H.Amdt. 270House111th Congress (2009-2011)
An amendment numbered 34 printed in House Report 111-182 to require the videotaping of all military interrogations, with appropriate security classifications.
Sponsored by 
Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ)
Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ)Submitted June 25, 2009
Description
Amendment requires the videotaping of all military interrogations, with appropriate security classifications.
Legislative Activity
Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action
Floor
Latest Action
House amendment offered
June 25, 2009
View full timeline
Floor
House amendment offered
June 25, 2009
Floor
House amendment agreed to: On agreeing to the Holt amendment (A010) Agreed to by recorded vote: 224 - 193 (Roll no. 457).
June 25, 2009 • 3:05 PM
Floor
Roll call votes on amendments in House
June 25, 2009 • 3:05 PM
Not Used
Amendment agreed to Committee of the Whole
June 25, 2009 • 3:05 PM
Not Used
House amendment offered/reported by : Amendment (A010) offered by Mr. Holt.(consideration: CR H7366-7368, H7385-7386; text: CR H7366-7367)
June 25, 2009 • 1:04 PM
Floor
Amendment (A010) offered by Mr. Holt. (consideration: CR H7366-7368, H7385-7386; text: CR H7366-7367)
June 25, 2009 • 1:04 PM
Floor
On agreeing to the Holt amendment (A010) Agreed to by recorded vote: 224 - 193 (Roll no. 457).
June 25, 2009 • 3:05 PM
Votes
1 roll call on this amendment
Text
Offered
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Kratovil
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle B of title XII of the bill, add the
following new section:
SEC. 1230. MODIFICATION OF REPORT ON PROGRESS TOWARD SECURITY
AND STABILITY IN AFGHANISTAN.
(a) Matters to Be Included: Strategic Direction of United
States Activities Relating to Security and Stability in
Afghanistan.--Subsection (c) of section 1230 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law
110-181; 122 Stat. 385) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C);
and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph:
``(B) The specific substance of any existing formal or
informal agreement with NATO ISAF countries regarding the
following:
``(i) Mutually agreed upon goals.
``(ii) Strategies to achieve such goals, including
strategies identified in `The Comprehensive Political
Military Strategic Plan' agreed to by the Heads of State and
Government from Allied and other troop-contributing nations.
``(iii) Resource and force requirements, including the
requirements as determined by NATO military authorities in
the agreed `Combined Joint Statement of Requirements'
(CJSOR).
``(iv) Commitments and pledges of support regarding troops
and resource levels.'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (6) as
paragraphs (3) through (7), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph:
``(2) Non-nato isaf troop-contributing countries.--A
description of the specific substance of any existing formal
or informal agreement with non-NATO ISAF troop-contributing
countries regarding the following:
``(A) Mutually agreed upon goals.
``(B) Strategies to achieve such goals.
``(C) Resource and force requirements.
``(D) Commitments and pledges of support regarding troops
and resource levels.''.
(b) Matters to Be Included: Performance Indicators and
Measures of Progress Toward Sustainable Long-Term Security
and Stability in Afghanistan.--Subsection (d)(2) of such
section is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)--
(A) by striking ``individual NATO ISAF countries'' and
inserting ``each individual NATO ISAF country''; and
(B) by inserting ``estimated in the most recent NATO ISAF
Troops Placemat'' after ``, including levels of troops and
equipment'';
(2) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) through (K) as
subparagraphs (D) through (L), respectively;
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) With respect to non-NATO ISAF troop-contributing
countries, a listing of contributions from each individual
country, including levels of troops and equipment, the effect
of contributions on operations, and unfulfilled
commitments.''; and
(4) in subparagraph (I) (as redesignated)--
(A) by redesignating clause (ii) as clause (iii); and
(B) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
``(ii) The location, funding, staffing requirements,
current staffing levels, and activities of each Provincial
Reconstruction Team led by a nation other than the United
States.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (d)(2) of such
section, as amended, is further amended in subparagraph (J)
(as redesignated) by striking ``subsection (c)(4)'' and
inserting ``subsection (c)(5)''.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Kratovil
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle D of title XXVIII (page 597, after
line 7), add the following new section:
SEC. 2846. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PARTICIPATION IN PROGRAMS
FOR MANAGEMENT OF ENERGY DEMAND OR REDUCTION OF
ENERGY USAGE DURING PEAK PERIODS.
(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 173 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``Sec. 2919. Participation in programs for management of
energy demand or reduction of energy usage during peak
periods
``(a) Participation in Demand Response or Load Management
Programs.--The Secretary of Defense shall permit and
encourage the Secretaries of the military departments, heads
of Defense agencies, and the heads of other instrumentalities
of the Department of Defense to participate in demand
response programs for the management of energy demand or the
reduction of energy usage during peak periods conducted by--
``(1) an electric utility;
``(2) independent system operator;
``(3) State agency; or
``(4) third-party entity (such as a demand response
aggregator or curtailment service provider) implementing
demand response programs on behalf of an electric utility,
independent system operator, or State agency.
``(b) Treatment of Certain Financial Incentives.--Financial
incentives received from an entity specified in subsection
(a) shall be received in cash and deposited into the Treasury
as a miscellaneous receipt. Amounts received shall be
available for obligation only to the extent provided in
advance in an appropriations act. The Secretary concerned or
head of the Defense Agency or other instrumentality shall pay
for the cost of the design and implementation of these
services in full in the year in which they are received from
amounts provided in advance in an appropriations Act.
``(c) Use of Certain Financial Incentives.--Of the amounts
provided in advance in an appropriations Act derived from
subsection (b) above, 100 percent shall be available to the
military installation where the proceeds were derived, and at
least 25 percent of that appropriated amount shall be
designated for use in energy management initiatives by the
military installation where the proceeds were derived.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such subchapter is amended by adding at the end
the following new item:
``2919. Participation in programs for management of energy demand or
reduction of energy usage during peak periods.''.
Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Cummings
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title V (page 180, after line 11), add the
following new section:
SEC. 594. EXPANSION OF MILITARY LEADERSHIP DIVERSITY
COMMISSION TO INCLUDE RESERVE COMPONENT
REPRESENTATIVES.
Section 596(b)(1) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417;
122 Stat. 4476) is amended by striking subparagraphs (C),
(D), (E) and inserting the following new subparagraphs:
``(C) A commissioned officer from each of the Army, Navy,
Air Force, Marine Corps, National Guard, and Reserves who
serves or has served in a leadership position with either a
military department command or combatant command.
``(D) A retired general or flag officer from each of the
Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, National Guard, and
Reserves.
``(E) A retired noncommissioned officer from each of the
Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, National Guard, and
Reserves.''.
Amendment No. 28 Offered by Mr. Driehaus
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle H of title V (page 175, after line
11), add the following new section:
[[Page H7359]]
SEC. 586. REPORT ON IMPACT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ON MILITARY
FAMILIES.
The Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report
containing--
(1) an assessment of the impact of domestic violence in
families of members of the Armed Forces on the children of
such families; and
(2) information on progress being made to ensure that
children of families of members of the Armed Forces receive
adequate care and services when such children are exposed to
domestic violence.
Amendment No. 30 Offered by Mr. Grayson
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VIII (page 291, after line 2), add the
following new secton:
SEC. 830. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON DEFENSE CONTRACT COST
OVERRUNS.
(a) Report Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall submit to Congress a report on cost
overruns in the performance of defense contracts.
(b) Matters Covered.--The report under subsection (a) shall
include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) A list of each contractor with a cost overrun during
any of fiscal years 2006, 2007, 2008, or 2009, including
identification of the contractor and the covered contract
involved, the cost estimate of the covered contract, and the
cost overrun for the covered contract.
(2) Findings and recommendations of the Comptroller
General.
(3) Such other matters as the Comptroller General considers
appropriate.
(c) Covered Contract.--In this section, the term ``covered
contract'' means a contract that is awarded by the Department
of Defense through the use of a solicitation for competitive
proposals, in an amount greater than the simplified
acquisition threshold, and that is a cost-reimbursement
contract or a time-and-materials contract.
Amendment No. 31 Offered by Mr. Hare
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle F of title III (page 115, after line
25) insert the following new section:
SEC. 356. EXTENSION OF ARSENAL SUPPORT PROGRAM INITIATIVE.
Section 343 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (10 U.S.C. 4551 note)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``2010'' and inserting
``2011''; and
(2) in subsection (g)(1), by striking ``2010'' and
inserting ``2011''.
Amendment No. 32 Offered by Mr. Hodes
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title V (page 180, after line 11), add the
following new section:
SEC. 594. EXPANSION OF SUICIDE PREVENTION AND COMMUNITY
HEALING AND RESPONSE TRAINING UNDER THE YELLOW
RIBBON REINTEGRATION PROGRAM.
Section 582 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 122) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (h)--
(A) by striking paragraph (3); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (15) as
paragraphs (3) through (14), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(i) Suicide Prevention and Community Healing and Response
Program.--
``(1) Establishment.--As part of the Yellow Ribbon
Reintegration Program, the Office for Reintegration Programs
shall establish a program to provide National Guard and
Reserve members, their families, and their communities with
training in suicide prevention and community healing and
response to suicide.
``(2) Design.--In establishing the program under paragraph
(1), the Office for Reintegration Programs shall consult
with--
``(A) persons that have experience and expertise with
combining military and civilian intervention strategies that
reduce risk and promote healing after a suicide attempt or
suicide death for National Guard and Reserve members; and
``(B) the adjutant general of each state, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, Guam, and the
Virgin Islands.
``(3) Operation.--
``(A) Suicide prevention training.--The Office for
Reintegration Programs shall provide National Guard and
Reserve members with training in suicide prevention. Such
training shall include--
``(i) describing the warning signs for suicide and teaching
effective strategies for prevention and intervention;
``(ii) examining the influence of military culture on risk
and protective factors for suicide; and
``(iii) engaging in interactive case scenarios and role
plays to practice effective intervention strategies.
``(B) Community healing and response training.--The Office
for Reintegration Programs shall provide the families and
communities of National Guard and Reserve members with
training in responses to suicide that promote individual and
community healing. Such training shall include--
``(i) enhancing collaboration among community members and
local service providers to create an integrated, coordinated
community response to suicide;
``(ii) communicating best practices for preventing suicide,
including safe messaging, appropriate memorial services, and
media guidelines;
``(iii) addressing the impact of suicide on the military
and the larger community, and the increased risk that can
result; and
``(iv) managing resources to assist key community and
military service providers in helping the families, friends,
and fellow soldiers of a suicide victim through the processes
of grieving and healing.
``(C) Collaboration with centers of excellence.-- The
Office for Reintegration Programs, in consultation with the
Defense Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and
Traumatic Brain Injury, shall collect and analyze `lessons
learned' and suggestions from State National Guard and
Reserve organizations with existing or developing suicide
prevention and community response programs.''.
Amendment No. 35 Offered by Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 249, after line 22, insert the following new
paragraph:
(6) With respect to dependents accompanying a member
stationed at a military installation outside of the United
States, the need for and availability of mental health care
services.
Amendment No. 36 Offered by Ms. Lee of California
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle B of title XII (page 453, after line
21), insert the following new section:
SEC. __. NO PERMANENT MILITARY BASES IN AFGHANISTAN.
None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
or otherwise made available by this or any other Act shall be
obligated or expended by the United States Government to
establish any military installation or base for the purpose
of providing for the permanent stationing of United States
Armed Forces in Afghanistan.
Amendment No. 37 Offered by Mr. Lipinski
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle F of title V (page 155, after line
4), add the following new section:
SEC. 563. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE RECOVERY OF THE
REMAINS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO WERE
KILLED DURING WORLD WAR II IN THE BATTLE OF
TARAWA ATOLL.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) On November 20, 1943, units of the United States Marine
Corps, supported by units of the United States Army and
warships and aircraft of the United States Navy, conducted an
amphibious landing on the Island of Betio, Tarawa Atoll, in
the Gilbert Islands in the Pacific Ocean.
(2) The United States military forces faced an entrenched
force of 5,000 Japanese soldiers.
(3) The Tarawa landing was the first American amphibious
assault on a fortified beachhead in World War II.
(4) Just 76 hours later, the American flag was raised at
Tarawa.
(5) More than 1,100 Marines and other members of the Armed
Forces were killed during the battle.
(6) Most of the Marines, soldiers, and sailors who were
killed during the battle were buried in hastily dug graves
and cemeteries on Tarawa.
(7) Between 1943 and 1946, the remains of some of the
Marines and other members of the Armed Forces were
disinterred and reinterred in temporary graves by the Navy.
(8) After World War II, the remains of some of these
Marines and other members of the Armed Forces were recovered
and returned to the United States for burial.
(9) Due to mistakes in reinterment, poor records, as well
as other causes, the remains of 564 Marines and other members
of the Armed Forces killed in the battle of Tarawa are in
unmarked, unknown graves.
(10) Since 1980, the Department of Defense has recovered
remains from some unmarked graves that have been found
through construction or other activity on Tarawa.
(11) The remains of members of the Armed Forces on Tarawa
continue to be threatened by construction or other land
disturbing activity.
(12) Recent research has shed new light on the locations of
unmarked and lost graves of members of the Armed Forces on
Tarawa.
(13) It is the responsibility of the Federal Government to
return to the United States for proper burial and respect all
members of the Armed Forces killed at Tarawa who lie in
unmarked and lost graves.
(b) Sense of Congress.--In light of these findings,
Congress--
(1) reaffirms its support for the recovery and return to
the United States of the remains of members of the Armed
Forces killed in battle, and for the efforts by the Joint
POW-MIA Accounting Command to recover the remains of members
of the Armed Forces from all wars;
(2) recognizes the courage and sacrifice of the members of
the Armed Forces who fought on Tarawa;
(3) acknowledges the dedicated research and efforts by
persons to identify, locate,
[[Page H7360]]
and advocate for the recovery of remains from Tarawa; and
(4) encourages the Department of Defense to review this
research and, as appropriate, pursue new efforts to conduct
field studies, new research, and undertake all feasible
efforts to recover, identify, and return remains of members
of the Armed Forces from Tarawa.
Amendment No. 38 Offered by Mrs. Maloney
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle I of title V (page 180, after line
11), insert the following new section:
SEC. 594. REPORT ON PROGRESS IN COMPLETING DEFENSE INCIDENT-
BASED REPORTING SYSTEM.
Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, and every 6 months thereafter, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to Congress a report detailing the
progress of the Secretary with respect to the Defense
Incident-Based Reporting System.
Amendment No. 40 Offered by Mr. Minnick
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle B of title VII (page 252, line 18),
add the following new section:
SEC. 716. REPORT ON RURAL ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE.
The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the health care of rural
members of the Armed Forces and individuals who receive
health care under chapter 55 of title 10, United States. The
report shall include recommendations of resources or
legislation the Secretary determines necessary to improve
access to health care for such individuals.
Amendment No. 41 Offered by Mr. Sarbanes
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VIII, add the following new section:
SEC. 830. PROCUREMENT PROFESSIONALISM ADVISORY PANEL.
(a) GAO-Convened Panel.--The Comptroller General shall
convene a panel of experts, to be known as the Procurement
Professionalism Advisory Panel, to study the ethics,
competence, and effectiveness of acquisition personnel and
the governmentwide procurement process, including the
following:
(1) The role played by the Federal acquisition workforce at
each stage of the procurement process, with a focus on the
following:
(A) Personnel shortages.
(B) Expertise shortages.
(C) The relationship between career acquisition personnel
and political appointees.
(D) The relationship between acquisition personnel and
contractors.
(2) The legislation, regulation, official policy, and
informal customs that govern procurement personnel.
(3) Training and retention tools used to hire, retain, and
professionally develop acquisition personnel, including the
following:
(A) The Defense Acquisition University.
(B) The Federal Acquisition Institute.
(C) Continuing education and professional development
opportunities available to acquisition professionals.
(D) Opportunities to pursue higher education available to
acquisition personnel, including scholarships and student
loan forgiveness.
(b) Administration of Panel.--The Comptroller General shall
be the chairman of the panel.
(c) Composition of Panel.--
(1) Membership.--The Comptroller General shall appoint
highly qualified and knowledgeable persons to serve on the
panel and shall ensure that the following groups receive fair
representation on the panel:
(A) Officers and employees of the United States.
(B) Persons in private industry.
(C) Federal labor organizations.
(2) Fair representation.--For the purposes of the
requirement for fair representation under paragraph (1),
persons serving on the panel under subparagraph (C) of that
paragraph shall not be counted as persons serving on the
panel under subparagraph (A) or (B) of that paragraph.
(d) Participation by Other Interested Parties.--The
Comptroller General shall ensure that the opportunity to
submit information and views on the ethics, competence, and
effectiveness of acquisition personnel to the panel for the
purposes of the study is accorded to all interested parties,
including officers and employees of the United States not
serving on the panel and entities in private industry and
representatives of Federal labor organizations not
represented on the panel.
(e) Information From Agencies.--The panel may secure
directly from any department or agency of the United States
any information that the panel considers necessary to carry
out a meaningful study of administration of the rules
described in subsection (a). Upon the request of the Chairman
of the panel, the head of such department or agency shall
furnish the requested information to the panel.
(f) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall
submit a report on the results of the study to--
(A) the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the
House of Representatives;
(B) the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives;
(C) the Committee on Homeland Security and Government
Affairs of the Senate; and
(D) the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.
(2) Availability.--The Comptroller General shall publish
the report in the Federal Register and on a publically
accessible website (acquisition.gov).
(g) Definition.--In this section, the term ``Federal labor
organization'' has the meaning given the term ``labor
organization'' in section 7103(a)(4) of title 5, United
States Code.
Amendment No. 42 Offered by Ms. Schakowsky
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VIII (page 291, after line 2), add the
following new section:
SEC. 830. ACCESS BY CONGRESS TO DATABASE OF INFORMATION
REGARDING THE INTEGRITY AND PERFORMANCE OF
CERTAIN PERSONS AWARDED FEDERAL CONTRACTS AND
GRANTS.
Section 872(e)(1) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417;
122 Stat. 455) is amended by striking ``the Chairman and
Ranking Member of the committees of Congress having
jurisdiction'' and inserting ``any Member of Congress''.
Amendment No. 47 Offered by Mr. Souder
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 24, line 10, strike ``or otherwise made available''.
Amendment No. 48 Offered by Mr. Space
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle C of title V (page 134, after line
24), add the following new section:
SEC. 524. SECURE ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF CERTIFICATE OF
RELEASE OR DISCHARGE FROM ACTIVE DUTY (DD FORM
214).
Section 596 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 1168 note),
as amended by section 523, is further amended by adding at
the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Secure Method of Electronic Delivery.--
``(1) Development and implementation.--The Secretary of
Veterans Affairs, in consultation with the Secretary of
Defense, shall develop and implement a secure electronic
method of forwarding the DD Form 214 to the appropriate
office specified in subsection (a)(2). The Secretary of
Veterans Affairs shall ensure that the method permits such
offices to access the forms electronically using current
computer operating systems.
``(2) Authority to cease delivery.--In developing the
secure electronic method of forwarding DD Forms 214, the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall ensure that the
information provided is not disclosed or used for
unauthorized purposes and may cease forwarding the forms
electronically to an office specified in subsection (a)(2) if
demonstrated problems arise.''.
Amendment No. 49 Offered by Mr. Thompson of California
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle E of title XXVIII (page 611, after
line 21), add the following new section:
SEC. 2858. LAND CONVEYANCE, FERNDALE HOUSING AT CENTERVILLE
BEACH NAVAL FACILITY TO CITY OF FERNDALE,
CALIFORNIA.
(a) Conveyance Authorized.--At such time as the Navy
vacates the Ferndale Housing, which previously supported the
now closed Centerville Beach Naval Facility in the City of
Ferndale, California, the Secretary of the Navy may convey,
at fair market value, to the City of Ferndale (in this
section referred to as the ``City''), all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to the parcels of real
property, including improvements thereon, for the purpose of
permitting the City to utilize the property for low- and
moderate-income housing for seniors, families, or both.
(b) Reversionary Interest.--If the Secretary determines at
any time that the real property conveyed under subsection (a)
is not being used in accordance with the purpose of the
conveyance, all right, title, and interest in and to such
real property, including any improvements and appurtenant
easements thereto, shall, at the option of the Secretary,
revert to and become the property of the United States, and
the United States shall have the right of immediate entry
onto such real property. A determination by the Secretary
under this subsection shall be made on the record after an
opportunity for a hearing.
(c) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal
description of the real property to be conveyed under
subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary.
(d) Payment of Costs of Conveyances.--
(1) Payment required.--The Secretary shall require the City
to cover costs to be incurred by the Secretary, or to
reimburse the Secretary for costs incurred by the Secretary,
to carry out the conveyance under subsection (a), including
survey costs, costs related to environmental documentation,
and other administrative costs related to the
[[Page H7361]]
conveyance. If amounts are collected from the city in advance
of the Secretary incurring the actual costs, and the amount
collected exceeds the costs actually incurred by the
Secretary to carry out the conveyance, the Secretary shall
refund the excess amount to the City.
(2) Treatment of amounts received.--Amounts received as
reimbursements under paragraph (1) shall be credited to the
fund or account that was used to cover the costs incurred by
the Secretary in carrying out the conveyance. Amounts so
credited shall be merged with amounts in such fund or account
and shall be available for the same purposes, and subject to
the same conditions and limitations, as amounts in such fund
or account.
(e) Additional Term and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United
States.
Amendment No. 50 Offered by Mr. Taylor
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle C of title I (page 37, after line
17), add the following new section:
SEC. 126. CONVERSION OF CERTAIN VESSELS; LEASING RATES.
(a) Use of Funds for Conversion.--Of the funds authorized
to be appropriated or otherwise made available for fiscal
year 2010 for weapons procurement, Navy, for Mk-46 torpedo
modifications, the Secretary of the Navy may obligate not
more than $35,000,000 for lease and conversion of any covered
vessel that, as a result of default on a loan guaranteed for
the vessels under chapter 537 of title 46, United States
Code, has become the property of the United States, such that
the Maritime Administrator has rights to dispose of the
financial interest of the United States in the covered
vessels.
(b) Determination of Leasing Rates.--The Maritime
Administrator shall coordinate with the Secretary of the Navy
to determine leasing rates that meet the obligation of the
United States with respect to any loan guarantee for the
vessels.
(c) Modification to a Covered Vessel.--The Secretary of the
Navy may make necessary modifications to a covered vessel for
military utility as the Secretary considers appropriate.
(d) Covered Vessel Defined.--In this section the term
``covered vessel'' means each of--
(1) the vessel Huakai (United States official number
1215902); and
(2) the vessel Alakai (United States official number
1182234).
Amendment No. 53 Offered by Mr. Van Hollen
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title XXVII (page 544, after line 10), add
the following new section:
SEC. 2723. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING TRAFFIC MITIGATION IN
VICINITY OF NATIONAL NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER,
BETHESDA, MARYLAND, IN RESPONSE TO INSTALLATION
EXPANSION.
Given the anticipated significant increases in local
traffic in the vicinity of the National Naval Medical Center,
Bethesda, Maryland, and the unusual impact that such traffic
increases will have on the surrounding community due to the
planned expansion of the installation, it is the sense of
Congress that--
(1) multiple methods are available to the Department of
Defense to implement the defense access roads program
(section 210 of title 23, United States Code) to help
alleviate traffic congestion, including expansion of adjacent
highways, improvements to nearby intersections, on-base
queuing options, and multi-modal expansion, including
expanded support of buses and subways and other measures; and
(2) all of the efforts to alleviate the significant traffic
impact need to be pursued to ensure readily available access
to health care at the installation.
Amendment No. 56 Offered by Mr. Whitfield
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 245, after line 23, add the following new subparagraph
(C) (and redesignate existing subparagraphs (C) and (D) as
subparagraphs (D) and (E), respectively):
(C) the effectiveness of alternative therapies in the
treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder, including the
therapeutic use of animals
Amendment No. 58 Offered by Mr. Wilson of South Carolina
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title IX, add the following new section:
SEC. 9__. RECOGNITION OF AND SUPPORT FOR STATE DEFENSE
FORCES.
(a) Recognition and Support.--Section 109 of title 32,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections
(k) and (l), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new
subsections:
``(d) Recognition.--Congress hereby recognizes forces
established under subsection (c) as an integral military
component of the homeland security effort of the United
States, while reaffirming that those forces remain entirely
State regulated, organized, and equipped and recognizing that
those forces will be used for homeland security purposes
exclusively at the local level and in accordance with State
law.
``(e) Assistance by Department of Defense.--(1) The
Secretary of Defense may coordinate homeland security efforts
with, and provide assistance to, a defense force established
under subsection (c) to the extent such assistance is
requested by a State or by a force established under
subsection (c) and subject to the provisions of this section.
``(2) The Secretary may not provide assistance under
paragraph (1) if, in the judgment of the Secretary, such
assistance would--
``(A) impede the ability of the Department of Defense to
execute missions of the Department;
``(B) take resources away from warfighting units;
``(C) incur nonreimbursed identifiable costs; or
``(D) consume resources in a manner inconsistent with the
mission of the Department of Defense.
``(f) Use of Department of Defense Property and
Equipment.--The Secretary of Defense may authorize qualified
personnel of a force established under subsection (c) to use
and operate property, arms, equipment, and facilities of the
Department of Defense as needed in the course of training
activities and State active duty.
``(g) Transfer of Excess Equipment.--(1) The Secretary of
Defense may transfer to a State or a force established under
subsection (c) any personal property of the Department of
Defense that the Secretary determines is--
``(A) excess to the needs of the Department of Defense; and
``(B) suitable for use by a force established under
subsection (c).
``(2) The Secretary of Defense may transfer personal
property under this section only if--
``(A) the property is drawn from existing stocks of the
Department of Defense;
``(B) the recipient force established under subsection (c)
accepts the property on an as-is, where-is basis;
``(C) the transfer is made without the expenditure of any
funds available to the Department of Defense for the
procurement of defense equipment; and
``(D) all costs incurred subsequent to the transfer of the
property are borne or reimbursed by the recipient.
``(3) Subject to paragraph (2)(D), the Secretary may
transfer personal property under this section without charge
to the recipient force established under subsection (c).
``(h) Federal/State Training Coordination.--(1)
Participation by a force established under subsection (c) in
a training program of the Department of Defense is at the
discretion of the State.
``(2) Nothing in this section may be construed as requiring
the Department of Defense to provide any training program to
any such force.
``(3) Any such training program shall be conducted in
accordance with an agreement between the Secretary of Defense
and the State or the force established under subsection (c)
if so authorized by State law.
``(4) Any direct costs to the Department of Defense of
providing training assistance to a force established under
subsection (c) shall be reimbursed by the State. Any
agreement under paragraph (3) between the Department of
Defense and a State or a force established under subsection
(c) for such training assistance shall provide for payment of
such costs.
``(i) Federal Funding of State Defense Forces.--Funds
available to the Department of Defense may not be made
available to a State defense force.
``(j) Liability.--Any liability for injuries or damages
incurred by a member of a force established under subsection
(c) while engaged in training activities or State active duty
shall be the sole responsibility of the State, regardless of
whether the injury or damage was incurred on United States
property or involved United States equipment or whether the
member was under direct supervision of United States
personnel at the time of the incident.''.
(b) Definition of State.--
(1) Definition.--Such section is further amended by adding
at the end the following new subsection:
``(n) State Defined.--In this section, the term `State'
includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--Such section is further amended
in subsections (a), (b), and (c) by striking ``a State, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, Guam,
or the Virgin Islands'' each place it appears and inserting
``a State''.
(c) Stylistic Amendments.--Such section is further
amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``Prohibition on
Maintenance of Other Troops.--'' after ``(a)'';
(2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``Use Within State
Borders.--'' after ``(b)'';
(3) in subsection (c), by inserting ``State Defense Forces
Authorized.--'' after ``(c)'';
(4) in subsection (k), as redesignated by subsection
(a)(1), by inserting ``Effect of Membership in Defense
Forces.--'' after ``(k)''; and
(5) in subsection (l), as redesignated by subsection
(a)(1), by inserting ``Prohibition on Reserve Component
Members Joining Defense Forces.--'' after ``(l)''.
(d) Clerical Amendments.--
[[Page H7362]]
(1) Section heading.--The heading of such section is
amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 109. Maintenance of other troops: State defense
forces''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The item relating to such section
in the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 1 of
such title is amended to read as follows:
``109. Maintenance of other troops: State defense forces.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 572, the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
McKeon) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to adopt the
amendments en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the
majority and minority.
I yield 2 minutes to my friend, who is on the Armed Services
Committee, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Kratovil).
Mr. KRATOVIL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the en bloc
amendment to H.R. 2647. Two specific amendments that I offered are
included in this package. I encourage my colleagues on both sides of
the aisle to support these efforts.
The first modifies the congressionally mandated Report on Progress
Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan. The amendment requires a
comprehensive assessment that improves our understanding of the role
being played by our coalition partners in Afghanistan.
My amendment requires that the report include any specifics on
existing agreements with NATO countries as well as non-NATO troop
contributing nations regarding the following: mutually agreed upon
goals, strategies to achieve those goals, resource and force
requirements, and commitments of support regarding troop and resource
levels.
It also requires a listing of the unfulfilled commitments of
coalition partners, as well as the location and staffing requirements
of each provincial reconstruction team led by a nation other than the
United States.
The second amendment I offered allows defense facilities to receive
financial incentives for implementing energy management policies.
Current law permits installations to receive financial incentives for
implementing energy management measures only from an electric utility,
not from a third-party energy management provider.
Andrews Air Force Base, as an example, was poised to accept $300,000
in financial incentives for reducing their usage, but was advised that
they had no authority to accept the incentive from an entity other than
a utility.
My amendment would give defense facilities the authority to accept
these financial incentives from third-party energy management
providers.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
While I will not oppose the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Mississippi contained in this bloc, I claim the time in opposition to
express a concern I have about the amendment as drafted.
Mr. Taylor's amendment would authorize the Navy to use $35 million
from procurement of lightweight torpedoes, known as Mark-46, to convert
two commercial ferries for military uses as intratheater lift
platforms. These two commercial vessels were built through a Maritime
Administration title 11 loan guarantee, which may soon be in default.
A separate amendment in the base bill directs the Maritime
Administration to consult with the Navy before disposing of these
vessels should the Maritime Administration receive title to them
through default on the loan.
The Navy has stated that they may have an interest in the vessels,
but would likely have to make significant improvements to them to
render the vessels appropriate for military use. This will require some
study and planning on the part of the Navy.
Should the Navy determine that these vessels have military utility, I
would not object to the Navy leasing and converting these commercial
ferries. But I do ask the chairman and the gentleman from Mississippi
to work with me in conference with the other body to find an alternate
offset for this effort.
Although the GAO has indicated that there may be nearly $50 million
in excess funds for the lightweight torpedo program, the Navy is
currently in negotiations with the supplier to procure at least 38 more
torpedo upgrade kits with $23 million of this money.
In addition, the Navy is moving to a full and open competition for
these upgrade kits starting in fiscal year 2010. A $35 million
reduction is more than a third of the fiscal year 2010 request and
would substantially limit the Navy's ability to complete this program
and continue to buy more upgrade kits.
The Navy is using the pressure of this future competition to get the
best price possible on these additional upgrade kits this year. These
upgrade kits are necessary to improve the capability of these torpedoes
against quiet, diesel electric submarines.
Therefore, I will support the amendment, but hope we can work
together to find a more suitable offset in the conference.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to yield 1 minute to our
friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I'm grateful to Chairman Skelton for including one of
my amendments in en bloc amendment 2 and another in en bloc amendment
3. Both address oversight and transparency of defense contracting. The
first will allow Members of Congress to access the contractor
performance database created under the FY 2009 National Defense
Authorization Act. The database collects information about civil,
criminal, and administrative proceedings that result in a conviction or
a finding of fault against companies holding U.S. government contracts.
Currently, access to the database is limited to the chairman and
ranking members of certain committees, and limits the ability of
Congress to determine the performance of contractors.
The second requires annual reporting on individuals responsible for
overseeing contracts, including reports of how many dollars each
contracting officer is responsible for and a report on how many
contracting officers are themselves contract employees.
In 2008, the GAO found that 42 percent of Army contract specialists
are themselves contractors. The amendment would ensure that we have
access to information illustrating changes in the contract oversight
workforce that will help us in improving defense contributing.
Mr. AKIN. I rise now to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield).
Mr. WHITFIELD. I rise to support the en bloc amendments. All of us
know all too well that many young men and women returning from Iraq and
Afghanistan have suffered serious physical and emotional injuries,
including post-traumatic stress syndrome.
Camp Lejeune, Camp Pendleton, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, and Walter
Reed have rehabilitative programs that include the therapeutic use of
animals to treat these wounded warriors, and preliminary results show
that these programs are particularly effective.
In the en bloc amendment I have an amendment that simply directs the
Department of Defense, working with HHS and the Veterans'
Administration, to conduct a study to determine whether the therapeutic
use of animals to treat these wounded warriors should be expanded to
other facilities and military installations around the country.
I urge support of the en bloc amendment and this amendment.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to our friend and
colleague, the chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure
Subcommittee on the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).
Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in
strong support of a great bill, the fiscal year 2010 National Defense
Authorization Act. Additionally, Mr. Chairman, I'm proud that the
language I offered to ensure that the National Guard and Reserve
components are represented in the overall composition and scope of the
Military Leadership Diversity Commission has been included in the en
bloc.
By including the National Guard and Reserves, we ensure that the DOD
does not present Congress with incomplete recommendations regarding the
representation of gender- and ethnic-specific groups within the armed
services.
[[Page H7363]]
My passion is to ensure that our armed services are representative of
America and that the leadership pipeline reflects our Nation's
diversity. And this amendment simply ensures that when the study and
composition of this Commission is formulated, that the National Guard
and Reserve components are included.
No component should be left behind in the DOD's shift to increase
diversity in the Armed Forces. We can and we must do better for the
sake of future gender- and ethnic-specific groups that will join the
ranks to ensure minority representation, leadership and promote
equality.
{time} 1245
Mr. McKEON. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would yield 1 minute to our
friend and colleague, the outstanding new Member from Florida (Mr.
Grayson).
Mr. GRAYSON. I want to thank the chairman of the committee for
allowing these amendments to go forward. This is a great bill; and in
particular, I am happy to say that we have a good amendment in here
that will finally get ahold of the subject of cost overruns.
I worked in defense procurement for 20 years. I worked fighting war
profiteers in Iraq for 5 years before I came here; and one of the dirty
dark secrets of defense contracting is the fact that contractors buy
in. That's a term that is used by contractors to explain the situation
where they compete for a time and materials contract or they compete
for a cost reimbursement contract. They propose a certain cost or
price, knowing full well they cannot meet that price. They get the
contract, and they overcharge the government. It's a cost overrun. It
happens every day of the week, and we need to get a fix on it so we can
end it.
The first amendment that I have offered on this bill, which is the
subject of my current statement, is to have the GAO identify cost
overruns on a systematic basis and report to Congress in 90 days. I'm
hopeful that that will give us a good fix on the scope of this problem
and explain to us what we can possibly do to end this terrible tragedy
which ends up cheating the taxpayer and cheating the troops.
Mr. McKEON. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to our friend and
colleague from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
Mr. LIPINSKI. I want to thank Chairman Skelton for accepting my
amendment.
My amendment encourages DOD to act to recover the remains of 564
brave men who died in the Battle of Tarawa but are still unaccounted
for. In 1943, 1,100 servicemen were lost in 76 hours as this island was
taken from the Japanese. The violence and speed of the battle resulted
in makeshift graves that are now missing. Acting now to find and
relocate the bodies is particularly important because development on
the small island threatens the search. Most importantly, retired Marine
William Niven has recently documented the likely locations of many of
the unaccounted-for remains. History Flight has also used ground-
penetrating radar to find remains. But unfortunately DOD has no plans
to conduct new research. I would like to commend Chicago Alderman James
Balcer, a decorated Vietnam Marine, for his leadership on this issue.
I would like to insert into the Record a resolution passed in the
Chicago City Council, urging action on the recovery of our brave
servicemen on Tarawa.
Whereas, On November 20, 1943, the 2nd Division of the
United States Marine Corps and a part of the Army's 27th
Infantry Division fought in one of the bloodiest battles of
World War II on the Pacific atoll of Tarawa; and
Whereas, The American invasion force, consisting of 17
aircraft carriers, 12 battleships, 8 heavy and 4 light
cruisers, 66 destroyers, and 36 transports, the largest
American force that had ever been assembled for a single
operation in the war, stormed the Japanese-held island
fortress of Betio on the atoll; and
Whereas, During the 76 hours of fierce combat, 1,106 United
States Marines were killed in action and over 2,200 were
wounded in an operation that decimated over 4,500 Japanese
defenders; and
Whereas, The 2nd Marine Division buried their dead in 43
temporary graveyards, recorded their location and departed
Tarawa the following month; and
Whereas, Military records indicate that the surface of the
island of Betio was subsequently graded by the United States
Navy during the war, and temporary grave markers were
replaced with proper ones; and
Whereas, However, when the United States Army went to
Tarawa after the end of the war to reclaim the bodies, it
recovered only 402 bodies, apparently because many of the
replacement markers were incorrectly located; and
Whereas, In addition to the 402 reclaimed bodies, 118 of
those Marines killed in action at Tarawa were buried at sea
and 88 were listed as missing in action during the war,
leaving the bodies of nearly 500 Marines killed in action
unaccounted for; and
Whereas, Recently a not-for-profit organization called
History Flight began an endeavor to determine the location of
the missing remains of the Marines, spending thousands of
hours researching military archives, and visiting Betio to
conduct interviews and to employ a firm to conduct tests with
ground-penetrating radar; and
Whereas, The research produced results that found the
remains of some missing Marines on Betio and found strong
evidence that, although some of the bodies have been
accidently disinterred since World war II, more bodies of the
Marines who died on Betio can be recovered if the United
States Government dedicates resources to this recovery
effort; now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That we, the Mayor and Members of the City
Council of the City of Chicago, assembled this twenty-second
day of April, 2009, do hereby urge the United States Congress
to pass legislation appropriating necessary funds to the
United States Department of Defense so that it may recover
the missing bodies of the Marines who were killed in the
battle of Tarawa and who remain buried on the island of
Betio, and to relocate the bodies in accordance with the
wishes of the Marines' families; and we do hereby urge the
President of the United States to approve such legislation
when it is passed by the Congress; and be it
Further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be
delivered to the President of the United States, the United
States Secretary of Defense, the President pro tempore of the
United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House
of Representatives, and each member of the Illinois
congressional delegation.
James A. Balcer,
Alderman, 11th Ward.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 7 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from New Jersey has 4\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I have no further speakers, so I will continue to reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure at this time to yield 1
minute to the gentlelady who is the Chair of the Water Resources
Subcommittee, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Johnson).
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Let me thank the leadership of
the committee for this fine bill.
My amendment requires the Department of Defense to report on the need
for and availability of mental health care services for servicemembers
and their families that are stationed overseas. Many face depression
and post-traumatic stress syndrome and are suicidal risks while trying
to recover and readjust their lives. We've had more of this because
we've had so many military members have to go back to the same war more
than one time, and only a small percentage of them have been able to
get any support.
I thank our chairman for accepting this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of my amendment to H.R. 2647, the
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010.'' Thanks to
the chairman of the committee Ike Skelton and ranking member McKeon.
My amendment requires the Department of Defense to report on the need
for and availability of mental health care services for service members
and their families stationed outside of the United States.
Upon leaving the battlefield, soldiers' physical wounds are only half
of their problems.
Mr. Chair, before being elected to public service, I was employed as
the Chief Psychiatric Nurse at the VA Hospital in Dallas, Texas.
I have 15 years of hands-on experience with patient care, specialized
in mental health.
My experience has taught me that mental health patients need to be
treated with mercy, communication, information, and understanding.
My amendment today simply requests that the Defense Department report
back to Congress on whether our health care workers abroad are
adequately trained in detecting and treating mental illness and if we
have the adequate resources and centers to treat these patients.
While fighting two wars, we have more veterans than ever before
returning home.
[[Page H7364]]
Many face depression, PTSD, and suicidal risk while trying to recover
and readjust to their lives at home.
So far, only a small percentage of servicemembers who may have been
inflicted with PTSD or depression have been given the proper and
necessary care.
Patients do not receive immediate evaluations or treatment.
They have to wait far too long to be given a sufficient amount of
care.
It is, therefore, vital for the Department of Defense to assess the
availability and quality of care of mental health centers abroad.
By gaining a proper understanding of the situation, we will be able
to make the changes needed to aid our servicemembers through their
recovery process.
This is why we must work towards fully understanding mental illnesses
and continue to improve upon the care and treatment of mental health
patients.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. SKELTON. At this time I yield 1 minute to my friend, the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes).
Mr. SARBANES. I want to thank Chairman Skelton for yielding. I want
to salute him for his work on this bill and for including an amendment
that we crafted that would promote efficiency and effectiveness within
the Federal acquisition process. This amendment would create a
procurement professionalism advisory panel.
My interest in this comes from two perspectives. One was serving on
the Oversight and Government Reform Committee last session and seeing
many instances of fraud and abuse that we can do something about, and
also working with contractors in my district who want to make sure that
their partner on the other side of the table, the Federal Government,
is strong and has good procurement.
This advisory panel will focus on whether the government's
procurement personnel have adequate resources, are adhering to high
ethical standards, are receiving high-quality professional development
and otherwise are being the best they can be, which will ensure
efficiency and effectiveness in the procurement process.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Weiner).
(Mr. WEINER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. WEINER. First of all, let me express my great gratitude to the
chairman and ranking member for including language that I had suggested
and also into improving general transparency in the bill.
The language that I inserted, that hopefully will be a part of the
manager's amendment when passed, will ask the GAO the fundamental
question, not only how much do the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq cost to
our Federal taxpayers, but how much do they cost localities like mine
where literally hundreds of thousands of hours have been lost by
patriotic New Yorkers, particularly in homeland security jobs like
police, fire and EMS, going off to fight on the frontlines, and yet the
city taxpayers still wind up paying for it. Hundreds of thousands of
hours have been lost.
Now obviously the primary cost of the war is the lost lives and the
injured men and women who serve for us, and we should always keep them
in our thoughts and our prayers. But there also is a growing cost to
localities, particularly ones with profound numbers of employees, like
New York City has. How much is this costing? The GAO is going to have
to come back to tell all of us in our localities how many of the
Reservists have gone off but yet the local taxpayers still are winding
up picking up those costs. These are important things to know. I want
to thank the chairman for including it. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the
manager's amendment so it can be included in the law.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 7 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from Missouri has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, this is an excellent series of amendments
that we have placed en bloc, and I want to express my appreciation not
only to the staff but to the minority, to the ranking member on the
work that they have done, agreeing to these amendments and making this
effort today move forward very, very smoothly.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Chair, there is a real and current
threat to the United States and our allies around the world from
countries, such as Iran and North Korea, who are developing with the
intention to employ missiles which have devastating potential. With the
provocative rhetoric and increasing missile tests by North Korea on an
almost daily basis, this is not the time to cut funding for missile
defense. I would like to commend Congressman Mike Turner of Ohio and
Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona for their tireless work on the
Armed Services Committee in advocating for the defense of our nation
through a strong missile defense.
However, Mr. Chair, I have to stand in opposition to the Franks
Amendment that would increase funding for the Missile Defense Agency by
$1.2 billion with offsets found in the Environmental Management fund. I
cannot stress enough that I encourage Congress and the Administration
to increase funding for missile defense; however, the mechanism
proposed by this amendment is ill-advised.
The Environmental Management program within the Department of Energy
is responsible for cleaning up the waste of our nation's nuclear
weapons production sites. Specifically, in the State of South Carolina,
the Savannah River Site is a key Department of Energy industrial
complex dedicated to the National Nuclear Security Administration
program that supports the Department of Energy national security and
non-proliferation programs. The Environmental Management program
addresses the reduction of risks at the Savannah River Site through
safe stabilization, treatment, and disposition of legacy nuclear
materials, spent nuclear fuel, and waste. The Savannah River Site
remains an important asset to this country as it was during the Cold
War.
Every member of this body is aware that the Franks amendment has
nothing to do with reducing nuclear waste cleanup funding and that it
has everything to do with setting spending priorities within the
federal government. Unfortunately, when it comes to the Democrat
majority and the Administration, a policy of fiscal restraint has been
imposed on the Department of Defense, while the rest of the federal
government enjoys a policy of fiscal largesse.
Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chair, I rise to note my concerns about the Grayson
amendment to H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2010. As Chair of the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform with jurisdiction over procurement issues, I share Mr. Grayson's
desire to ensure that our procurement process uses taxpayer dollars
most efficiently and obtains the lowest possible prices. However, I am
concerned that the Grayson amendment could conflict with the
Administration's acquisition reform policies, would remove the ability
of acquisition professionals to determine the ``Best Value'' for the
taxpayers' dollars, and would significantly overburden the heads of
agencies.
President Obama made it clear in his Memorandum of March 4, 2009,
Government Contracting, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive
Departments and Agencies, that acquisition professionals should be
entrusted to determine the ``best value'' for taxpayer dollars in each
procurement: ``The Federal Government has an overriding obligation to
American taxpayers. It should perform its functions efficiently and
effectively while ensuring that its actions result in the best value
for the taxpayers.'' The Administration has made it clear that
acquisition professionals ``must have the flexibility to tailor
contracts to carry out their missions and achieve the policy goals of
the Government.'' The Grayson amendment would unnecessarily restrict
``Best Value'' analysis.
The Federal Acquisition Regulation (``FAR'') defines ``Best Value''
as ``the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government's
estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the
requirement.'' Instead of pre-determining the most important factors
for consideration in an acquisition, our current system places that
judgment in the hands of the acquisition professionals. These
professionals tailor the evaluation factors for each individual
acquisition to the particular needs of that acquisition. This process
results in the ``Best Value'' for each taxpayer dollar. The FAR
requires that price must always be considered in every source
selection. But importantly, its importance must be considered in
comparison to other criteria, including past performance, compliance
with solicitation requirements, technical excellence, management
capability, personnel qualifications, and prior experience.
Additionally, all the factors and significant subfactors that will
affect contract award and their relative importance must be stated
clearly in the solicitation.
I believe that the goal of Mr. Grayson's amendment is to prevent
situations where price receives minimal consideration in the
acquisition process. I share this concern, and the Committee has
received information that price has been routinely ignored as a major
evaluation factor. Reforms are needed to ensure that price is treated
as a critical criterion that is not given short shrift in the best
value analysis.
[[Page H7365]]
However, the Grayson amendment would set a rigid numerical formula
for consideration of price, which may not be appropriate in all
circumstances. By requiring price to be ``at least equal to all other
factors combined,'' this amendment would return our procurement process
to the lowest price technically acceptable or sealed bid methods of the
past, which failed to achieve the maximum yield for each tax dollar
spent. Furthermore, this amendment would require the head of every
agency who finds other factors more important than price (such as time
of delivery, etc.) to issue a waiver. This process would be an
overwhelming and unnecessary distraction for agency heads.
Mr. Chair, my concern about this amendment is about getting the best
value for each tax dollar spent. I would like to continue to work
together with Mr. Grayson to address his very legitimate concerns about
the importance of price as an evaluation factor in the procurement
process. However for the reasons discussed above, I cannot support this
amendment in its present form.
Mr. HARE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the en bloc
amendment #2 which includes an amendment I offered with my colleagues
Congressmen Braley, Tonko and Scott Murphy.
Mr. Chair, my district is home to the Rock Island Arsenal, the
largest government-owned weapons manufacturing arsenal in the western
world.
The Arsenal Support Program Initiative, commonly known as ASPI, has
made a critical impact on the economic development of the Rock Island
Arsenal and surrounding communities by bringing in new business and
creating over 500 jobs.
Mr. Chair, ASPI was designed to help maintain the viability of our
nation's arsenals by encouraging businesses to utilize and invest in
the industrial base. It is also important to note that the Army
supports ASPI because the program yields substantial cost savings for
the government and contributes to the increased use of the industrial
base by promoting public-private partnerships.
Mr. Chair, the underlying bill authorizes funding to continue the
success of ASPI, but does not reauthorize the program, which is set to
expire this year. My amendment simply seeks to extend the program
authority through FY2011.
I want to thank Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon for
agreeing to include my amendment in the en bloc package and urge my
colleagues to support it.
Mr. Skelton. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 4 of House Resolution
572, I request that following consideration of amendments en bloc No. 4
that amendment No. 20 be considered.
The Acting CHAIR. Notice has been given.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. SKELTON. Parliamentary inquiry.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. SKELTON. What was the ruling on the previous recommendation?
The Acting CHAIR. Notice was given to take amendment No. 20 at a
different place in the order.
Mr. SKELTON. I thank the Chair.
Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Cummings
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 24
printed in House Report 111-182.
Mr. CUMMINGS. I have an amendment at the desk that was made in order
by the rule.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 24 offered by Mr. Cummings:
After section 3505 insert the following new section (and
redesignate accordingly):
SEC. 3506. DEFENSE OF VESSELS AND CARGOS AGAINST PIRACY.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Protecting cargoes owned by the United States
Government and transported on United States-flag vessels
through an area designated by the Coast Guard or the
International Maritime Bureau of the International Chamber of
Commerce as an area of high risk of piracy is in our national
interest.
(2) Protecting United States-citizen mariners employed on
United States-flag vessels transiting an area designated by
the Coast Guard or the International Maritime Bureau of the
international Chamber of Commerce as an area of high risk of
piracy is in our national interest.
(3) Weapons and supplies that may be used to support
military operations should not fall into the hands of
pirates.
(b) Embarkation of Military Personnel.--The Secretary of
Defense shall embark military personnel on board a United
States-flag vessel carrying Government-impelled cargoes if
the vessel is--
(1) operating in an area designated by the Coast Guard or
the International Maritime Bureau of the International
Chamber of Commerce as an area of high risk of piracy; and
(2) determined by the Coast Guard to be at risk of being
boarded by pirates.
(c) Limitation on Application.--This section shall not
apply with respect to an area referred to in subsection
(b)(1) on the earlier of--
(1) September 30, 2011; or
(2) the date on which the Secretary of Defense notifies the
Congress that the Secretary believes that there is not a
credible threat to United States-flag vessels carrying
Government-impelled cargoes operating in such area.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 572, the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also extend my deep thanks
to Chairman Skelton for working so closely with me on this amendment,
and I applaud his leadership of the House Armed Services Committee.
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation, I have convened two hearings to examine maritime
piracy, including one in May after two U.S.-flagged vessels, the Maersk
Alabama and the Liberty Sun, both of which were carrying U.S. food aid,
were attacked by Somali pirates. The attack against the Maersk Alabama
left American Captain Richard Phillips hostage to the pirates. He was
freed only through the decisive intervention of U.S. military forces.
Incidents of piracy in the Horn of Africa region are increasing.
According to the International Maritime Bureau, in 2008 there were 111
actual and attempted Somali pirate attacks, resulting in the hijackings
of 42 vessels. By mid May of this year, there had already been 114
actual and attempted Somali pirate attacks, resulting in 29 successful
hijackings. Nonetheless, despite the obvious threat to United States
mariners, the Department of Defense has been inexplicably reluctant to
directly secure U.S.-flagged vessels transiting the Horn of Africa
region, even when they are carrying government-owned cargoes.
While I have no doubt that our military would respond immediately if
another U.S.-flagged vessel was attacked, the timeliness of their
response could be hindered if Navy assets are far from the scene.
Further, it is truly preferable to prevent an incident from occurring
rather than to respond to a hostage situation. However, the DOD has
repeatedly argued, including in the testimony before my subcommittee,
that the area in which Somali pirates operate is so vast the Navy
simply cannot prevent every attack by conducting patrols and,
therefore, essentially merchant vessels should protect themselves. This
perspective assumes that the only way the military can protect merchant
shipping from pirates is to stage vessels across the entire million-
square-mile theater of operations. Frankly, there are other ways to
protect our merchant fleet.
The United States Maritime Administration estimates that
approximately 54 U.S.-flagged vessels transit the Horn of Africa region
during the course of a year. Of these, about 40 will carry U.S.
Government food aid cargoes, and 44 have the ability to carry U.S.
military cargoes. Only a handful of these vessels, fewer than 10 in a
3-month period, are estimated to be at serious risk of attack by
pirates due to their operating characteristics.
Given these figures, my amendment would require the Department of
Defense to embark military security personnel on U.S.-flagged vessels
carrying United States Government cargoes when they transit pirate-
infested waters if they are deemed to be at risk of being boarded by
pirates.
Mr. Chairman, U.S. maritime labor unions collectively testified
before my subcommittee in support of the immediate provision to U.S.-
flagged vessels by the government of ``the force protection necessary
to prevent any further acts of piracy against them.'' In keeping with
that position, the Transportation Trades Department of The
[[Page H7366]]
AFL-CIO; the Masters, Mates and Pilots Union; the Marine Engineers'
Beneficial Association and others support this legislation. The
maritime unions also wrote in their testimony, ``When a vessel flies
the United States flag, it becomes an extension of the United States
itself, regardless of where in the world the vessel is operating.''
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, while I will not oppose the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Maryland, I claim the time in opposition
to express some reservations I have about the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The gentleman from Maryland's amendment would require the Secretary
of Defense to place military personnel on U.S.-flagged vessels
operating in high-risk piracy areas of the world's oceans. The
gentleman's intention is good. All Americans are outraged about the
recent outbreak of piracy and desire a comprehensive solution. But we
also must recognize that commercial shipping lines bear responsibility
to secure their cargoes and should not be given free protection by U.S.
military personnel everywhere in the world. The solution to piracy
cannot simply be a military one. Additionally, the sad fact is that the
bulk of U.S. cargo and U.S. citizens travel on ships that are not U.S.-
flagged vessels and would not be protected by this amendment.
{time} 1300
Further, the Navy and Marine Corps do not have a sufficient number of
Embarked Security Teams, known as ESTs, which receive specialized
training, to protect even the relatively small number of U.S. flagged
vessels. Based on operational tempo and dwell times, set by the Chief
of Naval Operations, it's clear that expanding the deployment of ESTs
would negatively impact other existing operational commitments. For
this reason and others, the Navy does not support placing ESTs on U.S.
flagged vessels for protection from pirates nor does the commander of
Fifth Fleet, Vice Admiral Gortney.
The Navy has also pointed out that embarking U.S. servicemembers on
nonsovereign immune vessels presents legal issues, including possible
criminal and civil liability for the servicemembers.
Therefore, while I will not oppose this amendment because the
underlying purpose is good, I would ask the chairman and the gentleman
from Maryland to work with me in conference with the other body to
develop a lasting solution that protects United States' interests and
does not place an undue burden on the Navy.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, just before I yield to our chairman, I
want to just say to the gentleman we are talking about only providing
security to U.S. flagged vessels carrying United States Government
cargoes operated by United States citizens. Surely we can provide that.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield to the chairman of the Armed
Services Committee (Mr. Skelton).
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. There
may be a requirement to redraft part of it at a future date, but I
think the purpose and the intent are correct.
Piracy is here. It's an age-old problem. From the Marines' hymn the
phrase ``to the shores of Tripoli,'' that was a successful antipiracy
effort on behalf of the United States Marines.
We have to do our very best to protect America, American vessels,
Americans that are sailing the ships, and particularly the government
cargo that's on them. So I applaud Mr. Cummings for making this
substantial step in the right direction in combating piracy.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I would urge the body to pass this
amendment. I think it's a very important amendment. We have heard the
testimony in our subcommittee and this is an appropriate way to address
it. It's a reasonable way.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 34 Offered by Mr. Holt
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 34
printed in House Report 111-182.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 34 offered by Mr. Holt:
At the end of subtitle E of title X (page 374, after line
6), insert the following new section:
SEC. 1055. REQUIREMENT FOR VIDEOTAPING OR OTHERWISE
ELECTRONICALLY RECORDING STRATEGIC INTELLIGENCE
INTERROGATIONS OF PERSONS IN THE CUSTODY OF OR
UNDER THE EFFECTIVE CONTROL OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) In January 2009, the Secretary of Defense tasked a
special Department of Defense team to review the conditions
of confinement at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to
ensure all detainees there are being held ``in conformity
with all applicable laws governing the conditions of
confinement, including Common Article 3 of the Geneva
Conventions'', pursuant to the President's Executive Order on
Review and Disposition of Individuals Detained at the
Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and Closure of Detention
Facilities, dated January 22, 2009.
(2) That review, led by Admiral Patrick M. Walsh, included
as one of its five key recommendations the following
statement: ``Fourth, we endorse the use of video recording in
all camps and for all interrogations. The use of video
recordings to confirm humane treatment could be an important
enabler for detainee operations. Just as internal controls
provide standardization, the use of video recordings provides
the capability to monitor performance and maintain
accountability.''.
(3) Congress concurs and finds that the implementation of
such a detainee videorecording requirement within the
Department of Defense is in the national security interest of
the United States.
(b) In General.--In accordance with the Army Field Manual
on Human Intelligence Collector Operations (FM 2-22.3,
September 2006), or any successor thereto, and the guidelines
developed pursuant to subsection (f), the Secretary of
Defense shall take such actions as are necessary to ensure
the videotaping or otherwise electronically recording of each
strategic intelligence interrogation of any person who is in
the custody or under the effective control of the Department
of Defense or under detention in a Department of Defense
facility.
(c) Classification of Information.--To protect United
States national security, the safety of the individuals
conducting or assisting in the conduct of a strategic
intelligence interrogation, and the privacy of persons
described in subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall
provide for the appropriate classification of video tapes or
other electronic recordings made pursuant to subsection (b).
The use of such classified video tapes or other electronic
recordings in proceedings conducted under the Detainee
Treatment Act of 2005 (title 14 of Public Law 109-163 and
title 10 of Public Law 109-148), the Military Commissions Act
of 2006 (10 U.S.C. 948 et seq.; Public Law 109-366), or any
other provision of law shall be governed by applicable rules,
regulations, and law.
(d) Strategic Intelligence Interrogation Defined.--For
purposes of this section, the term ``strategic intelligence
interrogation'' means an interrogation of a person described
in subsection (b) conducted at a theater-level detention
facility.
(e) Exclusion.--Nothing in this section shall be construed
as requiring--
(1) any member of the Armed Forces engaged in direct combat
operations to videotape or otherwise electronically record a
person described in subsection (b); or
(2) the videotaping or other electronic recording of
tactical questioning, as such term is defined in the Army
Field Manual on Human Intelligence Collector Operations (FM
2-22.3, September 2006), or any successor thereto.
(f) Guidelines for Videotape and Other Electronic
Recordings.--
(1) Development of guidelines.--The Secretary of Defense,
acting through the Judge Advocates General (as defined in
section 801(1) of title 10, United States Code, (Article 1 of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice)), shall develop and
adopt uniform guidelines designed to ensure that the
videotaping or other electronic recording required under
subsection (b), at a minimum--
(A) promotes full compliance with the laws of the United
States;
(B) is maintained for a length of time that serves the
interests of justice in cases for which trials are being or
may be conducted pursuant to the Detainee Treatment Act of
2005 (title 14 of Public Law 109-163 and title 10
[[Page H7367]]
of Public Law 109-148), the Military Commissions Act of 2006
(10 U.S.C. 948 et seq.; Public Law 109-366), or any other
provision of law;
(C) promotes the exploitation of intelligence; and
(D) ensures the safety of all participants in the
interrogations.
(2) Submittal to congress.--Not later than 30 days after
the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of
the Senate and House of Representatives a report containing
the guidelines developed under paragraph (1). Such report
shall be in an unclassified form but may include a classified
annex.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 572, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. HOLT. I particularly want to thank the distinguished chairman of
the committee, our friend, Mr. Skelton, for his support of this
amendment. It is identical to the amendment passed by the House during
consideration of the 2009 Defense Authorization last year with the
exception of some changes in the findings which I think strengthen the
case for this amendment. A similar intelligence-focused, CIA-focused
detainee video recording provision was included in the fiscal year 2010
Intelligence Authorization Act that was voted out of the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence last week.
Mr. Chairman, the amendment's purpose is simple. It is to improve the
intelligence operations of our Armed Forces by ensuring the video
recording of each strategic interrogation of any person who is in the
control or detention of the Department of Defense.
Let me be clear: this amendment does not impede combat operations.
The bill explicitly states that troops in the field in contact with the
enemy shall not be required to videotape or otherwise record tactical
questioning.
It does require the Secretary of Defense to promulgate and provide to
the Congress guidelines under which video recording of detainees shall
be done. It does require that the recordings be properly classified and
maintained securely just as any foreign intelligence information should
be. It does require that the recordings be maintained for an
appropriate length of time. What is the reason for this amendment?
Because multiple studies have documented the benefits of video
recording or electronically recording interrogations. Law enforcement
organizations across the United States routinely use the practice both
to protect the person being interrogated and the officer conducting the
interrogations. It is the standard of best practice.
Some U.S. attorneys are on record as favoring this requirement for
the FBI. And the Customs and Border Patrol does routinely videotape or
electronically record key interactions and interrogations with those in
their custody. Video recording is the standard within the United States
for interrogations of all types in all agencies and for prosecutors.
Well, what about the Department of Defense? Is it appropriate there?
Earlier this year a task force convened by Secretary of Defense Gates
to review our detainee policies issued its report. This is known as the
``Walsh Report.'' The report was unequivocal. It said: ``We endorse the
use of video recording in all camps and for all interrogations. The use
of video recording to confirm humane treatment could be an important
enabler for detainee operations. Just as internal controls provide
standardization, the use of video recordings provides the capability to
monitor performance and to maintain accountability.''
But more than this, more than maintaining the standards for behavior
in the interrogation room, it strengthens our ability to collect
intelligence and understand what's going on. The amendment would
strengthen previous laws passed by Congress regarding the treatment of
detainees, and it would maximize our intelligence collections from such
interrogations.
In fact, the origin of this amendment came from my questioning of
interrogators. When I asked how they get maximum information of nuances
of language, languages that the interrogators might not have real
fluency with. Who reviews the tapes? I said. And they said, There are
no tapes. By having tapes, we can get the maximum benefit of the
interrogation.
This amendment is endorsed by major human rights organizations. It's
been certified by CBO not to result in additional spending. I urge my
colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield, if he wishes, such time as he may consume to
the distinguished Chairman.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, as a former prosecuting attorney, I speak
in favor of this amendment.
It serves two purposes. First, it protects our men and women in
uniform who are conducting interrogations of detainees from frivolous
claims of alleged abuse or coercion. Second, the videotapes will act as
a deterrent for private contractors or other agencies who are
conducting interrogations of the Department of Defense detainees from
straying from those requirements of the Army field manual in the
treatment of detainees. It is a way to ensure that it is done right.
And when you have a correctly conducted interrogation, in all
probability the results will be positive. I certainly think this is a
major step in the right direction. Videotaping is good.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman from New Jersey has
expired.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
We have been down this road before. Last year Mr. Holt proposed a
similar amendment to our bill. In response we received statements from
the Army and the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence stating
their opposition to mandatory videotaping and interrogations. Today the
Office of the Secretary of Defense has informed us that the Department
strongly opposes this amendment.
According to DOD, the provision would cause three main problems: it
would severely restrict the collection of intelligence through
interrogations. It would undercut the Department's ability to recruit
sources. And it would impose an unreasonable administrative and
logistical burden on the warfighter. A provision like this would create
a public record that would go straight into terrorists' counter-
resistance training programs.
I strongly, as I said, oppose this amendment.
At this time, Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Conaway).
Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, I also rise in great deference and respect
for my chairman and Mr. Holt in this difference of opinion.
I think there's a great significant difference between collection of
data in interrogations conducted in a law enforcement arena in which
the evidence is gathered to go into a court of law to be presented with
a proper chain of evidence and that the sources and methods are not
necessarily needed to be protected versus the interrogations that go on
every day in the battle against Islamic jihadists. I don't believe that
those interrogations routinely should be videotaped.
We are in an argument right now with respect to data, photographs and
videos, taken between September 11, 2001, and January 2, 2009, as to
whether or not that data should be made public. I, for one, believe it
should not be made public. There are differences of opinion on that. I
personally think we need to legislate a fix to prevent those
photographs from being put in the public domain and further inflaming
the Islamic jihadists whom we oppose.
So I would oppose this videotaping because I think, as my ranking
member has said, it works against our efforts to try to get
intelligence on the fly and it will work against us. So with that I
encourage my colleagues to vote against the amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, just to again reiterate what the Department
of Defense has told us, this is a statement that we received yesterday
afternoon from the Department of Defense. I would like to read just a
couple of things from it:
``The Department of Defense strongly opposes the provision because it
would severely restrict the collection of intelligence through
interrogations, undercut the Department's ability to recruit sources,
and impose an unreasonable administrative and logistical burden on the
warfighter.
[[Page H7368]]
``A statutory video recording requirement will be a matter of public
record. Detainees will, therefore, know through counter-resistance
training that anything they say will be recorded and may be used
against them publicly, in a courtroom, or to gain leverage with other
detainees. This will inhibit detainees from cooperating with
interrogators and undercut the interrogators' most effective technique,
establishing rapport with the detainees. Moreover, if a video recording
is, in fact, released to the public and it becomes known that a
detainee has collaborated with U.S. intelligence, the safety of the
detainee and his family would be jeopardized.
``Even if a detainee agrees to be recorded, there is a tendency for
both the detainee and the interrogator to `play to the camera,'
creating an artificiality to the questioning, thereby degrading the
quality of the intelligence information.''
{time} 1315
Mr. HOLT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McKEON. I yield the gentleman 30 seconds.
Mr. HOLT. I thank the gentleman.
The communication which you speak of came from a mid-level official
at the Pentagon. The Secretary of Defense has not spoken on this. This
is not a statement of administration policy against this. The only
formal statement comes from the Walsh report, which I quoted from
earlier, which said, We endorse the use of video recordings in all
camps for all interrogations.
Perhaps this mid-level official at the Pentagon has not received the
word that currently there are being developed improved procedures for
detention and interrogation in this new administration.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, the mid-level official is a lieutenant
colonel. I think that is fairly high-ranking, field officer, and I
think the record, as he stated, stands for itself. He is a legislative
officer with the department.
The lieutenant colonel will not state on the record something that
opposes his higher rank. I think we all know that.
With that, I urge all us to defeat this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 39 Offered by Mrs. Maloney
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 39 printed in House
Report 111-182.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I have a amendment at the desk, No. 39.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 39 offered by Mrs. Maloney:
At the end of subtitle H of title V (page 175, after line
11), add the following new section:
SEC. 586. OVERSEAS VOTING ADVISORY BOARD.
(a) Establishment; Duties.--There is hereby established the
Overseas Voting Advisory Board (hereafter in this Act
referred to as the ``Board'').
(b) Duties.--
(1) In general.--The Board shall conduct studies and issue
reports with respect to the following issues:
(A) The ability of citizens of the United States who reside
outside of the United States to register to vote and vote in
elections for public office.
(B) Methods to promote voter registration and voting among
such citizens.
(C) The effectiveness of the Director of the Federal Voting
Assistance Program under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens
Absentee Voting Act in assisting such citizens in registering
to vote and casting votes in elections.
(D) The effectiveness of the administration and enforcement
of the requirements of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens
Absentee Voting Act.
(E) The need for the enactment of legislation or the
adoption of administrative actions to ensure that all
Americans who are away from the jurisdiction in which they
are eligible to vote because they live overseas or serve in
the military (or are a spouse or dependent of someone who
serves in the military) are able to register to vote and vote
in elections for public office.
(2) Reports.--In addition to issuing such reports as it
considers appropriate, the Board shall transmit to Congress a
report not later than March 31 of each year describing its
activities during the previous year, and shall include in
that report such recommendations as the Board considers
appropriate for legislative or administrative action,
including the provision of funding, to address the issues
described in paragraph (1).
(3) Committee hearings on annual report.--During each year,
the Committees on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives and Senate, the Committee on House
Administration of the House of Representatives, and the
Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate may each
hold a hearing on the annual report submitted by the Board
under paragraph (2).
(c) Membership.--
(1) Appointment.--The Board shall be composed of 5 members
appointed by the President not later than 6 months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, of whom--
(A) 1 shall be appointed from among a list of nominees
submitted by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
(B) 1 shall be appointed from among a list of nominees
submitted by the Minority Leader of the House of
Representatives;
(C) 1 shall be appointed from among a list of nominees
submitted by the Majority Leader of the Senate; and
(D) 1 shall be appointed from among a list of nominees
submitted by the Minority Leader of the Senate.
(2) Qualifications.--An individual may serve as a member of
the Board only if the individual has experience in election
administration and resides or has resided for an extended
period of time overseas (as a member of the uniformed
services or as a civilian), except that the President shall
ensure that at least one member of the Board is a citizen who
resides overseas while serving on the Board.
(3) Terms of service.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
each member shall be appointed for a term of 4 years. A
member may be reappointed for additional terms.
(B) Vacancies.--A vacancy in the Board shall be filled in
the manner in which the original appointment was made. Any
member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the
expiration of the term for which the member's predecessor was
appointed shall be appointed only for the remainder of that
term. A member may serve after the expiration of that
member's term until a successor has taken office.
(4) Pay.--
(A) No pay for service.--A member shall serve without pay,
except that a member shall receive travel expenses, including
per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with
applicable provisions under subchapter I of chapter 57 of
title 5, United States Code.
(B) Reimbursement of travel expenses by director.--Upon
request of the Chairperson of the Board, the Director of the
Federal Voting Assistance Program under the Uniformed and
Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act shall, from amounts
made available for the salaries and expenses of the Director,
reimburse the Board for any travel expenses paid on behalf of
a member under subparagraph (A).
(5) Quorum.--3 members of the Board shall constitute a
quorum but a lesser number may hold hearings.
(6) Chairperson.--The members of the Board shall designate
one member to serve as Chairperson.
(d) Staff.--
(1) Authority to appoint.--Subject to rules prescribed the
Board, the chairperson may appoint and fix the pay of such
staff as the chairperson considers necessary.
(2) Application of civil service laws.--The staff of the
Board shall be appointed subject to the provisions of title
5, United States Code, governing appointments in the
competitive service, and shall be paid in accordance with the
provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of
that title relating to classification and General Schedule
pay rates.
(3) Experts and consultants.--Subject to rules prescribed
by the Board, the Chairperson may procure temporary and
intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5,
United States Code.
(4) Staff of federal agencies.--Upon request of the
Chairperson, the head of any Federal department or agency may
detail, on a reimbursable basis, any of the personnel of that
department or agency to the Board to assist it in carrying
out its duties under this Act.
(e) Powers.--
(1) Hearings and sessions.--The Board may, for the purpose
of carrying out this Act, hold hearings, sit and act at times
and places, take testimony, and receive evidence as the Board
considers appropriate. The Board may administer oaths or
affirmations to witnesses appearing before it.
(2) Obtaining official data.--The Board may secure directly
from any department or agency of the United States
information necessary to enable it to carry out this Act.
Upon request of the Chairperson, the head of that department
or agency shall furnish that information to the Board.
(3) Mails.--The Board may use the United States mails in
the same manner and under the same conditions as other
departments and agencies of the United States.
[[Page H7369]]
(4) Administrative support services.--Upon the request of
the Board, the Administrator of General Services shall
provide to the Board, on a reimbursable basis, the
administrative support services necessary for the Board to
carry out its responsibilities under this Act.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Board such sums as may be necessary
to carry out this section for fiscal year 2010 and each
succeeding fiscal year.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 572, the gentlewoman
from New York (Mrs. Maloney) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. MALONEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This amendment would establish an overseas voting advisory board to
provide guidance and oversight to the Federal Voting Assistance
Program's efforts to increase ballot access for military and overseas
voters.
I would like to thank the distinguished Chairman Skelton for his
support of this amendment.
The Voting Assistance Program, which is part of the Department of
Defense, is the government's primary entity for assisting overseas
voters' access to the ballot, including men and women serving in the
military and Americans living abroad, who are our unofficial
ambassadors. With the global economy, more and more Americans will be
living abroad, and we need to make sure that their voices and votes are
counted.
While the State Department cannot give an exact number, there are
estimated to be between 4 and 6 million Americans living abroad. There
are also hundreds of thousands of brave men and women abroad from
Afghanistan to Germany, serving our country in the Armed Forces.
In recent election cycles, the Voting Assistance Program has failed
to bring about increased overseas voting participation, even with
extreme and increased cost to the taxpayer.
For example, in 2004, the Integrated Voting Assistance System,
created by the Voting Assistance Program, cost over $500,000 with only
17 overseas voters participating. In 2006, the Voting Assistance
Program did even worse by spending over $1.1 million on the same voting
system, but it accounted for an increase of only eight votes placed in
the system.
In 2008, the Voting Assistance Program Web site to help active
members in the military to vote wasn't even put up and operative until
July, just 4 months prior to the November election. From July 23
through November 4, 2008, of the roughly 1.6 million servicemembers
across the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps, only 780
servicemembers requested ballots through the program. This really is
disgraceful and disrespectful to the sacrifices made by our fighting
men and women.
Mr. Honda and I have offered this amendment to address the issues to
overseas military and civilian voting now long before the next
election. This panel will provide oversight for the Federal program
that has struggled in a mission to ensure greater ballot access for
Americans overseas and our military. The program's longtime director
resigned her post in 2008, and at that time it appeared that the next
director would be chosen in a closed process.
Along with many Members of this body on both sides of the aisle, we
sent a letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates urging him to conduct a
fair and open hiring process for the program.
I am pleased that Secretary Gates did a national search and selected
Mr. Robert Carey to be the next program director. I know and I respect
his experience, and I believe he will bring fresh ideas and workable
solutions to improve ballot access for all Americans living abroad.
And while he is very capable and will certainly bring long-awaited
and much-needed overhaul of the program, the advisory panel will add
additional strength, expertise, and depth and support for his efforts.
By passing this amendment, which will establish an oversight board,
we can guarantee that the best policies are being pursued to provide
better access to the ballot by bringing greater attention and support
for the Voting Assistance Program for Americans living abroad for our
military.
I thank my colleagues for supporting this amendment, and I urge a
``yes'' vote on the amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member seek time in opposition?
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition,
although I won't oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would establish an overseas advisory
board.
Now, that will not be to tell people how to vote?
Mrs. MALONEY. Absolutely not. The purpose of the board is to increase
voter participation. And in a global economy, believe me, there will be
more and more Americans living abroad. We now have hundreds of
thousands of military living abroad.
Mr. McKEON. Reclaiming my time.
This will work to improve the process by which our men and women in
uniform who are serving outside the United States register and vote in
State and local and Federal elections.
I understand that Congress is already working to improve this
process. I also understand that the Federal Voting Assistance Program,
which is responsible for assisting our troops with the voting process,
has a newly appointed director who will begin his duties next month.
With that, I support efforts to increase the opportunities for our
servicemembers to vote. I congratulate the gentlelady from New York for
bringing forth this amendment, and especially while they are serving in
combat.
I know we have had questions during elections whether their votes
were counted, whether they got back in time. So I really appreciate the
effort she makes on their behalf and, therefore, I support and urge all
of our Members to support this amendment.
I yield back the balance of our time.
Mrs. MALONEY. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his
support.
It certainly is a bipartisan effort to increase voter participation
in our country, particularly for our brave men and women living abroad
and serving in the military. In this new global economy, more and more
Americans will be working abroad. This is a common goal for our
Congress and for our democracy.
I thank the gentleman for his support.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendments En Bloc No. 3 Offered by Mr. Skelton
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to H. Res. 572, I offer
amendments en bloc entitled No. 3.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc printed in House Report 111-182 consisting of
amendments numbered 43, 44, 7, 25, 27, 33, 46, 51, 52, and 54 offered
by Mr. Skelton.
Amendment No. 43 Offered by Ms. Schakowsky
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VIII (page 291, after line 2), add the
following new section:
SEC. 830. ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR INVENTORY
RELATING TO CONTRACTS FOR SERVICES.
(a) Additional Reporting Requirements.--Section 2330a(c)(1)
of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the
end the following new subparagraph:
``(H) With respect to such contracts for services--
``(i) the ratio between the number of individuals
responsible for awarding and overseeing such contracts to the
amount obligated or expended on such contracts; and
``(ii) the number of individuals responsible for awarding
and overseeing such contracts who are themselves
contractors.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2011 and fiscal years
thereafter.
Amendment No. 44 Offered by Mr. Schrader
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle A of title VII (page 244, after line
8), insert the following new section:
[[Page H7370]]
SEC. 708. NOTIFICATION OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES OF
EXPOSURE TO POTENTIALLY HARMFUL MATERIALS AND
CONTAMINANTS.
(a) Notification Required.--In the case of a member of the
Armed Forces who is exposed to a potentially harmful material
or contaminant, as determined by the Secretary of Defense,
the Secretary shall, as soon as possible, notify the member,
and in the case of a member of a reserve component, the State
military department of the member, of the member's exposure
to such material or contaminant and any health risks
associated with exposure to such material or contaminant.
(b) In-Theater Notification.--If the Secretary of Defense
determines that a member of the Armed Forces has been exposed
to a potentially harmful material or contaminant while that
member is deployed, the Secretary shall notify the member of
such exposure under subsection (a) while that member is so
deployed.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. LoBiondo
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title V (page 180, line 11), add the
following new section:
SEC. 594. LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR ADDITIONAL RESERVE COMPONENT
MEMBERS.
Section 1044(a)(4) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``the Secretary of Defense), for a period
of time, prescribed by the Secretary of Defense,'' and
inserting ``the Secretary), for a period of time (prescribed
by the Secretary)''.
Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Davis of Kentucky
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 352, after line 12, add the following:
SEC. 1039. STUDY ON NATIONAL SECURITY PROFESSIONAL CAREER
DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT.
(a) Study Required.--Not later than 30 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the President shall designate
an Executive agency to commission a study by an appropriate
independent, non-profit organization. The organization
selected shall study the design and implementation of an
interagency system for the career development and support of
national security professionals. The organization selected
shall be qualified on the basis of having performed related
work in the fields of national security and human capital
development, and on the basis of such other criteria as the
head of the Executive agency may determine.
(b) Matters Considered.--The study required by subsection
(a) shall, at a minimum, include the following:
(1) The qualifications required to certify an employee as a
national security professional.
(2) Methods for identifying and designating positions
within the Federal Government which require the knowledge,
skills and aptitudes of a national security professional.
(3) The essential elements required for an accredited
interagency national security professional education system.
(4) A system for training national security professionals
to ensure they develop and maintain the qualifications
identified under paragraph (1).
(5) An institutional structure for managing a national
security professional career development system.
(6) Potential mechanisms for funding a national security
professional career development program.
(c) Report.--A report containing the findings and
recommendations resulting from the study required by
subsection (a), together with any views or recommendations of
the President, shall be submitted to Congress by December 1,
2010.
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
(1) the term ``Executive agency'' has the meaning given
such term by section 105 of title 5, United States Code;
(2) the term ``employee'' has the meaning given such term
by section 2105 of title 5, United States Code; and
(3) the term ``national security professional'' means, with
respect to an employee of an Executive agency, an employee of
such agency in a position relating to the planning of,
coordination of, or participation in, interagency national
security operations.
Amendment No. 27 Offered by Ms. DeLauro
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle A of title VII (page 244, after line
8), add the following new section:
SEC. 708. POST-DEPLOYMENT MENTAL HEALTH SCREENING
DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.
(a) Demonstration Project Required.--The Secretary of
Defense shall conduct a demonstration project to assess the
feasibility and efficacy of providing a member of the Armed
Forces with a post-deployment mental health screening that is
conducted in person by a mental health provider.
(b) Elements.--The demonstration project shall include, at
a minimum, the following elements:
(1) A combat stress evaluation conducted in person by a
qualified mental health professional not later than 120 to
180 days after the date on which the member returns from
combat theater.
(2) Follow-ups by a case manager (who may or may not be
stationed at the same military installation as the member)
conducted by telephone at the following intervals after the
initial post-deployment screening:
(A) Six months.
(B) 12 months.
(C) 18 months.
(D) 24 months.
(c) Requirements of Combat Stress Evaluation.--The combat
stress evaluation required by subsection (b)(1) shall be
designed to--
(1) provide members of the Armed Forces with an objective
mental health and traumatic brain injury standard to screen
for suicide risk factors;
(2) ease post-deployment transition by allowing members to
be honest in their assessments;
(3) battle the stigma of depression and mental health
problems among members and veterans; and
(4) ultimately reduce the prevalence of suicide among
veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring
Freedom.
(d) Consultation.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop
the demonstration project in consultation with the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Health and Human
Services. The Secretary of Defense may also coordinate the
program with any accredited college, university, hospital-
based or community-based mental health center the Secretary
considers appropriate.
(e) Selection of Military Installation.--The demonstration
project shall be conducted at two military installations, one
active duty and one reserve component demobilization station,
selected by the Secretary of Defense. The installations
selected shall have members of the Armed Forces on active
duty and members of the reserve components that use the
installation as a training and operating base, with members
routinely deploying in support of operations in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and other assignments related to the global war
on terrorism.
(f) Personnel Requirements.--The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure an adequate number of the following personnel in the
program:
(1) Qualified mental health professionals that are licensed
psychologists, psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, licensed
professional counselors, or clinical social workers.
(2) Suicide prevention counselors.
(g) Timeline.--
(1) The demonstration project required by this section
shall be implemented not later than September 30, 2010.
(2) Authority for this demonstration project shall expire
on September 30, 2012.
(h) Reports.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees--
(1) a plan to implement the demonstration project,
including site selection and criteria for choosing the site,
not later than June 1, 2010;
(2) an interim report every 180 days thereafter; and
(3) a final report detailing the results not later than
January 1, 2013.
Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. Holden
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle G of title V (page 158, after line
9), add the following new section:
SEC. 575. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMBAT MEDEVAC BADGE.
(a) Army.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 357 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 3757. Combat Medevac Badge
``(a) Issuance.--The Secretary of the Army shall issue a
badge of appropriate design, to be known as the Combat
Medevac Badge, to each person who while a member of the Army
served in combat on or after June 25, 1950, as a pilot or
crew member of a helicopter medical evacuation ambulance and
who meets the requirements for the award of that badge.
``(b) Eligibility Requirements.--The Secretary of the Army
shall prescribe requirements for eligibility for the Combat
Medevac Badge.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:
``3757. Combat Medevac Badge''.
(b) Navy and Marine Corps.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 567 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 6259. Combat Medevac Badge
``(a) Issuance.--The Secretary of the Navy shall issue a
badge of appropriate design, to be known as the Combat
Medevac Badge, to each person who while a member of the Navy
or Marine Corps served in combat on or after June 25, 1950,
as a pilot or crew member of a helicopter medical evacuation
ambulance and who meets the requirements for the award of
that badge.
``(b) Eligibility Requirements.--The Secretary of the Navy
shall prescribe requirements for eligibility for the Combat
Medevac Badge.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:
``6259. Combat Medevac Badge''.
(c) Air Force.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 857 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
[[Page H7371]]
``Sec. 8757. Combat Medevac Badge
``(a) Issuance.--The Secretary of the Air Force shall issue
a badge of appropriate design, to be known as the Combat
Medevac Badge, to each person who while a member of the Air
Force served in combat on or after June 25, 1950, as a pilot
or crew member of a helicopter medical evacuation ambulance
and who meets the requirements for the award of that badge.
``(b) Eligibility Requirements.--The Secretary of the Air
Force shall prescribe requirements for eligibility for the
Combat Medevac Badge.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:
``8757. Combat Medevac Badge''.
(d) Award for Service Before Date of Enactment.--In the
case of persons who, while a member of the Armed Forces,
served in combat as a pilot or crew member of a helicopter
medical evacuation ambulance during the period beginning on
June 25, 1950, and ending on the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of the military department concerned shall
issue the Combat Medevac Badge--
(1) to each such person who is known to the Secretary
before the date of enactment of this Act; and
(2) to each such person with respect to whom an application
for the issuance of the badge is made to the Secretary after
such date in such manner, and within such time period, as the
Secretary may require.
Amendment No. 46 Offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle H of title V (page 175, after line
11), add the following new section:
SEC. 586. SENSE OF CONGRESS AND REPORT ON INTRA-FAMILIAL
ABDUCTION OF CHILDREN OF MILITARY PERSONNEL.
(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the intra-familial abduction to foreign countries of children
of members of the Armed Forces constitutes a grave violation
of the rights of military parents whose children are abducted
and poses a significant threat to the psychological well-
being and development of the abducted children.
(b) Report on Intra-Familial Child Abduction Effecting
Active Duty Military Personnel.--
(1) Report required.--Not later than 60 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, and not later than December 31
of calendar year 2010 and each December 31 thereafter, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report
on the programs, projects, and activities carried out by the
Department of Defense to assist members of the Armed Forces
whose children are abducted.
(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include information concerning the following:
(A) The total number of children abducted from military
parents, with a breakdown of the number of children abducted
to each country that is a party to the Hague Convention on
the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (the
``Hague Convention'') and each country that is not a party to
the Hague Convention.
(B) The total number of children abducted from military
parents who were returned to their military parent, with a
breakdown of the number of children returned from each
country that is a party to the Hague Convention and each
country that is not a party to the Hague Convention,
including the average length of time per country that the
children spent separated from their military parent, whether
the Department of Defense helped facilitate any of the
returns, specific actions taken to facilitate the return, and
other Departments involved.
(C) Whether these numbers are shared with the Department of
State for inclusion in the Report on Compliance with the
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child
Abduction.
(D) An assessment as to how international child abductions
impact the force readiness of affected military personnel.
(E) An assessment of the effectiveness of the centralized
office within the Department of Defense responsible for
implementing measures to prevent international child
abductions and to provide assistance to military personnel,
including--
(i) the coordination of international child abduction-
related issues between the relevant agencies and departments
with the Department of Defense;
(ii) the education of appropriate personnel;
(iii) the coordination with family support offices and
other applicable agencies, both within the United States and
in host countries, to implement mechanisms for assistance to
left behind parents;
(iv) the coordination with the Department of State and
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to provide
assistance to left behind parents in obtaining the return of
their children; and
(v) the collection of the data required by subparagraphs
(A) and (B).
(F) An assessment of the current availability of, and
additional need for assistance, including general
information, psychological counseling, financial assistance,
leave for travel, legal services, and the contact information
for the office identified in subparagraph (E), provided by
the Department of Defense to left behind military parents for
the purpose of obtaining the return of their abducted
children and ensuring the force readiness of military
personnel.
(G) The means through which available services,
information, and activities relating to international child
abductions are communicated to left behind military parents.
(H) The proportion of identified left behind military
parents who utilize the services and activities referred to
in subparagraph (F).
(I) Measures taken by the Department of Defense, including
any written policy guidelines, to prevent the abduction of
children.
(J) The means by which military personnel are educated on
the risks of international child abduction, particularly when
they first arrive on a base abroad or when the military
receives notice that the personnel is considering marriage or
divorce abroad.
(K) The training provided to those who supply legal
assistance to military personnel, in particular the Armed
Forces Legal Assistance Offices, on the legal aspects of
international child abduction and legal options available to
left behind military parents, including the risks of
conferring jurisdiction on the host country court system by
applying for child custody in the host country court system.
(L) Which of the Status of Forces Agreements negotiated
with host countries, if any, are written to protect the
ability of a member of the Armed Forces to have international
child abduction cases adjudicated in the member's State of
legal residence.
(M) The feasibility of including in present and future
Status of Forces Agreements a framework for the expeditious
and just resolution of intra-familial child abduction.
(N) Identification of potential strategies for engagement
with host countries with high incidences of military
international child abductions.
(O) Whether the Department of Defense has engaged in joint
efforts with the State Department to provide a forum, such as
a conference, for left behind military parents to share their
experiences, network, and develop best practices for securing
the return of abducted children, and the assistance provided
for left behind parents to attend such an event.
(P) Whether the Department of Defense currently partners
with, or intends to partner with, civilian experts on
International Child Abduction, to understand the
psychological and social implications of this issue upon
Department of Defense personnel, and to help develop an
effective awareness campaign and training.
Amendment No. 51 Offered by Mr. Tierney
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 57, line 13, insert ``and the proposed radars'' after
``proposed interceptor''.
Amendment No. 52 Offered by Mr. Tierney
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle C of title II (page 67, after line
5), insert the following new section:
SEC. 227. STUDY ON DISCRIMINATION CAPABILITIES OF MISSILE
DEFENSE SYSTEM.
(a) Study.--The Secretary of Defense shall enter into an
arrangement with the JASON Defense Advisory Panel under which
JASON shall carry out a study on the technical and scientific
feasibility of the discrimination capabilities of the missile
defense system of the United States, as such system is
designed and conceived as of the date of the study.
(b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
appropriate congressional committees a report on the study.
(c) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means the following:
(1) The Committees on Armed Services, Appropriations, and
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives.
(2) The Committees on Armed Services, Appropriations, and
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate.
Amendment No. 54 Offered by Mr. Walz
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle A of title VII (page 244, after line
8), insert the following new section:
SEC. 708. REPORT ON JOINT VIRTUAL LIFETIME ELECTRONIC RECORD.
Not later than December 31, 2009, the Secretary of Defense,
in coordination with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall
submit to Congress a report on the progress that has been
made on the establishment, announced by the President on
April 9, 2009, of a Joint Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record
for members of the Armed Forces to improve the quality of
medical care and create a seamless integration between the
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The report shall--
(1) explain what steps compose the Secretaries' plan to
fully achieve the establishment of the seamless record system
between the two departments;
(2) identify any unforeseen obstacles that have arisen that
may require legislative action; and
(3) explain how the plan relates to the mandate in section
1635 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2008
[[Page H7372]]
(Public Law 110-181; 10 U.S.C. 1071 note) that the Secretary
of Defense and the Secretary of the Department of Veterans
Affairs jointly develop and implement, by September 30, 2009,
electronic health record systems or capabilities that allow
for full interoperability of personal health care information
between the Department of Defense and the Department of
Veterans Affairs.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 572, the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
McKeon) each will be recognized for 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to adopt the
amendments en bloc, all of which have been examined by the majority and
the minority.
Mr. Chairman, I understand that the gentleman from Colorado (Mr.
Polis) wishes to propose a colloquy, and I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman.
Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to gain a better understanding of the
status of the policy and law on the service of gay men and lesbians in
the military, commonly referred to as Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The law
and policy, established in 1993, disrupts unit cohesion as gay and
lesbian servicemen and women worry constantly--``who knows what''--
about their private lives.
Given the objective of the President to repeal the law and the
evidence that the law and policy harmed military readiness and morale,
what will be the strategy of the Committee on Armed Services for
assessing this law?
Mr. SKELTON. I thank the gentleman for raising this issue. It's fair
to say that much has happened since the law was adopted back in 1993,
and I propose that the committee will continue to engage in a
deliberative process to hear perspectives from all sides of the debate,
but particularly to understand the perspectives of the civilian and
military leadership of the Department of Defense and the perspectives
of ordinary servicemembers.
If we conclude that repeal is the appropriate course, the success of
the change will hinge on our full understanding of the implications of
the change and the development of a law and policy that will preserve
the readiness and morale of our military forces. Certainly hearings
will be at the heart of the committee's effort to determine those
necessary facts.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, can we expect hearings to be conducted this
summer?
Mr. SKELTON. Our Military Personnel Subcommittee has already held one
hearing with outside experts. We will clearly need to hear the
perspectives of the Department of Defense as well. Since the civilian
leadership responsible for personnel matters within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense has not yet been announced, I don't believe it
would be appropriate to begin a formal reassessment process until the
new Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness has been allowed to
settle into the position. But the committee will continue to hold
hearings.
Mr. POLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
At this point, I would like to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy).
Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to add my voice to the growing chorus
calling for the repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell law.
As you have suggested, many years have passed since the law has been
adopted, and I believe that many of the reasons that the Members of
Congress found compelling in 1993 will be considered outdated by
current servicemembers and the American public today.
Mr. Chairman, I know our schedule in Armed Services is challenging,
but I would encourage you to consider conducting hearings at the
earliest possible date in the hope of correcting this policy that I
believe undermines national security and military readiness.
I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman for his comments and I thank the
chairman for the opportunity to discuss the issue.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Smith).
(Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the distinguished gentleman for
yielding and for his help and the chairman's help in making this
amendment, my amendment, part of the en bloc amendment.
This amendment requires the Department of Defense, Mr. Chairman, to
report to Congress on the plight of our service members who, along with
their children, suffer from intrafamilial international child
abduction. The international movement of our servicemembers make them
especially vulnerable to the risks of international child abduction.
Attorneys familiar with this phenomenon estimate that there are
approximately 25 to 30 new cases of international child abductions
affecting our servicemembers every year. One man, Commander Paul
Toland, recently came into my office largely because of the publicity
about David Goldman and his son, Sean Goldman, the Brazilian case that
I have been working on. He heard about it, and he came in and said, You
have got to hear my story. And it is a heartbreaking story.
Commander Toland was deployed to Yokohama, Japan. He and his wife,
regrettably, had a split.
{time} 1330
She is now tragically deceased. And yet for approximately 6 long
years, he has been trying to get his daughter back and has been unable
to. The custody of his child is with the maternal grandparents. Again,
he has not been able to get his own child back. Commander Toland
received poor advice from the Naval Legal Services Officer on how to
adjudicate the case. Have others?
Be advised, The amendment will not entangle the Department of Defense
in custody disputes. Rather it will instruct the Department of Defense
to study and produce a comprehensive report to Congress about what they
are doing to ensure that our servicemembers are receiving preventive
education, legal protections and other assistance needed to avoid and,
when necessary, resolve the international abduction of their children.
This is the least we can do for those who serve our nation.
Our servicemen and women risk much in the service of our Nation. We
must do all that we can to mitigate the risks to their families. I
thank my colleagues for supporting this amendment, especially the
ranking member and the distinguished Chair.
I rise in support of the amendment to require the Department of
Defense (DOD) to report to Congress on the plight of our service
members who, along with their children, suffer from intra-familial and
international child abduction. The international movements of our
service men and women make them especially vulnerable to the risks of
international child abduction. This amendment will require a study to
pinpoint the extent of the problem within our armed services and what
the DOD is doing to prevent and remedy international child abduction
within the armed services.
The particular issue of international child abduction came to my
attention with the Sean Goldman case. As many of you know, Sean Goldman
was abducted to Brazil by his mother for a family vacation when Sean
was four years old. His mother divorced his father and refused to
return the child to the United States, which was Sean's country of
habitual residence and consequently should have been the legal
jurisdiction in which custody was decided. Sean's father has been
fighting for the return of his son for five years. Sean's mother is now
deceased, and Sean's father still cannot get him back.
Since my involvement with this case, I have been receiving calls from
parents left behind in an international child abduction--the particular
plight of military parents caught my attention. Military parents are at
heightened risk because they often marry when they are serving this
country abroad, and may live in numerous countries, including the
United States, while they build a family with their spouse. Upon
divorce, one parent sometimes whisks the child away to a legal
jurisdiction unfavorable to the left behind parent.
Such was the case of Commander Paul Toland, whose infant daughter was
abducted by his estranged wife while he was stationed on our naval base
in Yokohama, Japan. When he sought help from the Naval Legal Services
Office on base, he was told to hire a local lawyer and deal with the
issue himself in Japanese courts.
Whether through lack of training by the DOD or lack of attention by
the personnel, this very wrong advice from the Naval Legal Services
Office directed Commander Toland to
[[Page H7373]]
give up the legal jurisdiction of his home state and engage with a
foreign legal jurisdiction that has NEVER returned a child to the
United States. Commander Toland's former wife is now deceased, his
daughter lives with her ailing grandmother in Japan, and he still
cannot get her back. The fight has been six long years, and it
continues with little hope.
Attorneys familiar with this phenomena estimate that there are
approximately 25-30 new cases of international child abductions
affecting our service men and women every year. Our service men and
women risk much in their service to our nation. The DOD must do what it
can to minimize their risks.
This amendment would not entangle the Department of Defense in
custody disputes. Rather, this amendment will instruct the DOD to share
with Congress what they are doing to ensure that our service men and
women are receiving the preventative education, legal protection, and
other assistance needed to avoid and resolve the international
abduction of their children. This amendment asks the Department of
Defense to report to Congress on the following items:
The total number of children abducted from military parents;
The total number of children who were later returned to left behind
military parents;
What the DOD did to facilitate any of the returns, and what sorts of
assistance the DOD offers to military parents--such as psychological
counseling, financial assistance, legal services, and leave for travel;
The means through which available services, information, and
activities relating to international child abductions are communicated
to left behind military parents;
The training provided to those who supply legal assistance to the
left behind military parents;
Measures taken by the DOD to prevent abductions;
Which of the Status of Forces Agreements negotiated with host
countries are written to protect the military parent's ability to
adjudicate abduction cases in the parent's state of legal residence;
The feasibility of including in present and future Status of Forces
Agreements a framework for the resolution of child abduction;
Identification of potential strategies for engagement with host
countries with high incidence of international child abductions;
Whether the DOD coordinates on abductions with other departments,
such as the U.S. Department of State;
Whether the DOD currently partners with, or intends to partner with,
civilian experts on international child abduction;
Whether the DOD has engaged in joint efforts with the U.S. Department
of State to provide a forum, such as a conference, for left behind
military parents to share experiences, network and develop best
practices for securing the return of abducted children;
An assessment as to how international child abductions impact the
force readiness of our service members.
We all want to do right by our service men and women. The study
called for by this amendment will give us a window into what we are
already doing, and what we can do better to protect our service men and
women from the frustration and anguish of international child
abduction.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, let me flash back to a previous amendment,
the Akin-Forbes amendment. I just received a letter from the Assistant
Secretary of Defense, dated today, regarding that amendment, which
reads in part, While the Department supports transparency in
government, we find the amendment as written directing the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report on every employee covered under a
nondisclosure agreement as overly burdensome and counterproductive in
meeting the security challenges of today.
I yield 1 minute to my friend, my colleague, also a member of the
Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr.
Courtney).
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Mr. Skelton's
outstanding work on the underlying bill and also to support that
portion of the en bloc amendment which sets up a mental health
screening demonstration project cosponsored by Congresswoman DeLauro,
Congressman McMahon of New York and myself.
This is an issue which addresses probably the most concerning issue
that Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, spoke to the Armed
Services Committee about, which is the stress levels of our troops who
have been repeatedly deployed in military conflict. General Odierno had
a number of us over in December. Again, his number one concern was the
uncomfortable and outrageous amount of suicides which is occurring in
theater. I was with General Bagby in Europe a couple of weeks ago, who
again stated that that is the biggest challenge facing our Armed Forces
in Europe, who, again, are made up of many troops who have served in
Iraq and Afghanistan. And the present system of screening for returning
troops is simply to fill out a questionnaire. That is not enough.
This amendment will set up a demonstration project with a face-to-
face evaluation with a mental health professional. This is the type of
process that we need to deal with this unprecedented challenge.
Again, I urge strong support for the en bloc amendment which includes
this important component.
Mr. McKEON. I yield, at this time, Mr. Chairman, to the gentleman
from Kentucky (Mr. Davis) 4 minutes.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, today I offer an amendment that
will enable our Nation to more effectively plan and execute national
security and interagency operations.
To enhance our national security, we must be able to effectively
integrate the military and nonmilitary elements of our national power.
This requires the effective integration of all agencies of the Federal
Government, not only those with traditional national security roles.
However, achieving highly integrated national security interagency
planning and execution requires personnel who have the knowledge,
skills and attributes to plan and participate in these interagency
operations. At present, there is no permanent, institutionalized system
for developing the skills and experience required.
Examples abound of the need for this change, and I will cite two
briefly. My first relates to our ongoing interagency operations in
Afghanistan, and I commend President Obama for his determination to
pursue an integrated interagency approach to resolving that conflict.
As our national security community knows, helping the Afghan
Government create a secure and stable society requires, among other
things, that we assist farmers in growing crops other than poppies,
which are used to produce opium. Unfortunately, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture has never been used before now to provide personnel in
support of operations like those in Afghanistan. Instead, the military
has been required to fill the gap with people without agricultural
experience.
While our soldiers are very adaptable, we would be better off if USDA
were routinely engaged in overseas national security operations with
other agencies, military and civilian, of the Federal Government.
Next I cite our experience in Iraq. In the early days of the Iraq
occupation, there was no modern banking system in Iraq, and Iraqi
security forces could only be paid in cash, which required them to
leave their units and to spend days away from their units taking money
home to their families. During this period, the deputy Treasury
Secretary told me that if he was given the go-ahead, he was prepared to
help Iraq establish a modern, electronic banking system which would
have, among other things, enabled Iraqi soldiers to get their pay at
home without leaving their units and ongoing combat operations.
If Treasury, and in particular a Treasury cadre of national security
professionals, had been properly involved early on, the problem and
rise of criminal gangs and militias could have been mitigated sooner,
thereby contributing to increased Iraqi combat power, lightening the
load on our troops during a very difficult period.
My amendment, simply put, would require the President to commission a
study by an executive agency to develop national security professionals
across departments of the Federal Government to provide skilled
personnel for planning and conducting national security interagency
operations.
It is critical that we achieve a transformation in national security
education, training and interagency experience to produce national
security professionals who are able to work seamlessly together. By
requiring the President to commission such a study on an interagency
national security professionals program, my amendment lays the
foundation for that transformation.
I commend Chairman Skelton. He has spent a lifetime supporting
defense
[[Page H7374]]
reforms going back to Goldwater-Nichols and championing these reforms
to further integrate our national security tools moving into the 21st
century.
I thank Ranking Member McKeon for his work on this issue during my 4
years on the Armed Services Committee and continuing now as our ranking
member on the committee.
Mr. SKELTON. At this time, I yield 1 minute to my friend, the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Walz).
Mr. WALZ. I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for
crafting a bill to keep this Nation safe and provide care for our
warriors and their families.
I would also like to thank you for accepting this amendment as part
of the en bloc amendment. It is a very simple amendment I'm offering
that is asking that the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, submit a report to Congress by the end
of the year telling us what progress they have made on the
establishment of a joint virtual lifetime electronic medical record.
This is to bring about seamless transition from when our warriors leave
the service until they enter into the VA system, making sure they don't
encounter all of the bureaucratic troubles, the holdups and the delays
in processing of their claims.
As a 24-year veteran of our Armed Forces, I can tell you this is a
critically important issue. It was backed and announced on April 9 by
the President. This amendment will allow Congress to do its most
critical function of oversight of the executive branch to make sure we
are making progress to ensure the quality care of our veterans.
I thank the chairman and the ranking member for including it in a
very fine bipartisan bill.
