Senate Proceeding on Dec 7th, 2006 :: 6:27:05 to 7:00:27
Total video length: 9 hours 29 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:1,351 Duration: 0:33:22 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

6:20:38 to 6:27:05( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Christopher S. Bond

6:26:51 to 6:27:05( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher S. Bond: kind tribute before i have given my speech, and those who were not aware of that may have thought that they would be able to get the short tributes and a avoid the long farewell swech speef anes that's

6:27:05 to 6:27:14( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: not true. -- farewell speech and that's not true. i am going to say a few words. and i'm going to devote my time, if the senate will indulge me to a substantive and very important subject: the

6:27:05 to 7:00:27( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: James Talent

6:27:14 to 6:27:30( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: appropriate level of funding for america's military. it is an issue that i have work worked on and fought for since went into the house of representatives in 1993, and i am going to speak for a few minutes

6:27:30 to 6:27:40( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: on that. before i do that, i want to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record remarks regarding john buck o'neil, one of the great ballplayers of the negro leaks and leagues. i am not going to --

6:27:40 to 6:27:49( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: he certain certainly deserves to be the speech read, but i am not going to read two speeches to the senate today. but i am going to ask unanimous consent that i can submit this for the record. the

6:27:49 to 6:28:00( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: presiding officer: without objection. mr. talent: i am grateful for my friend's remarks. i do want to get into the substance of this speech. i just want to say with regard to what he said that

6:28:00 to 6:28:12( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: i've always enjoyed serving in legislatures, in part because of the collegial nature of the service. when you're done, yes, it's the legislation that you've worked on that you'd like people to

6:28:12 to 6:28:25( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: remember. but what you remember are the friendships and the associations and the bonds that you have made and, fortunately, mr. president, those do not end with your service. i look forward to continuing

6:28:25 to 6:28:40( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: to visit with my friends here in the senate for years to come and i hope to be able to work with them in other venues on issues of importance to america. and nothing, mr. president, is more important

6:28:40 to 6:28:50( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: for america than her security. mr. president, america has the most capable military in the world by a large margin. in fact we have the best military that has ever served any nation, at any time in

6:28:50 to 6:29:04( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: human history, and we should be proud of that. we should especially be proud of the men and women who make america's military what it is. but it would be wrong for us to believe that because our military

6:29:04 to 6:29:14( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: is the best in the world or even the best ever that it is as capable as it needs to be to protect us. it's true. america is many times stronger than other nations but its responsibilities are many times

6:29:14 to 6:29:27( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: greater as well. if denmark's military is inadequate, mr. president, it doesn't matter that much, even to denmark -- i say with respect respect. but if america's military is in inadequate, it matters

6:29:27 to 6:29:40( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: tremendously. first to america but also to the hopes and aspirations of people throughout the world. i want us to understand the importance of this issue very clearly. without the distortionz of ideology,

6:29:40 to 6:29:51( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: politics, expediency or wishful thinking. like it or not, mr. president, the progress of the international order towards peace and democracy depends on the reality and perception of american power. like it

6:29:51 to 6:30:04( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: or not, america is the first defender of freedom from in the world and therefore always a prime target for those who hate freedom and, like it or not, while there are many tools in the basket of international

6:30:04 to 6:30:16( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: diplomat circumstance the under underpinning of them all is an american military which the world knows is capable of swiftly, effectively and at minimal cost defeating every substantial threat to our security

6:30:16 to 6:30:30( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: or to the hope of freedom in the world. and judged by this standard, which i submit is the only a appropriate standard, the situation is very grave. i have substantial doubt whether our current military

6:30:30 to 6:30:42( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: establishment, as good as the men and women in it are, is strong enough. because ofstitions decision over the last 15 years driven obvious by budgetary rather than military, consideration mption

6:30:42 to 6:30:54( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: s, our army and navy may be too small and much of the equipment is too old and creeingly unreliable. but whatever the current status of the military may be, there can be no doubt that without a substantial

6:30:54 to 6:31:06( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: increase in procurement spending -- beginning now -- and sustained over the next five years, an increase i want to suggest to the senate today that must be measured not in billions but in tens of billions

6:31:06 to 6:31:19( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: of dollars above current estimates every year, our military will be set back for a generation. i suggest that we will not be able to modernize our forces to the minimum degree necessary to preserve

