Levin Introduces Separate Missile Defense Amendment
September 20, 2001
Last evening, Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) introduced as a separate bill (s 1439) the controversial provision in the Defense Authorization bill on missile defense.
He stated: “I strongly believe that the missile defense provisions took an appropriate step on an issue of national importance … In my view, however, this is the wrong time for divisive debate on issues of national defense. We cannot let issues like this pull us apart and undermine our common sense of national purpose in fighting terrorism. “
The provision, adopted 13 - 12 in the Senate Armed Services Committee, would require the President to come back to Congress to seek approval for any spending on missile defense tests that would violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
There are continuing disagreements on the level of funding for missile defense. The Senate Armed Services Committee approved $7 billion; the House Armed Services Committee approved $8.2 billion (the President requested $8.3 billion).
The House may take up the Defense Authorization bill today, September 20. The Senate may take up the bill tomorrow.
The full text of Sen. Levin’s statement follows (the text of the bill is not yet available):
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I hope that the Senate will soon begin consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002. This bill would authorize $343.5 billion for national defense programs, the full amount requested by the administration, including the $18.4 billion requested by the President in his amended budget request.
The bill would also address a number of important priorities identified by the Armed Services Committee, adding significant funding for military compensation and quality of life, the readiness and transformation of the military services, and the capability of our armed forces to meet nontraditional threats, including terrorism. In light of recent events, we will obviously do more, as we already have, with the enactment of the $40 billion emergency supplemental appropriation bill last week. However, these are no ordinary times, and the debate on this bill will be no ordinary debate. Debate on a bill like this is an inherent part of our democracy, and while our democratic institutions are stronger than any terrorist attack, in one regard we operate differently in times of national emergency. We strive to set aside our differences, and ask decent people everywhere to join forces with us to seek out and to defeat the common enemy of the civilized world.
For this reason, I am today introducing two new bills. The first bill is identical to S. 1416, as reported by the Senate Armed Services Committee in every respect but onethe removal of legislative language dealing with missile defense. The second bill, which would be deferred for debate at a later and more appropriate time, would include the missile defense language.
I strongly believe that the missile defense provisions took an appropriate step on an issue of national importance, and I was disappointed that this single area of disagreement led the Republican Members of our committee to vote against this bill that is so important to our national security.
In my view, however, this is the wrong time for divisive debate on issues of national defense. We cannot let issues like this pull us apart and undermine our common sense of national purpose in fighting terrorism. Rather, we should leave this debate to a later time and link arms against our attackers.
When we take up the defense authorization act, I hope that my colleagues will join me in putting controversial issues aside and help us move forward together to pass this bill promptly and indicate our strong and unified support for the national defense with a minimum of divisive debate.