am not in a position to rebut that.
All I can say is----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority's time has expired.
Mr. WARNER. Within the past 15 minutes, I received the assurance.
Has all time expired, Mr. President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa has 20 seconds.
Mr. HARKIN. I think again what this boils down to is do you want to
have our troops have more debate, more discussion, more ideas, or do
you want them to be limited? I say to my friends on the Republican
side, maybe you will be inclined to just vote for Limbaugh and Dr.
Laura and stuff, but I ask for your thoughts on fairness and equity.
Someday the shoe may be on the other foot. I don't want them to hear
one side of the story. I want them to hear both sides of the story.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. HARKIN. I beg you, let's have some fairness. That is what this
amendment will do, not the sense-of-the-Senate resolution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. WARNER. Have the yeas and nays been ordered?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
Mr. WARNER. I so make that request for both amendments, Mr.
President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The yeas
and nays may be requested on both amendments.
Mr. WARNER. And I so make that request, the underlying amendment and
the Inhofe amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The clerk will call the
roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coleman). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 55, nays 43, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 305 Leg.]

YEAS--55

Alexander
Allard
Allen
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Chafee
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Roberts
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner

NAYS--43

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Clinton
Conrad
Dayton
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sarbanes
Schumer
Stabenow
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Corzine
McCain

The amendment (No. 2439) was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. INHOFE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Vote on Amendment No. 2438

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Harkin
amendment No. 2438. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will
call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 44, nays 54, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 306 Leg.]

YEAS--44

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Clinton
Conrad
Dayton
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sarbanes
Schumer
Stabenow
Wyden

NAYS--54

Alexander
Allard
Allen
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Chafee
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner

NOT VOTING--2

Corzine
McCain

The amendment (No. 2438) was rejected.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move
to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the
use or the yielding back of the debate time on the Byrd amendment, the
Senate proceed to a series of stacked votes in relation to the
following amendments: The first is the Byrd amendment; the second is
the Nelson amendment, No. 2424; the third is the Snowe amendment, No.
2436; provided that no second degrees be in order to the amendments
prior to the votes; finally, that there be 2 minutes equally divided
between the votes and that the second and third votes be limited to 10
minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, further I hope, working in consultation
with the distinguished ranking member, to have more votes. There is an
outstanding Reed amendment and there is an outstanding amendment by the
Senator from Michigan, Mr. Levin. I hope those votes will be addressed
by the Senate not too long after the conclusion of this series of
votes.
Mr. President, under the order of the Senate that I asked for
earlier, the Senator from Alaska is to be recognized.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
(The remarks of Mr. Stevens and Ms. Murkowski are printed in today's
Record under ``Morning Business.'')
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. BYRD. What is the business before the Senate?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Snowe amendment is pending.
Mr. BYRD. The Snowe amendment to what?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. To the Department of Defense authorization.

[[Page S12483]]

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator would yield, we have
already scheduled Senator Byrd's amendment at this point in time, so it
is quite in order and timely.

Amendment No. 2442

(Purpose: To establish the position of Deputy Secretary of
Defense for Management.)

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from
Virginia, a man for whom I have great respect.
In 1787, during the drafting of the Constitution, the Founding
Fathers struggled with the question of how to create a government that
would simultaneously govern and yet remain accountable to the people.
The Framers developed a number of principles with which every
schoolchild should be familiar: Direct and indirect representation,
checks and balances, separation of powers.
In addition to these great principles, the Framers were also
insightfully pragmatic. For example, in article I, section 9, the
Constitution gives the Congress--us, the Senate and the House, the
Congress--the power of the purse. As Cicero said, there is no fortress
so strong that money cannot buy it. Money cannot take it.
That section also requires accountability for how the people's tax
money is to be used. Here is what it says:

. . . a regular statement and account of the receipts and
expenditures of all public money shall be published from time
to time.

The Founding Fathers, among whom were the Framers, the Framers
understood the importance of informing the American people about how
their taxes are spent. However, this constitutional requirement has
frequently clashed with the realities of the modern day bureaucracy. In
no other Government agency, is this clash more evident than in the
largest department, the Department of Defense, with its budget that is
approaching half a trillion every year. How long would it take to count
$1 trillion at the rate of one dollar per second? That is pretty fast
counting, one dollar per second. How long would it take to count $1
trillion at the rate of one dollar per second? Guess. What is the
guess? Thirty-two thousand years. That would be quite a while. I
wouldn't be around to hear the counting of $1 trillion at the rate of
one dollar per second.
The Department of Defense, with a budget that is approaching half a
trillion dollars per year--that takes 16,000 years to count--is unable
to adequately account for the funds that are appropriated to it.
What a shame. Are you astounded? It is amazing, isn't it? That is
astonishing.
Despite decades of congressional scrutiny, multibillion dollar reform
efforts and promises for progress, the Pentagon is unable to pass an
audit of its books. How about that? The Pentagon is unable to pass an
audit of its books. I have been saying this now for how many years,
pretty close to 5 years that I have been saying this. Secretary
Rumsfeld admitted it. He said he was going to do something about it.
Dr. David Walker, the Comptroller of the United States and the head
of the Government Accountability Office, has stated:

Numerous management problems, inefficiencies, and wasted
resources continue to trouble DOD's business operations,
resulting in billions of wasted resources annually at a time
when our nation is facing an increasing fiscal imbalance.

We ought to listen to that. That ought to get everyone on their feet.
Stand up and take notice. He is talking about billions of dollars of
the people's money. That is your money; your money; yes, your money;
and your money. Turn to the four corners of the Earth, the proverbial
four winds. It is your money that goes down the tubes each year, down
the tubes.
These billions are not being spent on training our troops. These
billions are not being spent on providing health care for the families
of our troops. We are talking about billions of dollars in spending
that neither improves our national security nor returns value to the
taxpayers. It is as if this huge amount of money vanishes into thin
air.
In this time of tight budgets, in this time of huge deficits, this is
exactly the sort of Government waste the Congress needs to eliminate.
The taxpayers cry out, even the rocks cry out.
When Secretary Rumsfeld came before the Committee on Armed Services
in January of 2001, I asked Secretary Rumsfeld what he was going to do
about this. That was in 2001. What are you going to do about it? So I
asked him what he was going to do about this. This what? This $2.3
trillion in unsupported accounting entries that appeared in the
Pentagon's ledgers in fiscal year 1999.
Mr. President, $2.3 trillion is a lot of money, isn't it? I believe
our national budget exceeded $1 trillion--when was it, may I say to the
distinguished Senator from Virginia, when did our Government budget
first exceed $1 trillion? I believe that was 1987; am I correct? Now,
here we were in 1999, when I noted that there was in the Pentagon's
ledgers, this number $2.3 trillion in unsupported accounting. Secretary
Rumsfeld said that the accounting mess was, to use his words,
``monumental.'' He used the word ``terrifying.'' And he said it would
take ``a period of years,'' it would take ``a period of years to sort
it out.'' So I said: Well, let's get started. It is past time.

Since January 2001, the Department of Defense has made progress in
some areas. For example, the Pentagon has been successful in reducing
the abuse of Government-issued credit cards. But the toughest work
remains ahead, and there are serious doubts that the Pentagon is up to
the task of tackling these difficult problems.
The previous Defense Department Comptroller, Dov Zakheim, set a goal
to have the Pentagon pass its first audit by fiscal year 2007. However,
this deadline is increasingly looking like a pipedream. Dr. Walker of
the General Accounting Office said, earlier this year, in a hearing
before the Armed Services Committee's Readiness Subcommittee:

The goal for 2007 is totally unrealistic. It's not credible
on its face.

How about that? That is quite astonishing. In fact, for the first
time, the GAO listed the Defense Department's business transformation
project on its annual list of ``high risk'' Government programs.
Now, this should lead the Congress to question whether the Defense
Department is moving forward in its efforts to straighten out its books
or if it is heading into even greater financial chaos.
Mr. President, I cry out for the American people. Oh, how they cry
out because of the burden, the never-ending, the increasingly heavy,
the increasingly unbearable burden. They simply can no longer afford
the billions of wasted dollars through the Pentagon's broken accounting
systems. That is why I offer an amendment on behalf of myself and
Senator Akaka and Senator Lautenberg, to put the Defense Department on
the right track to fix its broken accounting and financial management
system. It is broken, so it needs fixing. Yes, it needs fixing. Why?
Because it is broken.
This amendment, which is similar to bipartisan legislation introduced
earlier this year, would create a Deputy Secretary of Defense for
Management to bring order to the Pentagon's bloated bureaucracy--the
Pentagon's bloated bureaucracy. The Deputy Secretary for Management
would be directly responsible--directly responsible--for overseeing
reform in the areas of accounting, human resources, information
technology, acquisition, and logistics, among others. These are the key
areas identified by the Government Accountability Office as being most
in need of stronger oversight. Getting these programs on the right
track could save taxpayers billions of dollars per year by eliminating
waste, inefficiency, and duplication--duplication, redundancy.
Based upon the recommendations of the GAO, the Byrd-Akaka amendment
would create a 7-year term for the Deputy Secretary of Defense for
Management. This fixed term of service is required to ensure that the
Pentagon lays out a single plan for reform and sticks to it--lays out a
single program for reform and sticks to that single program for reform.
Above all else, the Defense Department needs this sustained, high-level
leadership if it is ever going to fix its accounting problems.
Well, there are some critics who might argue that the Department of
Defense already has high-level leadership concerned about financial
management and accounting practices. Well, that is probably true. So
what. It

[[Page S12484]]

is, indeed, true that Secretary Rumsfeld and his Acting Deputy
Secretary, Gordon England, both have spoken often about the importance
of straightening out the Pentagon's books.
But this amendment is not about the Secretary, not about the Deputy
Secretary of Defense. If experience shows us anything, it is that
Secretaries and Deputy Secretaries come and go, but the Pentagon's
accounting problems remain. The Secretaries and Deputy Secretaries come
and go, but the Pentagon's accounting problems do not go away. They do
not go away. They remain.
In the 15 years since the Congress passed the Chief Financial
Officers Act of 1990, which requires every Government agency to pass a
financial audit, the Pentagon has seen five--F-I-V-E--Secretaries of
Defense, eight--E-I-G-H-T--Deputy Secretaries of Defense, and five--F-
I-V-E--Comptrollers. How about that. How can any major reform plan hope
to succeed if the Department's leadership is in such a constant
turnover, such a constant state of change?
Plans for accounting reform have been written, written, written, and
rewritten more times than anyone can count. Billions of taxpayer
dollars have been spent in the vain attempt to implement a never-ending
series of reform proposals, each one of which claims to be the plan
that will finally straighten out the Pentagon's books. But do you know
what. These proposals, plans, and programs just are not getting the job
done. They do not amount to a hill of beans. They are not doing the
work.
In fact, just a few short weeks ago, the Department of Defense
finished creating another revised plan to fix its accounting systems
and inaugurated another new agency to implement the new plan. Well,
while some may argue that this means the Pentagon is finally getting
serious about its efforts to balance its books, I see history repeating
itself--yes, more new plans, more new plans, more new plans, but little
hope for success.
Mr. President, the time has come and passed for a real shakeup of the
Department of Defense. That giant bureaucracy needs to be tamed--needs
to be tamed. While the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense have a
multitude of competing priorities, including their responsibility to
oversee the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon
needs a single official to focus on the day-to-day management of the
Department of Defense. The Byrd-Akaka amendment creates a Deputy
Secretary of Defense for Management to do that.
Too much of the American people's hard-earned tax dollars are lost
through the waste and inefficiency of the Defense Department's
bureaucratic morass. It is time for reform. I urge my colleagues to
support the Byrd-Akaka amendment.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, one of the great pleasures of those of us
who serve on the Armed Services Committee is to have the opportunity to
work with Senator Byrd, an individual for whom I have the greatest
respect and whose corporate knowledge of the institutions of
Government, most particularly the institution of the U.S. Senate, is
second to none.
I have listened carefully to this presentation by our distinguished
colleague from West Virginia, and I think he cites, with relative
accuracy, points that should be taken into consideration. But I would
like to say to my friend, I wonder if you might consider an alternative
approach.
We stop to think that the Department of Defense was envisioned by the
Key West Conference in 1947, when Harry Truman--I might say one of my
favorite Presidents--saw the need to bring together the Departments of
the Navy and the Army and the emerging Air Force from the glorious days
of the Army Air Corps and put them all together, unify them, and
eliminate, thereby, certain frictions, and so forth, that normally
exist between the military Departments. The Department of Defense as we
know it today was born, and James Forrestal was our first Secretary.
This Department has served this Nation very well in the ensuing years
since 1947. And yet, as Mr. Byrd has said very eloquently, he has
pointed out problems associated with the enormity of the growth of
responsibilities, the enormity of the growth of appearances required by
the senior members of the Department before the Congress and the like.
I think he also has in mind the British system, for which all of us
who have dealt with that system through the years have a certain degree
of admiration. They have a civil service sort of permanent under
secretary structure, so as there is turnover in the top positions
through the years, there is someone to come in and say: Well, I was
here under the previous two secretaries and, indeed, the facts are such
and so. It has its virtue. But I think the complexity of the problems
you raise requires some careful study.
Now, a subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee, under the
distinguished chairmanship of Senator Ensign, has looked at this
question. He will succeed me here momentarily to give his thoughts.
I come down to this point, I say to my good friend from West
Virginia. You start with the proposition there is no other Government
agency or Department of our Federal system, other than the FAA--and I
did not know that until I was prompted by your amendment to do the
research--which has the two Deputy Secretaries or Under Secretaries, as
the case may be. That, to me, indicates that throughout the formation
of our Government, whether it has been under Democrat control or
Republican control, it is a concept that has not been tried. But it
merits careful study.
I am wondering if the Senator from West Virginia would think of
converting his amendment to provide for a study. Now, I do not mean to
kick the can down the road for a year and let it disappear as a
concept. Let's have a tight study of 90 or 120 days. Let's have it done
by one of the Federal research centers, not the GAO because the GAO,
frankly, has an opinion, maybe have it done by two of them, require two
of them to do it, and report back to the Congress early next year, say
in the February-March timeframe, such that we could hold a hearing in
the Armed Services Committee and perhaps the Government Operations
Committee, which has sort of plenary jurisdiction over Government
agencies and Departments, and take a look at it. It might take root,
and as such we would put it in as a part of next year's authorization
bill. We could then go to our colleagues in the Senate and our
colleagues in the other body and say: Look, we have carefully analyzed
and studied, and this is our conclusion. I say to my good friend--not
that I could teach him anything--knowing where the votes are, I am
inclined to think there is probably a sufficient structure of votes
here not to carry your amendment, and I would hate to see it lost, to
be honest. And should it pass here, there is nothing in the House. And
as you well know from more experience than I, that conference produces
unpredictable results.
This is a good idea. This idea merits very careful attention and
study. I would be the first to cosponsor with you if you were so
desiring of amending your pending amendment to provide for a framework
by which this concept is studied step by step before the Congress is
called upon to render its judgment.
I say that with the greatest respect.
At this point, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the proposal coming, as it does, from the
distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee, gives me pause.
First, I send the amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Byrd], for himself, Mr.
Akaka, and Mr. Lautenberg, proposes an amendment numbered
2442.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')
Mr. BYRD. Continuing, the Department of Defense has served our
country well. But from time to time Congress

[[Page S12485]]

has needed to make changes, such as the Goldwater-Nichols Act, to fix
problems that have arisen. We know what the problem is. The Department
needs someone to dive in and fix these accounting problems. The GAO has
told the Congress what is needed to fix these problems. My amendment
does just that. One more year means more money spent. One might ask the
rhetorical question, how many more years does Congress need to wait
before it acts? I don't slough off the proposal nonchalantly or
``chalantly.'' I would like to think about that. Let me do just that.
While the Senator from Nevada, Mr. Ensign, speaks, let me converse with
the Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my dear colleague. I suggest,
indeed, as Senator Ensign has looked into this, the Senate would
benefit from his perspective. I suggest we make this the pending
amendment, lay it aside such that the Senate can proceed to the votes
on the other two amendments. I don't know that there is any urgency. As
long as it is the pending amendment, it can be brought up at any time
the Senator from West Virginia so desires, either to be amended or
voted in its present framework. I would be happy to yield the floor for
the purposes of the distinguished Senator from Nevada addressing the
Senate on this important subject and confer with the Senator from West
Virginia briefly. I have an appointment with the British Minister of
Defense. He is in my office. I would like to keep that for a brief
period and then return to the floor.
Mr. BYRD. Fine, if we could set this amendment aside until after the
two votes. In the meantime, let the Senator from Nevada, Mr. Ensign,
speak, and then have the amendment set aside until after the two votes.
Meanwhile we can confer.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent then that the
Senator from Nevada be recognized for such time as he wishes to take on
the Byrd amendment in its present configuration at the desk and then,
at the conclusion of the remarks of the Senator from Nevada, we proceed
to the scheduled votes under a previous order. Then immediately
following the last vote, this becomes the pending amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Nevada.
Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, Senator Byrd has offered an amendment
virtually identical to a piece of legislation that I brought forward
because he has the same concerns I have. When I took over the
chairmanship of the Readiness Subcommittee, the staff briefed me on
various hearings that they do traditionally during the year. One of the
hearings, the information that we got at the hearing, this piece of
legislation was trying to address. It was the reason I drafted it,
because I had literally the identical concerns Senator Byrd has raised
today. Nothing he has said have I disagreed with. This happened last
year. We used to have one of these hearings a year. I have actually
stepped them up to every 6 months. We have a hearing tomorrow in the
Readiness Subcommittee on this very issue, as well as others on the
business transformation for the military.
The military is a huge bureaucracy that none of us have our arms
around. The military doesn't have its arms around its own bureaucracy.
There are incredible inefficiencies. The problem is, you get one person
in; they are there for a year, maybe two. They say they are going to be
making changes. They have been promising to make changes for years. And
then nothing happens.
Last year, I was ready to proceed with my legislation. I met with
Secretary England, and he asked me for 1 year. He said: Give me a year.
I am new in this position. Give me a year. If you are not satisfied at
the end of that year, if we haven't made significant progress, then go
forward with your legislation.
I reluctantly said: OK. You are new. I liked some of the ideas he was
laying out. He was going in the right direction. I said, reluctantly: I
will give you the year.
Tomorrow we are having a hearing to see at least what progress they
have made in the last 6 to 8 months. Depending on what happens at that
hearing--from some of the preliminary results we have received, there
is some progress being made--we are going to delve into it much more
deeply tomorrow, plus what we see over the next several months. If we
are not satisfied, I will be the first person to join the Senator from
West Virginia on this legislation next year to create this position.
The reason I thought this was good, that it was a good idea to make
this change, was because to have somebody focused on the business
goings on at the Department of Defense made good common sense to me. I
didn't want to see another layer of bureaucracy created. But with the
Deputy Secretary of Defense, I didn't see them focused on the business
activities. I saw them focused on warfighting activities--all well and
good. We want them focused on that. But these other duties seem to be
neglected at the same time.
I commit to the Senator from West Virginia that I am absolutely
willing to work with him on this, with the same goals in mind; that is,
to reform our Defense Department to make it more efficient, more
accountable, more transparent in the way that it actually performs
business. It is never going to operate like a business, but we have to
get it to operate more like a business than it does today.
I think the spirit of this amendment is absolutely right. I would ask
that we would either go the direction of what Senator Warner has
suggested or at least wait until next spring, when we go for
reauthorizing the Defense Department again next year, to address this
issue, simply because I made that personal commitment to Acting Deputy
Secretary Gordon England.
I would be more than happy to yield back or engage in a colloquy or
whatever the Senator from West Virginia would like at this point.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I have great
respect for the Senator. I am interested in what he said. Let us confer
a little bit and think a little bit about this during the two votes
that are about to take place. Perhaps we can find out what the Senator
from Nevada and the Senator from Virginia have in mind. Perhaps we can
work out something that will be in the best interest of the country. I
would like to think about that. I thank the Senator. Let's just hold it
in abeyance for a little while until after the votes, and then we will
come back to it.
Mr. ENSIGN. I thank the Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: If I yield the floor, we go
directly to the votes?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes evenly divided preceding
the votes.
Mr. ENSIGN. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. 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. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I defer to my distinguished
chairman.

Amendment No. 2424

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, may I suggest the Senator go first, and
then I would seek the opportunity for recognition to indicate that it
is acceptable on this side. But if the Senator from Florida desires, I
think there is good reason to have a rollcall vote as opposed to a
voice vote.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, this amendment is all about the
painful offsets of the Department of Defense survivor benefit plan
against the Veterans' Affairs Department's dependency and indemnity
compensation. This offset that we have in current law mistreats the
survivors of our military who die on active duty and also mistreats our
100-percent disabled military retirees who purchase this benefit at the
end of their career. It is wrong, we know it, and we are going to fix
it. Taking care of widows and orphans is a cost of war. It is our
solemn duty to take care of the widows and orphans.
I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that

[[Page S12486]]

there be printed in the Record a number of letters from military and
veterans groups around the country.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Military Officers

Association of America,

Alexandria, VA, November 7, 2005.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Nelson: I am writing on behalf of the 368,000
members of the Military Officers Association of America
(MOAA) to pledge our support for your amendment, SA 2424, to
the FY2006 Defense Authorization Bill. Your amendment would
correct two major military Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP)
inequities by (1) ending the unfair deduction of VA survivor
benefits from military SBP annuities when military service
causes an active duty or retired member's death and (2)
moving up the effective date of 30-year, paid-up SBP coverage
from October 1, 2008 to October 1, 2005.
MOM opposes Sen. John Warner's 2d degree amendment that
would simply require a study of the SBP annuity deduction and
drops the paid-up SBP initiative entirely.
MOM believes another study is not required to do what's
right. We feel strongly that, when military service causes
the member's death, the VA's payment of Dependency and
Indemnity Compensation (DIC) should be considered just that--
an additional indemnity for the service's role in the
member's untimely death. It should be added to SBP, not
substituted for it. Fewer than 3,500 of the 55,000 widows
affected by the DIC offset are eligible for the new lump sum
death benefit improvements leaving large numbers of survivors
with an annuity of only $993 per month. Only survivors
widowed after November 24, 2003 can transfer SBP eligibility
to their children--this does nothing to help older survivors
or those without children. Further, survivors who are
financially compelled to take advantage of this temporary
relief will be left at an even greater long-term disadvantage
because they must forfeit all SBP eligibility when their
children reach age 18. We should not be treating our
survivors in this manner.
Similarly, older retirees need and deserve relief from the
current 2008 effective date of paid-up SBP. The delayed
effective date means that thousands of ``Greatest
Generation'' retirees who have been paying into SBP since
1972 will have to pay up to 36 years of premiums, and will
end up paying one-third more premiums than members who
retired after 1978.
The time for action on your amendment is now. Failure to do
so would do a disservice to the thousands of survivors and
retirees who have waited years for relief from these two SBP
inequities.
MOM is urging your colleagues, via a separate letters, to
vote for your SBP amendment and oppose any effort to dilute
or defer action on these long-overdue fixes for military
widows and ``Greatest Generation'' retirees.
Sincerely,
Norbert R. Ryan, Jr.
____

The Retired Enlisted Association,

Alexandria, Virginia, November 7, 2005.
Re: SA 2424 ending the SBP/DIC offset.

Hon. Bill Nelson,
U.S. Senate,
Washington DC.
Dear Senator Nelson: The Retired Enlisted Association
(TREA) is writing to strongly support your efforts to include
amendment SA 2424 in the NDAA. Your amendment would finally
correct the SBP's programs remaining deficiencies. It would
end the unfair dollar-for-dollar DBP/DIC Offset and it would
move up the paid up provisions of SBP to October 1, 2005.
These are improvements that have been long in coming.
TREA is a nationwide VSO whose members served a career in
the enlisted ranks and their spouses and survivors. Both
provisions of your Amendment would greatly improve the
situation of numerous of our members.
TREA knows how hard you and your staff have worked on this
issue. And now that success seems close at hand the ``DOD's
opposition paper'' is presented to the Senate. It is
incorrect. TREA is, of course, well aware of both the
mentioned substantial improvements in death benefits and the
improvements in the basic SBP plan that were adopted last
year. And we were very grateful for both actions. However
these improvements do not help the vast majority of military
widows who suffer under this offset.
Most of these widows' military spouses were seriously
disabled in the service of their country. When they retired
they enrolled in SBP (commercial plans not being an option
for them due to their disabilities.) They now pay 6\1/2\
percent of their retired pay to protect their loved ones from
being left penniless if they died of a non service connected
disability.
But when they died of their service connected disability
their survivors suffer a dollar for dollar offset on their
SBP for their DIC. All their planning and financial sacrifice
is ineffective due to the offset. The improvements in the SBP
payments made last year do not help them. The active duty
death improvements do not help them. These ladies are not
helped by any of the changes Congress has made in the last
few years. They should not be forgotten.
Many of TREA's members' survivors are harmed by this
offset. They, like their Service member spouse dedicated
their lives to the service of their country. They then
dedicated their lives to caring for their disabled spouses.
Their service should be acknowledged.
Your Amendment would also move up the paid up provisions to
the beginning of this fiscal year. This would help elderly
military retirees who have been paying into SBP for at least
30 years and who are at least 70 years old. In 2008 the paid
up provisions will kick in but many will be paying 6 more
years than intended. They have surely paid in a great deal
more into SBP than their spouses will ever receive and your
change can allow these dedicated men and women to live with a
bit more comfort the next few years.
Again, TREA wishes to thank you and your staff for your
dedicated work to support the men and women who dedicated
their lives to the service of America's Military. We strongly
support your efforts to have SA 2424 included in this year's
NDAA.
Sincerely,

Deirdre Parke Holleman, Esq.,

National Legislative Director,
The Retired Enlisted Association.
____

National Military Family

Association,

Alexandria, VA, November 7, 2005.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Nelson: On behalf of the National Military
Family Association (NMFA) and the military families it
serves, I thank you for introducing Senate Amendment 2424 to
S. 1042, the FY 2006 National Defense Authorization Act. This
amendment provides for certain fixes to the Survivor Benefit
Plan (SBP). The survivors of servicemembers killed on active
duty and those of military retirees, who died of service-
connected injuries or illnesses, deserve the financial
stability that would be provided through the provision to end
the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) offset to
SBP. In addition elderly retirees, who have paid into SBP for
more than thirty years, deserve relief now instead of paying
additional premiums until 2008.
As we have stated in Congressional testimony this year,
NMFA believes that ending the DIC offset to SBP is essential
in protecting both the long and short-term financial security
of military survivors, especially those of career
servicemembers. Many of these survivors find their monthly
family income decreases substantially following the
servicemember's death, due in large part to the DIC offset to
SBP. Widows of retirees, who die of service-connected
illnesses or injuries, also experience a decrease in their
benefit income following the retiree's death. In recent
years, Congress has ended the VA disability pay offset of
military retired pay for retirees with a VA disability rating
of 50 percent and higher and provided for the phase-out of
the age-62 offset to SBP. Full receipt of both SBP and DIC is
just as important to survivors as full concurrent receipt of
VA disability pay and military retired pay has been to
retired servicemembers. The DIC offset to SBP affects the
most vulnerable members of our military community: the
surviving spouses of those who have given their lives for our
country. While surviving spouses of active duty deaths, who
are affected by the offset, have the option of choosing
child-only SBP, they do so knowing their DoD SBP benefits
will end as soon as their child reaches adulthood. Child-only
SBP payments do not compensate for the lost income caused by
the DIC offset.
We thank you for your efforts to protect the financial
security of military families by sponsoring this legislation
to eliminate the DIC offset of SBP. Military families today
are called upon to make extraordinary sacrifices. Survivors
have made the ultimate sacrifices. Thank you for your work to
ensure our Nation provides the full benefits due them in
recognition of that sacrifice.
Sincerely,
Candace A. Wheeler,
Chairman/Chief Executive Officer.
____

National Association

for Uniformed Services,

Springfield, VA, November 7, 2005.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Nelson: On behalf of the nearly 200,000
members and supporters of the National Association for
Unifonned Service (NAUS), I would like to offer our full
support for your amendment to S. 1042, the fiscal year 2006
National Defense Authorization Act, that would correct two
important inequities faced by our military widows and our
military retirees.
Your amendment would 1.) end the unfair dollar-for-dollar
deduction of the Defense Department's Survivor Benefit Plan
against the Veterans Department's Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation; and 2.) accelerate the effective date of paid-
up SBP coverage to October 1, 2005 from October 1, 2008.
Many military members and retirees have paid for SBP and
have the most obvious of expectations to receive what was
paid for. Surprisingly, that's not what happens. Under
current law, SBP is reduced one dollar for each dollar
received under DIC. In some cases survivors of retirees, upon
eligibility for DIC, lose a majority--or all too often--the
entire amount of their monthly SBP annuity.

