Senate Proceeding on May 7th, 2009 :: 2:04:25 to 2:24:25
Total video length: 3 hours 15 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:525 Duration: 0:20:00 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

2:03:30 to 2:04:25( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: John McCain

2:04:10 to 2:04:26( Edit History Discussion )

John McCain: objection. mr. mccain: mr. president, i believe -- there's a senator coming over to speak and i think that's the last speaker on this bill that i the mean time waiting for his

2:04:27 to 2:04:48( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: arrival i suggest -- mr. levin: if withhold for a moment. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. levin: i agree with him, we know of no other amendments are going to be offered. but there are one or two senators that may want to speak on either their amendment that bill itself -- adopted or on the bill itself. and we'll know that in the next few minutes.

2:04:30 to 2:05:30( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Carl Levin

2:04:49 to 2:05:10( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: what we're exploring, both our cloakrooms, is whether or not we could have a vote on final passage at about -- minutes. we don't know that that is a possibility yet. if not, we would vote on final passage sometime probably early this but we're trying now to identify what the time would be for a

2:05:11 to 2:05:28( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: vote on final passage hopefully, we'll have more to say on minutes. i note the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

2:08:03 to 2:08:03( Edit History Discussion )

quorum call: a senator: mr. president?

2:08:04 to 2:08:24( Edit History Discussion )

the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. coburn: i ask the quorum call be dispensed the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coburn: first of relay my appreciion to both the chairman and ranking member for this bill. it does a lot of things that have needed to be done for a long time. i would also say is it won't do

2:08:25 to 2:08:45( Edit History Discussion )

anything unless the president puts the right person that has the is mean as all get out, thorough and comprehensive in what they're going to do and plans on staying there for a long time. the other make, and i'll be brief, --

2:08:46 to 2:09:08( Edit History Discussion )

really there's just two. i've listened to all of this debate. not necessarily here, but from my office. and, you know, there's 1 thing that's missing in the debate. we've had -- well, there's a problem with the contractors, and there's a problem with the pentagon. but not once did i hear that there's a problem with us.

2:09:09 to 2:09:31( Edit History Discussion )

and the real reason that we've gotten in trouble to the degree we have is because we haven't we haven't done our job. and so we're seeing a great response now by the leadership of our armed services committee to do some of the right things. but had we been doing our job,

2:09:32 to 2:09:52( Edit History Discussion )

much of what we see in terms of failed major procurement systems, lack of we could have had that transparencyad we been doing the oversight. i will give you an example. senator carper and i did the transparency on the c-5 retrofit.

2:09:53 to 2:10:14( Edit History Discussion )

and we had a supposed nunn-mccurdy breach when there wasn't a nunn-mccurdy breach. people wanted there to be a nunn-mccurdy we could, in fact, cut down cost, create just with the effects of what this bill is going to do if we're much more aggressive.

2:10:15 to 2:10:35( Edit History Discussion )

the last point i'll make is there are no questions that the earmarking process hampers far more than it helps us in the pentagon. when we see amount on those process versus

2:10:36 to 2:10:57( Edit History Discussion )

oversight, the american taxpayers are getting short changed. they're just getting short changed. and i that although sometimes earmarks turn out to be fantastic, the vast majority of times they don't. and we spend staff time doing that rather than

2:10:58 to 2:11:19( Edit History Discussion )

happening there today. our number constitution is the defense of this and we don't just spend $500 billion on that when you add up everything that we spend, count nuclear weapon maintenance, and you count the

2:11:20 to 2:11:41( Edit History Discussion )

research from nuclear warheads, if you count everything that goes through, we're about $1 trillion when you add everything else that comes up to that. and we're highly inefficient and i'm very appreciative of what's happening with this bill. but i think the arican public ought to recognize that the earmarking process and congress has hurt the defense department

2:11:42 to 2:12:03( Edit History Discussion )

because it has taken us away from doing the and, number two, congress has hurt our procurement and our ability to defend ourselves because we aren't doing the work that we need to do to oversight on a monthly basis, major program. we can't just depend on i.gs and g.a.o.

2:12:04 to 2:12:24( Edit History Discussion )

where are you going, are you on time, are you meeting the schedule? because we're putting one-third of our assets that we spend every year every -- every year into defense. it is rich. when we pay out $7 billion or $8 billion for performance contracts that the performance contractor didn't make, didn't meet the requirement, but we pay

2:12:25 to 2:12:46( Edit History Discussion )

it any how, we're the ones that allow that to happen. finally, the last point i would make. until we address the revolving door going to work f a contractor and how that what people do in terms of procurement and major decisions, we're really not going to solve this problem.

2:12:47 to 2:13:08( Edit History Discussion )

and whether it is an ethical constraint or a statement of -- of -- a positive statement of principles, how we have address that issue. because you cannot blame the people who are looking for their next job to -- to be less than perfectly independent in this job if, in fact, it is going to affect their future. so we haven't addressed that in

2:13:09 to 2:13:30( Edit History Discussion )

this, but that's still one of the things that has to be addressed because it is problematic. no do, but what we get for what we actually pay out. so, again, i thank the chairman and ranking member. i appreciate the work. i appreciate them taking our amendments. my hope is that when we combine what you have put forward with a

2:13:31 to 2:13:52( Edit History Discussion )

-- i can't use the word i want to use on the senate floor. but somebody of significantly tough demeanor to ramrod this that, in fact, we'll see great savings, better performance a better procurement for the american taxpayer. thank you, and i yield the floor, and note the absence -- mr. levin: the presiding officer: the

