National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009
Floor Speech
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 -- (Senate - September 16, 2008)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for finally working this out.
I rise today in strong support of the Fiscal Year 2009 National Defense Authorization Act. Let me begin by thanking the committee's distinguished chairman, Senator Levin, for his leadership, and also Senator Warner, who is taking on double duty, acting as the ranking Republican on the committee in the absence of Senator McCain. I want to take this opportunity to thank the senior Senator from Virginia for his years of service on the committee. He has been a true friend to me and to the members of our committee and the armed services of this Nation, and his guidance, wisdom and, above all, his civility in all matters will be greatly missed. I deeply admire him, and I thank him for his leadership on this bill and on so many other issues.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I humbly thank my distinguished colleague and longtime friend. I am certain she can take my place.
Ms. COLLINS. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, this legislation will provide essential training, equipment, and support to our troops as they engage in combat overseas and in exercises at home. It also offers an important opportunity for continued debate as to our Nation's strategy in Iraq, especially the cost of reconstruction in Iraq.
I am particularly pleased the legislation we are now debating contains an amendment that Senators Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, and I offered to alleviate the burden on the American taxpayers of our operations in Iraq. It is time for the Iraqis to pay more of the costs of securing, rebuilding, and stabilizing their own country. During the Armed Services Committee markup, I joined Senators Nelson and Bayh in authoring the provisions that are in this bill which shift to the Iraqi Government the costs of securing and rebuilding Iraq in order to lift that burden from the shoulders of the American taxpayers.
While our country is struggling with a soaring deficit, the Iraqi Government is awash in oil revenues. The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction has estimated that Iraq's oil profits will reach $70 billion this year. That is far more than the Government of Iraq anticipated when it established its budget of $47 billion.
Similarly, on August 5, the Government Accountability Office issued a report that provided an in-depth examination of Iraqi revenues, expenditures, and surpluses. This GAO report underscores the need for our amendment requiring the Iraqi Government to assume greater responsibility for its own costs. The report verifies the stronger financial position of the Iraqis due to the unanticipated windfall brought about by record-high oil revenues. According to the GAO, Iraq is likely to receive between $67 billion and $79 billion in revenues from oil sales in 2008 alone--twice the average of revenues between 2005 and 2007. Yet the Iraqis still have not adequately invested in reconstruction efforts in their own country. In fact, they have spent just 28 percent of the $12 billion investment budget.
In addition, the Iraqis had approximately $29 billion in surplus funds that actually went unused during the past 2 years. When Americans are struggling with the high cost of energy, a weakening economy, and a burdensome deficit, there is simply no reason for the American taxpayers to continue paying for the major reconstruction projects, for the salaries, training, and equipping of the Iraqi security forces, or the cost of fuel in a country that has the second largest oil reserves and a burgeoning budget surplus.
Our bipartisan amendment would shift these costs to the Iraqis. Specifically, our amendment prohibits America's tax dollars from being spent on major reconstruction projects in Iraq. It requires the Iraqis to assume the responsibility of paying for the salaries, training, and equipping of Iraq's security forces, including the army, the police, and the Sons of Iraq; it initiates negotiations between our Government and the Iraqi Government on a plan to cover other expenses, such as the fuel used by American forces when they are in-country.
Our proposal was approved unanimously by the Senate Armed Services Committee, and it represents a significant bipartisan change in our policy in Iraq.
The fact is, the American taxpayers cannot wait for the administration to act. We must require this significant reform by changing the law. Asking the Iraqis to take more responsibility for their own security and for the reconstruction of their own country will give them a sense of ownership, and it makes common sense given Iraq's growing budget surplus. That is the purpose of our provision, and I urge my colleagues to support the proposal that we have incorporated into the Defense authorization bill.
The legislation before us also includes a strong commitment to strengthening Navy shipbuilding by including more than $14 billion for shipbuilding programs. It fully supports the Navy's shipbuilding priorities. The declining size of our naval fleet is of great concern to me. This legislation is an important step toward reversing that troubling decline.
The Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Roughead, has put forth a plan for a 313-ship Navy. It would address longstanding congressional concerns that naval shipbuilding has been inadequately funded. The instability and inadequacy of previous naval shipbuilding budgets has had a number of troubling effects on our shipbuilding industrial base and has contributed to significant cost growth in the Navy's shipbuilding programs. The 313-ship plan, combined with more robust funding by Congress, will begin to reverse the decline in Navy shipbuilding.
This bill authorizes funding for construction of a third Zumwalt class destroyer. The DDG-1000 represents a significant advancement in Navy surface combatant technology.
It is critical that the construction of the first two DDG-1000 destroyers continue on schedule without further delay. It is equally important that Congress provide full funding for the third ship.
