Making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations For The Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2006
Floor Speech
MAKING EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006 -- (Senate - April 26, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, the U.S. Navy today very proudly has 12 aircraft carriers on active service. That is a figure that was acted upon by this body and the other body and enacted into law, instructing the Commander in Chief, the President, and the Secretary of Defense to maintain no less than 12 carriers in our fleet.
Subsequent to the legislation by the Congress, and the law enacted, the Navy has determined that the USS John F. Kennedy--a ship that bears a name in which every Member of this Chamber takes a deep and abiding pride--that ship is now 38 years old and is, in the judgment of the Chief of Naval Operations, not qualified to perform her primary mission of aviation operations. And she is not deployable without a significant investment of resources. By that I mean to return her to her primary mission would require an inordinate amount of money to go into reconstruction of the launching and arresting gear, the main powerplant, steam-powered plant. She is a conventional as opposed to a nuclear-powered carrier.
It is a decision of the Department of the Navy that those expenditures on a ship 38 years old are simply not prudent, not in the best interests of the Navy, and those funds should be directed towards new ship construction.
As to the risks inherent to naval aviation--and they are very significant risks to all of us who have been aboard those carriers and watched aircraft take off and land--and as to maintaining her at sea, at this point in time she cannot perform that primary mission. Therefore, the purpose of this amendment is to revise the previous legislation such that the Secretary of the Navy can retire this ship.
Now, I recognize to many it is a painful thing to realize this ship can no longer serve. But these are the consequences, if we were not to enact this legislation: Each month there is a delay on a decision--the decision being not acting on this piece of legislation--costs the Navy $20 million in operations and manpower funds, funds that are sorely needed elsewhere by the Navy.
It puts an extraordinary burden upon the sailors who are proudly attached to this ship and deep in their hearts regret that ship can no longer perform its primary mission. And it puts a burden on their families. There have to be adjustments in their new assignments--moves, transfers, and all the other personnel actions that are essential to maintain our fleets throughout the world.
Madam President, as I said, I rise today to offer an important piece of legislation related to our Navy and national security.
The Department of Defense has submitted its report to the Congress on the Quadrennial Defense Review for 2005 and, as we are all well aware, in the 4 years since the previous Quadrennial Defense Review the global war on terror has dramatically broadened the demands on our naval combat forces. In response, the Navy has implemented fundamental changes to fleet deployment practices that have increased total force availability, and it has fielded advances in ship systems, aircraft, and precision weapons that have provided appreciably greater combat power than 4 years ago.
However, we must consider that the Navy is at its smallest size in decades, and the threat of emerging naval powers superimposed upon the Navy's broader mission of maintaining global maritime security requires that we modernize and expand our Navy.
The longer view dictated by naval force structure planning requires that we invest today to ensure maritime dominance 15 years and further in the future; investment to modernize our aircraft carrier force, to increase our expeditionary capability, to maintain our undersea superiority, and to develop the ability to penetrate the littorals with the same command we possess today in the open seas.
The 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review impresses these critical requirements against the backdrop of the National Defense Strategy and concludes that the Navy must build a larger fleet. This determination is in whole agreement with concerns raised by Congress as the rate of shipbuilding declined over the past 15 years. Now we must finance this critical modernization, and in doing so we must strike an affordable balance between existing and future force structure.
The centerpiece of the Navy's force structure is the carrier strike group, and the evaluation of current and future aircraft carrier capabilities by the Quadrennial Defense Review has concluded that 11 aircraft carriers provide the decisively superior combat capability required by the National Defense Strategy. Carefully considering this conclusion, we must weigh the risk of reducing the naval force from 12 to 11 aircraft carriers against the risk of failing to modernize the naval force.
Maintaining 12 aircraft carriers would require extending the service life and continuing to operate the USS John F. Kennedy, CV-67.
The compelling reality is that today the 38-year-old USS John F. Kennedy, CV-67, is not qualified to perform her primary mission of aviation operations, and she is not deployable without a significant investment of resources. Recognizing the great complexity and the risks inherent to naval aviation, there are very real concerns regarding the ability to maintain the Kennedy in an operationally safe condition for our sailors at sea.
In the final assessment, the costs to extend the service life and to safely operate and deploy this aging aircraft carrier in the future prove prohibitive when measured against the critical need to invest in modernizing the naval force.
Meanwhile, each month that we delay on this decision costs the Navy $20 million in operations and manpower costs that are sorely needed to support greater priorities, and it levies an untold burden on the lives of the sailors and their families assigned to the Kennedy.
