Replies

FINAL PASSAGE OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL (Senate - August 04, 1990)

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, while I will vote in favor of this Defense authorization bill, as a means of continuing our Nation's ability to defend itself, I have numerous differences with the decisions reached by the Senate in considering this bill.

This bill is more than $1.5 billion over the amount agreed to for defense by the Senate Budget Committee. it fails to adequately take into account the changes that have taken place in the world over the past year, especially in Eastern and Central Europe. It also fails to take into account sufficiently our Federal deficit crisis and current deficit talks, which will surely result in cuts to levels for military spending far below what we have agreed to today.

This bill contains too much money for star wars, which needs to be returned to the research program it was before President Reagan began pushing the fantasy of a peace shield in 1983.

This bill contains too much money for antisatellite weapons, which we should be restraining.

It continues to fund the B-2 bomber, which we cannot afford and do not need for our national security.

These and other choices we have made are not the choices that should be made to meet the challenges our Nation faces. This defense bill still is based on strategies and approaches developed during the darker days of the cold war. The Senate has not yet found new approaches to dealing with national security, that properly reflect our greater threats--the threat to our economy from foreign competition in Europe and the Pacific Rim--the threat to our communities from drugs--the threat to our future if we fail to provide the education and resources needed for coming generations.

In short, this bill does not reflect the priorities this Nation need to have. I vote for it with grave reservations, and hopes that we will be able to correct many of these choices in the months to come as the dimensions of our budgetary crisis, and the need to spend money elsewhere, becomes increasingly apparent.

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1991--CONFERENCE REPORT (Senate - October 26, 1986)

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am opposing the Department of Defense authorization and appropriations conference reports on the grounds that they do not represent sound budgetary policy.

At this time of extreme budget austerity and with the dramatic changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe that have occurred, we can, and should, make larger reductions in defense. Larger reductions can be made without jeopardizing our Nation's security.

These bills afforded the Congress an opportunity to do more than just talk about reducing the deficit over the next 5 years. Unfortunately, we have failed that test, particularly since we have continued funding for wasteful programs and programs for which there is not any rational justification from a national security standpoint.

The B-2 Stealth Bomber Program is a case in point. This is one of the most costly, waste-ridden programs in a long history of waste, fraud and abuse scandals that have plagued Pentagon spending, particularly over the past decade.

The primary contractor for the B-2's, Northrop Corp., is currently the subject of 7 grand jury probes and 11 criminal investigations stemming from problems associated with defense contracts it has received in recent years.

Even top U.S. Air Force officials have taken the unprecedented step of charging publicly that Northrop is so poorly managed that it cannot account for the cost of many programs, and has suffered major breakdowns in the production of every weapon the Pentagon reviewed. Yet, we are still funding this program to the tune of nearly $900 million per plane.

The bills also contain funds for the continuation of the strategic defense initiative. Along with the B-2, the SDI is a product of the cold war era. And as the crisis in the Persian Gulf should demonstrate, we need to spend money on defense requirements to meet real threats, rather theoretical threats of the past. We can only undermine our legitimate defense needs.

But most of all, these bills undermine our ability to come to grips, in a meaningful way, with the serious deficit problem facing this country. The deficit-reduction package with which we have been struggling has to be fair. It is time for the Pentagon to take its fair share of cuts, rather than pressing for billions of dollars for programs that are fraught with waste, fraud, and abuse and which do nothing to contribute to the strong defense of our Nation. The time is long overdue for us to end the military-industrial corporate welfare complex that has relentlessly chewed up taxpayers' dollars for far too long.

I support strongly our critical military mission in the Persian Gulf. And I will continue to support all reasonable costs necessary to maintain the effectiveness of this effort. However, it is a bit much to ask the American taxpayers to continue investing their hard-earned dollars in wasteful program that only serve to undermine our legitimate defense needs.