6:31:19 to 6:31:29( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: our security with the necessary margin of safety. mr. president, i said that our current military is too small -- i'm talking about the current military now -- and inadequately equipped lyequipped

6:31:29 to 6:31:43( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: to execute the national military strategy. i will not go into detail on this point because my main focus is on the future. the world is on balance at least as danger today as it was at the end of the

6:31:43 to 6:31:57( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: cold war. it's true. and we may thank god for it that we're no longer in danger of a massive nuclear attack from the former soviet union, nor is a major land war in europe likely. we are engage ed in a

6:31:57 to 6:32:07( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: global war on terror that will continue for years to come. the end of the cold war led to the e emergence of dangerous regional conflicts such as the bosnian conflict. we are in greater danger today of

6:32:07 to 6:32:20( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: a rogue missile attack than we've ever been before and china is emerging as a peer competitor competitor, much faster than anyone believed. none of these conditions existed during the time of the

6:32:20 to 6:32:33( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: cold war. as a result, mr. president, the operational tempo of our conventional forces -- and that means the rate and intensity of their deployment -- was far higher even in the 1990's before 9/11

6:32:33 to 6:32:48( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: than it had ever been during the cold war. yede yet at the beginning of the 1990's, the size of our force was 30% to 040% bigger than it is today. for example, the active duty army was cut from 18 divisions

6:32:48 to 6:33:03( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: at the time of "desert storm" to only ten divisions by 1994 and don't we wish, mr. president, that we had those additional divisions today to relieve the pressure in iraq. the navy has gone from 576

6:33:03 to 6:33:18( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: ships in the late-1980's to 278 ships today. at the same time, procurement budgets have been cut substantially, far greater than the cuts in force structure warranted. the contrast in the average annual procurement

6:33:18 to 6:33:34( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: of major equipment from two periods -- 19 1975 to 1990 and from 1991 to 2 2000 -- is startle ing. for example, we purchased an average of 78 scout and attack helicopters each year from 1975 to 1990.

6:33:34 to 6:33:48( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: and only seven each year from 19 1991 to 2000. we purchased an average of 238 air force fighters each year from 1975 to 1990 0, an average of only 28 from 1991 to 2000. we purchased five tanker aircraft

6:33:48 to 6:34:01( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: each year from 1975 to 1990, an average of only one per year from 1991 to 2000. the implications for these dramatic reductions are profound profound. older platforms -- that's what the military capes

6:34:01 to 6:34:14( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: calls ships, planes planes, and vehicles -- old he er platforms are retired and not re replace ed. military capabilities are reduced. if platforms are not replaced, the average age of the fleet increases,

6:34:14 to 6:34:24( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: ready iness levels drop and the cost of maintaining that smaller, older inventory climbs rapidly because maintenance cost costs increase. for these reasons i suggest that the current force today is too

6:34:24 to 6:34:36( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: small and its equipment too old relative to the requirements of our national military strategy. that strategy calls for a military capable f of defending the homeland, sustaining four peacekeeping

6:34:36 to 6:34:46( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: engagements and fighting two large-scale regional conflicts at least at approximately the same time. we're supposed to be able to do all that at once. and i believe the requirement on our military

6:34:46 to 6:35:00( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: are actually greater than this. but in any event, we probably cannot execute even these commitments and we certainly will not be able to do so in the future with an acceptable level of risk unless the

6:35:00 to 6:35:10( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: -- at least the army is made bigger and unless all three services have the money to robustly recapital recapitalize their major platforms with the most modern equipment. for years the various services in

6:35:10 to 6:35:24( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: response to pressure to reduce the budget below what they really needed have been delaying or canceling new programs. they've been reducing the number of new ships or planes they say they need, kicking

6:35:24 to 6:35:37( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: crucial decisions down the budgetary road, robbing peter to pay paul, and otherwise trying to avoid confronting the approaching crisis. but the crisis is upon us now. we are entering the crucial

6:35:37 to 6:35:48( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: phase of recapitalization. beginning with the next budget and intensifying over the next five to seine ters years, the service services are scheduled to bring online the new platforms that will anchor american

6:35:48 to 6:36:02( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: security for the next generation. mr. president, no one can say that these programs run needed. the navy must buy new destroyers destroyers, must ramp up procurement of virginia-class submarines,

6:36:02 to 6:36:14( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: must finalize the design and buy large numbers of combat ships and must design and build the new c.g.x. cruise er. the air force must buy large newspapers numbers of the f-22, our new air air-to-air

6:36:14 to 6:36:25( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: superiority fighter. we must maintain the ability to have complete air superiority over any combat theater.~ the air force must buy large numbers of joint strike fighters or equilt aircraft. in addition,

6:36:25 to 6:36:40( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: the air force must buy out its airlift requirement. that's how we get from one place to another in the world. must build a new generation of tankers, must design and build a long range strike bomber to

6:36:40 to 6:36:55( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: replace the b-52. our b 52 inventory, mr. president, is 40- to 50 years old. if we don't replace it, young men and women going into the air force now will be flying aircraft 70 or 80 years old. the

6:36:55 to 6:37:04( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: army must rebuild, modernize or replace almost its entire capital stock of ground combat and support vehicles, including many of its tanks. the current procurement budget for all three services is

6:37:04 to 6:37:17( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: is $80.9 billion. simple budgetary mathematics tells us the services cannot possibly meet their crucial requirements without an average budget over the next five to 10 years that i estimate is at least

6:37:17 to 6:37:29( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: 30% higher than what we are now spending. mr. president, perhaps i have gone in more detail than the senate is willing to indulge me in already, but i want to look at some depth of the situation

6:37:29 to 6:37:45( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: of the navy, and here i speak from what i know, because i have been the chairman of the sea power subcommittee for the last four years. currently there are 278 ships in the united states navy. the navy

6:37:45 to 6:37:57( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: shipbuilding plan calls for 326 ships by the year 2020, and eventually, that's settling down into an average of 313 ships. the plan actually calls for fewer aircraft carriers, a substantial drop in attack

6:37:57 to 6:38:11( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: submarines, and fewer major surface combatants, but it attempts to make up for this with modern destroyers, more capable submarines and what's called prepositioning ships that will allow us to build

6:38:11 to 6:38:26( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: and defend sea bases as well as a whole new class of smaller, multimission modular vessels called latoral combat ships. there's no margin whatsoever for america in this plan. it is, at best, the minimum necessary

6:38:26 to 6:38:38( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: for our security. now, the chief of naval operations, that's the admiral who runs the navy, stims that the plan will require a shipbuilding budget of of $13.3 billion for fiscal 2008. that is $5 billion more

6:38:38 to 6:38:51( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: than spent on shipbuilding this year. his plan calls for that number to escalate to $17.5 billion by 2012. i believe these figures are too conservative, and good faith effort to calculate what we need,

6:38:51 to 6:39:03( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: but too conservative. i think the plan will require billions more than that each year to execute and both the congressional budget office and the congressional research office agree. but i say on

6:39:03 to 6:39:16( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: my oath as a senator that it will be utterly impossible at current levels of defense spending for the navy to reach and sustain the the $13.3 billion to say nothing of the even higher sums required

6:39:16 to 6:39:27( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: in the outyears of the five-year defense plan and beyond. beginning no later than 2009, there will be a growing shortfall in the shipbuilding accounts in addition to an annual shortfall of $1 billion to $2

6:39:27 to 6:39:44( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: billion per year in navy aviation procurement. i expect the total efficiency to be no less than $45 billion over the fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2016 period, and remember, even this assumes that the 300

6:39:44 to 6:39:54( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: in ship navy is sufficient to protect american security and an optimistic assumption. lest the senate get lost in all these figures, mr. president, let me sum it this way, the navy responding to budgetary pressure

6:39:54 to 6:40:06( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: has formed a 313 ship plan in the future which may be inadequate. the navy estimates a figure for funding that plan which independent authorities, using long-term historical data, believe is far too

6:40:06 to 6:40:18( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: low. and yet, without substantial increases in the navy's procurement budget, it's a dead certainty that even that figure cannot be sustained. as a practical matter, the expected shortfall means the sacrifice

6:40:18 to 6:40:32( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: of two to three attack subs, and two to three surface combatants, a reduction in purchases of the littoral combat ships and delays to the sea basing program and the new c.g.x. cruiser program which

6:40:32 to 6:40:42( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: is necessary for missile defense. the short of it is that the navy needs at least an $8 billion increase per year in procurement above current estimates. the marines need about $3 billion more. it's

6:40:42 to 6:40:55( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: not necessary to go into the same level of detail with regard to the budgetary picture for the other surfaces, mr. president. the pain has been spread fairly evenly across the services, and so they're

