YOUR STATE, AND YOUR PREDECESSOR, SENATOR PASTORE, BROUGHT THIS
           HUMBLE PUBLIC SERVANT, THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, DOWN TO THE
           CAUCUS ROOM OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE IN THE RUSSELL BUILDING
           BEFORE MORE CAMERAS THAN I'VE EVER SEEN AND GRILLED ME FOR HOUR AFTER HOUR AFTER HOUR?
           TOGETHER WITH THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS. AND THAT CONVINCED

           ME THAT WE HAD TO HAVE A PROCESS CALLED BRAC. AND I SAY WITH
           HUMILITY I WAS THE COAUTHOR OF THE FIRST BRAC STATUTE, THE
           COAUTHOR OF THE SECOND BRAC STATUTE AND THEN I LOST CONFIDENCE
           IN BRAC BECAUSE OF JUST WHAT YOU SAID -- THE POLITICIZATION OF
           THE PROCESS AS IT RELATES TO DECISIONS IN CALIFORNIA AND TEXAS.
           AND IF WE WERE TO PASS THIS, ALL OVER AMERICA THESE COMMUNITIES
           WOULD SLID BEGIN TO WONDER, OH, WILL POLITICS PLAY AS THE

           BUREAUCRATS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BEGIN THEIR ASSIGNED
           TASKS TO WORK UP THOSE LISTS THAT SLOWLY GO TO THE TOP AND
           EVENTUALLY TO THE BRAC COMMISSIONS?
           MR. PRESIDENT, THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THAT'S THE PROBLEM THAT'S
           SHARED BY SO MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES. THAT WAS THE PROBLEM THAT
           WAS SHARED BY THE MAJORITY OF OUR COMMITTEE -- THE ARMED
           SERVICES COMMITTEE ON WHICH WE ALL SERVE WITH GREAT PRIDE --
           AND IN TWO INSTANCES THAT COMMITTEE TURNED DOWN THE PROPOSAL

           WHICH YOU GENTLEMEN, YOU SENATORS BRING BEFORE US TONIGHT.
           THAT'S THE PROCESS.
           

           A SENATOR: WILL THE SENATOR YIELD?
           
           

           MR. WARNER: YES. I DON'T HAVE THE FLOOR.
           

           MR. REED: I YIELD TO THE SENATOR.
           

           MR. WARNER: THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. TO HAVE THE COLLOQUY.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: IF THE SENATOR DOESN'T LIKE THE FACT THAT IT UPSETS
           THE COMMUNITIES BUT BELIEVES THAT WE NEED TO CLOSE BASES, DOES
           THE SENATOR HAVE ANOTHER SOLUTION?
           
           

           MR. WARNER: YES. MR. MCCAIN: WHAT IS IT?
           
           

           MR. WARNER: THE SOLUTION IS WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT
           PRESIDENT DETERMINES WHETHER OR NOT IN HIS JUDGMENT WE SHOULD
           HAVE A BRAC COMMISSION, AND HE COMES BEFORE THE CONGRESS AND HE
           REQUESTS IT AND I'LL COMMIT RIGHT NOW, SENATOR, NO MATTER WHO
           WINS THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY, INCLUDING, IF I MAY SAY WITH
           GREAT RESPECT, YOURSELF, I WOULD BE THE FIRST TO SPONSOR A BRAC
           COMMISSION UNDER THE MCCAIN ADMINISTRATION AND I WILL WORK
           RELENTLESSLY TO GET IT THROUGH THE UNITED STATES SENATE. BUT

           THAT WOULD BE THE MOMENT THAT THE BUREAUCRACY BEGINS TO WORK UP
           THE LIST OF THE COMMUNITIES.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: MAY I JUST SAY, IN ALL DUE RESPECT -- I GUESS THE
           SENATOR FROM RHODE ISLAND HAS THE FLOOR, IF I MAY --
           

           MR. REED: I YIELD TO THE SENATOR.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: -- SAY. THE AMENDMENT CALLS FOR A BASE CLOSING
           COMMISSION TO BE APPOINTED IN THE MAY OF 2001. IN MAY OF 2001.
           SO, THE ELECTION TAKES PLACE IN NOVEMBER OF THE YEAR 2000, AS I
           SEEM TO RECOLLECT, AND SO SOME FIVE OR SIX MONTHS LATER IS WHEN
           THE COMMISSION IS APPOINTED. THE LOGIC OF THE SENATOR FROM
           VIRGINIA, IN ALL DUE RESPECT TO MY CHAIRMAN, ESCAPES ME,
           ESCAPES ME. THERE WILL BE A NEW PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
           THERE WILL BE A NEW SECRETARY OF DEFENSE. OBVIOUSLY THE