The dedicated and highly skilled workers at our Nation's surface combatant shipyards, such as the Bath Iron Works in my great State of Maine, are simply too valuable to jeopardize with any cuts or delays in this program. To date, the Navy has spent more than $11 billion on research, development, detailed design, and advanced procurement for this program. In addition, industry, including not just our shipyards but also a multitude of vendors in over 48 States, has made significant investments in preparation for building this new class of ship. It is critically important in these tight budget times that we not throw away the investment our country has made as the Navy prepares to build the destroyer for the 21st century. That is why I am so concerned that the House version of the Defense authorization bill eliminates funding for the construction of a third ship, and even more troubling, does not provide sufficient funding for the construction of any surface combatant.
Mr. President, as the threats from around the world continue to grow, it is vitally important that the Navy have the best fleet available to counter those threats, keep the sealanes open, and to defend our Nation.
Bath Iron Works and the shipyards of this country are ready to build whatever ships the Navy needs. But it is vitally important that there not be a gap in shipbuilding that jeopardizes our industrial base. I am pleased with the funding provided in this bill. I look forward to resolving this important issue in conference.
Earlier this year, the Navy proposed to truncate the DDG-1000 program after just two ships. In July, after further evaluation, the Navy realized the terrible effect that such a decision would have on the industrial base and on our shipyards, in particular. It would have created a gap in work for Bath Iron Works because of the delays and costs inherent in restarting the DDG-51 line.
It is important to note that Bath Iron Works is prepared to build whatever ships the Navy needs, but that there must be a stable work plan to sustain the industrial base. The best way to achieve that goal, and to take advantage of the billions of dollars already invested in the DDG-1000, is to proceed with the third ship at this time even if the Navy ultimately decides to build more DDG-51s.
The House version of this bill would also require that the next-generation class of amphibious ships be powered by nuclear propulsion systems, even though the shipyard that currently builds those ships does not have either the facilities or certifications required to construct nuclear-powered ships. This provision could dramatically increase the costs of future amphibious force vessels, with some estimates stating it could be as much as $800 million more per ship. This would reduce the overall number of ships that could be built at a time when the Navy is seeking to revitalize and modernize its fleet. It is completely contradictory to the Chief of Naval Operations 313-ship plan.
I am pleased that our Senate bill also includes funding for additional littoral combat ships. While this program has suffered a number of setbacks, the Navy, with the help of Congress, has taken significant steps in order to begin to get this program under control. These ships are important for the Navy in order to counter new, asymmetric threats, and the Navy needs to get these ships to the fleet soon.
I am pleased that the Senate Armed Services Committee also agreed to my request for $25 million in additional funding to continue the modernization program for the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke class destroyers. This program provides significant savings to the Navy by applying some of the technology that is being developed for the DDG-1000 destroyer and back fitting the DDG-51, which may reduce the crew size by 30 to 40 sailors.
The Senate's fiscal 2009 Defense authorization bill also includes funding for other defense-related projects that benefit Maine and our national security.
The bill also authorizes $20.6 million for construction of a new drydock support facility at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, ME. This drydock, and its accompanying support facility, are essential for the shipyard's future work on Virginia-class submarines, the Navy's newest attack submarine.
Funding is provided for machine guns and grenade launchers, both of which are manufactured by the highly skilled workers at Saco Defense in Saco, ME.
In addition, the legislation provides $1.5 million to the University of Maine for the continued research and development of modular ballistic tent insert panels. These panels provide crucial protection to servicemembers in temporary dining and housing facilities in mobile forward operating bases in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The bill also authorizes an additional $1.5 million for the University of Maine's work on high temperature sensors that is important to the Air Force. These sensors are capable of sensing physical properties such as temperature, pressure, corrosion and vibration in critical aerospace components.
The legislation also provides $3.5 million for further development of the ripsaw ground vehicle, an innovative unmanned tank-like vehicle, manufactured by Howe and Howe Technologies in North Berwick, ME. This technology will have the ability to provide force security for our troops by taking them directly out of harm's way.
Finally, I am pleased that this bipartisan Defense bill also authorizes a 3.9 percent across-the-board pay increase for servicemembers, half a percent above the President's budget request.
This bill provides the necessary resources to our troops and our Nation and recognizes the enormous contributions made by the State of Maine. The bill provides the necessary funding for our troops, and I offer it my full support.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if I might ask my colleague for 30 seconds. I listened carefully to the Senator's thoughts on the Iraqi funding issue. I commend the Senator for that. We have amendments that address it. In the managers' package are certain amendments that the Senator from Maine put in. That is a very important issue. We owe no less responsibility to the American taxpayers but to assure that every single dollar going into that area at this time is absolutely essential for the purpose of the mission of our troops and otherwise, and that the Iraqi Government be made aware that they are a sovereign government now and such expenses as can be should be borne by that Government.
Ms. COLLINS. I thank the chairman. I agree with his comments. I am delighted with the support he and the chairman have given to this effort. I thank the Senator.
Source