Mr. President, let me just share what just happened here. I have been involved with this for a long time, including over in the House when we had our NDAA. Now, I am fully aware and everybody here knows that we have passed this NDAA for 57…
Mr. President, let me just share what just happened here. I have been involved with this for a long time, including over in the House when we had our NDAA. Now, I am fully aware and everybody here knows that we have passed this NDAA for 57 consecutive years, and we are going to pass it. But one of the things I really don't like about the procedure is that one person--any one person, Democrat or Republican--can object, as this was just objected to, and cause us to have to file cloture. This is going to put this off for a period of time, and two undesirable results can result. One result can be that it can ultimately deny Members from offering their amendments, whether they are germane or not.
I will state how much I appreciate the fact that Senator Reed and I in our committee have worked very closely together, and we made a decision that we want to have an open amendment process. We had discussion of this in our committee and everyone agrees with this.
This could have the effect of ultimately closing the door to everyone who has an amendment. We don't want that, but we did everything we could to stop an objection from taking place so that we could at least move on to the bill.
We need to get on the bill, and then we can try to do all kinds of arrangements. At one time, Senator Reed and I talked about maybe coming up with 10 amendments or 15 amendments or 3 amendments each, Democrats and Republicans, so that we could at least say to the individuals on our side--and I would say to my Republican friends--that I will do everything within my power to see that you get a vote. Unfortunately you can't do that because you can't guarantee there will be a vote. So that is the thing I regret, and the other bad part of this is that it is going to put it off for about a week.
I just got back from all of our war zones, talking to our troops on the ground, telling them that this is going to happen, that we are going to be taking up the NDAA, and telling them what is in it in terms of pay raises, what is in it in terms of priorities, and how we are going to try to get modernized. Right now we have several pieces of equipment that over the last 10 years have been ignored, and we have peer competitors in Russia and in China that have better equipment than we do. An artillery piece is evaluated by rapid fire and range, and right now our rapid fire is not as fast as either Russia's or China's. We see what is happening in the China Sea. We are over there. We see that our allies are looking and thinking: You know, the Chinese are preparing for World War III. What are we doing?
By postponing this, all of our troops and all of our very valued people who are risking their lives on a daily basis are going to wonder: Why didn't we go ahead and go with this thing? It is wrong.
I do want to say this. Senator Reed and I and our committees did everything we could to try to accommodate everyone as best as our rules would allow us to do. In living with the limitations that we have, we have done everything we can do.
I do want to compliment the entire Senate Armed Services Committee. We have also worked on the House side. Between Senator Reed and me-- Democrats and Republicans--we have done everything we could to keep this from happening. Again, as long as I can remember, at the last minute, one Senator can put this off and create the damage and potential damage that has been created now. I do regret that.
Mr. President, I think it is kind of unprecedented to have, in this case, the acting chairman and the ranking member be so close together on what we have attempted to do.
I think it is worthwhile to note, as Senator Reed brought up, that we had the committee hearing on this, and it is very rare we come out as we did on that. We actually did that in 1 day. It was 1 day, and it was 9 hours total. I am not sure if that is some kind of a record or not, but it shows that we are working very well together, and I was hoping that would take care of this today.
Anyway, we are now going to start discussing this bill. Since we have lost the opportunity to move to the bill and actually start on amendments, I think it is more important now to at least talk about what we are anticipating. Today we will begin consideration--even though we are not on the bill, we can still talk about it. This is the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2019. It is the most important piece of legislation we consider every year.
As I have said, this is now the 57th consecutive year that we have done this. I remember that just a few years ago we got very close to the middle of December or the end of December, which is an absolute deadline to get it done for the fiscal year. We had to go to the big four, and we got it done and got it passed. Well, we don't want to do that now. We want to do it the right way, and we want to consider all of the amendments because in that year, we got the bill, but we didn't consider any amendments.
You can talk to any of the Members. A lot of times they were in closed meetings, and we talked about the necessity of getting the amendments opened up so that anyone could offer an amendment, and, of course, they were denied doing that at that time. Now we are still in a position that we can do this, but it has put it off about a week.
Anyway, this is the most important legislation we pass every year. One more time, I want to thank Senator Jack Reed, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, for his work on this and for the fact that we were able to do it as rapidly as we did. I also want to thank the majority leader, Senator McConnell, not only for bringing the NDAA to the floor this week, but also for his willingness to do so under regular order. That is what we wanted, and we were able to do it.
Finally, and most importantly, I want to thank the committee chairman, Senator John McCain, for his strong leadership in the preparation of the NDAA this year, which he has done each year for a long period of time. Make no mistake, he may not be here today, but this is his bill. His priorities and his policy objectives are in this bill. This year's NDAA is a true embodiment of what Chairman McCain has worked to advance during his decades of service and his tenure as chairman of this committee. It deserves to bear his name, and it does bear his name.