[[Page S12487]]

NAUS also strongly opposes any effort to postpone an up-or-
down vote on your amendment. In this regard, we oppose Sen.
John Warner's 2nd degree amendment that would send the SBP
issue to the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission for
further study. Frankly, we are deeply disappointed in efforts
to postpone doing what is right for military widows and
orphans and older veterans who have paid SBP premiums in some
cases for well over 30 years.
NAUS believes this matter already has been studied,
restudied, examined and re-examined. No further study is
required. Now is the time to act. And we urge you and your
colleagues to do the right thing.
Sincerely,
Rick Jones,
NAUS Legislative Director.
____

Association of the United States Army,
Arlington, VA, November 7, 2005.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Nelson: On behalf of the more than 100,000
members of the Association of the United States Army (AUSA),
I am writing to reinforce our support for your Survivor
Benefit Plan (SSP) amendment (SA#762) to the Defense
Authorization Bill. AUSA strongly opposes any effort to
dilute or delay action on the fixes it proposes to the
military SBP.
We understand that Senator Warner plans to introduce a
``second-degree'' amendment on Monday, 7 November, that would
nullify your initiative to (1) end the unfair deduction of VA
benefits for service-connected deaths from military
survivors' SBP annuities and (2) accelerate the 2008
effective date for 30-year paid-up SBP coverage that now
makes ``Greatest Generation'' retirees pay one-third more SBP
premiums than similar servicemembers who retired since 1978.
The Warner amendment would drop any reference to the paid-
up SBP fix and merely call for a study of the survivors'
issue. Action on the two inequities in SA#762 is already long
overdue, and military retirees and survivors need action to
fix them now, rather than more delays, studies, and
deferrals.
AUSA stands firm in support of your SBP amendment and
opposes any and all efforts to dilute, defer, or nullify it.
Sincerely,
Gordon R. Sullivan,
General, USA Retired.
____

Air Force Sergeants Association,

Temple Hills, MD, November 7, 2005.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Nelson: On behalf of the 130,000 members of
the Air Force Sergeants Association, I thank you for
introducing Senate Amendment 2424 to S. 1042, the FY 2006
National Defense Authorization Act.
This amendment would end the Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation (DIC) offset to SBP. These spouses of military
members also served their nation, facing the rigors of that
lifestyle, constantly being aware that their military spouse
has agreed to the ultimate sacrifice. It is important to keep
our Nation's promises to those who have served and sacrificed
for our freedoms. That includes taking care of their
survivors.
We are especially pleased that your amendment would
accelerate the implementation date of the ``age 70, 30 years
paid up'' provision from October 1, 2008, to October 1, 2005.
This group of elderly retirees has been paying into SBP for
more than thirty years. Without question, they deserve the
immediate relief your amendment would provide.
During times of war it is importaut that a nation
communicate its sincerity to take care of its service
members. AFSA appreciates your leadership on this issue.
Please let us know what we can do to help you advance this
important legislation.
Sincerely,

James E. Lokovic,

Deputy Executive Director and Director of
Military & Government Relations.
____

EANGUS,

Alexandria, VA, November 7, 2005.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Nelson: On behalf of the enlisted men and
women of the Army and Air National Guard, we thank you for
offering an amendment to the FY 2006 National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) to address current inequities in the
military Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) program.
Your amendment will address the current dollar for dollar
deduction of VA benefits for service-connected deaths from
the survivors' SBP annuities. In the case of service members
killed on active duty, a surviving spouse with children can
avoid the dollar-for-dollar offset only by assigning SBP to
her children. For retired members, we support your view that
if military service causes a retired member's death, the
Dependency Indemnity Compensation (DIC) the VA pays the
survivor should be added to the SBP benefits the retiree
bought and paid for, not substituted for them.
The Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the
United States strongly supports your amendment to address
these concerns. If I can be of further assistance, please
don't hesitate to contact us.
Working for America's Best!
MSG (Ret.) Michael P. Cline,
Executive Director.
____

Uniformed Services Disabled

Retirees,

Las Cruces, NM, November 4, 2005.
Dear Senators: No bombastic prose, so let's cut to the
chase. Please pardon the lack of formal addressing as this is
being faxed to all 100 of you United States Senators.
Today, I learned that Sen. John Warner, Chairman of the
Senate Armed Services Committee, will offer an amendment to
the FY2006 Defense Authorization Sill that would defer action
on two top USDR legislative goals for 2005--fixing two
significant inequities concerning the military Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP).
Current law reduces SBP for survivors of members whose
death was caused by military service. In those cases, the
survivor is entitled to an annuity from the VA (currently
$993 a month for a spouse), and the SBP payment is reduced by
that amount. In other words, this is a ``widow's tax''
because it wipes out the SBP annuity. USDR believes that, if
military service causes the member's death, the VA indemnity
payment should be added to SBP, not substituted for it.
The other SBP inequity affects older retirees already
enrolled in SBP. Congress passed a law in 1998 authorizing
paid-up SBP coverage for retirees who have attained age 70
and paid SBP premiums for 30 years (360 payments). This would
allow such retirees to stop paying premiums while retaining
coverage for their spouses. But Congress delayed the
effective date of that law until October 1, 2008, which
thousands of retirees who enrolled in SBP in 1972 will have
to pay premiums for 36 years--and end up paying about one-
third more SSP premiums than similar members who retired
after 1978.
Sen. Warner's amendment would negate an amendment proposed
by Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) to end these two major SSP
inequities as of October 1, 2005. The Warner amendment would
cancel Sen. Nelson's proposals entirely and substitute
language calling for a study of the VA/SBP issue. Dare say I
that this is so much Equine Scatology?
These issues have been studied ad nauseum. There is no
further need for more impotent studies. There is need for
affirmative action.
Please vote NO on any amendments to study, delay, or cancel
Sen. Nelson's proposed amendments to correct this gross
inequity heaped upon our widows.
Charles D. Revie,
LTC, USAR, Retired, Legislative Director.
____

Commissioned Officers Association,

Landover, MD, November 7, 2005.
Hon. Bill Nelson,
U.S. Senate, Senate Hart Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Nelson: I am writing to support your SBP
amendment (SA #762) to the 2006 Defense Authorization Bill.
The Commissioned Officers Association of the U.S. Public
Health Service most strongly opposes any effort to dilute or
delay action on the fixes it proposes to the military
Survivor Benefit Plan.
This Association is firmly opposed to Senator Warner's
plans to introduce a ``second-degree'' amendment on Monday, 7
November, that would nullify your initiative to (1) end the
unfair deduction of VA benefits for service-connected deaths
from military survivors' SBP annuities and (2) accelerate the
2008 effective date for 30-year paid-up SBP coverage that now
makes ``Greatest Generation'' retirees pay one-third more SBP
premiums than similar servicemembers who retired since 1978.
Action on these two inequities is already long overdue and
uniformed service retirees and survivors need action to fix
them now, rather than more delays, studies, and deferrals.
COA and the entire Military Coalition urge you to stand
firm with your SBP amendment and oppose any and all efforts
to dilute, defer, or nullify it
Sincerely,
Gerard M. Farrell,
Captain, U.S. Navy (Ret.), Executive Director.

Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I wish to express my support of Senator
Bill Nelson's amendment to improve benefits for the survivors of
America's servicemembers. This is a very important amendment that
deserves the Senate's support.
Under current law, annuity payments received under the survivor
benefit plan are reduced, dollar for dollar, by benefits received from
the VA's dependency and indemnity compensation program.
This is not fair. Servicemembers pay into the survivor benefit plan
and they expect that their surviving spouse and children will receive
these benefits upon their death. But if the servicemember's surviving
spouse is also entitled to dependency and indemnity compensation, then
the benefits of the survivor benefit plan are significantly reduced.
Families who have lost a servicemember often face a very difficult
future. Military death benefits are a significant help but often fall
far short of providing for a secure future for a family. To further
reduce a family's income by offsetting survivor benefit

[[Page S12488]]

plan benefits seems cruel. This amendment would end this offset. It is
imperative that we do so now.
Enactment of this amendment would also correct another injustice.
Congress has authorized military retirees who reach 70 years of age and
who have paid survivor benefit plan premiums for at least 30 years to
retain coverage while ceasing any further premium payments.
Unfortunately, the effective date of this provision has been pushed out
to October 1, 2008. This forces retirees to continue paying these
premiums, even though, in some instances, they have been paying
premiums for 36 years. This amendment would remove this unfair
requirement and allow military retirees who have paid great amounts
into their annuity plan to cease their payments after 30 years, just as
Congress intended.
Passage of this amendment is urgent. The families of deceased
servicemembers are dealing with a great deal of stress. They need the
financial benefit provided by this amendment. Military retirees,
likewise, deserve the relief now that Congress intended to give them.
It has been suggested that we postpone action on this matter until
after the Commission on Veterans' Disability Compensation can study the
larger issue of disability compensation. While the work of the
Commission is very important, it is clear to me that the benefits
provided by this amendment are of paramount importance and should not
wait for the conclusion of a more exhaustive study of the disability
compensation system. We must stand four-square behind those who have
given their life for their country and behind those who have served
their country for their entire career.
I urge my colleagues' support for the Nelson amendment.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed
for 2 minutes in support of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and
it is so ordered. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Chair.
I commend the Senator from Florida. He has been a passionate
supporter of this cause for so long. He has had some success but not
the full success which he deserves and which the widows and orphans in
this country deserve and which the survivors and our disabled people in
this country deserve, people who have given so much. So I want to add
my voice in support. I think a strong vote will make the Senate more
able to maintain this position in conference with the House.
I congratulate and thank the Senator from Florida, Mr. Nelson, for
his tenacity on this issue.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I again join my colleague from Michigan
and our distinguished colleague, a member of the committee. As the
Senator says, it is all about veterans, and this is a most deserving
class. This is the group that has done a minimum of 20 years, and a
loyal spouse that has gone through all of the challenges that face
families in career military service.
This is something that has been studied in the Congress for a very
long time. It is the subject of a study now. As a matter of fact, it is
going to be the centerpiece of a study. As you know, Mr. President, we
have the commission on the future of the Guard and Reserve and
retirees, and so forth, constituted by the Congress, which has now had
its first meeting.
So I urge colleagues on this side of the aisle to follow my lead and
support the amendment of the Senator from Florida.
There was a time in which I thought I would try to work on a second-
degree amendment. In consultation with a wide range of my colleagues
who have expressed strong support, as I have, we decided not to do
that. And then there was the thought about, you know, it is a technical
thing under the Budget Act. But I don't think it is appropriate to go
through that exercise.
So I suggest to all Members of the Senate to give a ringing
endorsement to this amendment, and I will be among those to cast the
first ``yea'' vote.
Again, I congratulate my colleague.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. I thank the Senator.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, under regular order, if the yeas and nays
have not been ordered, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, do we have two votes now scheduled?
Mr. WARNER. We do.
I think perhaps we should ask for the yeas and nays on the Snowe
amendment at this time.
Mr. LEVIN. Will that be a 10-minute vote?
Mr. WARNER. That will be a 10-minute vote on that amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is in order to request
the yeas and nays on the amendment at this time.
Is there a sufficient second? There appears to be a sufficient
second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Under the original order, we were to have the Byrd
amendment which would experience the full length of time for an
amendment. This was subject to 10 minutes. I think we had better
reconstitute that UC to say that this amendment will be given the full
15 minutes, the Snowe amendment to have the 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. LEVIN. Reserving the right to object, and I will not, of course,
has the Byrd amendment either been adopted--
Mr. WARNER. It is laid aside temporarily to come up at the conclusion
of the Snowe amendment. And then, of course, prior to the Senate
addressing a vote on the Snowe amendment, there will be 2 minutes for
each side to address that amendment. I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCAIN).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 93, nays 5, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 307 Leg.]

YEAS--93

Akaka
Alexander
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Warner
Wyden

NAYS--5

Allard
Coburn
DeMint
Sessions
Voinovich

NOT VOTING--2

Corzine
McCain

The amendment (No. 2424) was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. SCHUMER. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 2441

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have an amendment that I send to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the consideration of the
amendment?
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, there is no objection. We have examined
the amendment. It is a technical amendment that is needed by the
Department of Defense to administer this program and the Department of
Veterans Affairs.

[[Page S12489]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid] proposes an amendment
numbered 2441.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide that veterans with service-connected disabilities
rated as total by virtue of unemployability shall be covered by the
termination of the phase-in of concurrent receipt of retired pay and
veterans disability compensation for military retirees)

At the appropriate place in title VI, add the following:

SEC. __. INCLUSION OF VETERANS WITH SERVICE-CONNECTED
DISABILITIES RATED AS TOTAL BY REASON OF
UNEMPLOYABILITY UNDER TERMINATION OF PHASE-IN
OF CONCURRENT RECEIPT OF RETIRED PAY AND
VETERANS' DISABILITY COMPENSATION.

(a) Inclusion of Veterans.--Section 1414(a)(1) of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by inserting ``or a qualified
retiree receiving veterans' disability compensation for a
disability rated as total (within the meaning of subsection
(e)(3)(B))'' after ``rated as 100 percent''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on December 31, 2004.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of our Nation's
veterans to once again discuss the unfair, outdated policy of
``concurrent receipt.'' It is an issue I have talked about on this
floor many times.
Concurrent receipt is a policy which prevents veterans from receiving
the full pay and benefits they have earned. Many Senators have joined
me in fighting this policy over the years, and we have made some
progress on behalf of our veterans.
In 2003, the Congress passed legislation which allowed disabled
retired veterans with at least a 50 percent disability rating to become
eligible for full concurrent receipt benefits over a 10-year period.
This was a significant victory that put hundreds of thousands of
veterans on the road to receiving both their retirement and disability
benefits.
Last year, we made a little more progress. I joined with Senator
Levin and others, and we were able to eliminate the 10-year phase in
period for the most severely disabled veterans, those with a 100
percent disability rating.
As we noted at that time, the 10-year waiting period is particularly
harsh for these veterans, some of whom would not live to see their full
benefits restored over the 10-year period, and others who could not
work a second job and were in fact considered ``unemployable.'' So we
passed legislation to end the waiting period and provide some relief to
these deserving, totally disabled veterans.
Unfortunately, as I noted on this floor a few months ago, the
administration has failed to implement our legislation. Instead of
eliminating the waiting period for veterans who are 100 percent
disabled, they have eliminated it only for some.
They have created two categories of disabled veterans. If you are
rated as ``totally disabled,'' you do not have to wait. You get 100
percent of your benefits today. But if you are rated as
``unemployable,'' you still have to wait.
This is not what we intended when we passed legislation last year.
And earlier in this session, a number of Senators and I sought to
correct this disparity.
We passed a sense of the Senate resolution that clearly expressed our
intentions: all completely disabled veterans should have their benefits
restored immediately. This was not an attempt to make law, but merely
to express what my colleagues on both sides of the isle intended when
we passed legislation last year.
Unfortunately, the majority-controlled conference committee removed
this resolution. So today, veterans rated as ``unemployable'' continue
to face this delay.
This is not a partisan issue. These veterans do not have 10 years to
wait for the full phase in of their benefits. It is time for the
administration to stop playing games and start honoring these veterans
service.
For all other purposes, both the VA and the Defense Department treat
``unemployables'' exactly the same as those with a ``totally disabled''
ratings.
In fact, these unemployables must meet a criterion that not even the
100 percent-rated disability retirees have to meet. They are certified
as unable to work because of their service-connected disability. The
administration pays equal combat-related special compensation to both
categories.
Yet, the administration is discriminating unemployables and 100
percent disabled retirees with non-combat disabilities in flagrant
disregard for the letter of the law as interpreted its own legal
counsel.
So once again, I rise on these veterans' behalf. Today I introduce
amendment No. 2441, legislation which explicitly ends the 10-year
waiting period for the most disabled veterans.
The time to act is now.
I hope my Republican colleagues will join me in supporting this bill.
These veterans have faced arbitrary discrimination long enough. We must
pass this legislation, so that these veterans can get the benefits they
deserve.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. If all time is yielded back, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 2441) was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 2436

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we will now return to the vote on the
Snowe amendment, am I correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. There are 2 minutes
evenly divided.
Mr. WARNER. Have the yeas and nays been ordered?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, they have.
The Senator from Maine.

Amendment No. 2436, as Modified

Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to modify my
amendment with the changes at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment will be so modified.
The amendment (No. 2436), as modified, is as follows:

On page 5, after line 16, insert the following:
(e) No Effect on Certain Property Interests.--Nothing in
this section or the amendments made by this section shall be
construed to affect any reversionary interest, remainder
interest, executory interest, right of entry, or possibility
of reverter held in real or personal property at a military
installation closed or realigned under the Defense Base
Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of
Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).

Mr. SNOWE. Mr. President, the amendment that I and Senator Collins
have offered, which is cosponsored by Senators Wyden, Corzine, and
Landrieu, would require that, when making determinations concerning the
transfer of property at installations to be closed or realigned under
the current BRAC round, the Secretary of Defense must first offer that
property to the affected communities--and if they accept the offer--
transfer it to those communities free of cost.
It is a perverse situation when communities that have already
contributed toward the more than $200 billion spent on the war in
Iraq--$28.5 billion of which was spent on redevelopment efforts in that
country--and now face base realignments or closures--are being told
that, if they want property for economic recovery, they will have to
buy it at fair market value.
Our communities should be in the driver seat concerning their
economic development, but that is not what current statute allows--
instead, putting these irrevocable decisions in the hands of the
Department of Defense. Our amendment puts the priority where it
belongs--with our towns and cities, not a Federal bureaucracy.
Now, some have argued the amendment would change a time-tested
framework of laws that dictate how properties should be transferred
following a base closure or realignment and that ensure that all base
rounds are treated consistently. I say Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act is not sacrosanct--it has changed many times in the
past--and will again. In fact, for the first time ever, the Secretary
of Defense is mandated to seek fair market value, in the case of an
economic development conveyance to a community for redevelopment
purpose.

[[Page S12490]]

Now that's a change that should engender concern!
Opponents also expressed concerns that the amendment would in some
way affect existing reversionary interests in deeds, which provide that
upon a closure or realignment, installation property would revert back
to a community interest. We have modified it today, clarifying that
nothing in the amendment shall be construed to affect any reversionary
interest in property at the installation.
As for protecting the pre-existing rights of Native Americans my
friend and colleague, Senator Warner, was correct in noting that my
amendment contains a provision explicitly retaining those rights.
Additionally, the amendment would not inhibit various military or
Federal agency uses of this property--or impede public benefit
transfers for schools or parks. Communities would retain the ability to
proceed with such opportunities, if they deem them beneficial.
Conversely, if there is a use that a community drastically opposes,
like an oil refinery prison--it should have the ability to oppose it .
. . which the amendment allows. Still, the amendment does contain an
exception providing the Secretary of Defense the authority to make
transfers in the national security interest of the United States.
Finally, to suggestions that base property is owned by the entire
nation, and that it is not necessarily fair to provide it to affected
communities, I could not disagree more.
According to the Government Accountability Office, the DoD has saved
as a result of BRAC closures--about $28.9 billion in net savings
through fiscal year 2003 from the prior four closure rounds, and is
projected to save $7 billion annually thereafter. While the entire
Nation can financially benefit from these savings associated with BRAC
closures, it is crucial to note that the negative impacts of base
closures are disproportionately and unfairly borne by the communities
where bases have closed. That is why it is a responsible course of
action for the government to provide these communities with the tools
and resources, such as required no-cost economic development
conveyances, needed to recover from a closure.
The modification to the amendment that I offered yesterday would
address the concerns raised about whether my amendment would have
changed reversionary interests in deeds, which would provide that upon
closure and realignment, installation property would revert back to a
community interest. We have modified it today, clarifying that nothing
in the amendment shall be construed to affect any reversionary interest
in property at the installation, and that was to address some of the
concerns raised with respect to my amendment.
To remind Members, the amendment I am offering today, on behalf of
myself, Senator Collins, Senator Lott, Senator Landrieu, Senator Wyden,
and Senator Corzine, would allow for the free transfer of closed
military bases to communities directly affected rather than allowing
the Secretary of Defense to demand fair market value.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The Senator's time has
expired.
Who yields time in opposition?
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I speak in strong opposition to this
amendment. I thank the Senator from Maine for accepting a number of the
problems that I described yesterday, but there still exists an enormous
number of problems associated with this amendment.
For 16 years and five BRAC rounds, we have tried, in an equitable
way, to work with the communities and return these properties. On
occasion, they have been sold and funds given to the Department of
Defense, put in an escrow account in the Treasury for expenditure of
cleanup of other sites and associated costs connected with the transfer
of properties and the conclusion and implementation of the BRAC
decisions. This would wipe out that whole framework of legislation that
has been passed by this body and has effectively worked for the
communities for all of these years. We simply cannot, at this point in
time, accept this type of change in our statutory framework as a matter
of equity.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I too object to the amendment. It is
inflexible. It provides no possibility that no matter how valuable----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The yeas and nays have been ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announcd--yeas 36, nays 62, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 308 Leg.]

YEAS--36

Bayh
Bond
Cantwell
Clinton
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hutchison
Inouye
Jeffords
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Lincoln
Lott
Mikulski
Murray
Obama
Pryor
Roberts
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Stabenow
Sununu
Talent
Thune
Vitter
Wyden

NAYS--62

Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeMint
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Hatch
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Kennedy
Kyl
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Sessions
Shelby
Specter
Stevens
Thomas
Voinovich
Warner

NOT VOTING--2

Corzine
McCain

The amendment (No. 2436), as modified, was rejected.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I understand we will now proceed to a
brief colloquy between colleagues on both sides of the aisle with
regard to the Levin amendment. That colloquy should, in total, not
exceed about 10 or 11 minutes, and then we will proceed to a rollcall
vote. At this time, shall we ask for the yeas and nays on the Levin
amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I talked to the manager, the chairman of
the committee, about this. I ask unanimous consent there be 6 minutes
allotted on our side in support of the amendment and that 3 minutes be
allotted to the Senator from Virginia and that we then vote by no later
than 25 to 6.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, may I remind colleagues we will try to
maintain this as a 15-minute vote because thereafter we have a vote on
the amendment of the Senator from Rhode Island and we want not to
inconvenience several Members who have very legitimate reasons to not
be present after these two votes.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I was hoping we would have a vote on the
amendment which I had offered earlier, or in relation thereto, a
rollcall vote.
Mr. WARNER. On our side, we would be happy to accommodate that vote
following the vote on the amendment of the Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. LEVIN. Is it my understanding the Senator from West Virginia
would accept a voice vote?
Mr. BYRD. No.
Mr. WARNER. I want to make it known now that the Senator from West
Virginia has substantially revised his amendment in accordance with
recommendations, if I may say with a

[[Page S12491]]

sense of humility, that I made. He fully adopted those. I am going to
support the amendment strongly, so it should be a very swift vote. No
further debate would be required except for maybe a minute for you and
a minute for me.
Mr. BYRD. Will that occur this day?
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the
10-minute vote on the matter raised by the Senator from Rhode Island
that we proceed to a third vote of 10 minutes on the amendment of the
distinguished Senator from West Virginia.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. LEVIN. Reserving the right to object, I wonder if the Senator
from West Virginia would modify that so that the vote on the Byrd
amendment would come immediately after the vote on my amendment and
then we would proceed to the vote on the Reed-Levin amendment?
Mr. WARNER. I have no objection.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Michigan.

Amendment No. 2430

Mr. LEVIN. I ask unanimous consent that Senators Lautenberg,
Feinstein, Biden, and Akaka be added as cosponsors of amendment No.
2430.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, this is an amendment that would create an
independent commission that would look into allegations of detainee
abuses. I yield myself 2 minutes and then I will yield 2 minutes to the
Senator from Delaware and then 2 minutes to the Senator from Illinois,
if he is here.
There are major gaps in the investigation which has taken place so
far. We have heard a lot about the number of hearings that have been
held. We have heard that 12 major investigations have taken place, 30
open hearings, 40 closed hearings, and so forth. None of the hearings,
none of the investigations, have gotten to five areas. These are huge
gaps, and we cannot sweep these gaps under the rug.
No. 1, none has looked at the role of the intelligence community, the
CIA role, secret prisons, ghost detainees. It is a huge area which
needs to be focused on.
No. 2, the Government policy on renditions, there has been no review
of this.
No. 3, the role of contractors, there has been no investigation of
the role of contractors.
No. 4, the legality of interrogation techniques, there has been no
assessment of the legality of interrogation techniques.
There are two memos we have not been able to obtain that an
independent commission with subpoena power could obtain, the second so-
called Bybee memo and the March 3 memo from Mr. Yoo to the Department
of Defense. They set forth what is allowed in terms of interrogation
techniques. We cannot get those memos. An independent commission, a
bipartisan commission based on the 9/11 model, could get those memos.
They are critically important. And there are additional outstanding
document requests which have been ignored.
This matter cannot be swept under the rug. No matter how many
hearings have been held, there are major gaps that exist in reviewing
this matter. We owe it to our troops, the men and women who wear the
uniform for the United States, that we get the full picture and get it
behind us. That is what is essential to restore the credibility of this
Nation as well as to support the men and women who someday may be
captured by our enemy, and we sure don't want any enemy of ours to ever
cite that we ignored the violations that apparently have existed.
I now yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Illinois and then 2 minutes
to the Senator from Delaware.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. I rise in strong support of this amendment, and I am
honored to be an original cosponsor.
We owe this to our troops. Anyone who came to the Chamber and heard
the speech given by Senator John McCain about an amendment which he
offered to the Defense appropriations bill will understand it was a
historic statement. Senator McCain, a prisoner of war in Vietnam and a
person who was the victim of torture, said it was imperative that we
make it clear to our troops what the standard of conduct would be.
What Senator Levin has done is to call together an inquiry as to
whether we have violated this standard in the past and what the
standard will be for the future. When we receive correspondence from
our troops, who are risking their lives for America today, begging us
to not only stand up for American values but to do it with clarity, we
owe them that responsibility.
When the President announces in South America that we are opposed to
torture while the Vice President is carving out exceptions for torture
in legislation before Congress, there is no clarity.
Senator Levin and his leadership will bring us to clarity and to
honesty, consistent with the American values which our troops are
fighting to defend.
I yield the floor.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, back in January I used a similar amendment
for the first bill I introduced this year. There is a simple reason for
it: It is more clear it is needed now. We have to take this out of
politics. As long as we are involved, we will argue this about
Democrat-Republican. It is not about Democrat-Republican. The world has
changed. It has changed utterly.
The fact is we need a clear-eyed assessment of where we are in this
changed world. This is a lot less about them--that is, the prisoners
and the terrorists. It is much more about us and our troops. I wonder
what happens the first time an American troop is captured anywhere in
this or a future war and turned over to the secret police of that
country, taken to a spot that no one knows, one that is clandestine. I
wonder what happens then.
It is all about where we stand as a nation, about our values. We are
in, as everyone says in this Senate, a battle for the hearts and minds
of 1.2 billion people who share a different religion and maybe a
different point of view. We are hurting, not helping, our troops. We
are hurting, not helping, our cause. We have to have a clear-eyed
resolution of it. The clearest way to do this is through a commission.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. I stand in opposition to the amendment for many reasons
which I have stated on three previous occasions, including early this
morning addressing this amendment.
The distinguished Senator from Delaware talked about looking forward
to our troops. I draw the attention of colleagues to Defense Department
directive No. 3115.09 issued on the 3rd of November of this year in
which they set forth the new regulations and rules with regard to
treatment of prisoners. The directive provides overarching policy to
the Department. It codifies existing departmental studies, including
the requirement for humane treatment of captured or detained persons
during intelligence interrogation and questioning, assigns
responsibilities for interrogation planning and training, and
establishes requirements for reporting violations of the policy
regarding humane treatment.
Section 3443 is a directive addressing some specific abuse detailed
in past investigations. The directive specifically requires the Central
Intelligence Agency interrogation must follow Pentagon guidelines when
questioning military prisoners and that a DOD representative be
present. Further, this release should be followed by the revision of
the Department of the Army Field Manual which is the subject of the
McCain amendment, which I strongly support, on interrogations which
this Senate overwhelmingly directed become the U.S. standard as part of
the amendment proposed by Senator McCain.
Our Government collectively is moving in the right direction to
correct the problems of the past, clearly, such that the whole world
knows how our Nation stands against this type of abuse that occurred in
the past. I strongly urge our colleagues not to start up another
commission in the middle of our war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for
the next year or 18 months begin to go over the material which this
Senate time and time again has addressed in debates, on which our
Committees on Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, and Armed Services have
reviewed this question with some dozen investigations conducted by our

[[Page S12492]]

Government, largely the Department of Defense.
I yield the floor.