6:40:55 to 6:41:08( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: in roughly the same situation. and that means the procurement shortfall over the next 10 years of at least $30 billion per year, and most independent experts believe the number is higher than that. for

6:41:08 to 6:41:20( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: example, the c.b.o. estimates that the shortfall will be no less than $52 billion per year. we should add to this the fact that the active duty army is clearly too small as we've now learned from

6:41:20 to 6:41:31( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: iraq. even in an age of transformation and nonlinear battlefields, there are still times when america needs to put large numbers of boots on the ground, particularly in the post-9/11 age, the united

6:41:31 to 6:41:45( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: states needs the ability to carry on sustained, large scale peacekeeping or low intensity combat operations. without having to send the same units three or four times to a combat theater over the duration

6:41:45 to 6:41:58( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: of a mission. mr. president, a nation of our size and strength should not have to use essentially its whole active duty army, much of its marine corps, and many of its reserves to sustain 130,000 troops

6:41:58 to 6:42:13( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: over time in a combat theater. in 1992, which was right after desert storm, the defense department stated a requirement of 12 active duty army divisions. that was before the increases in operational

6:42:13 to 6:42:25( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: tempo of the 1990's and before the global war on terror. the army should surely be at least 12 divisions today. it costs approximately $2 billion to stand up and sustain in addition to the army or marine

6:42:25 to 6:42:36( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: corps a division strength and that means we need to invest about $4 billion per year in increased force structure for the army in addition to the $30 billion more in new procurement funding. so

6:42:36 to 6:42:50( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: to sustain our military over the next generation at the minimum level, we need to increase procurement spending and spending on the size of the army by about $34 billion per year, and that's above

6:42:50 to 6:43:01( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: current base line estimates. it would have to be success staibd sid -- sustained over the life of the current defense plan and beyond. mr. president, i want to emphasize this is a necessary -- a necessity

6:43:01 to 6:43:12( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: ballpark figure. it's always difficult to estimate precisely defense programs, some which are in design phase, particularly in an age of transformational technology. we'll be acquiring this equipment

6:43:12 to 6:43:27( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: over the next 10 to 20 years and needs in technology are going to change. but i believe we must confront the fact that whatever the necessary amount turns out precisely to be, the procurement budgets

6:43:27 to 6:43:37( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: we're projected today are fundamentally inadequate. we have to ramp up spending. we must begin now. and we have to accept the fact that it will not be cheap. mr. president, i also want to make clear that

6:43:37 to 6:43:51( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: this additional additional $34 billion must come from an increased overall defense budget. there may be some who say that it is possible to cannibalize the rest of the budget for the defense budget to

6:43:51 to 6:44:03( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: produce all or most of this additional procurement funding. and i have to say that that is a dangerous fantasy. the money cannot come from the supplemental appropriation bills. those are necessary

6:44:03 to 6:44:15( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: to pay the day-to-day costs of the war and may not have been adequate to do that. the money cannot come from producing a readiness budget, because that budget is overstressed already. it cannot come from

6:44:15 to 6:44:27( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: reducing the number of service personnel because the military is already too small. it can't come from reducing salary and benefits. we have to retain the best people. and besides, congress is far

6:44:27 to 6:44:40( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: more likely and properly, in my view, to increase personnel benefits rather than reduce them. just taking a look at the last seven years, total spending on defense health care has increased from 17.5 billion

6:44:40 to 6:44:57( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: in fiscal two thousand to $37 billion in fiscal 2006, an increase of more than 100% over the last seven years, appropriately so. the men and women of america's military need good salaries and good

6:44:57 to 6:45:10( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: benefits, and so do those who are retired.~ the savings from base close ings are not going to provide the additional funds. those are highly speculative. they are unlike un likely tube ly unlikely

6:45:10 to 6:45:23( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: to be more than $1 billion a year. the total of such earmarks is mo harass than $3 billion to $4 billion per year, realistically, congress isn't going to give all of them up and at least some number

6:45:23 to 6:45:34( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: of them are clearly justified. because they simply restore to the budget items that the service chiefs desperately want wanted and only omitted in the first place because of budgetary pressures.

6:45:34 to 6:45:44( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: and then there are others who will say that we can get the necessary additional funding by loarlg lowering the cost of new programs through procurement re reform. mr. president, i'm all for procurement reform.

6:45:44 to 6:45:55( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: i've been ford for it ever since secretary bill perry, who was a good secretary of defense, proposed it over ten years ago. it may well have been proposed by secretary ies of defense before him.

6:45:55 to 6:46:07( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: we've had several waves of procurement reform in the last ten years. several defense secretary ies have all championed its virtues. we continue to hold oversight hearings to pressure the defense industry

6:46:07 to 6:46:20( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: to lower costs. we keep trying to cooch people in the department violating the procurement regulations. i've chaired some of those hearings, mr. president. meanwhile, the cost of new programs keeps

6:46:20 to 6:46:30( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: going up. i suggest that the reasons have less to do with deficiencies in the procurement system, bad as it is, than with the stress on the industrial base and on the military costs on the budgets that

6:46:30 to 6:46:44( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: have budget consistently too low. one of the arguments supporting the reductions in force in the past has been that transformational technology and tactics can empower the military to do more with

6:46:44 to 6:46:58( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: less. the idea is to make each service member, each plane, shirngs and vehicle less vulnerable so we loser lose fewer of them, and more lethal so we need fewer of them. and within limits that's true.

6:46:58 to 6:47:13( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: but the best technology costs money and change ing technology tactics and doctrine makes it more difficult to fix stable requirements and that in instability costs money, too. here's an example. the

6:47:13 to 6:47:26( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: navy planned to procure 32 e.d.x. next-generation destroyers. it is a marvel of tran formation formational technology. but its unique capability ies have driven the per shf ship cost to about $3 billion.

6:47:26 to 6:47:38( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: as a result, the navy plans to procure only seven new destroyers. the problem is that the complexity of the ship's design, the unprecedented capabilities of the vessel, and the high price of the best technologies

6:47:38 to 6:47:50( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: have all driven up cost to the point where the ship is impossible to procure in sufficient numbers at current budget levels. another example: irk the air force desperately needs more lift and it also

6:47:50 to 6:48:02( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: has to have a new tanker aircraft. the air force has to take our force around the world, and they have to be able to refuel in the air. normal i will the air force would simply buy more c-17 aircraft.

6:48:02 to 6:48:14( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: i know about the c-17. it is produced in california and in st. louis. it is a perfectly good, modern aircraft. then the air force would go a ahead and design and pro procure a new tanker. but because

6:48:14 to 6:48:26( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: the service sunder tremendous pressure to save money, it has decide ed to develop a cargo tanker, combining the two missions into one aircraft. the service assures us that it's not going to have any

6:48:26 to 6:48:36( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: bells and whistles on the new plane and that the aircraft will be low- low-cost. and surely the concept of a cargo tairng allows the air force to claim that it will be able to perform both of these

6:48:36 to 6:48:49( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: missions while relieving some of the pressure on its budget. but again, mr. president, reality must and will eventually bite. as requirements build, changing technologies force changes into in

6:48:49 to 6:49:01( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: design, the odds are very high that the cost of the new aircraft, if it is to do the combined mission it is supposed to do, will go up substantially. the problem of cost is ex exacerbate ed by the

6:49:01 to 6:49:15( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: stress on the defense industrial base. procurement budgets have been too low for 15 years and because of pressure have been constantly changed. the department will regularly project what it intends to

6:49:15 to 6:49:26( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: spend in out years and then often makes last-minute cuts and changes. under those circumstances, it's no surprise that people aren't investing in the defense industrial base. it's shrinking and it's under undercapitallize

6:49:26 to 6:49:45( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: ed and that means fewer competitors, more sole- sole-source contracts, less research and, therefore, higher costs. and, mr. president, no amount of oversight, reform, or pressure on procurement officials

6:49:45 to 6:49:56( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: can change that. the good news is that a robust and consistent commitment to adequate funding would soon begin to reverse these friend trends. i'm all for improvements in the way we design and build new systems.

6:49:56 to 6:50:07( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: sufficient and stable funding is not only consistent with transformation and efficient use of dollars, it's necessary to both. if congress were to commit to my proposal, for example, the service chiefs and

6:50:07 to 6:50:18( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: the defense industry would know that substantial new money was coming coming, enough to make it at least plausible that they could produce and acquire the systems they need. they can budget long-range, they

6:50:18 to 6:50:28( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: could stick to their plans, they could work together in a way that really would reduce cost instead of trying to pull money away from other services or maneuver year to year just to keep vital programs

6:50:28 to 6:50:40( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: alive and often in a way that ends up cost costing the crps taxpayers more in the long run. mr. president, we must stop thinking that face ing reality and funding our military adequately is beyond the

6:50:40 to 6:50:56( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: reach of this great nation. yes, the federal government has fiscal problems. yes, the two major parties have very different views 0 on what to do about those problems but nobody can or does claim

6:50:56 to 6:51:13( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: that the defense budget is the cause. right now we are spending $3.8 -- 3.8% of our gross domestic product on the regular defense budget. that's a very low percentage historically, far less than

6:51:13 to 6:51:23( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: we spent at any time during the cold war. under president carter we spent 4.6% of the g.d.p. on our defense. if we spent only 4.2% now, we could easily fund what i've proposed. we'd have a fighting

6:51:23 to 6:51:34( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: chance to support our servicemen and women with the equipment they need and deserve. we could sustain the military power that the last two presidents have use ed to protect our freedom and stable ize

6:51:34 to 6:51:44( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: the post-cold war world. we would send the clearest possible message, mr. president, to both our friends and enemies and to those nations who are deciding now whether they're going to be a friend or enemy,

6:51:44 to 6:51:56( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: that whatever happens, whatever the direction our foreign policy takes, the united states has the ability to sustain our freedom and the hope of freedom for the world. to those who worry about

6:51:56 to 6:52:09( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: the price of strength, i say, there's a greater price to be paid for weakness. how many conflicts will we in invite? how much instability will we en engender? if wee how this rest restless and troubled

6:52:09 to 6:52:21( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: world to doubt america's ability to defend herself? mr. president, let's look at risks of alternatives portions -- courses of action. if we adopt the course i suggest and it turns out that i was wrong,

6:52:21 to 6:52:34( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: all we will have lost is a fraction of our wealth. and wealth that will be spent in this country on products produced by our workers for a margin of safety that in the end we did not need. but if we

6:52:34 to 6:52:47( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: stay on our current course and it turns out that i was right, how much will we pay then in lost lives and treasure? fighting in conflicts that a policy of strength would have deterred? how big will the

6:52:47 to 6:52:59( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: deficit become then in a world made less stable by american weakness? what effect will that have on the economy and not just on the economy but on the hopes and opportunities of the next generation, our children

6:52:59 to 6:53:11( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: and grandchildren who have the right to expect that we're looking out for them? 25 years ago our country was also in a difficult situation. our enemies doubted american re resolve. they were challenge ing

6:53:11 to 6:53:22( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: us on a number of fronts. we had just gone through a period of chronic underfunding of the military, probably worse than what's happened recently. and as a result the force was hollow. it was unable to

6:53:22 to 6:53:32( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: reliably perform the missions necessary to protect america. that's why the helicopters went down in the desert during the first iranian crisis. when president reagan assumed office, he face ed the situation

6:53:32 to 6:53:45( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: fairly and honestly and with the support of a democratic house and a republican senate, he secured two double-digit increases in the overall defense budget and reasonable increases for several years

6:53:45 to 6:53:58( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: thereafter. on the strengths of that bipartisan commitment, america's service mendz and women and merks defense industrial base transformed our military into the first information-age force for freedom in

6:53:58 to 6:54:12( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: the history of mankind. a unite ed government sent a message to friend and foe alike that whatever our differences about foreign policy, america was still willing to pay the price of freedom. it's

6:54:12 to 6:54:25( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: not too much to say, mr. president, that decisions made then in 1981 and 1982 laid the basis for the collapse of the soviet union, the success of "operation desert storm," and the benefits of peace

6:54:25 to 6:54:40( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: and security that we enjoyed throughout the 1990's. mr. president, with this speech, i bring my career in the senate to a close. i believe i can do no greater service to my country than to urge senators

6:54:40 to 6:54:51( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: not to be dissuaded by the counsels of those who say that what i have proposed cannot be done. at the beginning of my remarks, i referred to the fact that america's servicemen and women are the

6:54:51 to 6:55:07( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: fine toast have ever served in any nilt on behalf of any nation at any time. i should have conclude included their families as wevment i realize that whed that today when i had the privilege