           PRESIDENT -- I MEAN, THE CHAIRMAN DOESN'T TRUST OR HAVE
           CONFIDENCE IN THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND THE CHAIRMAN OF THE
           JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, BOTH OF WHOM SENT OVER COMPELLING
           STATEMENTS AND LETTERS. SO IF IT'S A NEW PRESIDENT THAT YOU
           WANT, THERE WILL BE A NEW PRESIDENT. SO, WHAT THE -- IF I GET
           THIS RIGHT, WHAT THE DISTINGUISHED CHAIRMAN IS SAYING IS THAT
           WE'LL JUST PUT EVERYTHING ON HOLD FOR A YEAR OR TWO UNTIL WE
           GET A NEW PRESIDENT. THEN WE CAN START A PROCESS. THIS
           AMENDMENT SAYS, THERE WILL BE A NEW PRESIDENT, THERE WILL BE A
           NEW SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, THERE WILL BE A NEW CHAIRMAN OF THE

           JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, AS A MATTER OF FACT, AND THAT IS WHAT
           THIS AMENDMENT CONTEMPLATES.
           

           MR. WARNER: MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD REPLY TO MY GOOD FRIEND,
           BOTH FRIENDS -- WE'RE IN AN INTERESTING COLLOQUY HERE -- THAT,
           FIRST, I WOULD HOPE MY GOOD FRIEND WOULD AMEND IT THAT THE
           SECRETARY OF DEFENSE -- PERHAPS HE WOULD STAY ON, AND I WOULD
           JOIN AT THAT POINT. I HAVE THE HIGHEST CONFIDENCE IN THE
           SECRETARY OF DEFENSE. BUT MY POINT -- CANE KAIVEN A STRANGE WAY
           OF DISPLAYING THAT CONFIDENCE IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH THIS
           PRIMARY AND MOST IMPORTANT RECOMMENDATION.
           

           MR. WARNER: BUT I SAY TO MY GOOD FRIEND, IT'S NOT THE
           SECRETARY. THE WORK BEGINS DOWN IN LITERALLY THE BOWELS OF THAT
           BUILDING WHICH I WAS PRIVILEGED TO REMAIN IN FOR FIVE AND A
           HALF YEARS, DOWN AT THE LOW LEVEL OF THE STAFF, BEGINNING TO
           WORK UP THOSE LISTS. AND THAT POLITICAL -- THAT POLITICAL
           PROBLEM THAT AROSE IN CALIFORNIA AND TEXAS COULD BEGIN TO CREEP
           INTO THOSE BASEMENT AND LOWER AREAS IN THE PENTAGON AND BEGIN
           TO INFLUENCE THOSE DECISIONS WHICH WOULD GRAVITATE TO THE TOP.
           

           MR. LEVIN: WOULD THE SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA YIELD?
           REASONABLE DOUBT RIDDLE LIJ LIKE TO RETAIN MY TIME.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: LET ME JUST SAY IN ALL DUE RESPECT TO MY FRIEND
           FROM VIRGINIA, THAT HE KNOWS WHERE THAT CALIFORNIA AND TEXAS
           THING CAME FROM. IT DIDN'T COME FROM THE BOWELS OF THE PLT. IT
           CAME FROM THE WHITE HOUSE. THAT'S -- AND THAT'S WHY -- AND
           THAT'S WHY HE KNOWS WHY WE ARE SAYING THAT THIS COMMISSION
           SHOULD ONLY CONVENE AFTER THERE IS A NEW PRESIDENT OF THE
           UNITED STATES.
           

           MR. WARNER: I AGREE WITH THAT. AND IT'S PRECISELY I DIDN'T
           OBJECT BECAUSE THAT SAME WHITE HOUSE COULD BEGIN TO COMMUNICATE
           DOWN WITH THOSE GOOD, HONEST, HARD-WORKING GS-14 EMPLOYEES OF
           THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, AND THAT'S WHERE IT COULD START.
           

           MR. LEVIN: IF THE SENATOR WOULD YIELD --
           

           MR. REED: I'LL YIELD.
           

