|
I think there was body armor in the famous $87 billion supplemental bills - but this could not be it as Kerry quite famously voted.
Looking at the Thomas roll call of votes and doing a query on the Congressional Record. I could VERY EASILY have missed something because the bills and amendments are sometimes weirdly described. In all cases, Kerry's vote would clearly not have made a difference and he went on record. It is very normal for Presidential candidates to do this - co-ordinating to return for close votes.
S RES NO. 1317 (July 22, 2003)
(includsed for completeness)
This was a Byrd amendment to the Homeland Security bill that add money for first responders, including the National Guard. Some money was specifically for body armor. This passed and Kerry was not present.
“Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. EDWARDS), the Senator from Florida (Mr. GRAHAM), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KERRY), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. LEAHY), and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. LIEBERMAN) are necessarily absent.
I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KERRY) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. LEAHY) would each vote ``yea.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. TALENT). Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 43, nays 50, as follows: - Allen voted against it.
S RES 1817 (October 2, 2003)
This may be the amendment referred to – it increased the money for body armor – reducing money to things like paying $1 million for one Iraqi family needing witness protection. This was Dodd’s amendment.
(Bonus – a very callous Steven’s comment:
“Now, I have been overseas. I said the other day, I remember going overseas, and on the way I bought boots. I did not like my boots. I bought shirts. I did not like my shirts. I bought gloves I would rather wear. Kids are kids, and they are going to buy what they want. This idea that they have to buy armor , armor is available on the basis of how rapidly it is produced. And we have put up money in here, more than enough to buy everything to be produced in this time that he mentioned between now and--what?--about 5 months away.”
This bill was tabled on a party line vote – Kerry was not present, but alone out of those not there indicated he would vote “nay” Allen voted “yes” (This was tabled – 49 – 37 , with 14 not voting)
Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. CARPER), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. EDWARDS), the Senator from Florida (Mr. GRAHAM), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. HOLLINGS), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. JOHNSON), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KERRY), the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. LIEBERMAN), and the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. PRYOR), are necessarily absent.
I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KERRY) would vote ``nay.''
S. Con. Res. 84 (November 21, 2003)
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 84--RECOGNIZING THE SACRIFICES MADE BY MEMBERS OF THE REGULAR AND RESERVE COMPONENTS OF THE ARMED FORCES, EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT THEIR SAFETY AND SECURITY, AND URGING THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE TO TAKE IMMEDIATE STEPS TO ENSURE THAT THE RESERVE COMPONENTS ARE PROVIDED WITH THE SAME EQUIPMENT AS REGULAR COMPONENTS -- (Senate - November 21, 2003)
Mr. DASCHLE (for Mr. KERRY) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services
Despite this fact, the equipment of the National Guard and Reserves has been substandard when compared to the equipment available to members of the active units for far too long. This peace-time nuisance is a mortal danger in war. It is inexcusable that any U.S. units, whether active or reserve, would deploy to a combat zone without the latest equipment and technology.
But we have heard concerns about National Guard and Reserve units lacking the latest gear or technology: helicopters lacking basic defense systems; Humvees without the additional armor needed to protect their occupants; and inadequate supplies of personal body armor . It is a dereliction of duty to send anyone into harm's way without basic protective gear.
The Concurrent Resolution submit today, expresses our concern for the welfare and security of all the men and women of the United states military, whether they serve in the active duty military, the National Guard, or the reserves. If this is to truly be a ``total-force,'' then we must also commit ourselves to equipping it as such. The courageous, young men and women of our armed forces deserve no less.
S. 1991 (December 9, 2003)
By Mr. DASCHLE (for Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. KENNEDY)):
S. 1991. A bill to require the reimbursement of members of the Armed Forces or their family members for the costs of protective body armor purchased by or on behalf of members of the Armed Forces; to the Committee on Armed Services.
(At the request of Mr. DASCHLE, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the RECORD).
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, it is the responsibility of the military departments to ``organize, train, and equip,'' the armed forces of the United States. Yet, reports indicate that nearly a quarter of the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq still wait for the latest ``Interceptor'' body armor , which is a Kevlar vest with ``small-arms protective inserts''--boron carbide ceramic plates--that protect critical organs from weapons fired by assault rifles like the Ak-47s favored by Iraqi insurgents.
While the Congress has taken measures to provide the latest personal protective gear to all U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, over the last several months we have heard alarming reports of family members scurrying to buy bullet-proof vests to send to their loved ones in Iraq. Military families are patriotic and selfless. Their devotion is no less than that of those serving in harm's way. They have more than enough to worry about, let alone whether or not they can find and buy the gear that might save their child's life. This is the responsibility of the Department of Defense, plain and simple. There is no excuse for their failure.