6:55:07 to 6:55:22( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: of meeting just a few hours ago with dana lambert lambertson and her fw twa two children. her husband was killed in iraq 0 only eight months asmght -- months s ago. before her husband deployed,

6:55:22 to 6:55:33( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: their family openly discussed the sacrifice which he and they might be called on to make. she told -- i asked her how she was able too to bear her grief with such grace and fortitude? she told me that

6:55:33 to 6:55:44( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: when she was tempted to be discouraged, she remembered what her husband had always said when times were tough, that life is only as difficult as you make it. mr. president, i have met thousands

6:55:44 to 6:55:59( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: of americans over the last four years like the lambert lambertson family, not just soldiers and their fathers but people from every walk of life who live each day with courage, resilience and optimism.

6:55:59 to 6:56:12( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: because of them, i believe with all my heart that america's time of leadership is not done. i ask the senate to honestly face the true costs of defending this nation. if we do, if we carry that

6:56:12 to 6:56:26( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: burden with confidence, we will find the weight of it to have been a small thing compared to the blessings of peace and liberty we will secure for ourselves. and the hope we will give to freedom-loving

6:56:26 to 6:56:38( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: people all over the world. mr. president, i can't close without thanking my dedicate ed staff who've served the people of missouri so well over the last four years, who've kept me going, kept me

6:56:38 to 6:56:53( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: on time, who are largely responsible for the many pieces of legislation which senator bond was kind enough to mention. i just would ask the senate to indoling me for another moment or two because i am

6:56:53 to 6:57:13( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: going to read their names. i think they deserve it. mark strand, my chief of staff; courtney brown, my schedule er; les sealy, our great office manager; brian anderson, our i. i.t. manager -- i'm

6:57:13 to 6:57:29( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: glad he understood it, mr. president, because i never do; our leg staff, brit thompson, my legislative assistants lindsey niece, katie smith, keating hall hall, jesse appleton, katie duck duckworth.

6:57:29 to 6:57:43( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: john cox who worked so hard and so well on veterans' issues, the men who serve this country, sarah cutworth who did legislative correspondent correspondence and many other things as well, grant grants and

6:57:43 to 6:58:02( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: case work. peter henry who managerred the mail, sarah barfield, staff assistant; two great fellows that we got from the navy, mr. president, who helped me run the naval -- or the sea power subcommittee,

6:58:02 to 6:58:14( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: lieutenant command commander laurie aguello. and a fellow that was sent over just in time to help me make a difference on the energy bill. i want to thank my great communications director aaron hum,

6:58:14 to 6:58:29( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: andrew brant, case work -- mr. president, we hand you would over 10,000 cases. i'm a big believer in case work, mr. president. this is a big government and navigate ing it is hard and if we can help,

6:58:29 to 6:58:49( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: we wanted to help. nora bride enbach, debbie doorn doornfeld, and jess jessica vanbeak. woonldz andz the state staff. we always tried to integrate the work of the state staff and the washington staff

6:58:49 to 6:59:06( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: and i think we did it. greg keller, our state director, cathy geller, rachel mccombs, angel mccormick franks, also in st. louis, joe petely in kansas city, danny piefer, and eric harris who worked out of

6:59:06 to 6:59:22( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: that office, donna spikert, beck becky almond, my in-state schedule er as well as a great staff assistant, terry campbell, the descrirkt district director in springfield, christopher stone and correspondentian

6:59:22 to 6:59:36( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: gaskill and jeff glenn 0 who director directed that office and lynn maynard. i also want to thank, as other senators have done, my family, my wife obviously in particular, who has shared the highs

6:59:36 to 6:59:48( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: and lows of this job and my kids. mr. president, it remains only for me to thank my colleagues in the senate for the many kind kindnesses personal and professional which they have shown me and my family

6:59:48 to 7:00:05( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: over the last four years.~ mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. specter: mr. president, i have sought recognition to discuss

7:00:05 to 7:00:27( Edit History Discussion )

James Talent: a number of matters briefly. first, i want to join my colleagues in paying tribute to our majority leader, senator bill frist, who has done such an outstanding job in the past 12 years. senator frist

7:00:27 to 7:00:39( Edit History Discussion )

Arlen Specter: came to this senate as a real all-american, has displayed extraordinary talents abg democrat khreurbgs professionally -- academically, professionally, public service and a family man, as a friend, a renowned heart-lung

7:00:27 to 7:13:16( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Arlen Specter