We are all keeping Chairman McCain in our hearts and our prayers as he continues to prove that he is the fighter we all know him to be. I am sure he is watching right now. Senator McCain, we all know the fighter you are. There is no one else like you, and we want you to continue that fight, and we are anticipating that is going to be taking place.
The NDAA represents some of the finest traditions of this body. For 57 years, Congress has passed this vital legislation to authorize funding and provide the necessary authority for our military to protect this great Nation.
I am proud that the Senate Armed Services Committee overwhelmingly passed this bill. I think, at one point, we had 300 amendments. We were able to sit down, reason together, incorporate several of them into a managers' package, come to the committee, and actually pass it overwhelmingly.
This is more than just a piece of legislation, but it is a message to each and every one of our servicemembers that they are our No. 1 priority. That is why I didn't like the idea that there is an objection to moving to this bill today. I was with our servicemembers who are overseas all last week, telling them what we were going to do, why we were going to do it, and why it is a top priority. Unfortunately, this sends the wrong message to them.
This is more than just a piece of legislation; it is what we have to do to defend our Nation. After all, you have to keep in mind that the No. 1 thing we need to be doing here in the U.S. Senate, as well as in the House, is defending America. Our Founding Fathers said that; it is in the Constitution; and that is what we are about do to now.
The fiscal year 2019 NDAA keeps faith with our troops. It has a 2.6- percent pay raise--the largest in 10 years--which, in some small way, honors their enormous sacrifice.
In total, the NDAA supports $716 billion in fiscal year 2019 for national defense. It authorizes a base defense budget of $639 billion for the Department of Defense and the national security programs of the Department of Energy, as well as $69 billion in the overseas contingency fund. When it all adds up, you have $716 billion. That is what we should be doing around here. We are glad we are at the point where we can give priority to defending our Nation, as it should always have been.
This is funding an important step toward recovering from years of cuts in our defense budget under the Budget Control Act and sequestration, which harmed our military readiness and slowed down our modernization efforts. As I mentioned before, sequestration has held us back, but it has not held our adversaries back. All the time we were held back over the last 10 years, our peer competition out there-- Russia and China--haven't been holding back. That is why I said that in areas such as artillery, they are ahead of us.
Every time I go--and I am sure the Chair finds the same thing to be true--back home where the real people are, they assume we have the best of everything. That was the kind of standard we had set in World War II, and, of course, we backed away from that. We have areas--not just artillery, but triad and hypersonic--in which we were not able to keep that up, and all the time that we were doing nothing for the last 10 years in the triad system, the Chinese and the Russians were advancing, and they are ahead of us now.
Hypersonic is something not many people know about. It is a weapons system that moves at five times the speed of sound, and this is something that is
going to be where future wars are going to be fought. Yet China and Russia are both ahead of us right now.
So with this bill, we are going back and are advancing in some areas where we have been very, very slow. The goal, as always, is to provide our warfighters with the resources and capabilities they need and to do so on time, on schedule, and at a reasonable cost.
Now I am going to run over this because I think it is important that people out there know--and even some Members in this body, if they are not on the committee, might not be aware--that the legislation authorizes starting $23 billion for shipbuilding to fund 10 new construction battle force ships. It also provides for the procurement of 117 naval aviation aircraft. It has $7.6 billion to procure 75 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.
I think we all recognize the mistake we made back when we had the F- 22. We should have, at that time, stayed with the original amount, and now we regret we didn't do it. We don't want to make that mistake with the F-35s, so we have that provision in there.
We have $2.3 billion to procure 14 KC-46s. This is kind of interesting because that is ultimately going to replace the KC-135s, which have been around for 58 years now. I can remember, in the last administration, the Secretary of the Air Force was having an event, and I remember commenting at Altus Air Force Base that in 1959 two wonderful things had happened. No. 1, I got married and, No. 2, we delivered our first KC-135. She said: Well, I guess that offers security for you here at Altus for the next 59 years, and I think it does. That is how important that is. Our KC-46s are necessary, and this has the procurement of 14 of these.
We have $350 million to procure Air Force light attack aircraft; procurement of 117 Army helicopters; $70 million to prototype the next- generation combat vehicle; and $100 million each for the U.S. Marine Corps light attack aircraft and Group 5 Unmanned Aerial System; and lastly, $10 billion for the Missile Defense Agency.
That is finally getting us up to where we had fallen behind during the last administration. We might as well say it as it is. We now have everyone agreeing. This is good. This bill has been unnecessarily postponed for another week. Someone is making a point there.