Order of Procedure

I have an agreement regarding future votes so Senators can make their
plans. I ask consent following debate on the Levin amendment, which is
now concluded, Senator Reed be recognized to speak for not more than 5
minutes in relation to his amendment; further, that following the
statement, the Senate proceed to a series of stacked votes in relation
to the following amendments: Levin amendment 2430; Byrd amendment 2442,
as modified; and the Reed amendment 2427.
There is no time here for Senator Byrd. I amend this to allow 2
minutes by Senator Byrd and a minute by the Senator from Virginia who
intends to support Senator Byrd.
Further, provided that no second degrees be in order to the
amendments prior to the votes. Finally, there be 2 minutes equally
divided between the votes.
Mr. LEVIN. There is an objection.
We reversed the order, No. 1, and there needs to be time for debate
before one of those amendments. I urge there be a unanimous consent
agreement entered into now that after this vote we proceed immediately
to a vote on the Byrd amendment, and between this vote and the vote on
the Byrd amendment, we work out an agreeable unanimous consent.
Mr. WARNER. We will now proceed to the debate on your amendment.
Mr. LEVIN. The vote on my amendment immediately as we agreed upon,
and then we go immediately to the Byrd amendment. Between the vote here
on my amendment and the Byrd amendment, we work on a unanimous consent
relative to the other amendment.
Mr. WARNER. In no event would we lose the opportunity to have the
votes.
Mr. LEVIN. I hope not, but we have not agreed with that yet. We have
to clear that with our leader.
Mr. REED. There was initially a 5-minute opportunity for me to speak
on my amendment. Will that take place immediately or be postponed until
after the vote on the Levin amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. I will restate the unanimous consent request in the hopes
it can be agreed to.
I ask consent that following debate on the Levin amendment--that
debate has taken place--we go to the Byrd amendment. That would require
2 minutes by the Senator from West Virginia, 1 minute by the Senator
from Virginia, following the vote on the Levin amendment, and then we
proceed to the Reed amendment with 5 minutes on both sides with regard
to debate prior to the vote on the Reed of Rhode Island amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The question is on agreeing to the Levin amendment.
The yeas and nays have been ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chambliss). Are there any other Senators
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 55, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 309 Leg.]

YEAS--43

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Clinton
Conrad
Dayton
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sarbanes
Schumer
Stabenow
Wyden

NAYS--55

Alexander
Allard
Allen
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Chafee
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Roberts
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner

NOT VOTING--2

Corzine
McCain
The amendment (2430) was rejected.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Under the previous order, the Senate turns its attention
to the amendment by the Senator from West Virginia, with 2 minutes of
debate on either side, a 10-minute vote, to be followed by the Reed
amendment, 5 minutes by the Senator from Rhode Island, and 2 or 3
minutes to the Senator from Virginia. Then that is a 10-minute vote.

Amendment No. 2442, as Modified

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from
West Virginia has 2 minutes, and the Senator from Virginia has 1
minute.
The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the Pentagon continues to have massive
management problems. The GAO believes that billions of taxpayer dollars
could be saved each year, if these problems can be straightened out.
This modification to my amendment would require an expedited study on
whether there should be a Deputy Secretary of Defense for Management to
take charge of fixing the Pentagon's accounting problems. I thank the
cosponsors of my modified amendment: Chairman Warner, Senator Ensign,
Senator Akaka, and Senator Lautenberg. I am encouraged by Chairman
Warner's intention to hold further hearings in the Armed Services
Committee once these reports are submitted to Congress.
Fixing the pervasive--I mean pervasive--accounting problems at the
Department of Defense will require more hearings, more oversight, and
more accountability. I took note of this some years ago when Secretary
Rumsfeld first appeared before the Armed Services Committee. He
admitted there was a problem, a very difficult problem. He indicated he
was going to do something about it. I think he needs help.
I look forward to working with my colleagues in the coming months to
set the Pentagon on an accelerated track for reform.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I strongly urge colleagues to support the
Byrd-Warner amendment. I am the principal cosponsor. I commend my
distinguished colleague from West Virginia. The Department of Defense
was established in 1947, over a half century ago. It has served the
Nation well, but there have been many changes. This will give the Armed
Services Committee, the Government Operations Committee, perhaps other
committees of Congress, a chance to take a good look at that Department
and how best, if necessary, to restructure it to meet the future
challenges before us.
I thank the Senator from West Virginia. I urge all Senators to vote
in favor of the amendment.
Mr. BYRD. I thank the Senator from Virginia.
Mr. LEVIN. I ask unanimous consent that I be added as a cosponsor to
the Byrd amendment, and I congratulate him on trying to address a
problem which is endemic. It seems perpetual. I believe it is going to
take all the energy of this body and the other body to force them to
make the kind of changes this could lead to. I congratulate the
Senator.
Mr. BYRD. I thank the distinguished senior Senator from Michigan.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator seek to modify the pending
amendment?
Mr. BYRD. Yes, the modification is at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the modification?
Without objection, the amendment is so modified.
The amendment, as modified, is as follows:
At the end of subtitle A of title IX, add the following:

SEC. __. REPORT ON ESTABLISHMENT OF A DEPUTY SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE FOR MANAGEMENT.

(a) Not later than 15 days after the enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of Defense

[[Page S12493]]

shall select two Federally Funded Research and Development
Centers to conduct independent studies of the feasibility and
advisability of establishing a Deputy Secretary of Defense
for Management. Each study under this section shall be
delivered to the Secretary and the congressional defense
committees not later than March 15, 2006.
(b) Content of Studies.--Each study required by this
section shall address--
(1) the extent to which the establishment of a Deputy
Secretary of Defense for Management would:
(A) improve the management of the Department of Defense;
(B) expedite the process of management reform in the
Department; and
(C) enhance the implementation of business systems
modernization in the Department;
(2) the appropriate relationship of the Deputy Secretary of
Defense for Management to other Department of Defense
officials;
(3) the appropriate term of service for a Deputy Secretary
of Defense for Management; and
(4) the experience of any other federal agencies that have
instituted similar management positions.
(c) For the purposes of this section, a Deputy Secretary of
Defense for Management is an official who--
(1) serves as the Chief Management Officer of the
Department of Defense;
(2) is the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on
matters relating to the management of the Department of
Defense, including defense business activities, to ensure
department-wide capability to carry out the strategic plan of
the Department of Defense in support of national security
objectives; and
(3) takes precedence in the Department of Defense
immediately after the Deputy Secretary of Defense.

Mr. WARNER. My understanding is the yeas and nays have been ordered
on the amendment, as modified.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not been ordered.
Mr. WARNER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The clerk will call the
roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) are necessarily
absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 97, nays 0, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 310 Leg.]

YEAS--97

Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeMint
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden

NOT VOTING--3

Corzine
Lautenberg
McCain
The amendment (No. 2442), as modified, was agreed to.

Amendment No. 2427

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, under the regular order, the Senate will
now proceed with the Reed of Rhode Island vote, with 5 minutes for the
Senator from Rhode Island and 3 to 4 minutes for the Senator from
Virginia.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. There is 10 minutes
equally divided on amendment No. 2427. The Senator from Rhode Island is
recognized.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, this amendment would transfer $50 million
from the Missile Defense Program to the Cooperative Threat Reduction
Program which is designed to secure nuclear materials and nuclear
weapons in countries around the globe, principally the former Soviet
Union.
A few facts I think are in order.
First, with respect to missile defense funding, in the emergency
supplemental appropriations bill for the global war on terror, there
was an additional $50 million appropriated that was not required or
asked for by the Agency. With this money, even with this amendment, the
Agency still would have sufficient money to carry out its programmed
operations for this year. Again, we are just transferring $50 million
from this rather expensive program overall.
Let me briefly recap where we are with respect to the program.
The administration has already requested and Congress has provided
funds for 30 interceptors. There are nine already in the ground. There
are others being constructed. There are 21 that are in some aspect of
construction. Yet in the fiscal year 2006 budget, there is a request
for 10 additional operational interceptors, plus 8 test interceptors,
for 18 in all. Again, these are in addition to the 30 interceptors that
are already planned for.
In addition to that, I must point out that the production rate
capacity for these interceptors is 12 per year. So we are asking for
more missiles than can be produced in 1 year. So there are ample funds
with respect to missile defense. We are asking for more missiles than
can be produced in 1 year--many more missiles than can be produced.
This is a situation that I believe calls for readjustment of funds,
moving it to another compelling need.
One of the compelling needs I urge on my colleagues is to fund the
Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. President Bush and President
Putin met in Bratislava months ago and created a unique opportunity for
additional funding of the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. This
meeting took place after preparation of the budget. So moving $50
million from missile defense to the Cooperative Threat Reduction
Program will allow this country to carry out the pledge President Bush
made to President Putin to more aggressively secure 15 additional
sites.
There is one final point I would like to make. There is often the
argument, well, we shouldn't fund the Cooperative Threat Reduction
Program because there are so many unobligated funds; they can't use the
money. In August of this year, the Missile Defense Program had $844
million in unobligated funds. If the Missile Defense Agency has $844
million in unobligated funds, I don't think anyone would stand up
immediately and say they can't use it, don't need it, et cetera. The
same goes for the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. We have needs
out there. The greatest threat to face this country, in my view, is the
combination of terrorists and nuclear materials. We are going after the
terrorists. We have to also aggressively go after nuclear materials. We
can do this.
This is a very modest transfer of funds for a program that is vitally
important to fulfill the pledge that the President made with President
Putin, and it will not in any way impair the funding available for
missile defense.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, in opposition to the amendment, I bring to
the attention of our colleagues that the CTR Program, of which our
distinguished colleague from Indiana, Mr. Lugar, was the principal
author and sponsor, is fully funded at the budget request of $415.5
million. There still remains an unobligated balance of $107 million
from the 2005 funds. So this category of our important work is fully
funded and moving ahead on its schedule of expenditures.
In contrast, the Missile Defense Program this year took a $1 billion
cut as part of the internal DOD budget deliberations, and missile
defense is also reduced by $5 billion over the period 2006 to 2011. By
adopting the Reed amendment, we would have a fracture in the long-lead
funding, resulting in a production break which, on the assumption it
would be restarted, would cost the taxpayers another $270 billion.
Mr. President, I say to my colleagues, I have a sheet here that shows
how three consecutive times this

[[Page S12494]]

Chamber has voted basically on this amendment and defeated it. A $500
million cut by Senator Levin was defeated in June of 2004 by 56 votes,
followed by a Boxer amendment limiting deployment of ground-based
interceptors, defeated by 57 votes, and a Reed amendment again defeated
by 53 votes--incidentally, all of those having some measure of
bipartisan support. So we are revisiting the same issue.
I strongly recommend to my colleagues that this amendment not be
adopted.
Have the yeas and nays been ordered, Mr. President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not been ordered.
Mr. WARNER. I so request the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The clerk will call the
roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) are necessarily
absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 37, nays 60, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 311 Leg.]

YEAS--37

Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Clinton
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
Lincoln
Lugar
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sarbanes
Schumer
Stabenow
Wyden

NAYS--60

Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeMint
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Kyl
Lieberman
Lott
Martinez
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Roberts
Salazar
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner

NOT VOTING--3

Corzine
Lautenberg
McCain
The amendment (No. 2427) was rejected.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, in concurrence with the ranking member,
the Senator from Oklahoma wishes to lay down an amendment which I am
going to recommend be accepted by a voice vote. I believe that is with
the concurrence of my ranking member.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.

Amendment No. 2432, as Modified

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to modify my
amendment 2432. I send to the desk the modification and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the modification?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is so modified.
The amendment (No. 2432), as modified, is as follows:
At the end of title XII, add the following:

SEC. __. BUILDING THE PARTNERSHIP SECURITY CAPACITY OF
FOREIGN MILITARY AND SECURITY FORCES.

(a) Authority.--The President may authorize building the
capacity of partner nations' military or security forces to
disrupt or destroy terrorist networks, close safe havens, or
participate in or support United States, coalition, or
international military or stability operations.
(b) Types of Partnership Security Capacity Building.--The
partnership security capacity building authorized under
subsection (a) may include the provision of equipment,
supplies, services, training, and funding.
(c) Availability of Funds.--The Secretary of Defense may,
at the request of the Secretary of State, support partnership
security capacity building as authorized under subsection (a)
by transferring funds available to the Department of Defense
to the Department of State. Any funds so transferred shall
remain available until expended. The amount of such
partnership security capacity building support provided by
the Department of Defense under this section may not exceed
$750,000,000 in any fiscal year.
(d) Congressional Notification.--Before building
partnership security capacity under this section, the
Secretaries of State and Defense shall submit to their
congressional oversight committees a notification of the
nations designated by the President with which partnership
security capacity will be built under this section and the
nature and amounts of security capacity building to occur.
Any such notification shall be submitted not less than 15
days before the provision of such partnership security
capacity building.
(e) Complementary Authority.--The authority to support
partnership security capacity building under this section is
in addition to any other authority of the Department of
Defense to provide assistance to a foreign country.
(f) Applicable Law.--The authorities and limitations in the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Foreign Operations,
Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act,
2006 shall be applicable to assistance provided and funds
transferred under the authority of this section.
(g) Military and Security Forces Defined.--In this section,
the term ``military and security forces'' includes armies,
guard, border security, civil defense, infrastructure
protection, and police forces.
(h) Expiration.--The authority in this section shall expire
on September 30, 2007.

SEC. __. SECURITY AND STABILIZATION ASSISTANCE.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, upon a request from the Secretary of State, with the
agreement of the Secretary of Defense and upon a
determination by the President that an unforeseen emergency
exists that requires immediate reconstruction, security, or
stabilization assistance to a foreign country for the purpose
of restoring or maintaining peace and security in that
country, and that the provision of such assistance is in the
national security interests of the United States, the
Secretary of Defense may authorize the use or transfer of
defense articles, services, training or other support,
including support acquired by contract or otherwise, to
provide such assistance.
(b) Availability of Funds.--Subject to subsection (a), the
Secretary of Defense may transfer funds available to the
Department of Defense to the Department of State or to any
other Federal agency to carry out the purposes of this
section, and funds so transferred shall remain available
until expended.
(c) Limitation.--The aggregate value of assistance provided
or funds transferred under the authority of this section may
not exceed $200,000,000.
(d) Complementary Authority.--The authority to provide
assistance under this section is in addition to any other
authority of the Department of Defense to provide assistance
to a foreign country.
(e) Notification Requirements.--Before the exercise of the
authority in this section, the President shall notify
Congress of the exercise of such authority in accordance with
the procedures set forth in section 652 of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2411).
(f) Applicable Law.--(1) The authorities and limitations in
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Foreign
Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, 2006 shall be applicable to assistance
provided and funds transferred under the authority of this
section.
(2) Any authority available to the President to waive a
provision of law referred to in paragraph (1) may be
exercised by the President in a written document executed
pursuant to subsection (a).
(g) Expiration.--The authority in this section shall expire
on September 30, 2007.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, we have spent quite a bit of time talking
about this amendment. This does amend sections 1201 and 1204 of title
XII, to provide our Government with new authorities to fight the global
war on terror. We have initially had some concerns, both from the other
side and from a couple of the other committees. We have worked out the
compromise, and that is what this modification is.
In an effort to accommodate my colleagues on the Foreign Relations
Committee and my colleagues across the aisle, we have made some
modifications to our original amendment. These modifications provide a
sunset for this authority on September 30, 2007. They provide for some
limitation of DOD authority in section 1201, subject to existing law in
the foreign relations and foreign appropriations act.
With these modifications, I think that it is going to be a great help
to the administration.
I ask unanimous consent that Senator Lugar be added as a cosponsor of
my amendment.

[[Page S12495]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to thank Senator Inhofe for the
excellent work he has done on this amendment and his generous efforts
to accommodate my previous concerns. In my view, his original amendment
may have had some unintended foreign policy consequences. In
particular, it might have produced some far-reaching changes to the way
that our country makes foreign assistance decisions.
The amendment as now written leaves the authority for deciding which
countries, and when, how, and why foreign assistance should be
provided, in the hands of the Secretary of State. The amendment does
not provide statutory authority to the Secretary of Defense to
establish a new foreign aid program outside the purview of the
Secretary of State. It does authorize the Secretary of Defense to
provide funding to the State Department for a new train and equip
foreign assistance program, as well as to address overseas emergencies
where the two Departments need to join forces to meet the crisis
successfully.
I support the $750 million train and equip program and the $200
million emergency funding. Both programs can be successfully carried
out under the Secretary of State's existing authorities. The Secretary
of State should retain full authority over decisions as to which
countries should receive assistance, the timing of its provision, and
the way in which it should be provided. The Department of Defense
should continue implementing train and equip programs under the purview
of the Secretary of State.
I understand that there have been frustrations with the current
situation. The Defense Department has apparently found State Department
oversight of these kinds of programs cumbersome and slow. These
obstacles need to be overcome. State Department procedures should be
streamlined and the two Departments should develop plans to push these
important programs forward efficiently and quickly.
But all foreign assistance programs need to take place within a
foreign policy context, with consideration of the traditional
concerns--the recipient country's treatment of its own people,
potential reactions from neighboring states in the region, and the
overall bilateral relationship with the recipient country, including
its assistance in the war against terrorism.
It is the Secretary of State's job to weigh such foreign policy
issues and make recommendations to the President that strike the right
balance for American interests. The amendment as now written meets the
concerns I had and I would request that I be listed as a co-sponsor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I strongly recommend to colleagues the
acceptance of this amendment. It has been carefully thought through. It
is a policy that has been joined in jointly by the Secretaries of State
and Defense. It is the expectation that to the extent we are successful
with these programs, it likely will go to the deployment of our troops
abroad in various situations we deem necessary to protect our own
national interests.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. First, I thank the Senator from Oklahoma for his
amendment, for working to modify that amendment. We think it is a
prudent and useful amendment and that it addresses a very significant
issue which is how do we obtain more support from other countries to be
effective in our effort against terrorism. So we want to thank the
Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. I thank the ranking member and the chairman for those
comments.
Mr. WARNER. I urge the adoption of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 2432), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. Subject to the concurrence of the ranking member, I ask
the Senate to turn its attention to the Senator from Nevada, who has an
amendment which I personally strongly endorse and so recommend to other
colleagues. It could well be the subject of a rollcall vote sometime
tomorrow. I thank him for his consideration of laying down the
amendment tonight such that colleagues have the time within which to
study it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.

Amendment No. 2443

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Ensign] proposes an amendment
numbered 2443.

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading
of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To restate United States policy on the use of riot control
agents by members of the Armed Forces, and for other purposes)

On page 286, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following:

SEC. 1073. RIOT CONTROL AGENTS.

(a) Restatement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United
States that riot control agents are not chemical weapons and
that the president may authorize their use as legitimate,
legal, and non-lethal alternatives to the use of force that,
as provided in Executive Order 11850 (40 Fed. Reg. 16187) and
consistent with the resolution of ratification of the
Chemical Weapons convention, may be employed by members of
the Armed Forces in war in defensive military modes to save
lives, including the illustrative purposes cited in Executive
Order 11850.
(b) Report Required.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to
Congress a report on the use of riot control agents by
members of the Armed Forces.
(2) Content.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) a description of all regulations, doctrines, training
materials, and any other information related to the use of
riot control agents by members of the Armed Forces;
(B) a description of the doctrinal publications, training,
and other resources provided or available to members of the
Armed Forces on an annual basis with regard to the tactical
employment of riot control agents;
(C) a description of how the material described in
subparagraphs (A) and (B) is consistent with United States
policy on the use of riot control agents;
(D) a description of the availability of riot control
agents, and the means to employ them, to members of the Armed
Forces deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan;
(E) a description of the frequency of use of riot control
agents since January 1, 1992, and a summary of views held by
military commanders about the utility of the employing riot
control agents by members of the Armed Forces;
(F) a general description of steps taken or to be taken by
the Department of Defense to clarify the circumstances under
which riot control agents may be used by members of the Armed
Forces; and
(G) an assessment of the legality of Executive Order 11850,
including an explanation why Executive Order 11850 remains
valid under United States law.
(3) Form.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified
annex.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Chemical weapons convention.--The term ``Chemical
Weapons Convention'' means the Convention on the Prohibitions
of Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical
Weapons and on Their Destruction, with annexes, done at
Paris, January 13, 1993, and entered into force April 29,
1997 (T. Doc. 103-21).
(2) Resolution of ratification of the chemical weapons
convention.--The term ``resolution of ratification of the
Chemical Weapons Convention'' means S. Res. 75, 105th
Congress, agreed to April 24, 1997, advising and consenting
to the ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, before I make my full statement, I want my
colleagues to know that the amendment that I have sent to the desk is
something that we have been working with the administration on for
almost 8 months now. I believe we have come up with a compromise that
most people in the administration support. It is a very important
amendment as far as the foreign policy and the military policy of our
country is concerned.
This amendment will allow our soldiers and marines to more
effectively carry out their mission on the ground in Iraq and
Afghanistan, while saving both military and civilian lives.

[[Page S12496]]

Riot control agents, more commonly referred to as tear gas, can be a
more effective alternative to the use of lethal weapons in combat. It
is shocking and unacceptable that under current policy our military is
banned from using tear gas on the battlefield. Let me restate that.
Under current policy, our military is banned from using tear gas on the
battlefield.
Police officers in any city in America can use tear gas to avoid the
loss of life, but our men and women carrying out the global war on
terror cannot. This is not right and it must change.
This restriction on the use of tear gas is the direct result of the
bureaucracy's faulty interpretation of the 1997 Chemical Weapons
Convention, an interpretation made by arms control advocates in
Brussels and The Hague and regrettably at our own State Department.
Under this faulty interpretation, tear gas is considered a chemical
weapon. In those isolated cases where it can be used, it requires
Presidential authorization. This is wrong. The use of riot control
agents in combat for defensive purposes to save lives is wholly
consistent with the U.S. obligations under the laws of land warfare and
of our treaty obligations.
Retaining this capability was so important to our military leaders
that the Senate included a condition in the 1997 Chemical Weapons
Convention that preserved our right to use tear gas in conflict. Many
Members today were in the Senate when this matter was debated. All
concurred with the arguments put forward by then-chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell, that giving up this capability is not
even worth getting the treaty. Here is what he said:

Nonlethal riot control agents provide a morally correct
option to achieve defensive military objectives without
having to resort to the unnecessary loss of innocent lives.
Sacrificing such an option would be an unacceptable price to
pay for a CW [chemical weapons] treaty.

Senators Lugar, Biden, and others spoke eloquently on this point in a
bipartisan manner. Senators knew then, and many do know now, that the
use of nonlethal weapons, such as tear gas, is demonstrated routinely
to be effective by law enforcement agencies all over the world. It is a
moral alternative to the use of lethal force.
In towns and streets throughout Iraq and Afghanistan, marines and
soldiers are going house to house in an attempt to flush out hiding
terrorists. In carrying out this vital mission, structures are damaged
and innocent people are killed. Some of that death and destruction
could be avoided if we allowed our military to use tear gas instead of
bullets. In other cases, we know of situations where the insurgents
have mixed in with innocent civilians, using them as human shields,
forcing our fighting men and women to either retreat or fire into a
crowd, which is a choice they should not have to make.
I am reminded of a New York Times article, dated June 28 of this
year. It chronicled marines clearing a town in Iraq. The article
referenced one particular incident where three civilians, a mother and
two children, were killed as marines battled an insurgent who had taken
the family hostage. Perhaps the use of tear gas would have saved their
lives; perhaps not. We will never know that. What we do know is that
those marines were not provided every tool with which to carry out this
global war on terrorism.
Certainly our image has been tarnished as a nation, and our public
diplomacy has suffered every time we use lethal force to clear a room,
empty a building or take other actions that wound or kill innocent
people. This is unconscionable when nonlethal alternatives are
available. Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in testimony before the House
Armed Services Committee, described the restriction on the use of riot
control agents as a straitjacket. Here is what he said:

We are doing our best to live within the straitjacket that
has been imposed on us on this subject. We are trying to find
ways that non-lethal agents could be used within the law.

He went on to point out that our soldiers and marines are authorized
to shoot and to kill people in situations where tear gas is prohibited.
This is a lethal lapse in legal judgment. It seems as if some would put
the concerns of the global arms control theocracy above the lives of
our military personnel. If anybody is watching or listening and they
are scratching their head wondering where is the common sense, that is
exactly what I thought and what led me to offer this amendment.
In fact, our military has been so spooked about this issue they don't
know how to train themselves on Riot Control Agent use on the
battlefield. The Tactical Employment of Nonlethal Weapons training
manual, dated January 2003, is applicable to all military branches. It
specifically reminds all that ``. . . using Riot Control Agents in an
armed conflict requires Presidential approval.''
Additionally, the Department of Defense's Joint Doctrine
Encyclopedia, dated July 1997, advises that ``Commanders must consider
the international ramifications . . . before recommending the use of
herbicides or Riot Control Agents.''
Now, there are those who erroneously claim my amendment seeks to
change long standing policy on the use of riot control agents in combat
and runs counter to U.S. treaty commitments.
In fact, my amendment seeks merely to reaffirm the policy of the
United States since 1975, and the Senate's view on this issue from
1997, by stating that it is the policy of the United States that Riot
Control Agents are not chemical weapons but are legitimate, legal, and
non-lethal alternatives to the use of lethal force. It adds that these
tools may be employed by members of the Armed Forces in defensive
military modes to save lives.
My amendment further requires the President to submit a one-time
report to Congress on the availability and use of Riot Control Agents
by our fighting men and women. It includes reporting language that
prods the State Department to speak about and advocate the U.S. view on
this important life-saving tool in multilateral forums. Finally, my
amendment presses the Pentagon to develop this capability, which has
languished in our training regimens, our doctrine, and our tactics
through lack of use.
I urge all of my colleagues to reaffirm this policy, to reaffirm what
the Senate said in 1997, and to send a strong message to our men and
women in uniform that the Senate puts their welfare above misguided
interpretations of arcane international agreements, that the Senate
wants to give them a full range of tools to help them accomplish their
mission in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that we want to do so in a manner
that doesn't jeopardize their lives or those of innocent civilians.
I reserve the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I want very much to support my colleague
from Nevada, but I would like to have some clarification. I tried to
listen very carefully to what the Senator said. I want to see if my
interpretation of the amendment is correct.
I begin by saying the question of whether and how the use of riot
control agents would be limited by the Chemical Weapons Convention
became a major issue when the treaty was considered by the Senate for
ratification in 1997. The resolution of ratification for the CWC
contains a condition requiring the President to certify that the United
States is not restricted by the CWC in its use of riot control agents
in certain specified circumstances. The condition also required the
President not to eliminate or alter Executive Order 11850--which I have
before me; it was signed by President Ford on April 8, 1975--which
prohibits the use of riot control agents in war except in defensive
military modes to save lives.
Now, I turn to the Executive Order 11850 and specifically ask the
Senator, is his interpretation of his amendment consistent with the
objectives as stated in Executive Order 11850, signed by President Ford
April 8, 1975?
Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Virginia that he
has stated it exactly right. We are trying to restate the position that
the Senate took in 1997, in the Executive Order 11850. It has been the
policy of the United States, based on this Executive order, based on
what the Senate did with the Chemical Weapons Treaty in 1997. But the
problem is there have been lawyers down at the State Department who
have interpreted it differently and therefore have put the military in
a very difficult position,

[[Page S12497]]

that if they used it consistent with former U.S. policy, they could be
accused of violating the Chemical Weapons Treaty and be subject to
prosecution as individual soldiers.
Mr. WARNER. I thank my colleague. If I could further propound a
clarification, reading from the preamble to 11850, the Executive order,
it says:

The United States renounces, as a matter of national
policy, first use of herbicides in war except use, under
regulations applicable to their domestic use, for control of
vegetation within U.S. bases and installations or around
their immediate defensive perimeters, and first use of riot
control agents in war except in defensive military modes to
save lives such as--

and these are the examples--

(a) Use of riot control agents in riot control situations
in areas under direct and distinct U.S. military control, to
include controlling rioting prisoners of war.
(b) Use of riot control agents in situations in which
civilians are used to mask or screen attacks and civilian
casualties can be reduced or avoided.
(c) Use of riot control agents in rescue missions in
remotely isolated areas, of downed aircrews and passengers,
and escaping prisoners.
(d) Use of riot control agents in rear echelon areas
outside the zone of immediate combat to protect convoys from
civil disturbances, terrorists and paramilitary
organizations.

Regarding the ground operations as we are reading about daily in the
Anbar Province, in Fallujah--I visited up in Fallujah several weeks
ago. How would they, under your amendment, be deployed, assuming this
amendment is adopted, in a manner differently than what they are doing
today?
Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I would say to the chairman of the Senate
Armed Services Committee, frankly, they are not being used today by our
military and that is the problem. Therein lies the problem.
We just saw President Bush down in the Summit of the Americas, and
they had riots down there and they used these very agents to control
the crowds. Even when they had problems at Abu Ghraib prison, these
riot control agents were not allowed to be used because people were
afraid to use them.
Can you imagine, if you are a first lieutenant or you are a sergeant
and you are out there and you know that these things have been allowed
in the past, but now the State Department and the military are putting
stuff out and there are questions, you are not going to use the thing
that may be the most effective at saving lives of the personnel around
you, as well as the civilians, because you could be accused potentially
of violating the Chemical Weapons Treaty. We are handcuffing the very
personnel that this Senate is supposed to be trying to protect.
That is why I believe, as the Senator has correctly pointed out, that
this amendment is consistent with the very examples that you pointed
out that are in the Executive Order No. 11850 that was signed back in
1975.
Mr. WARNER. I want to make clear I presume the amendment of the
Senator clarifies some ambiguity, which ambiguity acts as a deterrent
on our forces today from using it. Once the ambiguities are set aside,
then we can proceed to utilize these agents, provided it is consistent
with the Executive Order 11850? Have I correctly stated that?

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I think what the Senator has stated is
very concise. That is exactly the intent of the amendment.
Mr. WARNER. I thank my distinguished colleague. We will have,
perhaps, opportunity in the morning to further debate this amendment. I
do want to posture myself so I can support your amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I wish to clarify a question the chairman
of the committee asked. I think I heard the answer, but I was not 100
percent sure.
Is the amendment intended to state the current policy of the United
States? When it says on line 1 of page 1, ``It is the policy of the
United States,'' is that intended to reflect the current policy of the
United States?
Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I would say to the Senator from Michigan
that the current policy is exactly what our amendment is trying to
reinforce. It is the interpretation of that current policy that is
happening down at the State Department that we are trying to clarify.
We think they are misinterpreting the current policy which has existed
for some time now in the United States. We now need to clarify it so
that our warriors know exactly that they can use riot control agents
under specific uses, as the examples that the chairman of the Committee
on Armed Services has pointed out.
Mr. LEVIN. Is it the intention of the amendment, then, to state the
policy of the United States as reflected in Executive Order 11850?
Mr. ENSIGN. That is correct, Mr. President.
Mr. LEVIN. So there is no effort, no intent in the statement of
policy on line 4 on page 1 through line 6 on page 2, to in any way
modify the policy set forth in that Executive Order 11850?
Mr. ENSIGN. The Senator is correct.
Mr. LEVIN. So this restatement of policy is not intended to modify
this in any way. But as I understand it, what the good Senator from
Nevada is saying is that some people in the Government have interpreted
Executive Order 11850 differently from the way the policy is stated in
section 1073?
Mr. ENSIGN. I think the policy is very clear in this Executive order,
as well as what the Senate stated. But it appears that certain people
down at the State Department have interpreted it a different way and
believe there is a higher threshold that our warriors must come under
before they can use these riot control agents out on the battlefield;
that they must seek Presidential authority. That is what we are trying
to clarify here, is to get back to what this Executive order said, as
well as what the Senate stated in 1997.
Mr. LEVIN. I thank my friend from Nevada.
Mr. President, we will reserve the time. We are not necessarily at
all in opposition, but we would like to review this overnight. We thank
the Senator from Nevada.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, subject to the order by the majority and
Democratic leader as to the sequence of events tomorrow, the Ensign
amendment would remain the pending business at such time as the
leadership directs the Senate return to this bill; am I correct in
that?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct, the Ensign amendment is
pending.
Mr. WARNER. At this time, I ask unanimous consent the Ensign
amendment be laid aside for the purpose of the distinguished Senator
from Michigan and I clearing some amendments.
Mr. LEVIN. I have no objection.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendments Nos. 1334, as modified; 1341, as modified; 1355, 1356, 1358,
as modified; 1362, as modified; 1367, 1387, 1388, as modified; 1404, as
modified; 1407, 1424, 1428, as modified; 1434, 1445, 1448, as modified;
1451, as modified; 1453, as modified; 1463, as modified; 1473, 1478,
1481, 1495, 1502, 1514, as modified; 1515, as modified; 1519, as
modified; 1526, as modified; 1548, as modified; 1555, as modified;
1563, as modified; 1568, 1574, as modified; 1578, as modified; 2446,
2447, 2448, 2449, 2450, 2451, 2452, 2453, 2454, 2455, 2456, 2457, 2458,
2459, 2460, 2461, 2462, 2463, 2464, 2465, 2466, 2467, 2468, 2469, 2470,
2471, en bloc.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, there are four packages of amendments at
the desk being held subject to action by the Senate. I ask the Senate
consider those amendments en bloc, the amendments be agreed to, the
motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and I ask any statements
relating to these individual amendments be printed in the Record.
Mr. LEVIN. Is it the intention that the packages be adopted one
package at time?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. All four. And the Chair has acted.
Mr. LEVIN. I am sure we can work it out whether the action has been
taken. Have not the four packages been acted upon and approved en bloc?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the Senator from Michigan is reserving the
right to object, he has that ability.
Mr. LEVIN. I am trying to understand what the unanimous consent
request was. Was it the amendments be considered en bloc and agreed to
en bloc?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is the understanding.
Mr. LEVIN. No objection.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendments were agreed to en bloc, as follows:

[[Page S12498]]

AMENDMENT NO. 1334, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To provide for outreach to members of the Armed Forces and
their dependents on the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act)

At the end of subtitle E of title VI, add the following:

SEC. 653. OUTREACH TO MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND THEIR
DEPENDENTS ON THE SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF
ACT.

(a) Outreach to Members of the Armed Forces.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary concerned shall provide to
each member of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary pertinent information on the rights and protections
available to servicemembers and their dependents under the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 501 et seq.).
(2) Time of provision.--Information shall be provided to a
member of the Armed Forces under paragraph (1) at times as
follows:
(A) During initial orientation training.
(B) In the case of a member of a reserve component of the
Armed Forces, during initial orientation training and when
the member is mobilized or otherwise individually called or
ordered to active duty for a period of more than one year.
(C) At such other times as the Secretary concerned
considers appropriate.
(b) Outreach to Dependents.--The Secretary concerned may
provide to the adult dependents of members of the Armed
Forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary pertinent
information on the rights and protections available to
servicemembers and their dependents under the Servicemembers
Civil Relief Act.
(c) Definitions.--In this section, the terms ``dependent''
and ``Secretary concerned'' have the meanings given such
terms in section 101 of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act
(50 U.S.C. App. 511).

AMENDMENT NO. 1341, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To require a report on the use of ground source heat pumps at
Department of Defense facilities)

On page 371, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following:

SEC. 2887. REPORT ON USE OF GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMPS AT
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FACILITIES.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on the use of ground source heat pumps at Department of
Defense facilities.
(b) Content.--The report required under subsection (a)
shall include--
(1) a description of the types of Department of Defense
facilities that use ground source heat pumps;
(2) an assessment of the applicability and cost-
effectiveness of the use of ground source heat pumps at
Department of Defense facilities in different geographic
regions of the United States;
(3) a description of the relative applicability of ground
source heat pumps for purposes of new construction at, and
retrofitting of, Department of Defense facilities; and
(4) recommendations for facilitating and encouraging the
increased use of ground source heat pumps at Department of
Defense facilities.

AMENDMENT NO. 1335

(Purpose: To authorize a land conveyance of Air Force property, La
Junta, Colorado)

On page 359, between lines 3 and 4, insert the following:

SEC. 2862. LAND CONVEYANCE, AIR FORCE PROPERTY, LA JUNTA,
COLORADO.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Air Force
may convey, without consideration, to the City of La Junta,
Colorado (in this section referred to as the ``City''), all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a
parcel of real property, including improvements thereon,
consisting of approximately 8 acres located at the USA Bomb
Plot in the La Junta Industrial Park for the purpose of
training local law enforcement officers.
(b) Payment of Costs of Conveyance.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall require the City to
cover costs to be incurred by the Secretary after the date of
enactment of the Act, or to reimburse the Secretary for costs
incurred by the Secretary after that date, to carry out the
conveyance under subsection (a), including any survey costs,
costs related to environmental assessments, studies,
analyses, or other documentation, and other administrative
costs related to the conveyance. If amounts are collected
from the City in advance of the Secretary incurring the
actual costs, and the amount collected exceeds the costs
actually incurred by the Secretary to carry out the
conveyance, the Secretary shall refund the excess amount to
the City.
(2) Treatment of amounts received.--Amounts received as
reimbursement under paragraph (1) shall be credited to the
fund or account that was used to cover the costs incurred by
the Secretary in carrying out the conveyance. Amounts so
credited shall be merged with amounts in such fund or
account, and shall be available for the same purposes, and
subject to the same conditions and limitations, as amounts in
such fund or account.
(c) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the property to be conveyed under subsection
(a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the
Secretary.
(d) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United
States.

AMENDMENT NO. 1356

(Purpose: To authorize the United States Air Force Institute of
Technology to receive faculty research grants for scientific, literary,
and educational purposes)

At the end of subtitle C of title IX, add the following:

SEC. 924. AUTHORITY FOR UNITED STATES AIR FORCE INSTITUTE OF
TECHNOLOGY TO RECEIVE FACULTY RESEARCH GRANTS
FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES.

Section 9314 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Acceptance of Research Grants.--(1) The Secretary of
the Air Force may authorize the Commandant of the United
States Air Force Institute of Technology to accept qualifying
research grants. Any such grant may only be accepted if the
work under the grant is to be carried out by a professor or
instructor of the Institute for a scientific, literary, or
educational purpose.
``(2) For purposes of this subsection, a qualifying
research grant is a grant that is awarded on a competitive
basis by an entity referred to in paragraph (3) for a
research project with a scientific, literary, or educational
purpose.
``(3) An entity referred to in this paragraph is a
corporation, fund, foundation, educational institution, or
similar entity that is organized and operated primarily for
scientific, literary, or educational purposes.
``(4) The Secretary shall establish an account for the
administration of funds received as qualifying research
grants under this subsection. Funds in the account with
respect to a grant shall be used in accordance with the terms
and condition of the grant and subject to applicable
provisions of the regulations prescribed under paragraph (6).
``(5) Subject to such limitations as may be provided in
appropriations Acts, appropriations available for the United
States Air Force Institute of Technology may be used to pay
expenses incurred by the Institute in applying for, and
otherwise pursuing, the award of qualifying research grants.
``(6) The Secretary of the Air Force shall prescribe
regulations for purposes of the administration of this
subsection.''.

AMENDMENT NO. 1358, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To require additional recommendations in the report on the
delivery of health care benefits through the military health care
system)

On page 178, strike lines 20 through 24 and insert the
following:
(4) Department of Defense participation in the Medicare
Advantage Program, formerly Medicareplus Choice;
(5) the use of flexible spending accounts and health
savings accounts for military retirees under the age of 65;
(6) incentives for eligible beneficiaries of the military
health care system to retain private employer-provided health
care insurance;
(7) means of improving integrated systems of disease
management, including chronic illness management;
(8) means of improving the safety and efficiency of
pharmacy benefits management;
(9) the management of enrollment options for categories of
eligible beneficiaries in the military health care system;
(10) reform of the provider payment system, including the
potential for use of a pay-for-performance system in order to
reward quality and efficiency in the TRICARE system;
(11) means of improving efficiency in the administration of
the TRICARE program, to include the reduction of headquarters
and redundant management layers, and maximizing efficiency in
the claims processing system;
(12) other improvements in the efficiency of the military
health care system; and
(13) any other matters the Secretary considers appropriate
to improve the efficiency and quality of military health care
benefits.

AMENDMENT NO. 1362, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To require a report on the Department of Defense Composite
Health Care System II)

At the end of subtitle B of title VII, add the following:

SEC. 718. REPORT ON THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMPOSITE
HEALTH CARE SYSTEM II.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than six months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a
report on the Department of Defense Composite Health Care
System II (CHCS II).
(b) Report Elements.--The report under subsection (a) shall
include the following:
(1) A chronology and description of previous efforts
undertaken to develop an electronic medical records system
capable of maintaining a two-way exchange of data between the
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
(2) The plans as of the date of the report, including any
projected commencement dates, for the implementation of the
Composite Health Care System II.

[[Page S12499]]

(3) A statement of the amounts obligated and expended as of
the date of the report on the development of a system for the
two-way exchange of data between the Department of Defense
and the Department of Veterans Affairs, including the
Composite Health Care System II.
(4) An estimate of the amounts that will be required for
the completion of the Composite Health Care System II.
(5) A description of the software and hardware being
considered as of the date of the report for use in the
Composite Health Care System II.
(6) A description of the management structure used in the
development of the Composite Health Care System II.
(7) A description of the accountability measures utilized
during the development of the Composite Health Care System II
in order to evaluate progress made in the development of that
System.
(8) The schedule for the remaining development of the
Composite Health Care System II.
(c) Appropriate Committees of Congress Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate committees of Congress''
means--
(1) the Committees on Armed Services, Appropriations,
Veterans' Affairs, and Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
of the Senate; and
(2) the Committees on Armed Services, Appropriations,
Veterans' Affairs, and Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives.

amendment no. 1367

(Purpose: To make permanent the authority to provide travel and
transportation allowances for dependents to visit hospitalized members
injured in combat operation or combat zone with funding provided out of
existing funds through a reduction in nonessential civilian travel)

(a) Authority To Continue Allowance.--Effective as of
September 30, 2005, section 1026 of division A of the
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the
Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005 (Public Law
109-13), is amended by striking subsections (d) and (e).
(b) Codification of Reporting Requirement.--Section 411h of
title 37, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(e) If the amount of travel and transportation allowances
provided in a fiscal year under clause (ii) of subsection
(a)(2)(B) exceeds $20,000,000, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to Congress a report specifying the total amount of
travel and transportation allowances provided under such
clause in such fiscal year.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (a)(2)(B)(ii) of such
section, as added by section 1026 of division A of the
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the
Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005 (Public Law
109-13), is amended by striking ``under section 1967(c)(1)(A)
of title 38''.
(d) Funding.--Funding shall be provided out of existing
funds.

AMENDMENT NO. 1387

(Purpose: To make the Savannah River National Laboratory eligible for
laboratory directed research and development funding)

On page 378, between lines 10 and 11, insert the following:

SEC. 31___. SAVANNAH RIVER NATIONAL LABORATORY.

The Savannah River National Laboratory shall be a
participating laboratory in the Department of Energy
laboratory directed research and development program.

AMENDMENT NO. 1388, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To provide for the establishment of the USS Oklahoma
Memorial)

On page 286, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following:

SEC. 10___. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE USS OKLAHOMA MEMORIAL.

(a) Site and Funding for Memorial.--Not later than 6 months
after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary of
the Navy, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior
shall identify an appropriate site on Ford Island for a
memorial for the USS Oklahoma consistent with the ``Pearl
Harbor Naval Complex Design Guidelines and Evaluation
Criteria for Memorials, April 2005''. The USS Oklahoma
Foundation shall be solely responsible for raising the funds
necessary to design and erect a dignified and suitable
memorial to the naval personnel serving aborad the USS
Oklahoma when it was attacked on December 7, 1941.
(b) Administration and Maintenance of Memorial.--After the
site has been selected, the Secretary of the Interior shall
administer and maintain the site as part of the USS Arizona
Memorial, a unit of the National Park System, in accordance
with the laws and regulations applicable to land administered
by the National Park Service and any Memorandum of
Understanding between the Secretary of the Navy and the
Secretary of the Interior. The Secretary of the Navy shall
continue to have jurisdiction over the land selected as the
site.
(c) Future Memorials.--Any future memorials for U.S. Naval
Vessels that were attacked at Pearl Harbor on December 7,
1941, shall be consistent with the ``Pearl Harbor Naval
Complex Design Guidelines and Evaluation Criteria for
Memorials, April 2005''.
(d) Master Plan.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, shall submit
to the Committee on Armed Services and Committee on Resources
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Armed
Services and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of
the Senate a master plan for operation and management of the
site presently encompassing the visitors center for the USS
Arizona Memorial, the area commonly known as the ``Halawa
Landing'', and any adjacent properties.

AMENDMENT NO. 1404, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To require a pilot program on enhanced quality of life for
members of the Army Reserve and their families)

At the end of subtitle C of title V, add the following:

SEC. 538. PILOT PROGRAM ON ENHANCED QUALITY OF LIFE FOR
MEMBERS OF THE ARMY RESERVE AND THEIR FAMILIES.

(a) Pilot Program Required.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Army shall carry out
a pilot program to assess the feasability and advisability of
utilizing a coalition of military and civilian community
personnel at military installations in order to enhance the
quality of life for members of the Army Reserve who serve at
such installations and their families.
(2) Locations.--The Secretary shall carry out the pilot
program at a military installation selected by the Secretary
for purposes of the pilot program in two States.
(b) Participating Personnel.--A coalition of personnel
under the pilot program shall consist of--
(1) such command personnel at the installation concerned as
the commander of such installation considers appropriate;
(2) such other military personnel at such installation as
the commander of such installation considers appropriate; and
(3) appropriate members of the civilian community of
installation, such as clinicians and teachers, who volunteer
for participation in the coalition.
(c) Objectives.--
(1) Principle objective.--The principle objective of the
pilot program shall be to enhance the quality of life for
members of the Army Reserve and their families in order to
enhance the mission readiness of such members, to facilitate
the transition of such members to and from deployment, and to
enhance the retention of such members.
(2) Objectives relating to deployment.--In seeking to
achieve the principle objective under paragraph (1) with
respect to the deployment of members of the Army Reserve,
each coalition under the pilot program shall seek to assist
members of the Army Reserve and their families in--
(A) successfully coping with the absence of such members
from their families during deployment; and
(B) successfully addressing other difficulties associated
with extended deployments, including difficulties of members
on deployment and difficulties of family members at home.
(3) Methods to achieve objectives.--The methods selected by
each coalition under the pilot program to achieve the
objectives specified in this subsection shall include methods
as follows:
(A) Methods that promote a balance of work and family
responsibilities through a principle-centered approach to
such matters.
(B) Methods that promote the establishment of appropriate
priorities for family matters, such as the allocation of time
and attention to finances, within the context of meeting
military responsibilities.
(C) Methods that promote the development of meaningful
family relationships.
(D) Methods that promote the development of parenting
skills intended to raise emotionally healthy and empowered
children.
(d) Report.--Not later than April 1, 2007, the Secretary
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on the pilot program carried out under this section. The
report shall include--
(1) a description of the pilot program;
(2) an assessment of the benefits of utilizing a coalition
of military and civilian community personnel on military
installations in order to enhance the quality of life for
members of the Army Reserve and their families; and
(3) such recommendations for legislative or administrative
action as the Secretary considers appropriate in light of the
pilot program.
(e) Funding.--
(1) In general.--The amount authorized to be appropriated
by section 301(6) for operation and maintenance for the Army
Reserve is hereby increased by $160,000, with the amount of
the increase to be available to carry out the pilot program
required by this section.
(2) Offset.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by
section 201(2) for research, development, test, and
evaluation for the Navy and available for Ship Self Defense
(Detect and Control) (PE #0604755N) is hereby reduced by
$160,000, with the amount of the reduction to be allocated to
amounts for Autonomous Unmanned Surface Vessel.

AMENDMENT NO. 1407

(Purpose: To strike the limitation on payment of facilities charges
assessed by the Department of State)

Strike section 1008.

[[Page S12500]]

AMENDMENT NO. 1424

(Purpose: Relating to the basic allowance for housing for members of
the reserves)

At the end of subtitle A of title VI, add the following:

SEC. 605. BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING FOR RESERVE MEMBERS.

(a) Equal Treatment of Reserve Members.--Subsection (g) of
section 403 of title 37, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4);
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph (3):
``(3) The rate of basic allowance for housing to be paid to
the following members of a reserve component shall be equal
to the rate in effect for similarly situated members of a
regular component of the uniformed services:
``(A) A member who is called or ordered to active duty for
a period of more than 30 days.
``(B) A member who is called or ordered to active duty for
a period of 30 days or less in support of a contingency
operation.''; and
(3) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated, by striking
``less than 140 days'' and inserting ``30 days or less''.
(b) Conforming Amendment Regarding Members Without
Dependents.--Paragraph (1) of such subsection is amended by
inserting ``or for a period of more than 30 days'' after ``in
support of a contingency operation'' both places it appears.

AMENDMENT NO. 1428, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To strengthen civil-military relationships by permitting
State and local governments to enter into lease purchase agreements
with the United States Armed Forces)

At the end of subtitle B of title XXVIII of division B, add
the following:

SEC. 2823. EXPANDED AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO LEASE-PURCHASE
AGREEMENTS.

Section 2812 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1)--
(A) by striking ``a private contractor'' and inserting ``an
eligible entity''; and
(B) by striking ``the contractor'' and inserting ``the
eligible entity'';
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``(c)(1)'' and inserting ``(c)'';
(B) by striking paragraph (2); and
(C) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as
paragraphs (1) and (2); and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) In this section, the term `eligible entity' means any
private person, corporation, firm, partnership, company, or
State or local government.''.

AMENDMENT NO. 1434, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To make available, with an offset, an additional $20,300,000
for aircraft procurement for the Army to increase the number of UH-60
Black Hawk helicopters to be procured in response to attrition from 2
helicopters to 4 helicopters)

At the end of subtitle A of title I, add the following:

SEC. 114. UH-60 BLACK HAWK HELICOPTER PROCUREMENT IN RESPONSE
TO ATTRITION.

(a) Increase in Amount.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated by section 101(1) for aircraft for the Army, the
amount available for the procurement UH-60 Black Hawk
helicopters in response to attrition is hereby increased to
$40,600,000, with the amount to be used to increase the
number of UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters to be procured in
response to attrition from 2 helicopters to 4 helicopters.
(b) Offset.--Of the amount authorized to be appropriated by
section 101(1) for aircraft for the Army, the amount
available for UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter medevac kits is
hereby reduced to $29,700,000, with the amount to be derived
in a reduction in the number of such kits from 10 kits to 6
kits.

AMENDMENT NO. 1445

(Purpose: To grant a Federal charter to Korean War Veterans
Association, Incorporated)

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following:

SEC. 1073. GRANT OF FEDERAL CHARTER TO KOREAN WAR VETERANS
ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED.

(a) Grant of Charter.--Part B of subtitle II of title 36,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking the following:

``CHAPTER 1201--[RESERVED]'';

and
(2) by inserting after chapter 1103 the following new
chapter:

``CHAPTER 1201--KOREAN WAR VETERANS ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED

``Sec.
``120101. Organization.
``120102. Purposes.
``120103. Membership.
``120104. Governing body.
``120105. Powers.
``120106. Restrictions.
``120107. Tax-exempt status required as condition of charter.
``120108. Records and inspection.
``120109. Service of process.
``120110. Liability for acts of officers and agents.
``120111. Annual report.
``120112. Definition.

``Sec. 120101. Organization

``(a) Federal Charter.--Korean War Veterans Association,
Incorporated (in this chapter, the `corporation'), a
nonprofit organization that meets the requirements for a
veterans service organization under section 501(c)(19) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and that is organized under the
laws of the State of New York, is a federally chartered
corporation.
``(b) Expiration of Charter.--If the corporation does not
comply with the provisions of this chapter, the charter
granted by subsection (a) expires.

``Sec. 120102. Purposes

``The purposes of the corporation are those provided in its
articles of incorporation and shall include the following:
``(1) Organize as a veterans service organization in order
to maintain a continuing interest in the welfare of veterans
of the Korean War, and rehabilitation of the disabled
veterans of the Korean War to include all that served during
active hostilities and subsequently in defense of the
Republic of Korea, and their families.
``(2) To establish facilities for the assistance of all
veterans and to represent them in their claims before the
Department of Veterans Affairs and other organizations
without charge.
``(3) To perpetuate and preserve the comradeship and
friendships born on the field of battle and nurtured by the
common experience of service to our nation during the time of
war and peace.
``(4) To honor the memory of those men and women who gave
their lives that a free America and a free world might live
by the creation of living memorial, monuments, and other
forms of additional educational, cultural, and recreational
facilities.
``(5) To preserve for ourselves and our posterity the great
and basic truths and enduring principles upon which this
nation was founded.

``Sec. 120103. Membership

``Eligibility for membership in the corporation, and the
rights and privileges of members of the corporation, are as
provided in the bylaws of the corporation.

``Sec. 120104. Governing body

``(a) Board of Directors.--The composition of the board of
directors of the corporation, and the responsibilities of the
board, are as provided in the articles of incorporation of
the corporation.
``(b) Officers.--The positions of officers of the
corporation, and the election of the officers, are as
provided in the articles of incorporation.

``Sec. 120105. Powers

``The corporation has only those powers provided in its
bylaws and articles of incorporation filed in each State in
which it is incorporated.