2:13:53 to 2:14:13( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: senator from michigan. mr. levin: let me just thank the senator from oklahoma for his amendment that was just adopted. it's a very significant amendment. and what it reflects is the determination of the senator from oklahoma to get the defense department to do something that our law is required to do, which is to give us a financial

2:13:55 to 2:17:10( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Carl Levin

2:14:14 to 2:14:35( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: statement, which receives clean audit. they haven't done that for decades. we'veried various ways to do it and the senator from oklahoma's voice is a strong voice that has been added to this effort. we appreciate that and appreciate his amendment and his willingness to the e

2:14:36 to 2:14:48( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: amendment. a senator: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

2:16:34 to 2:16:55( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding ofcer: the mr. levin: mr. preside would ask that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin levin: we're approaching the end of our debate and i believe that the senator from alabama wishes to speak for up to five

2:16:56 to 2:17:11( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: minutes; is that correct? then i would -- i would ask unanimou further amendments be in order, that the -- that following senator sessions' remarks, that the senate proceed as provided for under a previous order with

2:17:12 to 2:17:34( Edit History Discussion )

John McCain: respect to passage of senate bill 454. mr. mccain: mr. president, reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. mccain: reserving the right to object. i will not object. i probably won't have time. i just want to say i thank the chairman and all the staff for the hard work they've done on this legislation. many hundreds of hours have been

2:17:15 to 2:17:45( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: John McCain

2:17:35 to 2:17:45( Edit History Discussion )

John McCain: put in, hours of hearings, and i thank the chairman for his leadership. and the kind of bi -- nonpartisanship that these important issues require for the

2:17:46 to 2:18:06( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: good of the country. mr. president, i do not object. mr. levin: mr. president? the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. levin: if i could be recognized just for 30 seconds. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. levin: let me join in thanking senator mccain of our staffs. the work that's gone into this bill both staffs -- we'llet into that after passage of the bill and put a statement in the

2:17:50 to 2:18:20( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Carl Levin

2:18:07 to 2:18:24( Edit History Discussion )

Carl Levin: record and have, perhaps, further thoughts on this. but senator mccain's role in this has been absolutely invaluable and essential and we've worked together very closely on this, as he puts it, well and a nonpartisan way and i just want to thank him and his

2:18:25 to 2:18:47( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: staff as well mr. sessions: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: i want to thank also senators levin and mccain for their work on this. we do need to deal with wasteful spending. both of these senators understand it. senator mccain i know has always been willing to challenge

2:18:25 to 2:22:25( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Jeff Sessions

2:18:48 to 2:19:09( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: programs that he thinks are not justified for the war fighter. but i would like to note a few things before we go to passage and urge support of it. i'm pleased, first, i would note, that the legitimate concerns recognized by the department of defense about thousand would have been listened to and i

2:19:10 to 2:19:31( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: accommodated. i'd like to highlight a few points identified by a report last month by the government accountability office, an independent g.a.o., "defense acquisition: assessments of selected weapons program." since 2003, the number of major

2:19:32 to 2:19:54( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: defense acquisitions programs has grown fr 77 to 96. all 96 programs were assessed by g.a.o. and they found investment in these programs had grown $1.2 trillion to $1.6 trillion. research and development costs

2:19:55 to 2:20:16( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: are now 42% higher than originally expected. the c $296 billion. i found that to be number. i almost have to believe that somehow they calculated it in an excessive way.

2:20:17 to 2:20:40( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: sometimes numbers can look misleading. but if it's a third of that, we've got a major problem. but they concluded the cost growth on these programs was almost $300 billion. and average delay in delivering the initial capabil increased to 22 months, so we've got an excessive delay in producing our capabilities.

2:20:41 to 2:21:03( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: g.a.o. found that only 28% of the programs were exp delivered on time and on schedule to combat cost growth, they found that quantities -- that is, the number of the weapons systems and vehicles and other things that have been -- were to

2:21:04 to 2:21:24( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: be produced had to be reduced by 25% or more for 15 of these programs in 2000 -- in the 2008 portfolio. and ten of the largest acquisition programs, which account for half the overall acquisition dollars in the portfolio, have seen quantities

2:21:25 to 2:21:46( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: reduced by almost well, when you price -- your price per item goes up significantly compensating action is just to reduce the numbers but the net reality is the got as much as we expected to get out of the so clearly these statistics are disturbing and underscore the

2:21:47 to 2:22:09( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: need for this important legislation and reform. in summary, our war fighters are receiving less capability at a higher cost than was originally agreed upon. so i believe this bill improve the acquisition process by ensuring the department and industry are more thoughtful when estimating the production

2:22:10 to 2:22:26( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: costs at the beginning total life cycle costs of these programs. while i' mindful acquisition reforms can continue to be improved, i encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation. it's clearly a step in the right

2:22:27 to 2:22:48( Edit History Discussion )

direction and i salute our chairman and senator levin and mccain, for thank you, i uld yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the amendment as amended i to and the clerk will read the bill for the third

2:22:49 to 2:23:09( Edit History Discussion )

the clerk: calendar number 45, s. organization and procedures of the department of defense f the acquisition of major weapons systems and for other purposes. mr. levin: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be.

2:23:10 to 2:23:24( Edit History Discussion )

the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will cl

2:24:23 to 2:24:28( Edit History Discussion )

vote: