I’ve looked at the legislation from the vantage point of Senators John McCainJohn McCainArmed Services chairman unveils .1B Asia-Pacific security bill Overnight Defense: Trump scolds NATO allies over spending | Flurry of leaks worries allies | Senators rip B Army 'debacle' | Lawmakers demand hearing on Saudi arms deal The case for protecting America's intelligence agency whistleblowers MORE, Lindsey GrahamLindsey GrahamSunday shows: Homeland Security chief hits the circuit after Manchester attack Senate panel could pass new Russia sanctions this summer Overnight Cybersecurity: Bad Russian intel may have swayed Comey's handling of Clinton probe | Apple sees spike in data requests | More subpoenas for Flynn | DOJ's plan for data warrants MORE, and John Warner, given their experience and their particular knowledge of the subject. In addition, I’ve paid close attention to the differences that are emerging, and I’ve concluded that this is the best compromise that I see. It might be a different bill if I wrote it, but this is the bill that can pass.

There is certainly an argument to be made that this in some way modifies Common Article 3. I understand that argument, but in a sense so does the Army manual. What I’ve resolved is that this is the most appropriate way to get legislation through and resolve our differences.