Along the way, the NDAA makes adjustments to the administration's budget request to ensure programs are sustainable and accountable and protecting American taxpayer dollars. It also takes steps to ensure we are prepared for a world defined by strategic competition with China and Russia, addressing China's militarization of the South China Sea, and deterring Russia's military aggression and cyber attacks.
We know that is happening right now. Several of us, including the Presiding Officer, just about a month ago, were in the South China Sea. You see what the Chinese are doing, which is totally illegal. It is not land they own. They talk about reclaiming land. They are not reclaiming land. It wasn't previously claimed by anybody. They have seven islands now out there. We are talking about over 33,000 acres out there where they created huge military formations. All of our allies in that part of the world are assuming they now have to take sides in what might be World War III. You see that what they are putting on these islands is all military, 100 percent, just as if they are preparing for World War III. It is a huge thing happening right now. We saw it there.
By the way, it is not just the South China Sea. We just got back from Djibouti. The first time in the history of China, they have military bases that are not within the confines of China. This supports the implementation of the Nuclear Posture Review by authorizing $65 million to develop a low-yield, submarine-launched ballistic missile. I know that is controversial, and there will be amendments on there. We look forward to that.
The ranking member and I don't agree on everything. This is one area that probably we don't agree on. We want to have amendments. We want to have an open debate. That is what we are going to have. Unfortunately, that is going to be delayed for a period of time that I believe is unnecessary.
Finally, the NDAA supports our allies and partners around the world. It authorizes $5.2 billion for the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.
We just got back from Afghanistan. Things are going well there. We had a chance to talk to General Nicholson and the rest over there. Some good things are happening, despite what an unfriendly press sometimes wants to lead you to believe.
For the fight against terrorism, it authorizes $1.2 billion for the counter-ISIS efforts via the Train and Equip Programs in Iraq and Syria. The Train and Equip Program is one we all agree--at least in the committee--that it is very important to continue. It authorizes $6.3 billion for the European Deterrence Initiative and $200 million for security assistance to Ukraine, including defensive lethal assistance.
This is something we should have done a long time ago. I happened to be in Ukraine when they had their last election--well, actually about 3 years ago. That was a time when, for the first time in 96 years, Ukraine didn't have one Communist in its Parliament. They did that because they love us. Of course, people came in and started killing them. We know what happened there. It was well publicized.
We had the opportunity to send some lethal defensive equipment over there to help them since they have this love for the West. At that time, the administration wouldn't allow that to take place.
Anyway, we offer $500 million for Israeli cooperative missile defense programs. By the way, I always like to say, when talking about Israel, there is kind of an assumption out there that they are dormant, and we are providing this. They actually have developed some systems over there that are superior to ours. There is no better relationship anywhere in the world than between the United States and Israel. Good things are happening there. The President is strongly in support of that. Of course, we have a great guy over there who looks to us as their closest friend.
It also includes the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act that was adopted by the Senate Banking Committee, which will give the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States the authority it needs to address some of the national security concerns.
As we move forward to considering the fiscal year 2019 NDAA, we have to remember our primary constitutional responsibility is to provide for the common defense of our great Nation. We forget that. People go back home and never talk about defending America. They kind of play on this assumption that we already have all we need and that it is no longer a mission that is worth fighting for. We have to face the facts that this is the most dangerous world we have ever faced. The military advantage we once enjoyed has eroded, and we cannot delay modernizing our capabilities and restoring readiness.
You don't have to go any further than looking at some of these countries like North Korea. Right now, some good things are happening. I believe, 6 days from now, a meeting will take place between Kim Jong- un and our President. It is unprecedented, and I am very excited about it. Nonetheless, in this world today, you can have one small country that has the capability of wiping out an American State, and it is something we haven't been dealing with in the past. That is all part of this bill we are talking about now that we are going to be passing and going to conference with the House.
Today, our Nation commemorates the 74th anniversary of D-day. The brave Americans who stormed the beaches of Normandy embodied the spirit that continues to inspire the service and sacrifice of so many-- fighting, sometimes against unsurmountable odds, in the name of freedom, and we won.
I urge my colleagues to keep in mind the meaning of this day throughout consideration of this legislation, the John S. McCain National Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019. It will help assert the quantitative and qualitative military advantage we will have. I would almost say reassert that because we have lost it. General Dunford made the statement that we are falling behind in our ways. It has always been our qualitative and quantitative advantage over the enemy.
I hope the ranking member agrees we can move forward with an open amendment process. This is very important. This is one we all agreed on, and we were hoping we would be in that process right now, but it didn't happen. Unfortunately, sometimes it is going to be lost.
We are committed to working with everyone here as soon as possible and get the amendments rolling.
I want to yield to Senator Reed, but before I do, I want to make sure we get on the record that I have never seen, in the years I have been here, more cooperation than we have between the Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.