We in the Congress have an obligation to ensure that our brave men and women in uniform are armed with the right capability when and where called upon to perform their mission in defense of freedom around the world. Previously, we have questioned the steady decline in naval force structure, raising concerns with regard to long-term impacts on operations, force readiness, and the viability of the industrial base that we rely upon to build our Nation's Navy. Accordingly, I am encouraged by and strongly endorse the Navy's vision for a larger, modernized fleet, sized and shaped to remain the world's dominant seapower through the 21st century.
However, to achieve this expansion while managing limited resources, it is necessary to retire the aging conventional carriers that have served this country for so long.
To this end, I offer this amendment which would eliminate the requirement for the naval combat forces of the Navy to include not less than 12 operational aircraft carriers.
Therefore, I urge the Senate to act favorably upon this amendment. At this time I will not seek the yeas and nays. I will defer to the manager that at such time as he believes it is appropriate that this matter be brought up.
Now, Madam President, to the second amendment. I have taken a great interest, along with other Senators--and it came into clear focus on my last trip to Afghanistan and to Iraq--that we simply have insufficient infrastructure in place from those Departments and agencies other than the Department of Defense. We are ever so proud of the courage and the dedication of the men and women in uniform who each day are assuming risks to see that the people of Iraq and Afghanistan have a government of their own choosing and take their place alongside other democracies in our world community.
But they need help, those military people. The Iraqi people need help. The new government which is making considerable progress towards its formation needs help. We need people experienced in agriculture, people experienced in commerce, people who can help them devise a code of military justice, a framework of laws, the whole framework of infrastructure that must be put in place to support these emerging democracies.
I first learned of this need in testimony months ago by General Abizaid, General Casey, Ambassador Khalilzad appearing before the Armed Services Committee and, indeed, in other public appearances. I have talked to them personally.
I subsequently have had two brief meetings with the President of the United States on this subject. I am very pleased to say that he is in full support of this legislation, which legislation devised by the Office of Management and Budget enables the various Cabinet officers to give additional incentives to their employees to accept all of the risks and hardships of being transferred to Iraq to perform missions to support our military, to support the formation of the new government by the Iraqi people.
Madam President, as I said, I rise today to propose an amendment along with Senators Lugar and Clinton that will equalize authorities to provide allowances, benefits, and gratuities to civilian personnel of the U.S. Government serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Many civilian agencies and Departments already have provisions to provide pay, allowances, benefits, and gratuities in danger zones. However, others do not. This amendment applies to those currently without such authorities.
Over the past few months, the President has explained candidly and frankly what is at stake in Iraq and Afghanistan. The free nations of the world must be steadfast in helping the people of these nations to attain a level of democracy and freedom of their own choosing.
It is vital to the security of the American people that we help them succeed such that their lands never again become the breeding ground or haven for terrorism as was Afghanistan for Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida.
We have seen how terrorists and insurgents in Iraq have failed to stop Iraq's democratic progress.
They tried to stop the transfer of sovereignty in June 2004; they tried to stop millions from voting in the January 2005 elections; they tried to stop Sunnis from participating in the October 2005 constitutional referendum; they tried to stop millions from voting in the December 2005 elections to form a permanent government under that constitution; and, in each case, they failed.
Just in the past few days, there have been significant, encouraging developments toward forming a unity government in Iraq. Clearly, the efforts of administration officials and congressional Members in meetings with Iraqi leaders and parliamentarians have contributed to these developments.
In my view, this represents important forward momentum, which has been long awaited. The new leadership in Iraq is making commitments to complete cabinet selection and take other actions to stand up a unity government. This is a pivotal moment in that critical period many of us spoke about after the December elections. We must be steadfast and demonstrate a strong show of support for Iraq's emerging government.
For 3 years now the coalition of military forces have, from the beginning, performed with the highest degree of professionalism, and they and their families have borne the brunt of the loss of life, injury, and separation.
In hearings of the Armed Services Committee this year, with a distinguished group of witnesses, and based on two--and I say this most respectfully and humbly--personal conversations I have had with the President of the United States and, indeed, the Secretary of State, I very forcefully said to each of them that we need to get the entirety of our Federal Government engaged in our efforts to a greater degree.
The Department of Defense concurs. I was struck by the 2006 QDR that which aptly states that:
Success requires unified statecraft: the ability of the U.S. Government to bring to bear all elements of national power at home and to work in close cooperation with allies and partners abroad.
I would add that General Abizaid, when he appeared before our committee this year, stated in his posture statement:
we need significantly more non-military personnel ..... with expertise in areas such as economic development, civil affairs, agriculture, and law.
I fully agree. I, along with five other Senators, heard the same sentiments from our field commanders and diplomatic officials during a trip to Iraq and Afghanistan last month.
