National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

Floor Speech

Date: Nov. 30, 2011
Location: Washington, DC

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I want to say a word about two amendments I have offered, both of which I think are important and both of which should be agreed to.

As I think you know, this country has a recordbreaking deficit and a $15 trillion national debt. What many people do not know is that one of the reasons our deficit is as high as it is is because there is a significant amount of fraud from defense contractors who sell their products to the Department of Defense.

I think the American people are very clear that when we pay one dollar for a product that goes to our military, we want to get one dollar's worth of value; that we do not want to see the taxpayers of this country or the Department of Defense ripped off because of fraudulent contractors. Unfortunately, fraud within the DOD in terms of private contractors is widespread.

During the last number of years, we have seen company after company engaged in fraud, including some of the largest defense contractors in the United States. For example, Lockheed Martin, the largest defense contractor in our country, in 2008 paid $10.5 million to settle charges that it defrauded the government by submitting false invoices on a multibillion-dollar contract connected to the Titan IV space-launch vehicle program. That did not seem to sour the relationship between Lockheed and the DOD, which gave Lockheed $30.2 billion in contracts in fiscal year 2009--more than ever before. One of the patterns we see is that a company gets convicted or reaches a settlement with regard to charges of fraud, but next year they continue to get very significant contracts.

In another case regarding one of the very large defense contractors, Northrop Grumman paid $62 million in 2005 to settle charges that ``it engaged in a fraud scheme by routinely submitting false contract proposals'' and ``concealed basic problems in its handling of inventory, scrap and attrition.''
Despite that serious charge of pervasive and repeated fraud, Northrop Grumman received $12.9 billion in contracts the following year, 16 percent more than the year before.

It seems clear to me that we need to do a much better job in terms of attacking fraud within the Department of Defense. Several years ago, I offered an amendment--which was passed--which provided that the DOD list virtually all of the fraud committed within the DOD. We have that report, and it is rather astounding. People should read it. Right now what this amendment does is it says to the DOD: Get your act together, hire the necessary well-trained staff so they are monitoring the contracts and making sure we do not continue to see the pervasive amount of fraud committed against the taxpayers of this country or the Defense Department. I would hope very much that amendment gets widespread support and that we see it passed.

There is another amendment we have offered, which I think is equally important, and that deals with making sure the Department of Defense--which turns out to be the largest single consumer of energy in the United States of America. Obviously, the Department of Defense has huge resources, controls huge numbers of buildings, has enormous aircraft, and so forth and so on. It is by far the single largest consumer of energy in the United States, accounting for approximately 90 percent of Federal energy consumption, with an annual energy cost of up to $18 billion. So the Department of Defense spends $18 billion on energy costs alone. I think, in recent years, the Department of Defense has understood the importance of trying to move toward energy efficiency in terms of saving energy, but we have a long way to go.

The major program to help cut energy consumption and costs at our military bases is called the Energy Conservation Investment Program. This is a very important program, although a relatively small program. This program has operated for more than 10 years, helping to invest in programs for more energy-efficient lighting, for example, at an Air Force base in Alaska, geothermal heating at Fort Knox Army Base in Kentucky, wind turbines for an Army base in Arizona, and solar power for the Air Force in Colorado.

Historically, according to the Department of Defense, every $1 used by the Energy Conservation Investment Program yields $2 in savings. We invest in energy efficiency; we invest in sustainable energy. For every $1 invested, we save $2. This makes it a very positive program for the DOD. Some projects, such as energy efficiency improvements at a Navy base in California, achieve greater than $15 in savings for every $1 invested.

The Department itself, the DOD, has stated this program achieves ``long-term public benefits by investing in technologies that increase economic efficiency and health benefits, build new sources of renewable energy, enhance job creation/retention, improve military facilities, and improve the quality of life for our troops and their families.''

Unfortunately, the authorization for this program in the current Defense authorization bill is $135 million, a relatively small amount of money for a Department of Defense which spends about $18 billion every year on energy. I think what we want to see is, A, the DOD save money through energy efficiency and sustainable energy and, secondly, become a model for the country as we attempt to break our dependence on fossil fuel, foreign oil, and we attempt to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions.

I can tell you that in the State of Vermont, we have our National Guard base, where we have worked with them to install a major solar installation which will pay a significant part of their electric bill. Frankly, I would like to see this done on National Guard bases all over the country and to the Active-Duty structures as well.

The bottom line is, we are currently spending about $135 million, a relatively small amount of money compared to the $18 billion energy bill run up by the DOD. What this amendment would do is increase the authorization for the Energy Conservation Investment Program to $200 million, up from $135 million--not anywhere near as much as I think we should be doing, but it is a step forward in helping the Department of Defense save money on their energy bill, break our dependence on foreign oil, and help us cut greenhouse gas emissions.

We know there remain many worthy projects at our military bases that have not yet been funded at today's funding levels that could be funded if my amendment were to pass. The amendment is fully offset and paid for by reducing expenditures on construction at overseas' bases, while still leaving nearly $300 million in funding for that purpose. I think that is a decent offset.

I applaud the Department of Defense and the military for the strides they have made so far in investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy. There are some wonderful projects going on all over this country--in fact, all over the world--under the DOD, and they deserve credit for that. They can and should be a leader for our country, but we still have a very long way to go.

I would ask for support from my colleagues for this amendment, which will save the Department of Defense money, will help break our dependency on foreign oil, move us to energy independence, and cut greenhouse gas emissions.

I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source
arrow_upward