``Sec. 120106. Restrictions

``(a) Stock and Dividends.--The corporation may not issue
stock or declare or pay a dividend.
``(b) Political Activities.--The corporation, or a director
or officer of the corporation as such, may not contribute to,
support, or participate in any political activity or in any
manner attempt to influence legislation.
``(c) Loan.--The corporation may not make a loan to a
director, officer, or employee of the corporation.
``(d) Claim of Governmental Approval or Authority.--The
corporation may not claim congressional approval, or the
authority of the United States, for any of its activities.
``(e) Corporate Status.--The corporation shall maintain its
status as a corporation incorporated under the laws of the
State of New York.

``Sec. 120107. Tax-exempt status required as condition of
charter

``If the corporation fails to maintain its status as an
organization exempt from taxation under the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, the charter granted under this chapter shall
terminate.

``Sec. 120108. Records and inspection

``(a) Records.--The corporation shall keep--
``(1) correct and complete records of account;
``(2) minutes of the proceedings of its members, board of
directors, and committees having any of the authority of its
board of directors; and
``(3) at its principal office, a record of the names and
addresses of its members entitled to vote on matters relating
to the corporation.
``(b) Inspection.--A member entitled to vote on matters
relating to the corporation, or an agent or attorney of the
member, may inspect the records of the corporation for any
proper purpose, at any reasonable time.

``Sec. 120109. Service of process

``The corporation shall have a designated agent in the
District of Columbia to receive service of process for the
corporation. Notice to or service on the agent is notice to
or service on the Corporation.

``Sec. 120110. Liability for acts of officers and agents

``The corporation is liable for the acts of its officers
and agents acting within the scope of their authority.

``Sec. 120111. Annual report

``The corporation shall submit to Congress an annual report
on the activities of the corporation during the preceding
fiscal year. The report shall be submitted at the same time
as the report of the audit required by section 10101(b) of
this title. The report may not be printed as a public
document.

[[Page S12501]]

``Sec. 120112. Definition

``For purposes of this chapter, the term `State' includes
the District of Columbia and the territories and possessions
of the United States.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The item relating to chapter 1201
in the table of chapters at the beginning of subtitle II of
title 36, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``1201. Korean War Veterans Association, Incorporated.........120101''.

AMENDMENT NO. 1448, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To ensure a response to medical needs arising from mandatory
military vaccinations)

At the end of subtitle B of title VII, add the following:

SEC. 718. RESPONSE TO MEDICAL NEEDS ARISING FROM MANDATORY
MILITARY VACCINATIONS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall maintain a
joint military medical center of excellence focusing on the
medical needs arising from mandatory military vaccinations.
(b) Elements.--The joint military medical center of
excellence under subsection (a) shall consist of the
following:
(1) The Vaccine Health Care Centers of the Department of
Defense, which shall be the principle elements of the center.
(2) Any other elements that the Secretary considers
appropriate.
(c) Authorized Activities.--In acting as the principle
elements of the joint military medical center under
subsection (a), the Vaccine Health Care Centers referred to
in subsection (b)(1) may carry out the following:
(1) Medical assistance and care to individuals receiving
mandatory military vaccines and their dependents, including
long-term case management for adverse events where necessary.
(2) Evaluations to identify and treat potential and actual
health effects from vaccines before and after their use in
the field.
(3) The development and sustainment of a long-term vaccine
safety and efficacy registry.
(4) Support for an expert clinical advisory board for case
reviews related to disability assessment questions.
(5) Long-term and short-term studies to identify
unanticipated benefits and adverse events from vaccines.
(6) Educational outreach for immunization providers and
those requiring immunizations.
(7) The development, dissemination, and validation of
educational materials for Department of Defense healthcare
workers relating to vaccine safety, efficacy, and
acceptability.

AMENDMENT NO. 1451, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To require screenings of members of the Armed Forces for Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder and other mental health conditions)

At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following:

SEC. 573. MENTAL HEALTH SCREENINGS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES FOR POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER AND
OTHER MENTAL HEALTH CONDITIONS.

(a) Mental Health Screenings.--
(1) In general.--Under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary concerned shall perform
mental health screenings of each member of the Armed Forces
who is deployed in a combat operation or to a combat zone.
(b) Nature of Screenings.--The first mental health
screening of a member under this section shall be designed to
determine the mental state of such member before deployment.
Each other mental health screening of a member under this
section shall be designated to detect symptoms or other
evidence in such member of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD) or other mental health condition relating to combat.
(c) Time of Screenings.--A member shall receive a mental
health screening under this section at times as follows:
(1) Prior to deployment in a combat operation or to a
combat zone.
(2) Not later than 30 days after the date of the member's
return from such deployment.
(3) Not later than 120 days after the date of the members
return from such deployment.

AMENDMENT NO. 1453, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To ensure the protection of military and civilian personnel
in the Department of Defense from an influenza pandemic, including an
avian influenza pandemic)

In subtitle B of title VII of the bill, add the following
at the end:

SEC. 718. PANDEMIC AVIAN FLU PREPAREDNESS.

(a) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall report to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives efforts within the Department of Defense to
prepare for pandemic influenza, including pandemic avian
influenza. The Secretary shall address the following, with
respect to military and civilian personnel--
(1) the procurement of vaccines, antivirals and other
medicines, and medical supplies, including personal
protective equipment, particularly those that must be
imported;
(2) protocols for the allocation and distribution of
vaccines and medicines among high priority populations;
(3) public health containment measures that may be
implemented on military bases and other facilities, including
quarantine, travel restrictions and other isolation
precautions;
(4) communication with Department of Defense affiliated
health providers about pandemic preparedness and response;
(5) surge capacity for the provision of medical care during
pandemics;
(6) the availability and delivery of food and basic
supplies and services;
(7) surveillance efforts domestically and internationally,
including those utilizing the Global Emerging Infections
Systems (GEIS), and how such efforts are integrated with
other ongoing surveillance systems;
(8) the integration of pandemic and response planning with
those of other Federal departments, including the Department
of Health and Human Services, Department of the Veterans
Affairs, Department of State, and USAID; and
(9) collaboration (as appropriate) with international
entities engaged in pandemic preparedness and response.
(b) Submission of Report.--Not later than 120 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit the report to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

amendment no. 1463, as modified

(Purpose: To authorize a land conveyance at Iowa Army Ammunition Plant,
Middletown, Iowa)

On page 357, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

SEC. 2843. LAND CONVEYANCE, IOWA ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT,
MIDDLETOWN, IOWA.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may
convey to the City of Middletown (in this section referred to
as the ``City'') all right, title, and interest of the United
States in and to a parcel of real property, including any
improvements thereon, consisting of approximately 1.0 acres
located at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant, Middletown, Iowa,
for the purpose of economic development.
(b) Consideration.--As consideration for the conveyance of
property under subsection (a), the City shall provide the
United States, whether by cash payment, in-kind
consideration, or a combination thereof, an amount that is
not less than the fair market value of the conveyed property,
as determined by the Secretary.
(c) Payment of Costs of Conveyance.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may require the City to
cover costs to be incurred by the Secretary, or to reimburse
the Secretary for costs incurred by the Secretary, to carry
out the conveyance under subsection (a), including survey
costs, costs related to environmental documentation, and
other administrative costs related to the conveyance. If
amounts are collected from the City in advance of the
Secretary incurring the actual costs, and the amount
collected exceeds the costs actually incurred by the
Secretary to carry out the conveyance, the Secretary shall
refund the excess amount to the City.
(2) Reimbursement.--Amounts received as reimbursement under
paragraph (1) shall be credited to the fund or account that
was used to cover the costs incurred by the Secretary in
carrying out the conveyance. Amounts so credited shall be
merged with amounts in such fund or account, and shall be
available for the same purposes, and subject to the same
conditions and limitations, as amounts in such fund or
account.
(d) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the real property to be conveyed under
subsection (a) shall be determined by surveys satisfactory to
the Secretary. The cost of each survey shall be borne by the
City.
(e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United
States.

amendment no. 1473

(Purpose: To improve the availability to survivors of military
decedents of information on the benefits and assistance available
through the Federal Government)

On page 117, line 11, insert ``through a computer
accessible Internet website and other means and'' before ``at
no cost''.

amendment no. 1478

(Purpose: To make oral and maxillofacial surgeons eligible for
incentive special pay payable to medical officers of the Armed Forces)

At the end of subtitle B of title VI, add the following:

SEC. 624. ELIGIBILITY OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGEONS FOR
INCENTIVE SPECIAL PAY FOR MEDICAL OFFICERS OF
THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) In General.--For purposes of eligibility for incentive
special pay payable under section 302(b) of title 37, United
States Code, oral and maxillofacial surgeons shall be treated
as medical officers of the Armed Forces who may be paid
variable special pay under section 302(a)(2) of such title.
(b) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) shall take effect on
October 1, 2005, and shall apply with respect to incentive
special pay payable under section 302(b) of title 37, United
States Code, on or after that date.

amendment no. 1481

(Purpose: To modify the authority of Army working-capital funded
facilities to engage in cooperative activities with non-Army entities)

At the end of subtitle C of title III, add the following:

[[Page S12502]]

SEC. 330. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY OF ARMY WORKING-CAPITAL
FUNDED FACILITIES TO ENGAGE IN COOPERATIVE
ACTIVITIES WITH NON-ARMY ENTITIES.

(a) Applicability of Sunset.--Subsection (j) of section
4544 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking
``September 30, 2009,'' and all that follows through the end
and inserting September 30, 2009.''.
(b) Crediting of Proceeds of Sale of Articles and
Services.--Such section is further amended--
(1) in subsection (d), by striking ``subsection (e)'' and
inserting ``subsection (f)'';
(2) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), (g), (h), and
(i) as subsections (f), (g), (h), (i), and (j), respectively;
(3) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new
subsection (e):
``(e) Proceeds Credited to Working Capital Fund.--The
proceeds of sale of an article or service pursuant to a
contract or other cooperative arrangement under this section
shall be credited to the working capital fund that incurs the
cost of manufacturing the article or performing the
service.''; and
(4) in subsection (g), as redesignated by paragraph (2) of
this subsection, by striking ``subsection (e)'' and inserting
``subsection (f)''.

amendment no. 1495

(Purpose: To provide that the governments of Indian tribes be treated
as State and local governments for purposes of the disposition of real
property recommended for closure in the report to the President from
the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission, July 1993)

On page 371, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following:

SEC. 2887. TREATMENT OF INDIAN TRIBE GOVERNMENTS AS PUBLIC
ENTITIES FOR PURPOSES OF DISPOSAL OF REAL
PROPERTY RECOMMENDED FOR CLOSURE IN JULY 2003
BRAC COMMISSION REPORT.

Section 8013 of the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act, 1994 (Public Law 103-139; 107 Stat. 1440) is amended by
striking ``the report to the President from the Defense Base
Closure and Realignment Commission, July 1991'' and inserting
``the reports to the President from the Defense Base Closure
and Realignment Commission, July 1991 and July 1993''.

amendment no. 1502

(Purpose: To make permanent the extension of the period of temporary
continuation of basic allowance for housing for dependents of members
of the Armed Forces who die on active duty)

At the end of subtitle A of title VI, add the following:

SEC. 605. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF PERIOD OF TEMPORARY
CONTINUATION OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING FOR
DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO
DIE ON ACTIVE DUTY.

Effective immediately after the termination, pursuant to
subsection (b) of section 1022 of the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and
Tsunami Relief, 2005 (Public Law 109-13; 119 Stat. 251), of
the amendments made by subsection (a) of such section,
section 403(l) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``180 days'' each place it appears and inserting
``365 days''.

amendment no. 1514, as modified

(Purpose: To authorize a land conveyance at Marine Corps Air Station,
Miramar, San Diego, California)

On page 357, strike line 20, and insert the following:

PART II--NAVY CONVEYANCES

SEC. 2851. LAND CONVEYANCE, MARINE CORPS AIR STATION,
MIRAMAR, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA.

(a) Conveyance Authorized.--Subject to subsection (c), the
Secretary of the Navy may convey to the County of San Diego,
California (in this section referred to as the ``County''),
all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to
a parcel of real property, including any improvements thereon
and appurtenant easements thereto, consisting of
approximately 230 acres located on the eastern boundary of
Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar, California, for the
purpose of removing the property from the boundaries of the
installation and permitting the County to preserve the entire
property known as the Stowe Trail as a public passive park/
recreational area.
(b) Consideration.--
(1) In general.--As consideration for the conveyance under
subsection (a), the County shall provide the United States an
amount with a total value that is not less than the fair
market value of the conveyed real property, as determined by
the Secretary.
(c) Reversionary Interest.--
(1) In general.--If the Secretary determines at any time
that the real property conveyed under subsection (a) is not
being used in accordance with the purpose of the conveyance
specified in such subsection, all right, title, and interest
in and to the property, including any improvements thereon,
shall revert, at the option of the Secretary, to the United
States, and the United States shall have the right of
immediate entry onto the property. Any determination of the
Secretary under this subsection shall be made on the record
after an opportunity for a hearing.
(2) Release of reversionary interest.--The Secretary shall
release, without consideration, the reversionary interest
retained by the United States under paragraph (1) if--
(A) Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar, is no longer being
used for Department of Defense activities;
(d) Payment of Costs of Conveyance.--
(1) Payment required.--The Secretary shall require the
County to cover costs to be incurred by the Secretary, or to
reimburse the Secretary for costs incurred by the Secretary,
to carry out the conveyance under subsection (a) and
implement the receipt of consideration under subsection (b),
including appraisal costs, survey costs, costs related to
environmental documentation, and other administrative costs
related to the conveyance and receipt of consideration. If
amounts are collected from the County in advance of the
Secretary incurring the actual costs, and the amount received
exceeds the costs actually incurred by the Secretary under
this section, the Secretary shall refund the excess amount to
the County.
(2) Reimbursement.--Amounts received as reimbursement under
paragraph (1) shall be credited to the fund or account that
was used to cover the costs incurred by the Secretary in
carrying out the conveyance. Amounts so credited shall be
merged with amounts in such fund or account and shall be
available for the same purposes, and subject to the same
conditions and limitations, as amounts in such fund or
account.
(e) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the real property to be conveyed under
subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary.
(f) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United
States.

PART III--AIR FORCE CONVEYANCES

amendment no. 1515, as modified

(Purpose: To make available an additional $60,000,000 for operation and
maintenance, Defense-wide, for certain child and family assistance
benefits for members of the Armed Forces)

At the end of subtitle C of title III, add the following:

SEC. 330. CHILD AND FAMILY ASSISTANCE BENEFITS FOR MEMBERS OF
THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Additional Amount for Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by
section 301(5) for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide
activities, is hereby increased by $60,000,000.
(b) Availability of Amount.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated by section 301(5) for operation and maintenance,
Defense-wide activities, as increased by subsection (a),
$60,000,000 may be available as follows:
(1) $50,000,000 for childcare services for families of
members of the Armed Forces.
(2) $10,000,000 for family assistance centers that
primarily serve members of the Armed Forces and their
families.
(b) Offset.--Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated
by section 301(i) for operation and maintenance, Army are
hereby reduced by $60,000,000.

amendment no. 1519, as modified

(Purpose: To provide for a Department of Defense task force on mental
health)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TASK FORCE ON MENTAL HEALTH.

(a) Requirement To Establish.--The Secretary of Defense
shall establish within the Department of Defense a task force
to examine matters relating to mental health and the Armed
Forces.
(b) Composition.--
(1) Members.--The task force shall consist of not more than
14 members appointed by the Secretary of Defense from among
individuals described in paragraph (2) who have demonstrated
expertise in the area of mental health.
(2) Range of members.--The individuals appointed to the
task force shall include--
(A) at least one member of each of the Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Marine Corps; and
(B) a number of persons from outside the Department of
Defense equal to the total number of personnel from within
the Department of Defense (whether members of the Armed
Forces or civilian personnel) who are appointed to the task
force.
(3) Individuals appointed within department of defense.--At
least one of the individuals appointed to the task force from
within the Department of Defense shall be the surgeon general
of an Armed Force or a designee of such surgeon general.
(4) Individuals appointed outside department of defense.--
(A) Individuals appointed to the task force from outside the
Department of Defense may include officers or employees of
other departments or agencies of the Federal Government,
officers or employees of State and governments, or
individuals from the private sector.
(B) The individuals appointed to the task force from
outside the Department of Defense shall include--
(i) an officer or employee of the Department of Veterans
Affairs appointed by the Secretary of Defense in consultation
with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs;
(ii) an officer or employee of the Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration of the Department of
Health and

[[Page S12503]]

Human Services appointed by the Secretary of Defense in
consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services;
and
(iii) at least two individuals who are representatives of--
(I) a mental health policy and advocacy organization; and
(II) a national veterans service organization.
(5) Deadline for appointment.--All appointments of
individuals to the task force shall be made not later than
120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(6) Co-chairs of Task Force.--There shall be two co-chairs
of the task force. One of the co-chairs shall be designated
by the Secretary of the Defense at the time of appointment
from among the Department of Defense personnel appointed to
the task force. The other co-chair shall be selected from
among the members appointed from outside the Department of
Defense by members so appointed.
(c) Long-Term Plan on Mental Health Services.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 12 months after the date on
which all members of the task force have been appointed, the
task force shall submit to the Secretary a long-term plan
(referred to as a strategic plan) on means by which the
Department of Defense shall improve the efficacy of mental
health services provided to members of the Armed Forces by
the Department of Defense.
(2) Utilization of other efforts.--In preparing the report,
the task force shall take into consideration completed and
ongoing efforts by the Department of Defense to improve the
efficacy of mental health care provided to members of the
Armed Forces by the Department.
(3) Elements.--The long-term plan shall include an
assessment of and recommendations (including recommendations
for legislative or administrative action) for measures to
improve the following:
(A) The awareness of the prevalence of mental health
conditions among members of the Armed Forces.
(B) The efficacy of existing programs to prevent, identify,
and treat mental health conditions among members of the Armed
Forces, including programs for and with respect to forward-
deployed troops.
(C) The reduction or elimination of barriers to care,
including the stigma associated with seeking help for mental
health related conditions, and the enhancement of
confidentiality for members of the Armed Forces seeking care
for such conditions.
(D) The adequacy of outreach, education, and support
programs on mental health matters for families of members of
the Armed Forces.
(E) The efficacy of programs and mechanisms for ensuring a
seamless transition from care of members of the Armed Forces
on active duty for mental health conditions through the
Department of Defense to care for such conditions through the
Department of Veterans Affairs after such members are
discharged or released from military, naval, or air service.
(F) The availability of long-term follow-up and access to
care for mental health conditions for members of the
Individual Ready Reserve, and the Selective Reserve and for
discharged, separated, or retired members of the Armed
Forces.
(G) Collaboration among organizations in the Department of
Defense with responsibility for or jurisdiction over the
provision of mental health services.
(H) Coordination between the Department of Defense and
civilian communities, including local support organizations,
with respect to mental health services.
(I) The scope and efficacy of curricula and training on
mental health matters for commanders in the Armed Forces.
(J) Such other matters as the task force considers
appropriate.
(d) Administrative Matters.--
(1) Compensation.--Each member of the task force who is a
member of the Armed Forces or a civilian officer or employee
of the United States shall serve without compensation (other
than compensation to which entitled as a member of the Armed
Forces or an officer or employee of the United States, as the
case may be). Other members of the task force shall be
treated for purposes of section 3161 of title 5, United
States Code, as having been appointed under subsection (b) of
such section.
(2) Oversight.--The Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness shall oversee the activities of the
task force.
(3) Administrative support.--The Washington Headquarters
Services of the Department of Defense shall provide the task
force with personnel, facilities, and other administrative
support as necessary for the performance of the duties of the
task force.
(4) Access to facilities.--The Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness shall, in coordination with the
Secretaries of the military departments, ensure appropriate
access by the task force to military installations and
facilities for purposes of the discharge of the duties of the
task force.
(e) Report.--
(1) In general.--The task force shall submit to the
Secretary of Defense a report on its activities under this
section. The report shall include--
(A) a description of the activities of the task force;
(B) the plan required by subsection (c); and
(C) such other mattes relating to the activities of the
task force that the task force considers appropriate.
(2) Transmittal to congress.--Not later than 90 days after
receipt of the report under paragraph (1), the Secretary
shall transmit the report to the Committees on Armed Services
and Veterans' Affairs of the Senate and the House of
Representatives. The Secretary may include in the transmittal
such comments on the report as the Secretary considers
appropriate.
(f) Termination.--The task force shall terminate 90 days
after the date on which the report of the task force is
submitted to Congress under subsection (e)(2).

amendment no. 1526, as modified

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate on the need for community
impact assistance related to the construction by the Navy of an
outlying land field in North Carolina)

On page 371, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following:

SEC. 2887. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING COMMUNITY IMPACT
ASSISTANCE RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION OF NAVY
LANDING FIELD, NORTH CAROLINA.

It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) the planned construction of an outlying landing field
in North Carolina is vital to the national security interests
of the United States; and
(2) the Department of Defense should work with other
Federal agencies to provide community impact assistance to
those communities directly impacted by the location of the
outlying landing field, including--
(A) economic development assistance;
(B) impact aid program assistance if required;
(C) the provision by cooperative agreement with the Navy of
fire, rescue, water, and sewer services;
(D) access by leasing arrangement to appropriate land for
farming for farmers impacted by the location of the landing
field;
(E) direct relocation assistance; and
(F) fair compensation to landowners for property purchased
by the Navy.

amendment no. 1548, as modified

(Purpose: To increase, with an offset, amounts available for the
procurement of Predator unmanned aerial vehicles)

On page 305, strike line 2 and all that follows through
line 6, and insert the following:
(a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2006 for the procurement
accounts for the Air Force in the amounts as follows:
(1) For aircraft, $323,200,000.
(2) For other procurement, $51,900,000.
(b) Availability of Certain Amounts.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated by subsection (a)(1),
$218,500,000 may be available for purposes as follows:
(1) Procurement of Predator MQ-1 air vehicles, initial
spares, and RSP kits.
(2) Procurement of Containerized Dual Control Station
Launch and Recovery Elements.
(3) Procurement of a Fixed Ground Control Station.
(4) Procurement of other upgrades to Predator MQ-1 Ground
Control Stations, spares, and signals intelligence packages.

SEC. 1405A. REDUCTION IN AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR
IRAQ FREEDOM FUND.

The amount authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year
2006 for the Iraq Freedom Fund is the amount specified by
section 1409(a) of this Act, reduced by $218,500,000.

amendment no. 1555, as modified

(Purpose: To regulate management contracts, require an Analysis of
Alternatives for major acquisitions of the Department of Defense and
impose additional limitations on certain leases and charters)

At the end of subtitle A of title VIII, add the following:

SEC. 807. MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO
CONTRACTS AUTHORIZED BY LAW FOR CERTAIN
MILITARY MATERIEL.

(a) Inclusion of Combat Vehicles Under Requirements.--
Section 2401 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``vessel or aircraft'' each place it
appears and inserting ``vessel, aircraft, or combat
vehicle'';
(2) in subsection (c), by striking ``aircraft or naval
vessel'' each place it appears and inserting ``aircraft,
naval vessel, or combat vehicle'';
(3) in subsection (e), by striking ``aircraft or naval
vessels'' each place it appears and inserting ``aircraft,
naval vessels, or combat vehicle''; and
(4) in subsection (f)--
(A) by striking ``aircraft and naval vessels'' and
inserting ``aircraft, naval vessels, and combat vehicle'';
and
(B) by striking ``such aircraft and vessels'' and inserting
``such aircraft, vessels, and combat vehicle''.
(b) Additional Information for Congress.--Subsection (b) of
such section is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) the Secretary has certified to those committees--

[[Page S12504]]

``(i) that entering into the proposed contract as a means
of obtaining the vessel, aircraft, or combat vehicle is the
most cost-effective means of obtaining such vessel, aircraft,
or combat vehicle; and
``(ii) that the Secretary has determined that the lease
complies with all applicable laws, Office of Management and
Budget circulars, and Department of Defense regulations.'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(3) Upon receipt of a notice under paragraph (1)(C), a
committee identified in paragraph (1)(B) may request the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense or the
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a review
of the proposed contract to determine whether or not such
contract meets the requirements of this section.
``(4) If a review is requested under paragraph (3), the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense or the
Comptroller General of the United States, as the case may be,
shall submit to the Secretary and the congressional defense
committees a report on such review before the expiration of
the period specified in paragraph (1)(C).''.
(c) Applicability of Acquisition Regulations.--Such section
is further amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new
subsection (f):
``(f)(1) If a lease or charter covered by this section is a
capital lease or a lease-purchase--
``(A) the lease or charter shall be treated as an
acquisition and shall be subject to all applicable statutory
and regulatory requirements for the acquisition of aircraft,
naval vessels, or combat vehicles; and
``(B) funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for
operation and maintenance may not be obligated or expended
for the lease or charter.
``(2) In this subsection, the terms `capital lease' and
`lease-purchase' have the meanings given those terms in
Appendix B to Office of Management and Budget Circular A-11,
as in effect on the date of the enactment of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006.''.
(d) Conforming and Clerical Amendments.--
(1) The heading of such section is amended to read as
follows:

``Sec. 2401. Requirement for authorization by law of certain
contracts relating to vessels, aircraft, and combat
vehicles''.

(2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 141
of such title is amended by striking the item relating to
section 2401 and inserting the following new item:

``Sec. 2401. Requirement for authorization by law of certain contracts
relating to vessels, aircraft, and combat vehicles.''.

SEC. 808. REQUIREMENT FOR ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES FOR MAJOR
DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS.

(a) Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 144 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 2431 the
following new section:

``Sec. 2431a. Major defense acquisition programs: requirement
for analysis of alternatives

``(a) No major defense acquisition program may be commenced
before the completion of an analysis of alternatives with
respect to such program.
``(b) For the purposes of this section, a major defense
acquisition program is commenced when the milestone decision
authority approves entry of the program into the first phase
of the acquisition process applicable to the program.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 144 of such title is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 2431 the
following new item:

``2431a. Major defense acquisition programs: requirement for analysis
of alternatives.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act,
and shall apply with respect to major defense acquisition
programs commenced on or after that date.

SEC. 809. REPORT ON USE OF LEAD SYSTEM INTEGRATORS IN THE
ACQUISITION OF MAJOR SYSTEMS.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on
the use of lead system integrators for the acquisition by the
Department of Defense of major systems.
(b) Contents.--The report required by subsection (a) shall
include a detailed description of the actions taken, or to be
taken (including a specific timetable), and the current
regulations and guidelines regarding--
(1) the definition of the respective rights of the
Department of Defense, lead system integrators, and other
contractors that participate in the development or production
of any individual element of the major weapon system
(including subcontractors under lead system integrators) in
intellectual property that is developed by the other
participating contractors in a manner that ensures that--
(A) the Department of Defense obtains appropriate rights in
technical data developed by the other participating
contractors in accordance with the requirements of section
2320 of title 10, United States Code; and
(B) lead system integrators obtain access to technical data
developed by the other participating contractors only to the
extent necessary to execute their contractual obligations as
lead systems integrators;
(2) the prevention or mitigation of organizational
conflicts of interest on the part of lead system integrators;
(3) the prevention of the performance by lead system
integrators of functions closely associated with inherently
governmental functions;
(4) the appropriate use of competitive procedures in the
award of subcontracts by lead system integrators with system
responsibility;
(5) the prevention of organizational conflicts of interest
arising out of any financial interest of lead system
integrators without system responsibility in the development
or production of individual elements of a major weapon
system; and
(6) the prevention of pass-through charges by lead system
integrators with system responsibility on systems or
subsystems developed or produced under subcontracts where
such lead system integrators do not provide significant value
added with regard to such systems or subsystems.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``lead system integrator'' includes lead
system integrators with system responsibility and lead system
integrators without system responsibility.
(2) The term ``lead system integrator with system
responsibility'' means a prime contractor for the development
or production of a major system if the prime contractor is
not expected at the time of award, as determined by the
Secretary of Defense for purposes of this section, to perform
a substantial portion of the work on the system and the major
subsystems.
(3) The term ``lead system integrator without system
responsibility'' means a contractor under a contract for the
procurement of services whose primary purpose is to perform
acquisition functions closely associated with inherently
governmental functions with regard to the development or
production of a major system.
(4) The term ``major system'' has the meaning given such
term in section 2302d of title 10, United States Code.
(5) The term ``pass-through charge'' means a charge for
overhead or profit on work performed by a lower-tier
contractor (other than charges for the direct costs of
managing lower-tier contracts and overhead and profit based
on such direct costs) that does not, as determined by the
Secretary for purposes of this section, promote significant
value added with regard to such work.
(6) The term ``functions closely associated with inherently
governmental functions'' has the meaning given such term in
section 2383(b)(3) of title 10, United States Code.