           MR. LEVIN: THE SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA SAYS HOW MUCH CONFIDENCE
           HE HAS IN THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE. IS THE SENATOR SUGGESTING
           THAT THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE IS GOING TO STAND BY WHILE SOME
           POLITICAL PERSON FROM SOMEWHERE REACHES AROUND HIM INTO THE
           BOWELS OF THE PENTAGON TO GIVE A SIGNAL THAT SOME BASE SHOULD
           NOT BE CONSIDERED?
           AND IT IS BECAUSE OUR GOOD FRIEND FROM VIRGINIA DID NOT WANT
           THERE TO BE ANY POSSIBILITY OF ANY POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT BY

           ANYBODY THAT WE DELAYED THE DATE FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
           TO TRANSMIT THE BASE CLOSURE RECOMMENDATIONS TO SEPTEMBER 1
           12002. THE NEW PRESIDENT AND THE NEW SECRETARY OF DEFENSE OR
           THE CURRENT ONE, IF HE'S CONTINUED WILL HAVE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 1
           TO TRANSMIT THE BASE CLOSURE RECOMMENDATION. WE DELAYED IT SIX
           MONTHS BECAUSE THE SENATOR, IN COMMITTEE, SAID ETCHES CONCERNED
           THAT THE PRELIMINARY -- SAID HE WAS CONCERNED THAT THE
           PRELIMINARY WORK COULD BE DONE NOW AND SOMEHOW UNBEKNOWNST TO
           AN HONEST SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, WHICH I THINK OUR GOOD FRIEND

           WOULD CONCEDE IS AN HONEST --
           

           MR. WARNER: I DO.
           

           MR. LEVIN: THAT THIS WORK COULD BE DONE. SEE WE DELAYED THE
           TRANSMITAL TO SEPTEMBER 1 OF THE YEAR AFTER THE NEW PRESIDENT
           IS ELECTED, SIX MONTHS -- MORE THAN THAT, EIGHT MONTHS AFTER
           THE NEW PRESZ IS IN OFFICE. NOW, IT SEEMS TO ME AT THIS POINT
           THAT THE ARGUMENT ABOUT POLITICIZATION IS NOW BEING USED AS AN
           EXCUSE NOT TO ACT. WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING WE POSSIBLY CAN TO
           ELIMINATE ANY POSSIBILITY. THE NEW PRESIDENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO
           TRANSMIT NAMES FOR A NEW BASE CLOSING COMMISSION. AS THE GOOD
           SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA KNOWS, IF THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T WANT A

           BASE CLOSING ROUND, HE OR SHE NEED NOT HAVE IT. THAT'S THE LAW.
           ALL THE NEW PRESIDENT HAS TO DO IS NOT NOMINATE ANYBODY. SO
           YOU'VE GOT TOTAL CONTROL IN THE NEW PRESIDENT. YOU'VE GOT NINE
           MONTHS TO SUBMIT THE RECOMMENDATIONS. AT THIS POINT, THE
           POLITICIZATION ARGUMENT, IT SEEMS TO ME, TALKING ABOUT REACHING
           DOWN, I THINK THE GOOD SENATOR, MY DEAR FRIEND, IS REACHING
           BACK.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: SCOMAI MY DEAR FRIEND FROM VIRGINIA, WOULD HE AGREE
           TO AN AMENDMENT THAT HAD THE BASE CLOSING ROUND BEGIN IN THE
           YEERT 2002?
           
           

           MR. WARNER: MR. PRESIDENT, THE ANSWER IS VERY SIMPLE -- NO.
           BECAUSE, THE MOMENT THE INK IS DRY AND THIS BECOMES LAW, WOULD
           YOU NOT AGREE WITH ME THAT THE WORK -- THE STAFF WORK BEGINS ON
           THIS, THE DAY IT BECOMES LAW?
           THE DECISIONS BEGIN TO BE MADE, THE COMMUNITIES ALL ACROSS
           AMERICA GO ON FULL ALERT, THE COMMUNITIES GIVEN TO HIGHER
           EXPENSIVE CONSULTANTS TO HELP THEM IN THE PROCESS TO PREPARE
           THEIR CASE SO THAT COMMUNITY IS NOT STRUCK. THAT WORK -- AIM
           NOT CORRECT?

           DOES ANY ONE OF THE THREE WISH TO DISPUTE THAT THE WORK BEGINS
           AT THE BUREAUCRATIC LEVEL BY HONEST, CONSCIENTIOUS INDIVIDUALS?
           
           

           MR. MCCAIN: IN RESPONSE TO MY FRIEND --
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CHAIR INFORMS THE MEMBERS OF THE
           SENATE THAT THE SENATOR FROM RHODE ISLAND CONTROLS THE TIME.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT WE ENGAGE -- CONTINUE
           IN KOL KEY AND MAYBE TO MAKE THE SIDES EVEN, THE SENATOR FROM
           MAINE WOULD LIKE TO ENGAGE AS WELL SINCE IT SEEMS TO BE 2-1.
           

           MR. WARNER: I WOULD WELCOME THE SENATOR FROM MAINE. THAT
           RESONANT VOICE WILL RESONATE THROUGH THIS CHAMBER WITH
           REASONABLE APPROACH.
           

           MR. LEVIN: THE SENATOR NEEDS THE SUPPORT AND HELP FROM THE
           SENATOR FROM MAINE. BEFORE THAT SUGGESTION RESERVE NAITSS
           THROUGH THIS KHAIRPBLGS I WOULD SAY JUST ONE OTHER
           
           THING: WOULD THE SENATOR ACCEPT AN AMENDMENT WHICH SAYS, NO
           STAFF WORK CAN BEGIN UNTIL JANUARY 21 OF THE YEAR 2000?
           IF WE ADDS THAT LANGUAGE, THAT IN THE BOWELS OF THE PENTAGON,
           NOBODY WOULD --
           

           MR. WARNER: NOT ON ANY LEVEL, MR. PRESIDENT.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: THERE WOULD BE NO MOVEMENT.
           

           MR. LEVIN: I WANT THE RECORD TO BE CLEAR THAT THAT COMMENT CAME
           FROM THE PRIME SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION. THAT THERE WOULD
           NOT BE A COMPUTER KEYBOARD TOUCHED IN THE BOWELS OR ANY LEVEL
           OF THE PENTAGON PRIOR TO JANUARY 25 OF NEXT YEAR, WOULD THE
           SENATOR ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT?
           
           

           MR. WARNER: MR. PRESIDENT, IN THE COURSE OF THE DELIBERATION IN
           THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE, I CAME UP WITH A PHRASE
           WHICH I SAID THERE IS NO WAY TO WRITE INTO LAW THE WORD
           "TRUST." AND, THEREFORE, MY ANSWER TO MY GOOD FRIEND IS "NO."
           

           MR. MCCAIN: WELL, MR. PRESIDENT -- MR. PRESIDENT?
           I'M SORRY. REASONABLE DOUBT RTED JUST BRIEFLY BECAUSE I KNOW MY
           COLLEAGUES ARE --
           

           MR. REED: JUST BRIEFLY BECAUSE I KNOW MY COLLEAGUES ARE EAGER
           TO FIN THIS COLLOQUY. BUT IN REPONS TO THE KHAIRNTION MOST OF
           WHAT I THINK THE INITIATIVE, IF YOU WILL, INVOLVED IN THE LAST
           BASE CLOSING CAME AFTER THE PARTICULAR BASES WERE IDENTIFIED
           FOR CLOSING BY THE COMMISSION. AND IT WASN'T A QUESTION WHERE
           THE POLITICAL DECISIONS WERE TODAY TO CLOSE BASES. I THINK,
           RATHER, POLITICAL DECISIONS WERE MADE TO TRY TO AVOID AND GO
           AROUND THE WORK OF THE COMMISSION. SO THE COMMISSION PROCESS IS

           I THINK WE'D ALL AGREE, IS AS UNPOLITICAL AS YOU CAN GET. AND
           THE RESEARCH IN THE BOWELS OF THE PENTAGON IS I THINK,
           SIMILARLY NONPOLITICAL. IF IT'S NOT, THEN WE'VE GOT MORE
           WORRIES THAN A BASE CLOSING COMMISSION, IF WE HAVE GS-14'S
           DOING POLITICAL DEEDS FOR ANYONE RATHER THAN LOOKING
           RATIONALELY AND -- RATIONALLY AND LOGICALLY AT THE NEEDS OF THE
           SERVICE AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THOSE NEEDS. SO MUCH
           OF WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED, I THINK, IS FURTHER EVIDENCE THAT IF

           THE ADMINISTRATION WAS GUILTY OF POLITICIZATION, THEN SHAME ON
           THEM. BUT WE'RE RUNG THE RISK OF OURSELVES POLITICIZING THIS
           PROCESS. WE'RE RUNNING THE RISK OF REJECTING THE LOGIC AND
           OVERWHELMING CONCLUSION, I THINK, ANY RATIONAL PERSON COULD
           DRAW IS THAT WE HAVE TO START CLOSING BASES, THE BASE CLOSING
           MECHANISM IS THE BEST WAY DO THAT AND WE'RE IN A SITUATION
           WHERE IF WE RESIST THIS, IF WE CAN'T FIND A FORMULATION, THEN
           WE ARE GOING TO POLITICIZE IT WORSE THAN ANYTHING THAT
           PURPORTED TO BE DONE BY THE ADMINISTRATION. I WOULD STRONGLY

           SUPPORT THE MEASURE OFFERED BY THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA, THE
           SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN. WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALIGN OUR
           FORCE STRUCTURE HAND OUR BASE STRUCTURE TO GIVE RESOURCES TO
           THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, TO SUPPORT THE REAL PRESSING NEEDS
           OF OUR TROOPS, TO RETAIN THEM, TO TRAIN THEM, TO PROVIDE THEM A
           QUALITY OF LIFE THEY DESERVE. WHEN YOU GO OUT TO VISIT TROOPS
           -- AND I KNOW EVERYONE HERE ON THIS FLOOR TODAY DOES FREQUENTLY
           -- WHAT THOSE YOUNG TROOPS ARE WORRIED ABOUT IS DO THEY HAVE
           THE BEST TRAINING, THE BEST QUIRPBLGTS AND ARE THEIR FAMILIES
           WELL-TAKEN CARE OF?

           THEY DON'T WORRY ABOUT WHETHER WE HAVE A BASE IN OR OREGON A
           BASE IN TEXAS OR A BASE IN RHODE ISLAND. THEY WORRY ABOUT THEIR
           TRAINING TRAINING, THEIR READINESS FOR THE MISSION, THEIR
           WEAPONS, AND WHETHER THEIR FAMILIES ARE TAKEN CARE OF. IF WE
           LISTEN TO THEM, WE'LL SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. AND I YIELD. MR.
           MCCAIN: MR. PRESIDENT?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE FLOR ARIZONA.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT TO THANK THE SENATOR FROM
           RHODE ISLAND FOR A VERY STRONG AND I THINK THOUGHTFUL
           STATEMENT. HE'S A MUCH-VALUED MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE AND I
           APPRECIATE HIS EFFORTS IN THIS AREA. I DON'T LIKE TO BELABOR MY
           OLD AND DEAR FRIEND, THE FORMER SECRETARY OF THE NAVY AND
           CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE, AND OUR RESPECT IN FRIENDSHIP IS
           MUTUAL AND IT'S BEEN THERE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. BUT I DON'T
           INTEND TO TALK --
           

           MR. WARNER: AND IF I MAY SAY, IT'LL BE WILL FOR AN EFERNTY.
           

           MR. MCCAIN: I THANK MY FRIEND FROM VIFERMENT I DO HAVE TO
           MENTION ONE OTHER ASPECT OF THIS ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT AND
           THEN I KNOW THAT THE SENATOR FROM MAINE HAS BEEN PATIENTLY
           WAITING. WE DO HAVE A CREDIBILITY PROBLEM HERE, MR. PRESIDENT.
           WE'RE ASKING THESE YOUNG PEOPLE TO DO WITHOUT -- SOME OF THEM
           RIGHT NOW ARE IN HARM'S WAY. WE ASK THEM TO SPEND TIME IN THE
           MIDDLE OF THE DESERT AND IN THE MIDDLE OF BOSNIA UNDER VERY
           DIFFICULT AND SOMETIMES NEARLY INTOLERABLE CONDITIONS. WE HAVE

           AN AIR FORCE THAT'S HALF THE SIZE OF WHAT IT WAS AT THE TIME OF
           DESERT "DESERT STORM." IT HAS FOUR TIMES THE COMMITMENTS. WE
           SIMPLY SDONTS HAVE A MILITARY THAT WE CAN -- WE SIMPLY DO NOT
           HAVE A MILITARY THAT WE CAN SUSTAIN UNDER THE PRESENT
           CONDITIONS. AND IF WE AREN'T WILLING, IF WE AREN'T WILLING TO
           MAKE A IS BEINGIFIES OF THE POSSIBILITY -- A SACRIFICE OF A
           POSSIBILITY OF A BASE CLOSURE IN OUR HOME STATE, HOW IN THE
           WORLD, HOW IN THE WORLD, CAN WE ASK THESE YOUNG PEOPLE TO RISK
           THEIR LIVES?

           THIS IS AN ISSUE OF CREDIBILITY CREDIBILITY. IF WE'RE GOING TO
           MAKE THE KIND OF CHANGES NECESSARY TO RESTRUCTURE THE MILITARY,
           THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE SOME VERY TOUGH DECISIONS MADE.
           BASE CLOSE SOMETHING JUST ONE OF THEM. BUT IF WE CAN'T EVEN
           MAKE A
{END: 1999/05/25 TIME: 20-30 , Tue.  106TH SENATE, FIRST SESSION}