Executive Calendar

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REED. I reserve my right to object, Mr. President.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REED. Well, thank you very much, Mr. President. I would like to first engage in a colloquy with Senator Inhofe, the ranking member of the committee, on the process we will use to consider all the ideas and amendments I expect will be offered by committee members to address the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault and related crimes under the UCMJ in the annual Defense bill.

I believe that the committee must start from a base that reflected the broadest consensus possible among our members on how best to move forward on this matter and on the recommendations of Secretary Austin's 90-day Independent Review Commission, or IRC. I understand some members would prefer there be nothing in our bill on this topic, while others will feel that the IRC recommendations do not go far enough. This is the nature of compromise and why I intend to include the IRC recommendations on accountability in the base markup of the fiscal year 2022 Defense bill, subject to amendment. I believe we will have a robust debate, and I commit to ensuring that every idea and amendment brought by our committee members is given due consideration and receives a vote if that is what the member wants.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REED. Mr. President, let me also thank the ranking member for his comments. I agree that our committee has a long tradition of fulsome debate during committee markup of the annual Defense bill. It is a hallmark of our committee. It ensures that everyone's voice is heard, and it is, in my view, one of the reasons we have enacted the Defense Authorization Act for 60 consecutive years.

But I also want to commend and thank Senator Gillibrand for her tireless advocacy for victims of sexual assault in the Armed Forces over the past 8 years, since she first introduced a version of this bill in 2013. As I announced this weekend, I agree with Senator Gillibrand that the time has come to reform how we investigate and prosecute sexual assault and other special victim crimes in the military.

The best way to move forward on this issue is to ensure that all 26 members of the Armed Services Committee have their voices heard and to consider this legislation in the course of the markup of the fiscal year 2022 Defense bill scheduled for July. Not only will this allow committee members, comprising over a quarter of the Senate, to have their ideas and amendments considered, as is our tradition, but it allows the administration to provide its input as well, as the Independent Review Commission that President Biden directed provides us its recommendations on accountability in the military justice system for the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault and other special victim crimes. We must be able to analyze these recommendations collectively as a committee and then consider their value.

With this in mind, as I said over the weekend, I intend to include in the chairman's mark of the fiscal year 2022 Defense bill, the IRC recommendations. It is my view that these recommendations provide the appropriate basis from which to consider the wide range of amendments and ideas I know our members will have.

I want to stress that all amendments offered by Senators on the committee will be fully considered during the full committee markup. I intend to continue our tradition of following an open amendment process within the committee, and I know that is something the Presiding Officer is quite aware of since he participated in the committee in a very responsible way over many years.

Further, while the first round of reform will focus on the issues of accountability, I hope and intend to incorporate the IRC's recommendations on prevention, climate and culture, and victim care and support into the bill as we move through the legislative year. I think these recommendations will be critically important to reducing the number of sexual assaults in the ranks.

The focus of the legislation before us is adjudication. I think we all would prefer that prevention, command climate--all of these factors be such that adjudication is not necessary because the crimes, the incidents, the difficulties, the mental and physical anguish that victims incur have been avoided because we have taken the steps to prevent these actions from taking place in our military forces.

With that, Mr. President, I would object

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REED. Madam President, my colleagues have expressed overwhelming confidence in this bill, and I don't think that confidence will be eroded through more careful consideration by the committee. I think, in fact, the committee process will allow us to incorporate, examine, accept some and reject other provisions and recommendations by the IRC.

It also, I think, will empower or allow us to consider something that we really have considered as consistently as the issue of sexual assault, and that is the indications that racial bias is such that all felonies must be taken out of the hands of commanders, not just those related to individual sexual assault or sexual harassment cases or other related sexual conduct or misconduct--I should rightly advocate this.

Again, I think if we want to go ahead and make a fundamental change, committee consideration can only assist that change by getting broad viewpoints of those who are in favor of it, those who may be opposed to, and those who may seek changes.

And if the committee reports to the floor, there will be opportunity on the floor, once again, to engage in debate and comment.

I think we will try our best to come to a solution that is the best solution. I say that with a commitment to try my best to do so.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REED. Just a point of clarification, my recollection of the ``don't ask, don't tell'' process was that it was, in fact, considered by the committee. The language that was ultimately adopted was the committee language; that because of objections to the issue, the NDAA was filibustered consistently and in order to try to break free, in terms of passing both pieces of legislation, the ``don't ask, don't tell'' was removed separately. That was after a complete committee process, as well as consideration of the NDAA on the floor.

At that point, as Senator Gillibrand indicated, after two attempts, there were sufficient votes to pass ``don't ask, don't tell,'' but it was duly considered in the committee.

Again, if the power of the ideas, the compelling data that they have is such, I don't know why they are concerned about allowing the full members of the committee, not just a subcommittee, to decide what should be in the final mark.

In addition to that, I think in this process--and, in fact, I think you find it on every committee--ideas, perspectives, insights are gained that would otherwise be lost. What we are trying to do is follow the procedure of the Senate, which is to present to this floor a bill that has been carefully examined by people who have dedicated a great deal of their Senate service to the Armed Services Committee, and do so with the input of the Secretary of Defense because all of this has to be implemented by the Department of Defense. And at that point, if there are still difficulties and issues, then, the Senate floor is available for amendments.

Again, I would suggest that we can make real progress in the committee. We can get legislation that is not only bipartisan but, hopefully, unanimous or nearly unanimous, and that would be a very powerful signal to our colleagues both in the House and to everyone else that this legislation will, in fact, become law.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source