AMENDMENT NO. 1563, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To authorize the Secretary of the Navy to lease United States
Navy Museum facilities at Washington Naval Yard, District of Columbia,
to the Naval Historical Foundation)

On page 357, strike line 20 and insert the following:

PART II--NAVY CONVEYANCES

SEC. 2851. LEASE OF UNITED STATES NAVY MUSEUM FACILITIES AT
WASHINGTON NAVY YARD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

(a) Lease or License Authorized.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Navy may lease or
license to the Naval Historical Foundation (in this section
referred to as the ``Foundation'') facilities located at
Washington Navy Yard, Washington, District of Columbia, that
house the United States Navy Museum (in this section referred
to as the ``Museum'') for the purpose of carrying out the
following activities:
(A) Generation of revenue for the Museum through the rental
of facilities to the public, commercial and non-profit
entities, State and local governments, and other Federal
agencies.
(B) Administrative activities in support of the Museum.
(2) Limitation.--Any activities carried out at the
facilities leased or licensed under paragraph (1) must be
consistent with the operations of the Museum.
(b) Consideration.--The amount of consideration paid in a
year by the Foundation to the United States for the lease or
license of facilities under subsection (a) may not exceed the
actual cost, as determined by the Secretary, of the annual
operation and maintenance of the facilities.
(c) Use of Proceeds.--
(1) Deposit of proceeds.--The Secretary shall deposit any
amounts received under subsection (b) for the lease or
license of facilities under subsection (a) into the account
for appropriations available for the operation and
maintenance of the Museum.
(2) Availability of amounts.--The Secretary may use any
amounts deposited under paragraph (1) to cover the costs
associated with the operation and maintenance of the Museum
and its exhibits.
(d) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the lease or lease of facilities under subsection (a) as
the Secretary considers appropriate to protect the interests
of the United States.

[[Page S12505]]

PART III--AIR FORCE CONVEYANCES

AMENDMENT NO. 1568, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To require quarterly reports on audits of task or delivery
order contracts and other contracts related to security and
reconstruction activities in Iraq and Afghanistan and to address
irregularities identified in such reports)

At the end of subtitle C of title VIII, add the following:

SEC. 824. REPORTS ON CERTAIN DEFENSE CONTRACTS IN IRAQ AND
AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Quarterly Reports.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate
committees of Congress a report that lists and describes each
task or delivery order contract or other contract related to
security and reconstruction activities in Iraq and
Afghanistan in which an audit conducted by an investigative
or audit component of the Department of Defense during the
90-day period ending on the date of such report resulted in a
finding described in subsection (b).
(2) Coverage of subcontracts.--For purposes of this
section, any reference to a contract shall be treated as a
reference to such contract and to any subcontracts under such
contract.
(b) Covered Finding.--A finding described in this
subsection with respect to a task or delivery order contract
or other contract described in subsection (a) is a finding by
an investigative or audit component of the Department of
Defense that the contract includes costs that are
unsupported, questioned, or both.
(c) Report Information.--Each report under subsection (a)
shall include, with respect to each task or delivery order
contract or other contract covered by such report--
(1) a description of the costs determined to be
unsupported, questioned, or both; and
(2) a statement of the amount of such unsupported or
questioned costs and the percentage of the total value of
such task or delivery order that such costs represent.
(d) Withholding of Payments.--In the event that any costs
under a task or delivery order contract or other contract
described in subsection (a) are determined by an
investigative or audit component of the Department of Defense
to be unsupported, questioned, or both, the appropriate
Federal procurement personnel may withhold from amounts
otherwise payable to the contractor under such contract a sum
of up to 100 percent of the total amount of such costs.
(e) Release of Withheld Payments.--Upon a subsequent
determination by the appropriate Federal procurement
personnel, or investigative or audit component of the
Department of Defense, that any unsupported or questioned
costs for which an amount payable was withheld under
subsection (d) has been determined to be allowable, or upon a
settlement negotiated by the appropriate Federal procurement
personnel, the appropriate Federal procurement personnel may
release such amount for payment to the contractor concerned.
(f) Inclusion of Information on Withholding and Release in
Quarterly Reports.--Each report under subsection (a) after
the initial report under that subsection shall include the
following:
(1) A description of each action taken under subsection (d)
or (e) during the period covered by such report.
(2) A justification of each determination or negotiated
settlement under subsection (d) or (e) that appropriately
explains the determination of the applicable Federal
procurement personnel in terms of reasonableness,
allocability, or other factors affecting the acceptability of
the costs concerned.
(g) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' means--
(A) the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, and
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and
(B) the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, and
Government Reform of the House of Representatives.
(2) The term ``investigative or audit component of the
Department of Defense'' means any of the following:
(A) The Office of the Inspector General of the Department
of Defense.
(B) The Defense Contract Audit Agency.
(C) The Defense Contract Management Agency.
(D) The Army Audit Agency.
(E) The Naval Audit Service.
(F) The Air Force Audit Agency.
(3) The term ``questioned'', with respect to a cost, means
an unreasonable, unallocable, or unallowable cost.

AMENDMENT NO. 1574, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To require a report on the development of a second domestic
source for tire production and supply for the Stryker combat vehicle)

At the end of subtitle B of title I, add the following:

SEC. 114. SECOND SOURCE FOR PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY OF TIRES
FOR THE STRYKER COMBAT VEHICLE.

(a) Requirement.--The Secretary of the Army shall conduct a
study of the feasibility and costs and benefits for the
participation of a second source for the production and
supply of tires for the Stryker combat vehicle, to be
procured by the Army with funds authorized to be appropriated
in this act.
(c) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of the Act. The Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the results of
the study under subsection (a). The report shall include--
(1) an analysis of the capacity of the industrial base in
the United States to meet requirements for a second source
for the production and supply of tires for the Stryker combat
vehicle; and
(2) to the extent that the capacity of the industrial base
in the United States is not adequate to meet such
requirements, recommendations on means, over the short-term
and the long-term, to address that inadequacy.

AMENDMENT NO. 1578, AS MODIFIED

(Purpose: To require reports on significant increases in program
acquisition unit costs or procurement unit costs of major defense
acquisition programs)

At the end of subtitle A of title VIII, add the following:

SEC. 807. REPORTS ON SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN PROGRAM
ACQUISITION UNIT COSTS OR PROCUREMENT UNIT
COSTS OF MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS.

(a) Initial Report Required.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees
a report on the acquisition status of each major defense
acquisition program whose program acquisition unit cost or
procurement unit cost, as of the date of the enactment of
this Act, has exceeded by more than 50 percent the original
baseline projection for such unit cost. The report shall
include the information specified in subsection (c).
(c) Information.--The information specified in this
subsection with respect to a major defense acquisition
program is the following:
(1) An assessment of the costs to be incurred to complete
the program if the program is not modified.
(2) An explanation of why the costs of the program have
increased.
(3) A justification for the continuation of the program
notwithstanding the increase in costs.
(d) Major Defense Acquisition Program Defined.--In this
section, the term ``major defense acquisition program'' has
the meaning given that term in section 2430 of title 10,
United States Code.

AMENDMENT NO. 2446

(Purpose: To require a report on the Department of Defense response to
the findings and recommendations of the Defense Science Board Task
Force on High Performance Microchip Supply)

At the end of subtitle D of title X, add the following:

SEC. 1044. REPORT ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RESPONSE TO
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF DEFENSE SCIENCE
BOARD TASK FORCE ON HIGH PERFORMANCE MICROCHIP
SUPPLY.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than March 15, 2006, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the implementation of the
recommendations of the Defense Science Board Task Force on
High Performance Microchip Supply.
(b) Contents.--The report required by subsection (a) shall
include the following:
(1) An analysis of each finding of the Task Force.
(2) A detailed description of the response of the
Department of Defense to each recommendation of the Task
Force, including--
(A) for each recommendation that is being implemented or
that the Secretary plans to implement--
(i) a summary of actions that have been taken to implement
the recommendation; and
(ii) a schedule, with specific milestones, for completing
the implementation of the recommendation; and
(B) For each recommendation that the Secretary does not
plan to implement--
(i) the reasons for the decision not to implement the
recommendation; and
(ii) a summary of alternative actions the Secretary plans
to take to address the purposes underlying the
recommendation.
(3) A summary of any additional actions the Secretary plan
to take to address concerns raised by the Task Force.
(c) Consultation.--To the extent practicable, the Secretary
may consult with other departments and agencies of the
Federal Government, institutions of higher education and
other academic organizations, and industry in the development
of the report required by subsection (a).

AMENDMENT NO. 2447

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate regarding the investment
of funds as called for in the Depot Maintenance Strategy and Master
Plan of the Air Force)

On page 66, after line 22, insert the following:

SEC. 330. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING DEPOT MAINTENANCE.

(a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
(1) the Depot Maintenance Strategy and Master Plan of the
Air Force reflects the essential requirements for the Air
Force to maintain a ready and controlled source of organic
technical competence, thereby ensuring an effective and
timely response to national defense contingencies and
emergency requirements;

[[Page S12506]]

(2) since the publication of the Depot Maintenance Strategy
and Master Plan of the Air Force in 2002, the service has
made great progress toward modernizing all 3 of its Depots,
in order to maintain their status as ``world class''
maintenance repair and overhaul operations;
(3) one of the indispensable components of the Depot
Maintenance Strategy and Master Plan of the Air Force is the
commitment of the Air Force to allocate $150,000,000 a year
over 6 years, beginning in fiscal year 2004, for
recapitalization and investment, including the procurement of
technologically advanced facilities and equipment, of our
Nation's 3 Air Force depots; and
(4) the funds expended to date have ensured that
transformation projects, such as the initial implementation
of ``Lean'' and ``Six Sigma'' production techniques, have
achieved great success in reducing the time necessary to
perform depot maintenance on aircraft.
(b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate
that--
(1) the Air Force should be commended for the
implementation of its Depot Maintenance Strategy and Master
Plan and, in particular, meeting its commitment to invest
$150,000,000 a year over 6 years, since fiscal year 2004, in
the Nation's 3 Air Force Depots; and
(2) the Air Force should continue to fully fund its
commitment of $150,000,000 a year through fiscal year 2009 in
investments and recapitalization projects pursuant to the
Depot Maintenance Strategy and Master Plan.

amendment no. 2448

(Purpose: To state the policy of the United States on the
intercontinental ballistic missile force)

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following:

SEC. 1073. POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES ON THE
INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC MISSILE FORCE.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Consistent with warhead levels agreed to in the
Moscow Treaty, the United States is modifying the capacity of
the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM)
from its prior capability to carry up to 3 independent
reentry vehicles (RVs) to carry as few as a single reentry
vehicle, a process known as downloading.
(2) A series of Department of Defense studies of United
States strategic forces, including the 2001 Nuclear Posture
Review, has confirmed the continued need for 500
intercontinental ballistic missiles.
(3) In a potential nuclear crisis it is important that
the nuclear weapons systems of the United States be
configured so as to discourage other nations from making a
first strike.
(4) The intercontinental ballistic missile force is
currently being considered as part of the deliberations of
the Department of Defense for the Quadrennial Defense Review.
(b) Statement of United States Policy.--It is the policy
of the United States to continue to deploy a force of 500
intercontinental ballistic missiles, provided that
unanticipated strategic developments may compel the United
States to make changes to this force structure in the future.
(c) Moscow Treaty Defined.--In this section, the term
``Moscow Treaty'' means the Treaty Between the United States
of America and the Russian Federation on Strategic Offensive
Reductions, done at Moscow on May 24, 2002.

amendment no. 2449

(Purpose: To require a study on the use of the Space Radar for
topographic mapping for scientific and civil purposes)

At the end of subtitle D of title X, add the following:

SEC. 1044. REPORT ON USE OF SPACE RADAR FOR TOPOGRAPHICAL
MAPPING FOR SCIENTIFIC AND CIVIL PURPOSES.

(a) In General.--Not later than January 15, 2006, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees on report on the feasability and
advisability of utilizing the Space Radar for purposes of
providing coastal zone and other topographical mapping
information, and related information, to the scientific
community and other elements of the private sector for
scientific and civil purposes.
(b) Report Elements.--The report required by subsection
(a) shall include the following:
(1) A description and evaluation of any uses of the Space
Radar for scientific or civil purposes that are identified by
the Secretary for purposes of the report.
(2) A description and evaluation of any additions or
modifications to the Space Radar identified by the Secretary
for purposes of the report that would increase the utility of
the Space Radar to the scientific community or other elements
of the private sector for scientific or civil purposes,
including the utilization of additional frequencies, the
development or enhancement of ground systems, and the
enhancement of operations.
(3) A description of the costs of any additions or
modifications identified pursuant to paragraph (2).
(4) A description and evaluation of processes to be
utilized to determine the means of modifying the Space Radar
in order to meet the needs of the scientific community or
other elements of the private sector with respect to the use
of the Space Radar for scientific or civil purposes, and a
proposal for meeting the costs of such modifications.
(5) A description and evaluation of the impacts, if any,
on the primary missions of the Space Radar, and on the
development of the Space Radar, of the use of the Space Radar
for scientific or civil purposes.
(6) A description of the process for developing
requirements for the Space Radar, including the involvement
of the Civil Applications Committee.

amendment no. 2450

(Purpose: To amend the assistance to local educational agencies with
significant enrollment changes in military dependent students due to
force structure changes, troop relocations, creation of new units, and
realignment under BRAC)

In the section heading of section 582, insert ``OR
DECREASES'' after ``INCREASES''.
In section 582(a), insert ``or decrease'' after ``overall
increase''.
In the matter preceding subparagraph (A) of section
582(b)(2), insert ``or decrease'' after ``overall increase''.
In section 582(b)(2)(B), strike ``; or'' and insert a
semicolon.
In section 582(b)(2)(C), strike the period at the end and
insert ``; or''.
In section 528(b)(2), add at the end the following:
(D) a change in the number of housing units on a military
installation.
In section 582(d)(1), insert ``or decrease'' after
``overall increase''.

amendment no. 2451

(Purpose: To authorize pilot projects to encourage pediatric early
literacy among children of members of the Armed Forces)

At the end of subtitle G of title V, add the following:

SEC. 585. PILOT PROJECTS ON PEDIATRIC EARLY LITERACY AMONG
CHILDREN OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Pilot Projects Authorized.--The Secretary of Defense
may conduct pilot projects to assess the feasibility,
advisability, and utility of encouraging pediatric literacy
among the children of members of the Armed Forces utilizing
the Reach Out and Read model of pediatric early literacy.
(b) Locations.--
(1) In general.--The pilot projects conducted under
subsection (a) shall be conducted at not more than 20
military medical treatment facilities designated by the
Secretary for purposes of this section.
(2) Co-location with certain installations.--In
designating military medical treatment facilities under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall, to the extent
practicable, designate facilities that are located on, or co-
located with, military installations at which the
mobilization or demobilization of members of the Armed Forces
occurs.
(c) Activities.--Activities under the pilot projects
conducted under subsection (a) shall include activities in
accordance with the Reach Out and Read model of pediatric
early literacy as follows:
(1) The provision of training to health care providers
and other appropriate personnel on early literacy promotion.
(2) The purchase and distribution of children's books to
members of the Armed Forces, their spouses, and their
children.
(3) The modification of treatment facility and clinic
waiting rooms to include a full selection of literature for
children.
(4) The dissemination to members of the Armed Forces and
their spouses of parent education materials on pediatric
early literacy.
(5) Such other activities as the Secretary considers
appropriate.
(d) Consultation.--The Secretary shall consult with the
Reach Out and Read National Center in the development and
implementation of the pilot projects conducted under this
section, including in the designation of locations of the
pilot projects under subsection (b).
(e) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than March 1, 2007, the
Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on the pilot projects conducted under
this section.
(2) Elements.--The report under paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) a description of the pilot projects conducted under
this section, including the location of each pilot project
and the activities conducted under each pilot project; and
(B) an assessment of the feasibility, advisability, and
utility of encouraging pediatric early literacy among the
children of members of the Armed Forces utilizing the Reach
Out and Read model of pediatric early literacy.
(f) Funding.--
(1) In general.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated by section 301(5) for operation and maintenance
for Defense-wide activities, up to $2,000,000 may be
available for the pilot projects authorized by this section.
(2) Availability.--The amount available under paragraph
(1) shall remain available until expended.

amendment no. 2452

(Purpose: To require the Secretary of Defense to establish a uniform
policy for the Armed Forces on parental leave and similar leave)

At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following:

[[Page S12507]]

SEC. 573. UNIFORM POLICY ON PARENTAL LEAVE AND SIMILAR LEAVE.

(a) Policy Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe in regulations a uniform policy for the taking by
members of the Armed Forces of parental leave to cover leave
to be used in connection with births or adoptions, as the
Secretary shall designate under the policy.
(b) Uniformity Across Armed Forces.--The policy
prescribed under subsection (a) shall apply uniformly across
the Armed Forces.

amendment no. 2453

(Purpose: To make available $80,000,000 for coproduction of the Arrow
ballistic missile defense system)

At the end of subtitle C of title II, add the following:

SEC. 224. ARROW BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM.

Of the amount authorized to be appropriated by section
201(5) for research, development, test, and evaluation for
Defense-wide activities and available for ballistic missile
defense, $80,000,000 may be available for coproduction of the
Arrow ballistic missile defense system.

AMENDMENT NO. 2454

(Purpose: Relating to the acquisition strategy of the Department of
Defense for commercial satellite communication services)

At the end of subtitle A of title VIII, add the following:

SEC. 807. ACQUISITION STRATEGY FOR COMMERCIAL SATELLITE
COMMUNICATION SERVICES.

(a) Requirement for Spend Analysis.--The Secretary of
Defense shall, as a part of the effort of the Department of
Defense to develop a revised strategy for acquiring
commercial satellite communication services, perform a
complete spend analysis of the past and current acquisitions
by the Department of commercial satellite communication
services.
(b) Report on Acquisition Strategy.--
(1) In general.--Not later than six months after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to
Congress a report on the acquisition strategy of the
Department of Defense for commercial satellite communications
services.
(2) Elements.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall
include the following:
(A) A description of the spend analysis required by
subsection (a), including the results of the analysis.
(B) The proposed strategy of the Department for acquiring
commercial satellite communication services, which strategy
shall--
(i) be based in appropriate part on the results of the
analysis required by subsection (a); and
(ii) take into account various methods of aggregating
purchases and leveraging the purchasing power of the
Department, including through the use of multiyear
contracting for commercial satellite communication services.
(C) A proposal for such legislative action as the Secretary
considers necessary to acquire appropriate types and amounts
of commercial satellite communications services using methods
of aggregating purchases and leveraging the purchasing power
of the Department (including the use of multiyear
contracting), or if the use of such methods is determined
inadvisable, a statement of the rationale for such
determination.
(D) A proposal for such other legislative action that the
Secretary considers necessary to implement the strategy of
the Department for acquiring commercial satellite
communication services.

AMENDMENT NO. 2455

(Purpose: To require a report on nonstrategic nuclear weapons)

On page 296, after line 19, add the following:

SEC. 1205. REPORT ON NONSTRATEGIC NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

(a) Review.--No later than six months after date of
enactment, the Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, conduct a review of United
States and Russian nonstrategic nuclear weapons and determine
whether it is in the national security interest of the United
States--
(1) to reduce the number of United States and Russian
nonstrategic nuclear weapons;
(2) to improve the security of United States and Russian
nonstrategic nuclear weapons in storage storage and during
transport;
(3) to identify and develop mechanisms and procedures to
implement transparent reductions in nonstrategic nuclear
weapons; and
(4) to identify and develop mechanisms and procedures to
implement the transparent dismantlement of excess
nonstrategic nuclear weapons.
(b) Report.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall, in
consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Energy, submit a joint report ton the results of the review
required under subsection (a). The report shall include a
plan to implement, not later than October 1, 2006, actions
determined to be in the United States national security
interest.
(2) Form.--The report require under paragraph (1) shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may include an
unclassified annex.

AMENDMENT NO. 2456

At the end of subtitle B of title VII, add the following:

SEC. 718. MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELORS UNDER TRICARE.

(a) In General.--Section 1079(a) of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(17) Services of mental health counselors, except that--
``(A) such services are limited to services provided by
counselors who are licensed under applicable State law to
provide mental health services;
``(B) such services may be provided independently of
medical oversight and supervision only in areas identified by
the Secretary as `medically underserved areas' where the
Secretary determines that 25 percent or more of the residents
are located in primary shortage areas designated pursuant to
section 332 of the Public Health Services Act (42 U.S.C.
254e); and
``(C) the provision of such services shall be consistent
with such rules as may be prescribed by the Secretary of
Defense, including criteria applicable to credentialing or
certification of mental health counselors and a requirement
that mental health counselors accept payment under this
section as full payment for all services provided pursuant to
this paragraph.''.
(b) Authority to Enter Into Personal Services Contracts.--
Section 704(c)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 2799; 10
U.S.C. 1091 note) is amended by inserting ``mental health
counselors,'' after ``psychologists,''.

AMENDMENT NO. 2457

(Purpose: To clarify certain authorities relating the Commission on the
National Guard and Reserves)

At the end of subtitle H of title V, add the following:

SEC. __. CLARIFICATION OF CERTAIN AUTHORITIES RELATING TO THE
COMMISSION ON THE NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVES.

(a) Nature of Commission.--Subsection (a) of section 513 of
the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375; 118 Stat. 1880) is
amended by inserting ``in the legislative branch'' after
``There is established''.
(b) Pay of Members.--Subsection (e)(1) of such section is
amended striking ``except that'' and all that follows through
the end and inserting ``except that--
``(A) in applying the first sentence of subsection (a) of
section 957 of such Act to the Commission, `may' shall be
substituted for `shall'; and
``(B) in applying subsections (a), (c)(2), and (e) of
section 957 of such Act to the Commission, `level IV of the
Executive Schedule' shall be substituted for `level V of the
Executive Schedule'.''.
(c) Technical Amendment.--Subsection (c)(2)(C) of such
section is amended by striking ``section 404(a)(4)'' and
inserting ``section 416(a)(4)''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on October 28, 2004, as if included in the
enactment of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005.

AMENDMENT NO. 2458

(Purpose: To enhance various authorities to assist the recruitment
efforts of the Armed Forces)

On page 144, strike lines 1 through 3 and insert the
following:

SEC. 619. RETENTION INCENTIVE AND ASSIGNMENT BONUS FOR
MEMBERS OF THE SELECTED RESERVE QUALIFIED IN A
CRITICAL MILITARY SKILL OR WHO VOLUNTEER FOR
ASSIGNMENT TO A HIGH PRIORITY UNIT.

On page 144, in the amendment made by section 619, strike
line 8 and all that follows through page 145, line 12, and
insert the following:

``Sec. 308k. Special pay: retention incentive bonus for
members of the Selected Reserve qualified in a critical
military skill; assignment bonus for members of the
Selected Reserve who volunteer for assignment to a high
priority unit

``(a) Bonuses Authorized.--(1) An eligible officer or
enlisted member of the armed forces may be paid a retention
bonus as provided in this section if--
``(A) in the case of an officer or warrant officer, the
member executes a written agreement to remain in the Selected
Reserve for at least 2 years;
``(B) in the case of an enlisted member, the member
reenlists or voluntarily extends the member's enlistment in
the Selected Reserve for a period of at least 2 years; or
``(C) in the case of an enlisted member serving on an
indefinite reenlistment, the member executes a written
agreement to remain in the Selected Reserve for at least 2
years.
``(2) An officer or enlisted member of the armed forces may
be paid an assignment bonus as provided in this section if
the member voluntarily agrees to an assignment to a high
priority unit of the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of
an armed force for at least 2 years.
``(b) Members Eligible for Retention Bonus.--Subject to
subsection (d), an officer or enlisted member is eligible
under subsection (a)(1) for a retention bonus under this
section if the member--
``(1) is qualified in a military skill or specialty
designated as critical for purposes of this section under
subsection (c); or
``(2) agrees to train or retrain in a military skill or
specialty so designated as critical.

[[Page S12508]]

``(c) Designation of Critical Skills or Specialties and
High Priority Units.--The Secretary concerned shall--
``(1) designate the military skills and specialties that
shall be treated as critical military skills and specialties
for purposes of this section; and
``(2) designate the units that shall be treated as high
priority units for purposes of this section.

On page 148, strike the matter between lines 6 and 7 and
insert the following:

``308k. Special pay: retention incentive bonus for members of the
Selected Reserve qualified in a critical military skill;
assignment bonus for members of the Selected Reserve who
volunteer for assignment to a high priority unit.''.

At the end of division A, add the following:

TITLE XV--RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION

SEC. 1501. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Military Recruiting
Initiatives Act of 2005''.

SEC. 1502. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM ENLISTMENT BONUS.

(a) Enlistment Bonus for Selected Reserve Members.--Section
308c(b) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``$10,000'' and inserting ``$20,000''.
(b) Enlistment Bonus for Active Members.--Section 309(a) of
title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking
``$20,000'' and inserting ``$40,000''.

SEC. 1503. TEMPORARY AUTHORITY TO PAY BONUS TO ENCOURAGE
MEMBERS OF THE ARMY TO REFER OTHER PERSONS FOR
ENLISTMENT IN THE ARMY.

(a) Authority To Pay Bonus.--The Secretary of the Army may
pay a bonus under this section to a member of the Army,
whether in the regular component of the Army or in the Army
National Guard or Army Reserve, who refers to an Army
recruiter a person who has not previously served in an Armed
Force and who, after such referral, enlists in the regular
component of the Army or in the Army National Guard or Army
Reserve.
(b) Referral.--For purposes of this section, a referral for
which a bonus may be paid under subsection (a) occurs--
(1) when a member of the Army contacts an Army recruiter on
behalf of a person interested in enlisting in the Army; or
(2) when a person interested in enlisting in the Army
contacts the Army recruiter and informs the recruiter of the
role of the member in initially recruiting the person.
(c) Certain Referrals Ineligible.--
(1) Referral of immediate family.--A member of the Army may
not be paid a bonus under subsection (a) for the referral of
an immediate family member.
(2) Members in recruiting roles.--A member of the Army
serving in a recruiting or retention assignment, or assigned
to other duties regarding which eligibility for a bonus under
subsection (a) could (as determined by the Secretary) be
perceived as creating a conflict of interest, may not be paid
a bonus under subsection (a).
(d) Amount of Bonus.--The amount of the bonus paid for a
referral under subsection (a) may not exceed $1,000. The
bonus shall be paid in a lump sum.
(e) Time of Payment.--A bonus may not be paid under
subsection (a) with respect to a person who enlists in the
Army until the person completes basic training and individual
advanced training.
(f) Relation To Prohibition on Bounties.--The referral
bonus authorized by this section is not a bounty for purposes
of section 514(a) of title 10, United States Code.
(g) Limitation on Initial Use of Authority.--During the
first year in which bonuses are offered under this section,
the Secretary of the Army may not pay more than 1,000
referral bonuses per component of the Army.
(h) Duration of Authority.--A bonus may not be paid under
subsection (a) with respect to any referral that occurs after
December 31, 2007.