On November 19, 2003, acting-Secretary of the Army Les Brownlee admitted to Congress that the administration failed to provide basic equipment, like body armor , to all of our forces in Iraq because, as he put it, ``Events since the end of major combat operations in Iraq have differed from our expectations and have combined to cause problems.'' The Washington Post reported recently that, ``Going into the war in Iraq, the Army decided to outfit only dismounted combat soldiers with the plated vests, which cost about $1,500 each. But when Iraqi insurgents began ambushing convoys and killing clerks as well as combat troops, controversy erupted.'' I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this article be included in the RECORD.
Stories abound of family members, fathers and mothers, wives, and others paying for personal body armor out of their own pockets and shipping the much needed equipment to Iraq. Consider the case of Mimi McCreary of Victorville, CA, whose son Olaf received his bullet-proof vest not from his reserve unit, but from his colleagues on the Clinton, SC, police department. Or consider the 120 members of the National Guard from Marin County, CA, who were unsure of when their body armor would be made available. Instead of letting their neighbors go off to war, the men and women of law enforcement in Marin County donated more than 60 vests so that they would have ``at least some protection.'' Or consider Army Specialist Richard Murphy of Sciota, PA, whose parents, Susan and Joe Werfelman, purchased the ceramic plates missing from their son's vest. According to Murphy's step-father, he ``called us frantically three or four times on this . . . We said, ``If the Army is not going to protect him, we've got to do it.''
We owe Mr. and Mrs. Werfelman and Mrs. McCreary and every other military family an incredible debt of gratitude. They raised children who believe in this country and are risking all in service to it. The last thing we should ask of them now is to
take money out of their own pockets to buy the gear their kids should have had in the first place. But that's exactly what poor planning has led to.
The legislation I introduce today with Senator KENNEDY requires the Department of Defense to reimburse family members who paid money out of their own pockets to provide the personal body armor that the government failed to provide our troops. Lives and blood will always be the cost of war. But it is a dereliction of duty to send anyone into harm's way without basic protective gear, and it is disgusting for family members to have to take this burden of outfitting their loved ones for war. This grateful Nation must make right by those family members and reimburse their expenses in providing these materials to their sons and daughters, husbands and wives. Let families send pictures and letters from home. The Department of Defense should provide the gear.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
Body Armor Saves Lives in Iraq
AMENDMENT NO. 3312, AS MODIFIED (June 14, 2004)
Dodd’s amendment
SEC. 1068. REIMBURSEMENT FOR CERTAIN PROTECTIVE, SAFETY, OR HEALTH EQUIPMENT PURCHASED BY OR FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES FOR DEPLOYMENT IN OPERATIONS IN IRAQ AND CENTRAL ASIA.
(a) REIMBURSEMENT REQUIRED.--(1) Subject to subsections (c) and (d), the Secretary of Defense shall reimburse a member of the Armed Forces, or a person or entity referred to in paragraph (2), for the cost (including shipping cost) of any protective, safety, or health equipment that was purchased by such member, or such person or entity on behalf of such member, before or during the deployment of such member in Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom, or Operation Iraqi Freedom for the use of such member in connection with such operation if the unit commander of such member certifies that such equipment was critical to the protection, safety, or health of such member.
(2) A person or entity referred to in this paragraph is a family member or relative of a member of the Armed Forces, a non-profit organization, or a community group.
(b) COVERED PROTECTIVE, SAFETY, AND HEALTH EQUIPMENT.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), protective, safety, and health equipment for which reimbursement shall be made under subsection (a) shall include personal body armor , collective armor or protective equipment (including armor or protective equipment for high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicles), and items provided through the Rapid Fielding Initiative of the Army such as the advanced (on-the-move) hydration system, the advanced combat helmet, the close combat optics system, a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver, and a soldier intercommunication device.
(2) Non-military equipment may be treated as protective, safety, and health equipment for purposes of paragraph (1) only if such equipment provides protection, safety, or health benefits, as the case may be, such as would be provided by equipment meeting military specifications.
(c) LIMITATIONS REGARDING DATE OF PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT.--(1) In the case of armor or protective equipment for high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicles (known as HUMVEEs), reimbursement shall be made under subsection (a) only for armor or equipment purchased during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on July 31, 2004 or any date thereafter as determined by the Secretary of Defense.
(2) In the case of any other protective, safety, and health equipment, reimbursement shall be made under subsection (a) only for equipment purchased during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on December 31, 2003 or any date thereafter as determined by the Secretary of Defense.
(d) LIMITATION REGARDING AMOUNT OF REIMBURSEMENT.--The aggregate amount of reimbursement provided under subsection (a) for any protective, safety, and health equipment purchased by or on behalf of any given member of the Armed Forces may not exceed the lesser of--
(1) the cost of such equipment (including shipping cost); or
(2) $1,100.
(e) OWNERSHIP OF EQUIPMENT.--The Secretary may provide, in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, that the United States shall assume title or ownership of any protective, safety, or health equipment for which reimbursement is provided under subsection (a).
(f) FUNDING.--Amounts for reimbursements under subsection (a) shall be derived from amounts any amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act.
This passed 91 – 0 (Kerry not voting , but would have voted “yes”
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