The United States has a talented and magnificent Federal work force whose skills and expertise are in urgent need in Iraq and Afghanistan. We must provide our agency heads with the tools they need to harness these elements of national power at this critical time.
I have spoken about this publicly on previous occasions. I have written to each Cabinet Secretary asking for a review of their current and future programs to support our Nation's goals and objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I have spoken to the President about this.
I will ask to have a copy of one of the letters printed in the RECORD.
The aim of this bill is to assist the U.S. Government in recruiting personnel to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to avoid inequities in allowances, benefits, and gratuities among similarly situated U.S. Government civilian personnel. It is essential that the heads of all agencies who have personnel serving in Iraq and Afghanistan have this authority with respect to allowances, benefits, and gratuities for such personnel.
In my conversations with President Bush and the Cabinet officers and others, there seems to be total support.
The administration, at their initiative, asked OMB to draw up the legislation, which I submit today in the form of an amendment.
I hope this will garner support across the aisle--Senator Clinton has certainly been active in this area, as have others--and that we can include this on the supplemental appropriations bill. The urgency is now, absolutely now.
Every day it becomes more and more critical that the message of 11 million Iraqi voters in December not be silenced. We want a government, a unified government, stood up and operating. To do that, this emerging Iraqi Government will utilize such assets as we can provide them from across the entire spectrum of our Government. Our troops have done their job with the Coalition Forces.
Now it is time for others in our Federal workforce to step forward and add their considerable devotion and expertise to make the peace secure in those nations so the lands of Iraq and Afghanistan do not revert to havens for terrorism and destruction. I know many in our exceptional civilian workforce will answer this noble call in the name of free people everywhere.
Madam President, I ask for the consideration of this amendment at such time as the distinguished manager so desires. I will reappear on the floor. Perhaps these amendments can be accepted. If not, I will ask for rollcall votes.
I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD the before mentioned letter to Cabinet officials regarding interagency support to our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES ,
Washington, DC, March 15, 2006.
Hon. CONDOLEEZZA RICE,
Secretary of State,
Washington, DC.
DEAR MADAM SECRETARY: Over the past few months, the President has candidly and frankly explained what is at stake in Iraq. I firmly believe that the success or failure of our efforts in Iraq may ultimately lie at how well the next Iraqi government is prepared to govern. For the past three years, the United States and our coalition partners have helped the Iraqi people prepare for this historic moment of self-governance.
Our mission in Iraq and Afghanistan requires coordinated and integrated action among all federal departments and agencies of our government. This mission has revealed that our government is not adequately organized to conduct interagency operations. I am concerned about the slow pace of organizational reform within our civilian departments and agencies to strengthen our interagency process and build operational readiness.
In recent months, General Peter Pace, USMC, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General John P. Abizaid, USA, Commander, United States Central Command, have emphasized the importance of interagency coordination in Iraq and Afghanistan. General Abizaid stated in his 2006 posture statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee, ``We need significantly more non-military personnel *.*.* with expertise in areas such as economic development, civil affairs, agriculture, and law.''
Strengthening interagency operations has become the foundation for the current Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The QDR so aptly states that, ``success requires unified statecraft: the ability of the U.S. Government to bring to bear all elements of national power at home and to work in close cooperation with allies and partners abroad.'' In the years since the passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986, ``jointness'' has promoted more unified direction and action of our Armed Forces. I now believe the time has come for similar changes to take place elsewhere in our federal government.
I commend the President for his leadership in issuing a directive to improve our interagency coordination by signing the National Security Presidential Directive-44, titled ``Management of Interagency Efforts Concerning Reconstruction and Stabilization,'' dated December 7, 2005. I applaud each of the heads of departments and agencies for working together to develop this important and timely directive. Now that the directive has been issued, I am writing to inquire about the plan for its full implementation. In particular, what steps have each federal department or agency taken to implement this directive?
I ask for your personal review of the level of support being provided by your department or agency in support of our Nation's objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan. Following this review, I request that you submit a report to me no later than April 10, 2006, on your current and projected activities in both theaters of operations, as well as your efforts in implementing the directive and what additional authorities or resources might be necessary to carry out the responsibilities contained in the directive.
I believe it is imperative that we leverage the resident expertise in all federal departments and agencies of our government to address the complex problems facing the emerging democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am prepared to work with the executive branch to sponsor legislation, if necessary, to overcome challenges posed by our current organizational structures and processes that prevent an integrated national response.
I look forward to continued consultation on this important subject.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely,
JOHN WARNER,
Chairman.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov
Source