SEC. 1504. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM AGE FOR ENLISTMENT.

Section 505(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``thirty-five years of age'' and inserting
``forty-two years of age''.

SEC. 1505. REPEAL OF PROHIBITION ON PRIOR SERVICE ENLISTMENT
BONUS FOR RECEIPT OF OTHER ENLISTMENT OR
REENLISTMENT BONUS FOR SERVICE IN THE SELECTED
RESERVE.

Section 308i(a)(2) of title 37, United States Code, is
amended by striking subparagraph (D).

SEC. 1506. INCREASE AND ENHANCEMENT OF AFFILIATION BONUS FOR
OFFICERS OF THE SELECTED RESERVE.

(a) Repeal of Prohibition on Eligibility for Prior Reserve
Service.--Subsection (a)(2) of section 308j of title 37,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by adding ``and'' at the end;
(2) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(3) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).
(b) Increase in Maximum Amount.--Subsection (d) of such
section is amended by striking ``$6,000'' and inserting
``$10,000''.

SEC. 1507. ENHANCEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL LOAN REPAYMENT
AUTHORITIES.

(a) Additional Loans Eligible for Repayment.--Paragraph (1)
of section 2171(a) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) any loan incurred for educational purposes made by a
lender that is--
``(i) an agency or instrumentality of a State;
``(ii) a financial or credit institution (including an
insurance company) that is subject to examination and
supervision by an agency of the United States or any State;
``(iii) a pension fund approved by the Secretary for
purposes of this section; or
``(iv) a non-profit private entity designated by a State,
regulated by such State, and approved by the Secretary for
purposes of this section.''.
(b) Eligibility of Officers.--Paragraph (2) of such section
is amended by striking ``an enlisted member in a military
specialty'' and inserting ``a member in an officer program or
military specialty''.

SEC. 1508. REPORT ON RESERVE DENTAL INSURANCE PROGRAM.

(a) Study.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a study
of the Reserve Dental Insurance program.
(b) Elements.--The study required by subsection (a) shall--
(1) identify the most effective mechanism or mechanisms for
the payment of premiums under the Reserve Dental Insurance
program for members of the reserve components of the Armed
Forces and their dependents, including by deduction from
reserve pay, by direct collection, or by other means
(including appropriate mechanisms from other military
benefits programs), to ensure uninterrupted availability of
premium payments regardless of whether members are performing
active duty with pay or inactive-duty training with pay;
(2) include such matters relating to the Reserve Dental
Insurance program as the Secretary considers appropriate; and
(3) assess the effectiveness of mechanisms for informing
the members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces of
the availability of, and benefits under, the Reserve Dental
Insurance program.
(c) Report.--Not later than February 1, 2007, the Secretary
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on the study required by subsection (a). The report shall
include the findings of the study and such recommendations
for legislative or administrative action regarding the
Reserve Dental Insurance program as the Secretary considers
appropriate in light of the study.
(d) Reserve Dental Insurance Program Defined.--In this
section, the term ``Reserve Dental Insurance program''
includes--
(1) the dental insurance plan required under paragraph (1)
of section 1076a(a) of title 10, United States Code; and
(2) any dental insurance plan established under paragraph
(2) or (4) of section 1076a(a) of title 10, United States
Code.

AMENDMENT NO. 2459

(Purpose: To require guidelines on the use of tiered evaluations for
offers for contracts and task orders under contracts)

At the end of subtitle A of title VIII, add the following:

SEC. 807. GUIDANCE ON USE OF TIERED EVALUATION OF OFFERS FOR
CONTRACTS AND TASK ORDERS UNDER CONTRACTS.

(a) Guidance Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe guidance for the military departments and the
Defense Agencies on the use of tiered evaluations of offers
or proposals of offerors for contracts and for task orders
under contracts.
(b) Elements.--The guidance prescribed under subsection (a)
shall include a prohibition on the initiation by a
contracting officer of a tiered evaluation of an offer or
proposal of an offeror for a contract or for a task or
delivery order under a contract unless the contracting
officer--
(1) has conducted market research in accordance with part
10 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation in order to
determine whether or not a sufficient number of qualified
small businesses are available to justify limiting
competition for the award of such contract or task or
delivery order under applicable law and regulations;
(2) is unable, after conducting market research under
paragraph (1), to make the determination described in that
paragraph; and
(3) includes in the contract file a written explanation why
such contracting officer was unable to make such
determination.

AMENDMENT NO. 2460

(Purpose: To provide for consumer education on insurance and other
financial services for members of the Armed Forces and their spouses)

At the end of subtitle H of title V, add the following:

SEC. 596. CONSUMER EDUCATION FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES
AND THEIR SPOUSES ON INSURANCE AND OTHER
FINANCIAL SERVICES.

(a) Education and Counseling Requirements.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 50 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:

``Sec. 992. Consumer education: financial services

``(a) Requirement for Consumer Education Program for
Members.--(1) The Secretary concerned shall carry out a
program

[[Page S12509]]

to provide comprehensive education to members of the armed
forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary on--
``(A) financial services that are available under law to
members;
``(B) financial services that are routinely offered by
private sector sources to members;
``(C) practices relating to the marketing of private sector
financial services to members;
``(D) such other matters relating to financial services
available to members, and the marketing of financial services
to members, as the Secretary considers appropriate; and
``(E) such other financial practices as the Secretary
considers appropriate.
``(2) Training under this subsection shall be provided to
members as--
``(A) a component of members initial entry orientation
training; and
``(B) a component of periodically recurring required
training that is provided for the members at military
installations.
``(3) The training provided at a military installation
under paragraph (2)(B) shall include information on any
financial services marketing practices that are particularly
prevalent at that military installation and in the vicinity.
``(b) Counseling for Members and Spouses.--(1) The
Secretary concerned shall, upon request, provide counseling
on financial services to each member of the armed forces, and
such member's spouse, under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary.
``(2)(A) In the case of a military installation at which at
least 2,000 members of the armed forces on active duty are
assigned, the Secretary concerned--
``(i) shall provide counseling on financial services under
this subsection through a full-time financial services
counselor at such installation; and
``(ii) may provide such counseling at such installation by
any means elected by the Secretary from among the following:
``(I) Through members of the armed forces in grade E-7 or
above, or civilians, who provide such counseling as part of
their other duties for the armed forces or the Department of
Defense.
``(II) By contract, including contract for services by
telephone and by the Internet.
``(III) Through qualified representatives of nonprofit
organizations and agencies under formal agreements with the
Department of Defense to provide such counseling.
``(B) In the case of any military installation not
described in subparagraph (A), the Secretary concerned shall
provide counseling on financial services under this
subsection at such installation by any of the means set forth
in subparagraph (A)(ii), as elected by the Secretary
concerned.
``(3) Each financial services counselor under paragraph
(2)(A)(i), and any other individual providing counseling on
financial services under paragraph (2), shall be an
individual who, by reason of education, training, or
experience, is qualified to provide helpful counseling to
members of the armed forces and their spouses on financial
services and marketing practices described in subsection
(a)(1). Such individual may be a member of the armed forces
or an employee of the Federal Government.
``(4) The Secretary concerned shall take such action as is
necessary to ensure that each financial services counselor
under paragraph (2)(A)(i), and any other individual providing
counseling on financial services under paragraphs (2), is
free from conflicts of interest relevant to the performance
of duty under this section. and, in the performance of that
duty, is dedicated to furnishing members of the armed forces
and their spouses with helpful information and counseling on
financial services and related marketing practices.
``(c) Life Insurance.--(1) In counseling a member of the
armed forces, or spouse of a member of the armed forces,
under this section regarding life insurance offered by a
private sector source, a financial services counselor under
subsection (b)(2)(A)(i), or another individual providing
counseling on financial services under subsection (b)(2),
shall furnish the member or spouse, as the case may be, with
information on the availability of Servicemembers' Group Life
Insurance under subchapter III of chapter 19 of title 38,
including information on the amounts of coverage available
and the procedures for electing coverage and the amount of
coverage.
``(2)(A) A covered member of the armed forces may not
authorize payment to be made for private sector life
insurance by means of an allotment of pay to which the member
is entitled under chapter 3 of title 37 unless the
authorization of allotment is accompanied by a written
certification by a commander of the member, a financial
services counselor referred to in subsection (b)(2)(A)(i), or
another individual providing counseling on financial services
under subsection (b)(2), as applicable, that the member has
received counseling under paragraph (1) regarding the
purchase of coverage under that private sector life
insurance.
``(B) Subject to subparagraph (C), a written certification
described in subparagraph (A) may not be made with respect to
a member`s authorization of allotment as described in
subparagraph (A) until seven days after the date of the
member's authorization of allotment in order to facilitate
the provision of counseling to the member under paragraph
(1).
``(C) The commander of a member may waive the applicability
of subparagraph (B) to a member for good cause, including the
member's imminent change of station.
``(D) In this paragraph, the term `covered member of the
armed forces' means an active duty member of the armed forces
in grades E-1 through E-4.
``(d) Financial Services Defined.--In this section, the
term `financial services' includes the following:
``(1) Life insurance, casualty insurance, and other
insurance.
``(2) Investments in securities or financial instruments.
``(3) Banking, credit, loans, deferred payment plans, and
mortgages.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``992. Consumer education: financial services.''.

(b) Continuing Effect of Existing Allotments for Life
Insurance.--Paragraph (c)(2) of section 992 of title 10,
United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), shall not
affect any allotment of pay authorized by a member of the
Armed Forces before the effective date of such section.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on the first day of the first month that
begins more than 120 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act.

AMENDMENT NO. 2461

(Purpose: To authorize funding for a human resources benefit call
center for the Navy)

On page 52, between lines 5 and 6, insert the following:

SEC. 304. NAVY HUMAN RESOURCES BENEFIT CALL CENTER.

Of the amount authorized to be appropriated by section
301(2) for operation and maintenance for the Navy, $1,500,000
may be available for civilian manpower and personnel for a
human resources benefit call center.

AMENDMENT NO. 2462

(Purpose: To require a report on any proposed change to the acquisition
strategy for a defense or joint business information system)

On page 213, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following:

SEC. 807. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION OF CANCELLATION OF MAJOR
AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS.

(a) Report Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall notify
the congressional defense committees not less than 60 days
before cancelling a major automated information system
program that has been fielded or approved to be fielded, or
making a change that will significantly reduce the scope of
such a program, of the proposed cancellation or change.
(c) Content.--Each notification submitted under subsection
(a) with respect to the proposed cancellation or change shall
include--
(1) the specific justification for the proposed change;
(2) a description of the impact of the proposed change on
the Departments ability to achieve the objectives of the
program that has been cancelled or changed:
(3) a description of the steps that the Department plans to
take to achieve such objectives; and
(4) other information relevant to the change in acquisition
strategy.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``major automated information system'' has the
meaning given that term in Department of Defense Directive
5000.
(2) The term ``approved to be fielded'' means having
received Milestone C approval.

AMENDMENT NO. 2463

(Purpose: To provide that, of the amount authorized to be appropriated
to the Department of Army for military construction projects at Fort
Gillem, Georgia, $4,550,000 is available for the construction of a
military police complex at Fort Gordon, Georgia)

On page 310, in the table following line 16, strike
``$8,450,000'' in the amount column of the item relating to
Fort Gillem, Georgia, and insert ``$3,900,000''.
On page 310, in the table following line 16, insert after
the item relating to Fort Gillem, Georgia, the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fort Gordon...........   $4,550,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page S12510]]

AMENDMENT NO. 2464

(Purpose: To increase by $360,800,000 the amount of supplemental
appropriations for Other Procurement, Army, for the procurement of
armored Tactical Wheeled Vehicles for units deployed in Iraq and
Afghanistan or for other Army priorities, and to provide an offset)

At the end of title XIV of division A, add the following:

SEC. 1411. TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLES.

(a) Additional Amount for Other Procurement, Army.--The
amount authorized to be appropriated by section 1403(a)(3)
for other procurement for the Army is hereby increased by
$360,800,000.
(b) Availability of Amount.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated by section 1403(a)(3) for other procurement for
the Army, as increased by subsection (a), $360,800,000 may be
made available--
(1) for the procurement of armored Tactical Wheeled
Vehicles for units deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan,
including the procurement of armored Light Tactical Vehicles
(LTVs), armored Medium Tactical Vehicles (MTVs), including
Low Signature Armored Cabs for the family of MTVs, and
armored Heavy Tactical Vehicles (HTVs); and
(2) to the extent the Secretary of the Army determines that
such amount is not needed for the procurement of such armored
Tactical Wheeled Vehicles for units deployed in Iraq and
Afghanistan, for the procurement of such armored vehicles in
accordance with other priorities of the Army.
(c) Offset.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by
section 1409(a) for the Iraq Freedom Fund is hereby reduced
by $360,800,000.

AMENDMENT NO. 2465

(Purpose: To make available, with an offset, $10,000,000 for the pilot
projects on early diagnosis and treatment of Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder and other mental health conditions)

At the end of section 732, add the following:
(d) Funding.--
(1) In general.--(A) The amount authorized to be
appropriated by section 303(a) for the Defense Health Program
is hereby increased by $10,000,000.
(B) Of the amount authorized to be appropriated by section
303(a) for the Defense Health Program, as increased by
subparagraph (A), $10,000,000 shall be available for pilot
projects under this section.
(C) The amount available under subparagraph (B) shall
remain available until expended.
(2) Offset.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by
section 301(2) for operation and maintenance for the Navy is
hereby decreased by $10,000,000.

AMENDMENT NO. 2466

(Purpose: To improve recruitment and retention in the Armed Forces)

On page 104, in the amendment made by section 571, strike
line 24 and all that follows through page 105, line 3, and
insert the following:
310(a) of title 37;
``(ii) is assigned to a deployable ship or mobile unit or
to other duty designated for the purpose of this section; or
``(iii) on or after August 29, 2005, performs duty
designated by the Secretary of Defense as qualifying duty for
purposes of this subsection.''.

At the end of title VI, add the following:

Subtitle F--Enhancement of Authorities for Recruitment and Retention

SEC. 671. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM RATE OF ASSIGNMENT INCENTIVE
PAY.

(a) Increase in Maximum Rate.--Section 307a(c) of title 37,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``$1,500'' and
inserting ``$3,000''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act,
and shall apply with respect to months beginning on or after
that date.

SEC. 672. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING
IN AREAS SUBJECT TO DECLARATION OF A MAJOR
DISASTER.

(a) Temporary Increase Authorized.--Section 403(b) of title
37, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (6) and (7) as paragraphs
(7) and (8), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following new
paragraph (5):
``(5)(A) The Secretary of Defense may prescribe a temporary
increase in rates of basic allowance for housing in a
military housing area located in an area for which a major
disaster has been declared in accordance with section 401 of
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170).
``(B) The amount of the increase under this paragraph in
rates of basic allowance for housing in an area by reason of
a disaster shall be based on a determination by the Secretary
of the amount by which the costs of adequate housing for
civilians have increased in the area by reason of the
disaster.
``(C) The amount of any increase under this paragraph in a
rate of basic allowance for housing may not exceed the amount
equal to 20 percent of such rate of basic allowance for
housing.
``(D) A member may be paid a basic allowance for housing at
a rate increased under this paragraph by reason of a disaster
only if the member certifies to the Secretary concerned that
the member has incurred increased housing costs in the area
concerned by reason of the disaster.
``(E) An increase in rates of basic allowance for housing
in an area under this paragraph shall remain in effect until
the effective date of the first adjustment in rates of basic
allowance for housing made for the area pursuant to a
redetermination of housing costs in the area under paragraph
(4) that occurs after the date of the increase under this
paragraph.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on September 1, 2005, and shall apply with
respect to months beginning on or after that date.

SEC. 673. TEMPORARY AUTHORITY FOR INCENTIVES FOR RECRUITMENT
OF MILITARY PERSONNEL.

(a) Authority To Provide Incentives.--The Secretary of
Defense may, in consultation with the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget, develop and provide incentives (in
addition to any other incentives authorized by law) for the
recruitment of individuals as officers and enlisted members
of the Armed Forces.
(b) Construction With Other Personnel Authorities.--
(1) In general.--Incentives may be provided under
subsection (a)--
(A) without regard to the lack of specific authority for
such incentives under title 10, United States Code, or title
37, United States Code; and
(B) notwithstanding any provision of title 10, United
States Code, or title 37, United States Code, or any rule or
regulation prescribed under such provision, relating to
methods of--
(i) determining requirements for, and the compensation of,
members of the Armed Forces who are assigned duty as military
recruiters; or
(ii) providing incentives to individuals to accept
commissions or enlist in the Armed Forces, including the
provision of group or individual bonuses, pay, or other
incentives.
(2) Waiver of otherwise applicable laws.--No provision of
title 10, United States Code, or title 37, United States
Code, may be waived with respect to, or otherwise determined
to be inapplicable to, the provision of incentives under
subsection (a) except with the approval of the Secretary.
(c) Plans.--
(1) Development of plans.--Before providing an incentive
under subsection (a), or entering into any agreement or
contract with respect to the provision of such incentive, the
Secretary shall develop a plan that includes--
(A) a description of such incentive, including the purpose
of such project and the members (or potential recruits) of
the Armed Forces to be addressed by such incentive;
(B) a statement of the anticipated outcomes of such
incentive; and
(C) the method of evaluating the effectiveness of such
incentive.
(2) Submittal of plans.--Not later than 30 days before the
provision of an incentive under subsection (a), the Secretary
shall submit a copy of the plan developed under paragraph (1)
on such incentive--
(A) to the elements of the Department of Defense to be
affected by the provision of such incentive; and
(B) to Congress.
(d) Limitations.--
(1) Number of individuals.--The number of individuals
provided incentives under subsection (a) may not exceed the
number of individuals equal to 20 percent of the accession
mission of the Armed Force concerned for the fiscal year in
which such incentives are first provided.
(2) Duration of provision.--The provision of incentives
under subsection (a) shall terminate not later than the end
of the three-year period beginning on the date on which the
provision of such incentives commences (except that such
incentives may continue to be provided beyond the date
otherwise provided in this paragraph to the extent necessary
to evaluate the effectiveness of such incentives).
(e) Reports.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress on
an annual basis a report on the incentives provided under
subsection (a) during the preceding year.
(2) Elements.--Each report under this subsection shall
include--
(A) a description of the incentives provided under
subsection (a) during the fiscal year covered by such report;
and
(B) an assessment of the impact of such incentives on the
recruitment of individuals as officers or enlisted members of
the Armed Forces.

SEC. 674. PAY AND BENEFITS TO FACILITATE VOLUNTARY SEPARATION
OF TARGETED MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Pay and Benefits Authorized.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 59 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 1175 the
following new section:

``Sec. 1175a. Voluntary separation pay and benefits

``(a) In General.--Under regulations approved by the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary concerned may provide
voluntary separation pay and benefits in accordance with this
section to eligible members of the armed forces who are
voluntarily separated from active duty in the armed forces.
``(b) Eligible Members.--(1) Except as provided in
paragraph (2), a member of the armed forces is eligible for
voluntary separation pay and benefits under this section if
the member--

[[Page S12511]]

``(A) has served on active duty for more than 6 years but
not more than 20 years;
``(B) has served at least 5 years of continuous active duty
immediately preceding the date of the member's separation
from active duty;
``(C) has not been approved for payment of a voluntary
separation incentive under section 1175 of this title;
``(D) meets such other requirements as the Secretary
concerned may prescribe, which may include requirements
relating to--
``(i) years of service, skill, rating, military specialty,
or competitive category;
``(ii) grade or rank;
``(iii) remaining period of obligated service; or
``(iv) any combination of these factors; and
``(E) requests separation from active duty.
``(2) The following members are not eligible for voluntary
separation pay and benefits under this section:
``(A) Members discharged with disability severance pay
under section 1212 of this title.
``(B) Members transferred to the temporary disability
retired list under section 1202 or 1205 of this title.
``(C) Members being evaluated for disability retirement
under chapter 61 of this title.
``(D) Members who have been previously discharged with
voluntary separation pay.
``(E) Members who are subject to pending disciplinary
action or who are subject to administrative separation or
mandatory discharge under any other provision of law or
regulations.
``(3) The Secretary concerned shall determine each year the
number of members to be separated, and provided separation
pay and benefits, under this section during the fiscal year
beginning in such year.
``(c) Separation.--Each eligible member of the armed forces
whose request for separation from active duty under
subsection (b)(1)(E) is approved shall be separated from
active duty.
``(d) Additional Service in Ready Reserve.--Of the number
of members of the armed forces to be separated from active
duty in a fiscal year, as determined under subsection (b)(3),
the Secretary concerned shall determine a number of such
members, in such skill and grade combinations as the
Secretary concerned shall designate, who shall serve in the
Ready Reserve, after separation from active duty, for a
period of not less than three years, as a condition of the
receipt of voluntary separation pay and benefits under this
section.
``(e) Separation Pay and Benefits.--(1) A member of the
armed forces who is separated from active duty under
subsection (c) shall be paid voluntary separation pay in
accordance with subsection (g) in an amount determined by the
Secretary concerned pursuant to subsection (f).
``(2) A member who is not entitled to retired or retainer
pay upon separation shall be entitled to the benefits and
services provided under--
``(A) chapter 58 of this title during the 180-day period
beginning on the date the member is separated
(notwithstanding any termination date for such benefits and
services otherwise applicable under the provisions of such
chapter); and
``(B) sections 404 and 406 of title 37.
``(f) Computation of Voluntary Separation Pay.--The
Secretary concerned shall specify the amount of voluntary
separation pay that an individual or defined group of members
of the armed forces may be paid under subsection (e)(1). No
member may receive as voluntary separation pay an amount
greater than three times the full amount of separation pay
for a member of the same pay grade and years of service who
is involuntarily separated under section 1174 of this title.
``(g) Payment of Voluntary Separation Pay.--(1) Voluntary
separation pay under this section may be paid in a single
lump sum.
``(2) In the case of a member of the armed forces who, at
the time of separation under subsection (c), has completed at
least 15 years, but less than 20 years, of active service,
voluntary separation pay may be paid, at the election of the
Secretary concerned, in--
``(A) a single lump sum;
``(B) installments over a period not to exceed 10 years; or
``(C) a combination of lump sum and such installments.
``(h) Coordination With Retired or Retainer Pay and
Disability Compensation.--(1) A member who is paid voluntary
separation pay under this section and who later qualities for
retired or retainer pay under this title or title 14 shall
have deducted from each payment of such retired or retainer
pay an amount, in such schedule of monthly installments as
the Secretary concerned shall specify, until the total amount
deducted from such retired or retainer pay is equal to the
total amount of voluntary separation pay so paid.
``(2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C), a
member who is paid voluntary separation pay under this
section shall not be deprived, by reason of the member's
receipt of such pay, of any disability compensation to which
the member is entitled under the laws administered by the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, but there shall be deducted
from such disability compensation an amount, in such schedule
of monthly installments as the Secretary concerned shall
specify, until the total amount deducted from such disability
compensation is equal to the total amount of voluntary
separation pay so paid.
``(B) No deduction shall be made from the disability
compensation paid to an eligible disabled uniformed services
retiree under section 1413, or to an eligible combat-related
disabled uniformed services retiree under section 1413a of
this title, who is paid voluntary separation pay under this
section.
``(C) No deduction may be made from the disability
compensation paid to a member for the amount of voluntary
separation pay received by the member because of an earlier
discharge or release from a period of active duty if the
disability which is the basis for that disability
compensation was incurred or aggravated during a later period
of active duty.
``(3) The requirement under this subsection to repay
voluntary separation pay following retirement from the armed
forces does not apply to a member who was eligible to retire
at the time the member applied and was accepted for voluntary
separation pay and benefits under this section.
``(4) The Secretary concerned may waive the requirement to
repay voluntary separation pay under paragraphs (1) and (2)
if the Secretary determines that recovery would be against
equity and good conscience or would be contrary to the best
interests of the United States.
``(i) Retirement Defined.--In this section, the term
`retirement' includes a transfer to the Fleet Reserve or
Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.
``(j) Repayment for Members who Return to Active Duty.--(1)
Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), a member of the
armed forces who, after having received all or part of
voluntary separation pay under this section, returns to
active duty shall have deducted from each payment of basic
pay, in such schedule of monthly installments as the
Secretary concerned shall specify, until the total amount
deducted from such basic pay equals the total amount of
voluntary separation pay received.
``(2) Members who are involuntarily recalled to active duty
or full-time National Guard duty in accordance with section
12301(a), 12301(b), 12301(g), 12302, 12303, or 12304 of this
title or section 502(f)(1) of title 32 shall not be subject
to this subsection.
``(3) Members who are recalled or perform active duty or
full-time National Guard duty in accordance with section
101(d)(1), 101(d)(2), 101(d)(5), 12301(d) (insofar as the
period served is less than 180 consecutive days with the
consent of the member), 12319, or 12503 of title 10, or
section 114, 115, or 502(f)(2) of title 32 (insofar as the
period served is less than 180 consecutive days with consent
of the member), shall not be subject to this subsection.
``(4) The Secretary of Defense may waive, in whole or in
part, repayment required under paragraph (1) if the Secretary
determines that recovery would be against equity and good
conscience or would be contrary to the best interests of the
United States. The authority in this paragraph may be
delegated only to the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness and the Principal Deputy Undersecretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness.
``(k) Termination of Authority.--(1) The authority to
separate a member of the armed forces from active duty under
subsection (c) shall terminate on December 31, 2008.
``(2) A member who separates by the date specified in
paragraph (1) may continue to be provided voluntary
separation pay and benefits under this section until the
member has received the entire amount of pay and benefits to
which the member is entitled under this section.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 59 of such title is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 1175 the following new
item:

``1175a. Voluntary separation pay and benefits.''.

(b) Limitation on Applicability.--During the period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending
on December 31, 2008, the members of the Armed Forces who are
eligible for separation, and for the provision of voluntary
separation pay and benefits, under section 1175a of title 10,
United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), shall be
limited to officers of the Armed Forces who meet the
eligibility requirements of section 1175a(b) of title 10,
United States Code (as so added), but have not completed more
than 12 years of active service as of the date of separation
from active duty.
(c) Officer Selective Early Retirement.--Section 638a(a) of
title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following new sentence: ``During the period beginning on
October 1, 2005, and ending on December 31, 2011, the
Secretary of Defense may also authorize the Secretary of the
Navy and the Secretary of the Air Force to take any of the
actions set forth in such subsection with respect to officers
of the armed forces under the jurisdiction of such
Secretary.''.

AMENDMENT NO. 2467

(Purpose: To improve the authority for reimbursement for protective,
safety, and health equipment purchased for members of the Armed Forces
deployed in Iraq and Central Asia)

At the end of subtitle C of title III, add the following:

[[Page S12512]]

SEC. __. REIMBURSEMENT FOR CERTAIN PROTECTIVE, SAFETY, OR
HEALTH EQUIPMENT PURCHASED BY OR FOR MEMBERS OF
THE ARMED FORCES FOR DEPLOYMENT IN OPERATIONS
IN IRAQ AND CENTRAL ASIA.

