Speech by Sen. Carl Levin (D- Michigan), June 23, 2004

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Byrd.

The Byrd amendment allows for increases. That is the most important single point to make. There has been a suggestion that somehow or other if the Byrd amendment is adopted, that would reflect some kind of a decrease in support for what we are doing in Colombia. The Byrd amendment provides for an increase from the current level both on the military side and on the civilian side. The current military level is 400. The Byrd amendment allows for an increase to 500.

On the civilian side, the current level in law is 400. The Byrd amendment provides for an increase to 500. So both on the military and the civilian personnel, the cap is raised by the Byrd amendment--not as far as the bill before us raises it. The committee raised it by more than that. But the question is by how much will we raise the cap, not whether we are going to raise the cap.

The Byrd amendment is a more modest increase. It is a more gradual increase. It is appropriate in terms of the circumstances in the world today. We have our troops spread all over. There are great needs, including in Colombia. I happen to agree with my good friend from Minnesota that we have successes in Colombia. I have been there, too. I have witnessed some of these successes. I support our efforts in Colombia. But given the kind of commitments that we have around the world, given the kind of demands on our troops around the world, it seems to me that a modest increase is called for at this time.

Again, we are not talking about reductions, we are talking about increases. The House of Representatives did not allow for an increase on the civilian side at all. They would retain the current cap of 400. The Byrd amendment would allow for that to go up to 500.

An increase, yes; an endorsement of what is going on in terms of the efforts in Colombia, yes, because if we raise the cap, that does reflect an endorsement of those activities. But given the requirements for our troops around the world, the demands upon us, this kind of a modest increase is appropriate.

Finally, it is unlikely that they will be able to use this many additional forces in any event. According to the State Department, the dates for increases in personnel are not just going to depend on our approval but also on program developments, personnel availability, and circumstances that exist on the ground.

The Byrd amendment represents a very proper, cautious, modest increase in flexibility for our Defense Department and State Department. It is appropriate that there be an increase but not as large as is currently in the bill.

I support the Byrd amendment.

As of July 7, 2004 this page was also available at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r108:@FIELD(FLD003+s)+@FIELD(DDATE+20040623)