(a) Reimbursement Required.--
(1) In general.--Subject to subsections (d) and (e), the
Secretary of Defense shall reimburse a member of the Armed
Forces, or a person or entity referred to in paragraph (2),
for the cost (including shipping cost) of any protective,
safety, or health equipment that was purchased by such
member, or such person or entity on behalf of such member,
before or during the deployment of such member in Operation
Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom, or Operation Iraqi
Freedom for the use of such member in connection with such
operation if the unit commander of such member certifies that
such equipment was critical to the protection, safety, or
health of such member.
(2) Covered persons and entities.--A person or entity
referred to in this paragraph is a family member or relative
of a member of the Armed Forces, a non-profit organization,
or a community group.
(3) Regulations not required for reimbursement.--
Reimbursements may be made under this subsection in advance
of the promulgation by the Secretary of Defense of
regulations, if any, relating to the administration of this
section.
(b) Protective Equipment Reimbursement Fund.--
(1) Establishment.--There is hereby established an account
to be known as the ``Protective Equipment Reimbursement
Fund'' (in this subsection referred to as the ``Fund'').
(2) Elements.--The Fund shall consist of amounts deposited
in the Fund from amounts available for the Fund under
subsection (g).
(3) Availability.--Amounts in the Fund shall be available
directly to the unit commanders of members of the Armed
Forces for the making of reimbursements for protective,
safety, and health equipment under subsection (a).
(4) Documentation.--Each person seeking reimbursement under
subsection (a) for protective, safety, or health equipment
purchased by or on behalf of a member of the Armed Forces
shall submit to the unit commander of such member such
documentation as is necessary to establish each of the
following:
(A) The nature of such equipment, including whether or not
such equipment qualifies as protective, safety, or health
equipment under subsection (c).
(B) The cost of such equipment.
(c) Covered Protective, Safety, and Health Equipment.--
Protective, safety, and health equipment for which
reimbursement shall be made under subsection (a) shall
include personal body armor, collective armor or protective
equipment (including armor or protective equipment for high
mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicles), and items provided
through the Rapid Fielding Initiative of the Army, or
equivalent programs of the other Armed Forces, such as the
advanced (on-the-move) hydration system, the advanced combat
helmet, the close combat optics system, a Global Positioning
System (GPS) receiver, a gun scope, and a soldier
intercommunication device.
(d) Limitation Regarding Amount of Reimbursement.--The
amount of reimbursement provided under subsection (a) per
item of protective, safety, and health equipment purchased by
or on behalf of any given member of the Armed Forces may not
exceed the lesser of--
(1) the cost of such equipment (including shipping cost);
or
(2) $1,100.
(e) Limitation on Date of Purchase.--Reimbursement may be
made under subsection (a) only for protective, safety, and
health equipment purchased before October 1, 2006.
(f) Ownership of Equipment.--The Secretary shall identify
the circumstances, if any, under which the United States
shall assume title or ownership of protective, safety, or
health equipment for which reimbursement is provided under
subsection (a).
(g) Funding.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
amounts for reimbursements under subsection (a) shall be
derived from any amounts authorized to be appropriated by
this Act.
(2) Exception.--Amounts authorized to be appropriated by
this Act and available for the procurement of equipment for
members of the Armed Forces deployed, or to be deployed, to
Iraq or Afghanistan may not be utilized for reimbursements
under subsection (a).
(h) Repeal of Superseded Authority.--Section 351 of the
Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2005 (Public Law 108-375; 118. Stat. 1857) is
repealed.

AMENDMENT NO. 2468

(Purpose: To require a report on predatory lending directed at members
of the Armed Forces and their dependents)

At the end of subtitle H of title V, add the following:

SEC. 596. REPORT ON PREDATORY LENDING PRACTICES DIRECTED AT
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND THEIR
DEPENDENTS.

(a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
(1) Predatory lending practices harm members of the Armed
Forces and are an increasing problem for the Armed Forces.
(2) Predatory lending practices not only hurt the financial
security of the members of the Armed Forces but, according to
the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness,
also threaten the operational readiness of the Armed Forces.
(3) The General Accountability Office found in an April
2005 report that the Department of Defense was not fully
utilizing tools available to the Department to curb the
predatory lending practices directed at members of the Armed
Forces.
(b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) the Department of Defense should work with financial
service regulators to protect the members of the Armed Forces
from predatory lending practices; and
(2) the Senate should consider and adopt legislation--
(A) to strengthen disclosure, education, and other
protections for members of the Armed Forces regarding
predatory lending practices; and
(B) to ensure greater cooperation between financial
services regulators and the Department of Defense on the
protection of members of the Armed Forces from predatory
lending practices.
(c) Report.--
(1) Report required.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall,
in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the
Chairman of the Federal Reserve, the Chairman of the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, and representatives of
military charity organizations and consumer organizations,
submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on
predatory lending practices directed at members of the Armed
Forces and their families.
(2) Elements.--The report under paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) a description of the prevalence of predatory lending
practices directed at members of the Armed Forces and their
families;
(B) an assessment of the effects of predatory lending
practices on members of the Armed Forces and their families;
(C) a description of the strategy of the Department of
Defense, and of any current or planned programs of the
Department, to educate members of the Armed Forces and their
families regarding predatory lending practices;
(D) a description of the strategy of the Department of
Defense, and of any current or planned programs of the
Department, to reduce or eliminate--
(i) the prevalence of predatory lending practices directed
at members of the Armed Forces and their families; and
(ii) the negative effect of such practices on members of
the Armed Forces and their families; and
(E) recommendations for additional legislative and
administrative action to reduce or eliminate predatory
lending practices directed at members of the Armed Forces and
their families.
(3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
(A) The term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' means--
(i) the Committees on Armed Services and Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs of the Senate; and
(ii) the Committees on Armed Services and Financial
Services of the House of Representatives.
(B) The term ``predatory lending practice'' means an unfair
or abusive loan or credit sale transition or collection
practice.

AMENDMENT NO. 2469

(Purpose: To authorize $1,440,000 in planning and design funds for a
replacement C-130 aircraft maintenance hangar at Air National Guard New
Castle County Airport, and to provide an offset)

On page 337, between lines 4 and 5, insert the following:

SEC. 2602. CONSTRUCTION OF MAINTENANCE HANGAR, NEW CASTLE
COUNTY AIRPORT AIR GUARD BASE, DELAWARE.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--The amount authorized
to be appropriated by section 2601(3)(A) for the Department
of the Air Force for the Air National Guard of the United
States is hereby increased by $1,440,000.
(b) Use of Funds.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated by section 2601(3)(A) for the Department of the
Air Force for the Air National Guard of the United States, as
increased by subsection (a), $1,440,000 is available for
planning and design for a replacement C-130 aircraft
maintenance hangar at Air National Guard New Castle County
Airport, Delaware.
(c) Offset.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by
section 2204(a) for military construction, land acquisition,
and military family housing functions of the Department of
the Navy and the amount of such funds authorized by paragraph
(11) of such subsection for the construction of increment 3
of the general purpose berthing pier at Naval Weapons
Station, Earle, New Jersey, are each hereby decreased by
$1,440,000.

AMENDMENT NO. 2470

(Purpose: Expressing the sense of the Senate on notice to Congress of
the recognition of members of the Armed Forces for extraordinary acts
of heroism, bravery, and achievement)

At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following:

[[Page S12513]]

SEC. __. SENSE OF SENATE ON NOTICE TO CONGRESS OF RECOGNITION
OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES FOR
EXTRAORDINARY ACTS OF BRAVERY, HEROISM, AND
ACHIEVEMENT.

It is the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Defense
or the Secretary of the military department concerned should,
upon awarding a medal to a member of the Armed Forces or
otherwise commending or recognizing a member of the Armed
Forces for an act of extraordinary heroism, bravery,
achievement, or other distinction, notify the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, the Senators from the State in which such
member resides, and the Member of the House of
Representatives from the district in which such member
resides of such extraordinary award, commendation, or
recognition.

AMENDMENT NO. 2471

(Purpose: To improve transitional assistance provided for members of
the Armed Forces being discharged, released from active duty, or
retired)

At the end of division A, add the following:

TITLE XV--TRANSITION SERVICES

SEC. 1501. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Veterans' Enhanced
Transition Services Act of 2005''.

SEC. 1502. IMPROVED ADMINISTRATION OF TRANSITIONAL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAMS.

(a) Preseparation Counseling.--Section 1142 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new
paragraph (4):
``(4) For members of the reserve components of the armed
forces (including members of the National Guard on active
duty under title 32) who have been serving on active duty
continuously for at least 180 days, the Secretary concerned
shall provide preseparation counseling under this section on
an individual basis to all such members before such members
are separated.''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (4), by striking ``(4) Information
concerning'' and inserting the following:
``(4) Provision of information on civilian occupations and
related assistance programs, including information
concerning--
``(A) certification and licensure requirements that are
applicable to civilian occupations;
``(B) civilian occupations that correspond to military
occupational specialties; and
``(C)''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(11) Information concerning the priority of service for
veterans in the receipt of employment, training, and
placement services provided under qualified job training
programs of the Department of Labor.
``(12) Information concerning veterans small business
ownership and entrepreneurship programs of the Small Business
Administration and the National Veterans Business Development
Corporation.
``(13) Information concerning employment and reemployment
rights and obligations under chapter 43 of title 38.
``(14) Information concerning veterans preference in
federal employment and federal procurement opportunities.
``(15) Contact information for housing counseling
assistance.
``(16) A description, developed in consultation with the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, of health care and other
benefits to which the member may be entitled under the laws
administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.''.
(b) Conforming and Clerical Amendments.--
(1) Conforming amendment.--The heading of such section is
amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 1142. Members separating from active duty:
preseparation counseling''.

(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 58 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking the item relating to section 1142 and
inserting the following:

``1142. Members separating from active duty: preseparation
counseling.''.

(c) Department of Labor Transitional Services Program.--
Section 1144 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``paragraph (4)(A)''
in the second sentence and inserting ``paragraph (5)(A)'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) Training Support Materials.--The Secretary concerned
shall, on a continuing basis and in cooperation with the
Secretary of Labor, update the content of all materials used
by the Department of Labor that provide direct training
support to personnel who provide transitional services
counseling under this section.''.

SEC. 1503. FOLLOW UP ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES AFTER PRESEPARATION PHYSICAL
EXAMINATIONS.

Section 1145(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5)(A) The Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation
with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, ensure that
appropriate actions are taken to assist a member of the armed
forces who, as a result of a medical examination under
paragraph (4), receives an indication for a referral for
follow up treatment from the health care provider who
performs the examination.
``(B) Assistance provided to a member under paragraph (1)
shall include the following:
``(i) Information regarding, and any appropriate referral
for, the care, treatment, and other services that the
Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Veterans Affairs may
provide to such member under any other provision of law,
including--
``(I) clinical services, including counseling and treatment
for post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health
conditions; and
``(II) any other care, treatment, and services.
``(ii) Information on the private sector sources of
treatment that are available to the member in the member's
community.
``(iii) Assistance to enroll in the health care system of
the Department of Veterans Affairs for health care benefits
for which the member is eligible under laws administered by
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.''.

SEC. 1504. REPORT ON TRANSITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than May 1, 2006, the
Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the
Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs,
submit to Congress a report on the actions taken to ensure
that the Transition Assistance Programs for members of the
Armed Forces separating from the Armed Forces (including
members of the regular components of the Armed Forces and
members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces)
function effectively to provide such members with timely and
comprehensive transition assistance when separating from the
Armed Forces.
(b) Focus on Particular Members.--The report required by
subsection (a) shall include particular attention to the
actions taken with respect to the Transition Assistance
Programs to assist the following members of the Armed Forces:
(1) Members deployed to Operation Iraqi Freedom.
(2) Members deployed to Operation Enduring Freedom.
(3) Members deployed to or in support of other contingency
operations.
(4) Members of the National Guard activated under the
provisions of title 32, United States Code, in support of
relief efforts for Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita.
Mr. WARNER. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. WARNER. I thank my colleague from Michigan for working together
with colleagues on both sides of the aisle. We achieved a substantial
amount of work. Tomorrow we will return, and my rough calculation with
regard to the amendments is of the 12 on the majority side, we have the
Chambliss amendment, which might be subject to a second degree; we have
the Ensign amendment, which is now the pending amendment; there is an
amendment by Senator Talent, Senator Graham, Senator Inhofe that
involves prayer at the service academies; Senator Frist in recognition
of our troops and others participating in the war against terrorism;
and consent to Brownback which is an amendment regarding personal
notification relating to the men and women of the Armed Forces in cases
where he deems parental consent is appropriate. And the Senator from
Virginia, Senator Warner, has an amendment.
I have the list of the Senator from Michigan. Six of the 12
amendments have been acted upon by the Senate. To the extent the
Senator can advise the Senate of the remaining amendments, it would be
helpful.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I thank my good friend from Virginia. We
have on our side disposed of six amendments. We are trying to boil down
the balance of the amendments. We have to boil down to six. We have not
yet done that. I don't want to identify which ones other than to say we
know there will be a Dorgan amendment on the Truman Commission which we
hope will come immediately after lunch tomorrow. There is still a
surplus of amendments we have to work out.
Mr. WARNER. I bring to the attention of my good friend and colleague,
we have provided the Senator with copies of the amendments by Senator
Chambliss, Senator Ensign, Senator Talent. The amendment by Senator
Graham is still under work. Senator Inhofe, you have that amendment.
Senator Frist's amendment we have not as yet distributed. The Brownback
amendment will be provided to you tonight. And we have not as yet
provided you with the one of the Senator from Virginia.
Mr. LEVIN. To be more helpful, the Dorgan amendment has been filed.

[[Page S12514]]

There is a likelihood there will be a Durbin amendment on Guard and
Reserve which also has been filed. I don't want to lock that in as one
because we are still juggling. That has been filed. It is likely that
will be one of the six.
Mr. WARNER. That would not be the proposed second degree to the
Chambliss amendment? The Chambliss amendment is Guard and Reserve, too.
Mr. LEVIN. I don't think it is, but I am not certain.
Mr. WARNER. This is helpful to colleagues as they are doing their
work tonight in support of what we are trying to achieve with final
passage tomorrow.

amendment no. 2423

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I would like to briefly discuss an amendment
that was offered to the Defense Authorization bill yesterday by the
Senators from Colorado. I voted against this measure, and I did so with
some reservation.
If approved by this body, this amendment would have provided
retirement benefits to government contract workers, who, by no fault of
their own, now find themselves denied of pension and lifetime medical
benefits that they were expecting to receive. In fact, the tragedy of
their situation is that because of these workers' efficiency, they are
actually being denied pensions and health insurance--in this case, they
are clearly victims of their own success.
As the Senators from Colorado explained, the Federal Government had
given employees of Kaiser Hill Company until December 15, 2006 to
complete their work decontaminating and demolishing the former nuclear
weapons facility at Rocky Flats. However, because Kaiser Hill's workers
finished their work a year ahead of schedule, they are being penalized
under the terms of their contract.
Like countless other Federal contracts, the arrangement for Rocky
Flats workers used a numerical formula for determining who would
receive lifetime benefits after the work's completion--if the sum of an
employee's age and years of employment at the nuclear weapons plant
added up to 70, the worker would be fully eligible for these benefits.
But with Kaiser Hill declaring the job complete 14 months before their
deadline, over 70 workers who would have qualified for these benefits
could not.
I commend the Senators from Colorado for offering their amendment.
They have every right to be troubled by the way workers in their State
have been affected by this contract. And I share their deep concern
that rather than be rewarded for their good work, the workers of Rocky
Flats are actually unable to obtain the benefits that they had
expected. Under terms of such a contract there is absolutely no
incentive for workers to perform as effectively as these fine Kaiser-
Hill employees did. I cannot disagree with that notion at all.
Nonetheless, yesterday, I felt compelled to vote against the
amendment--not because it was offered without the best of intentions. I
believe that the workers of Kaiser-Hill deserve to be commended for
their quick and thorough work. However, I am afraid that if we are to
single out these workers' contract, Congress would be creating an
unfair standard that would help one segment of the Nation's Federal
contracting workforce while leaving the rest without any similar
support.
If this amendment had been approved, I would be concerned about
benefiting some to the exclusion of others who might be deserving of
similar consideration. I believe that we ought to revisit the issues
facing these workers in the context of other Federal contract employees
who might be in a similar situation. I stand ready to work with my
colleagues from Colorado as well as others from other States who share
my concern about these workers, who have been penalized due to no fault
of their own. I believe that the Senators from Colorado have identified
a critically important problem with formulas being used to regulate
benefit disbursements in Federal contracts. And I hope these issues
will be revisited to ensure that we are rewarding good and efficient
performance and providing American workers the benefits that they
deserve.

vote explanation

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I was necessarily absent from the vote on
amendment No. 2423, Senator Allard's amendment, during consideration of
the Fiscal Year 2006 Defense Authorization bill. As my constituents
know, with my wife Elaine, I was hosting the 21st Annual Utah Women's
Conference. Mr. President, this is an important event, in which the
women of the State of Utah can directly inform our State's leaders
about the issues that affect them and their families.
Had I been present to vote on Senator Allard's amendment, I would
have voted against the proposal.

amendment no. 1514

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the
amendment to the FY06 National Defense Authorization Act that
authorizes the Navy to convey approximately 230 acres of open space
land along the eastern boundary of Marine Corps Air Station Miramar to
the County of San Diego in order to provide access to the historic
Stowe Trail.
The Stowe Trail at one time functioned as the primary road leading to
the historic town of Stowe, and now links the Goodan Ranch and Sycamore
Canyon Preserves in the north with the Mission Trails Regional Park and
Santee Lakes Regional Recreation Area further south.
According to county records, up until the 1930s when access to this
portion became restricted for military use, the Stowe Trail had served
for some 80 years as the principle thoroughfare between the towns of
Santee and Poway.
The 230 acres of land that would be conveyed by the Navy under this
provision include diverse plant and animal life and environmentally-
sensitive habitats and would provide a natural wildlife corridor
between the two preserves, as well as with the Santee Lakes Recreation
Area.
Under the control of the County of San Diego, this land will become
part of an extensive open space trail system that will not only
increase recreational opportunities in the region, but will also
provide buffer zone that will mitigate against potential encroachment
that could impact the essential military missions at Marine Corps Air
Station Miramar.
It is important to point out that this proposed land conveyance is
the fruition of a process set in motion jointly by the San Diego County
Board of Supervisors and Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in 2002.
Both sides have worked together closely since that time to ensure
that the result will be a win-win situation for both the County and the
Marines.
For example, as part of the land conveyance process, the County of
San Diego has fully committed to compensate the Navy by paying the full
fair market value for this property.

Amendment No. 2424

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, for the last 4 years I have
been talking about the unfair and painful offset of the Defense
Department's Survivors Benefits Plan against Veteran's Affairs
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation, or DIC.
This offset mistreats the survivors of our service members who die on
active duty now and our 100 percent disabled military retirees who
purchased this benefit at the end of their careers. It is wrong, we
know it, and we have got to fix it.
Taking care of widows and orphans is a cost of war.
I have reminded the Senate of the Good Book's words, that in God's
eyes the true measure of our faith is how we look after orphans and
widows in their distress. And they are in distress. We are in a violent
struggle around the world with brutal and vicious enemies. Sadly,
American troops are lost every day.
We must never forget that the loved ones left behind by our
courageous men and women in uniform bear the greatest pain. Their lives
are forever altered; their futures left unclear. They suffer the
enduring cost of the ultimate sacrifice, and the Nation that asked for
that sacrifice must honor it.
The Department of Defense has provided the Senate several objections
to our amendment. For the benefit of my colleagues, I would like to
answer each objection.
First, just because the Pentagon objects to the amendment does not
mean we should not act. The Pentagon's objections have not stopped
Congress from correcting military benefit inequities before. They
should not stop us now.

[[Page S12515]]

The Pentagon objected to TRICARE For Life. And the Congress supported
it anyway.
The Pentagon objected to concurrent receipt for disabled military
retirees. And the Congress supported it anyway.
Last year, the Pentagon objected to eliminating the age-62 SBP
benefit reduction. And Congress fixed that inequity anyway.
I remind my colleagues that it is Congress' responsibility to ensure
our widows and retirees are treated fairly. We are the ones who must
recognize that the Nation has an obligation to those who give their
lives for our country.
The Defense Department argues that a VA Disability Benefits
Commission is studying this, so we should not take any action. There is
no indication whatsoever that the commission is actively looking at
either of the issues addressed in my amendment. We understand that they
are about to ask for a 1 year extension. The fact is that nothing will
come out of that commission until at least fiscal year 2009. That is
too late to help the World War II and Korean era retirees who should
already be ``paid up'' in their SBP. We don't need to study these
issues for several more years. The inequities are clear.
The Defense Department argues that SBP and DIC are fully funded and
that the offset is consistent with other Government programs. They are
not fully funded from the beneficiaries' perspective, because one
offsets the other. The fact that other Government programs have offsets
is irrelevant when you consider the sacrifices of military members and
widows for the rest of the country.
This same argument was used to argue against concurrent receipt of
retired pay and disability compensation, but the Congress rejected it 2
years ago. When military duty causes the disability or death of a
servicemember, all comparisons with other Government programs seem
hollow.
The Defense Department argues that they refund the premiums for the
SBP that is not paid to the widows of our 100 percent disable retirees.
I know a thing or two about insurance. When someone buys an insurance
policy and then dies, no insurance company in America could get away
with saying, ``sorry, we're not going to pay; here's a refund of your
premiums.''
Not only that, but the Government does not even pay interest on the
refunded premiums. However, let a widow get an overpayment from the
Government, and the Government insists on collecting interest from her.
These widows are rightly saying ``keep your premium refund; give me the
benefit we purchased.''
The Department of Defense argues that the law lets widows assign the
SBP benefit to their children and, in fact, draw both their VA and SBP
benefits. This is not true for the vast majority. It applies only to
widows who have children and only to those whose husbands were killed
since November 24, 2003. It does absolutely nothing for more than 90
percent of widows affected by this inequity.
Even for those widows with kids, who do have the option, it poses a
terrible choice. If they assign the benefit to their children, they
lose it completely after their children reach age 18, or 22 if they go
to college. One Army Sergeant Major's widow in this situation had two
children in college. She made the choice to assign the SBP to them to
help them stay in school. But the price of that decision is she will
lose her annuity as soon as they graduate, and will have to live on
$993 a month. We shouldn't put widows in a position of sacrificing
their long-term financial health for the immediate needs of their
families.
As usual, the Defense Department says fixing this inequity would cost
money. We all acknowledge that this will cost money. Everything we do
costs money. But when something is the right thing to do, then we do
it. Sometimes we compromise to pay the cost over time. But we find a
way to do it. And that is what we should do now.
The Defense Department argues that we shouldn't fix the SBP/DIC
offset or the ``Greatest Generation'' SBP tax because we raised the
age-62 SBP benefit last year. Not true. For the vast majority of the
people affected by my amendment, last year's SBP fix did nothing. Many
widows affected by the SBP/DIC offset still have their entire SBP
annuity eliminated by the DIC offset. They get zero benefit from last
year's change to SBP.
One big reason for that is most servicemembers being killed on active
duty today are junior--not 62 years old--and they don't have a very
large SBP benefit. Their benefit would be much less than the $993 a
month in VA DIC their survivors will receive. But that doesn't mean
their loved ones aren't entitled to that small benefit.
Also, last year's law did nothing for the World War II and Korean-era
retirees who already have paid almost 20 percent more SBP premiums than
later retirees, and who will end up paying one-third more if we don't
change the law this year. These benefit changes affect different
populations. Just because we brought fairness to one part of the
retiree population last year doesn't mean that the others don't deserve
fairness too.
The Department of Defense argues that this change isn't needed
because we raised the death gratuity to $100,000 and raised
Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance, SGLI, to $400,000 earlier this
year. It is correct that Congress made those changes, but the idea that
fixing the SBP-DIC offset is now unnecessary couldn't be further from
the truth.
I am proud to have supported those changes to the death gratuity and
SGLI, but they did nothing to help the vast majority of DIC widows and
they certainly didn't help our ``Greatest Generation'' retirees. They
only help the survivors of those killed in combat since 2001. Thousands
of servicemembers gave their lives and their health for their country
in hot and cold wars before that date. Their survivors have had no
relief and most are living on $993 a month. That is just wrong.
We have gone around and around on this issue over the years. We are
in a dangerous and long term war with an evil and intractable enemy. We
owe those who go in harm's way the assurance that the loved ones they
leave behind will get all the care a grateful Nation can provide. It is
the right thing to do, and now is the time to do it.
Mrs. DOLE. Mr. President, these are certainly challenging times for
our Nation--particularly as we confront an ever-emboldened terrorist
network that seeks to threaten civilized societies and destroy our way
of life. The threats are very real and the stakes are very high. Thank
God we have men and women who are answering the call of duty by proudly
wearing the uniform of the United States and defending our homeland
here and abroad. It is imperative that we continually show them and
their families just how much we appreciate and honor their service and
their sacrifice.
This Defense authorization bill certainly provides for much needed
programs that will increase readiness and quality of life for our
military personnel, and I applaud our distinguished Armed Services
chairman, John Warner, and Majority Leader Frist for moving this bill
forward. I represent a strong military constituency in North Carolina,
and I am delighted that this bill includes several of my proposals
addressing critical areas of need. I will briefly highlight a few of
them.
One of my amendments makes mental health counseling more accessible
for service members and their families. It allows certified and
licensed mental health counselors to directly bill TRICARE without a
physician's referral, in Under Served Areas--those areas where there is
an insufficient availability of mental health care providers.
It is estimated that over half of U.S. counties have no practicing
psychiatrists, psychologists, or social workers. Mental health
counselors can certainly help fill the void. The Department of Health
and Human Services already has in place a loan repayment program to
encourage mental health counselors to work in underserved areas. My
amendment removes barriers for those counselors to serve our military
members--especially the reservists and guardsmen who often live in
rural areas.
There is no question that when our military men and women are
deployed and separated from their families, the emotional stress and
trauma can be unimaginable. It is absolutely imperative that they have
access to mental health services not only to mitigate potential long
term affects like depression, violence or divorce--but also to ease the

[[Page S12516]]

reintegration into their family, and society, following long
deployments. Caring for our servicemembers' mental as well as physical
health is critical in retaining quality forces for our nation's
defense.
In last year's Defense authorization bill, my effort to have marriage
and family therapists added to the list of mental health care providers
available under TRICARE was successful. But with the ongoing war on
terror, the reality is that more needs to be done.
Another area we must all be concerned about is the blatant targeting
of servicemembers by predatory lenders. It is an egregious practice
that must be stopped. Not only can these practices lead to a cycle of
financial and professional suffering for individual servicemembers and
their families, but they can also have serious ramifications for our
military's operational readiness. Military conduct codes stress
financial solvency, and a member with bad credit and mounting debt can
face potentially career-ending disciplinary measures.
Many young troops--like many young people across the country--do not
have a cushion of savings to use in an emergency, and most are not
educated in financial management. In this time of more frequent and
extended deployments, servicemembers are faced with extra expenses due
to preparing for deployments and family emergencies that can force them
or their spouses to look to predatory lenders for short-term relief.
My amendment on predatory lending practices has two components.
First, it places the Senate on record acknowledging predatory lending
practices. Second, it requires the Defense Department, in consultation
with Treasury, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and representatives of
military charity and consumer organizations, to report to Congress
within 90 days on several matters: their current and planned programs
to assess the prevalence of predatory lending and to educate
servicemembers and their families; and second, their recommendations
for specific legislative and administrative actions to prevent or
eliminate predatory lending.
The Army has identified personal financial issues as one of the most
difficult problems facing military families. I couldn't agree more.
This Defense authorization bill will get the ball rolling on some much-
needed action, and I am very pleased to have the support of groups such
as the Consumer Federation of America, the Center for Responsible
Lending, the Military Coalition, and the Fleet Reserve Association.
Finally, another of my amendments directs that acquisition personnel
receive training on the requirements and application of the Berry
amendment. Implemented in 1941, the Berry amendment requires the
Defense Department to give preference in procurement to domestically
produced, manufactured, or home grown products. In my view, this is
essential to supporting the businesses that supply our troops with the
equipment they need to carry out their duties.
I am pleased that each of these amendments has been included in this
authorization bill. I believe they reaffirm the commitment of this
Congress to our military personnel, to their families, and to our
entire Nation.

____________________