My amendment is very simple and, I believe, very significant: it
would require the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to submit to Congress a report on the
progress that has been made on the establishment of a Joint Virtual
Lifetime Electronic Record for members of the Armed Forces to improve
the quality of medical care and create a seamless integration between
the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The
President announced on April 9 of this year that his Secretary of
Defense and Secretary of VA would be working toward establishing that
Joint Virtual Lifetime Record. My amendment simply aims to make sure
the administration is doing what it says it would do, and to make sure
that any required legislative assistance is identified. My amendment
performs the crucial congressional oversight function of holding the
administration accountable on its commitments. And this is a truly
significant commitment, because it is widely understood that such a
shared record system between DoD and VA is one of the keys to
successfully providing our returning servicemen and women what we call
a seamless transition as they return to civilian life. As a 24-year
veteran of the National Guard and a member of the House Veterans'
Affairs Committee, I know both from experience and from careful study
that this challenge of ensuring that DoD and VA, two enormous and
complex organizations with different missions, are cooperating to make
sure that our troops, when they return home and become veterans, do not
fall through the cracks at that moment is both one of the most
difficult things to achieve and one of the best for guaranteeing that
our veterans receive the best care possible ever after. I appreciate
all the efforts the House Armed Services Committee has made to this
effort, and I respectfully request that my amendment be included among
them.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, we have no further speakers, and I would be
happy to yield 2 minutes to the chairman.
Mr. SKELTON. I certainly thank the gentleman for that. I yield 1
minute to my friend, a very special lady, the Chair of the
Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development and FDA,
the gentlelady from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. According to the Army, 143 soldiers committed suicide in
2008, the highest rate since the Army began keeping records nearly
three decades ago.
Mr. Chairman, after asking our men and women in uniform to sacrifice
so much, the very least that we must do is to ensure that they get the
care they deserve.
This amendment, based on the Sergeant Jonathan Schulze Military
Mental Health Services Improvement Act, is about making sure our troops
receive adequate pre- and postdeployment mental health evaluations. It
directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a demonstration project at
two military installations, one Active Duty and one Reserve, to assess
the feasibility and efficacy of providing face-to-face post-deployment
mental health screenings between a member of the Armed Forces and a
mental health provider.
The 2-year project will include a combat stress evaluation conducted
by a qualified mental health professional within 120 to 180 days of the
date the soldier returns, and a case manager will follow up.
Let me say thank you to Chairman Skelton for his collaboration and
his commitment to this issue. We have no excuse for failing the
soldiers who have given this Nation everything. Let's give them a long
life, good health and quality care.
Mr. SKELTON. May I inquire, Mr. Chairman, the time remaining, please.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Missouri has 5\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
The gentleman from California has 3 minutes remaining.
Mr. SKELTON. At this time, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. McMahon).
Mr. McMAHON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this amendment which I offer along
with my esteemed colleague from Connecticut, the great Congresswoman
Rosa DeLauro, together with my great colleague from Connecticut, Joe
Courtney, and my great colleague from the great State of New Mexico,
Harry Teague.
Like my colleagues, I too am alarmed at the statistics coming out of
the armed services. Nearly 150 soldiers took their lives last year, the
highest figures since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan began.
In 2009, it is already reporting 64 potential active-duty Army
suicides. One-to-one mental health screenings with a certified mental
health professional is the least that we can offer to our servicemen
and women that sacrifice so much for this country.
This amendment creates a well thought-out pilot program that would
assess the feasibility of such screenings and would hopefully lead to
legislation in a broader sense.
For this reason, I urge my colleagues here today to support this
amendment on behalf of the men and women who serve this country so
proudly.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney)
Mr. TIERNEY. I want to thank the chairman for the time and for the
bill that he has put on the floor today.
I rise in support of this en bloc amendment, particularly because it
includes two amendments that were made in order under the rule. The
bill as reported by the committee specifies that no funds may be
obligated for the deployment of a long-range missile defense system in
Europe until the Secretary of Defense submits a report to Congress
certifying that the proposed interceptor that is going to be deployed
has been realistically flight-tested and has demonstrated a high
probability of working in an operational manner. That makes perfect
sense.
In recent months, those studies have been conducted by various
independent scientists, and they have shown that the radar proposed for
the Czech Republic does not have enough range to perform effectively.
As my colleagues know, the interceptors' capabilities are dependent on
the ability and the accuracy of the radar. That is why I believe that
it is imperative that the Secretary's report also certify about the
proposed radars, and that first amendment requires just that.
The second amendment directs the JASON panel, which has been
providing independent scientific advice and consultation to the
government since 1960 on matters of defense, science and technology, to
conduct a study on whether the discrimination capabilities being sought
by the Missile Defense Agency are achievable.
The system has to be evaluated by its ability to successfully
distinguish between an enemy's missile and any accompanying decoys
countermeasures. And right now, there is little evidence to suggest
that the system can make those kinds of distinctions.
Furthermore, this is a big challenge. As Dr. Phil Coyle, who was the
former
[[Page H7375]]
director of operational test and evaluation at the Pentagon noted
during a hearing that we convened, ``shooting down an enemy missile
going 17,000 miles per hour is like trying to hit a hole-in-one in golf
when the hole is going 17,000 miles per hour. If an enemy uses decoys
and countermeasures, missile defense is like trying to shoot a hole-in-
one while the hole is going 17,000 miles per hour and the green is
covered with black circles the same size as the hole. The defender
doesn't know what target to aim for.''
So this report should inform Congress on whether or not the ballistic
missile defense system will actually be able to employ discrimination
technology.
So I hope to thank Chairman Skelton for approving these amendments in
the en bloc package. I believe they will provide important oversight
over the missile defense system.
And finally, as one who has long believed Congress must reexamine how
it funds this program, I'm delighted that it takes a small but
important step in reducing by $1.2 billion the funding for these
programs. I hope it is the beginning of a trend on the way we go.
Mr. LoBIONDO. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this third en
bloc amendment. I want to thank Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member
McKeon for including the LoBiondo, Delahunt, Coble, Taylor amendment in
this bloc.
A couple of weeks ago I met with Master Chief Petty Officer of the
Coast Guard, Skip Bowen, to discuss benefits available to Coast Guard
service members.
He brought to my attention the fact that current law provides active
duty members of the Armed Forces and Coast Guard and their dependents
with access to legal assistance in connection with their personal civil
affairs. The law also grants eligibility to certain DoD reservists who
are called to active duty for more than 30 days. Unfortunately, the law
does not provide the same eligibility to similarly situated Coast Guard
reservists.
I am offering this amendment with Representatives Delahunt and Coble,
two Coast Guard veterans, to ensure current Coast Guard reservists have
access to the same legal assistance as other DoD reservists upon
release from active duty.
This legal assistance is critical in helping reservists understand
their rights under the Uniformed Services Reemployment Rights Act, the
Service member's Civil Relief Act, as well as probate, housing,
consumer and tax laws.
There are currently over 8,100 reservists in the USCG, including over
a hundred serving on active duty in Iraq providing port and waterways
security.
I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for working with me on this
important issue and I encourage all members to support this en bloc
amendment.
Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Chair, I'm very happy to rise in support of this
amendment and thank my colleagues for their work on this very important
issue, especially the distinguished Gentlelady from Connecticut,
Congresswoman DeLauro. I also thank Chairman Skelton and Chairwoman
Slaughter for the opportunity to consider this amendment to the
National Defense Authorization Act.
As you all may know, I recently I introduced H.R. 2931, the Kyle
Barthel Veterans and Service Members Mental Health Screening Act. The
bill calls for mandatory confidential mental health screenings for
members of the Armed Forces. By requiring the in person screenings, we
can reduce the stigma associated with the unseen injuries sustained by
our men and women in uniform and ensure that these brave soldiers and
veterans receive the treatment they need and deserve. Ultimately, by
mandating in person mental health screenings, we will reduce the
incidence of suicides and substance abuse among active duty personnel
and veterans.
When I introduced this bill, I named it after a young man whose life
was cut too short because we as a nation failed to give him the mental
health treatment he needed and deserved. It is my belief that mandating
screenings by a qualified mental health professional for every member
of the military is the only way to begin indentifying and treating the
invisible wounds of war.
While I would have liked an across the board mental health screening
mandate to be a part of this bill, I also realize that we need to walk
before we run. I believe that this amendment is the first step on the
road to effective mental health illness prevention and treatment for
service members and veterans.
Mr. Chair, I don't want to lose another Kyle. I don't want to lose
another fine American service member or veteran to an invisible but
very real illness. I don't want to ever have to go to another mother,
father, wife, or husband or brother or sister and say ``I'm sorry we
didn't do enough''.
Let's stand together and protect the health of our service members
and veterans. Support this amendment, and work with me to mandate
mental health screenings for service members in the future.
I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, we have no more speakers on this en bloc
amendment. I yield back.
Mr. McKEON. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.
Amendments En Bloc No. 4 Offered by Mr. Skelton
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to H. Res. 572, I offer
amendments en bloc entitled No. 4.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc printed in House Report 111-182 consisting of
amendments numbered 55, 57, 59, 62, 66, 67, 68, 69, 65, and 60 offered
by Mr. Skelton:
Amendment No. 55 Offered by Mr. Weiner
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VI (page 134, after line 24), add the
following new section:
SEC. 665. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON COST TO CITIES AND
OTHER MUNICIPALITIES THAT COVER THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN AN EMPLOYEE'S MILITARY SALARY AND
MUNICIPAL SALARY.
Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a
report on the costs incurred by cities and other
municipalities that elect to cover the difference between--
(1) an employee's military salary when that employee is a
member of a reserve component and called or ordered to active
duty; and
(2) the municipal salary of the employee.
Amendment No. 57 Offered by Mr. Griffith
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 67, after line 5, insert the following:
SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS REAFFIRMING THE REQUIREMENT TO
THOROUGHLY CONSIDER THE ROLE OF BALLISTIC
MISSILE DEFENSES DURING THE QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE
REVIEW AND THE NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Congress passed and the President signed the National
Missile Defense Act of 1999 (Public Law: 106-38), which
stated: ``It is the policy of the United States to deploy as
soon as is technologically possible an effective National
Missile Defense system capable of defending the territory of
the United States against limited ballistic missile attack
(whether accidental, unauthorized, or deliberate).''
(2) Section 118 of title 10, United States Code requires
the Secretary of Defense ``every four years, during a year
following a year evenly divisible by four, to conduct a
comprehensive examination (to be known as a''Quadrennial
Defense Review``) of the national defense strategy, force
structure, force modernization plans, infrastructure, budget
plan, and other elements of the defense program and policies
of the United States with a view toward determining and
expressing the defense strategy of the United States and
establishing a defense program for the next 20 years.''
(3) Among the requirements established by section 118 of
title 10, United States Code, for the elements that must be
included in the Quadrennial Defense Review are the following:
(A) The threats to the assumed or defined national security
interests of the United States that were examined for the
purposes of the review and the scenarios developed in the
examination of those threats.
(B) The specific capabilities, including the general number
and type of specific military platforms, needed to achieve
the strategic and warfighting objectives identified in the
review.
(C) The effect on force structure of the use by the armed
forces of technologies anticipated to be available for the
ensuing 20 years.
(4) Section 1070 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-116) requires the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive review of the
nuclear posture of the United States for the next 5 to 10
years ``in order to clarify United States nuclear deterrence
policy and strategy for the near term.''
(5) Among the requirements established by section 1070 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
for the elements that must be included in the nuclear posture
review is ``[t]he role that missile defense capabilities and
conventional strike forces play in determining the role and
size of nuclear forces.''
(6) The Final Report of the Congressional Commission on the
Strategic Posture of the United States, issued on May 7,
2009, concluded: ``Missile defenses can play a useful role in
supporting the basic objectives of deterrence, broadly
defined. Defenses that are
[[Page H7376]]
effective against regional aggressors are a valuable
component of the U.S. strategic posture. The United States
should develop and, where appropriate, deploy missile
defenses against regional nuclear aggressors, including
against limited long-range threats. These can also be
beneficial for limiting damage if deterrence fails. The
United States should ensure that its actions do not lead
Russia or China to take actions that increase the threat to
the United States and its allies and friends.''
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Secretary of Defense should thoroughly consider the role
of ballistic missile defenses during the Quadrennial Defense
Review and the Nuclear Posture Review.
Amendment No. 59 Offered by Mr. Holt
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle A of title VII (page 244, after line
8), insert the following new section:
SEC. 708. SUICIDE AMONG MEMBERS OF THE INDIVIDUAL READY
RESERVE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that veterans who are members
of the Individual Ready Reserve (in this section referred to
as the ``IRR'') and are not assigned to units that muster
regularly and have an established support structure are less
likely to be helped by existing suicide prevention programs
run by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that
all covered members receive a counseling call from properly
trained personnel not less than once every 90 days so long as
the member remains a member of the IRR.
(c) Personnel.--In carrying out this section, the Secretary
shall ensure the following:
(1) Personnel conducting calls determine the emotional,
psychological, medical, and career needs and concerns of the
covered member.
(2) Any covered member identified as being at-risk of self-
caused harm is referred to the nearest military medical
treatment facility or accredited TRICARE provider for
immediate evaluation and treatment by a qualified mental
health care provider.
(3) If a covered member is identified under paragraph (2),
the Secretary shall confirm that the member has received the
evaluation and any necessary treatment.
(d) Report.--Not later than January 31 of each year,
beginning in 2010, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a
report on the number of IRR members not assigned to units who
have been referred for counseling or mental health treatment,
as well as the health and career status of such members.
(e) Covered Member Defined.--In this section, a ``covered
member'' is a member of the Individual Ready Reserve who has
completed at least one tour in either Iraq or Afghanistan.
Amendment No. 62 Offered by Mr. Sestak
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle A of title VII (page 244, after line
8), insert the following new section:
SEC. 708. TREATMENT OF AUTISM UNDER TRICARE.
(a) In General.--Section 1077 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(18) In accordance with subsection (g), treatment of
autism spectrum disorders.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(g)(1) For purposes of subsection (a)(18), and to the
extent that appropriated funds are available for the purposes
of this subsection, treatment of autism spectrum disorders
shall be provided if a health care professional determines
that the treatment is medically necessary. Such treatment
shall include the following:
``(A) Habilitative or rehabilitative care.
``(B) Pharmaceutical agents.
``(C) Psychiatric care.
``(D) Psychological care.
``(E) Speech therapy.
``(F) Occupational therapy.
``(G) Physical therapy.
``(H) Group therapy, if a health care professional
determines it necessary to develop, maintain, or restore the
skills of the beneficiary.
``(I) Any other care or treatment that a health care
professional determines medically necessary.
``(2) Beneficiaries under the age of five who have
developmental delays and are considered at-risk for autism
may not be denied access to treatment described by paragraph
(1) if a health care professional determines that the
treatment is medically necessary.
``(3) The Secretary may not consider the use of applied
behavior analysis or other structured behavior programs under
this section to be special education for purposes of section
1079(a)(9) of this title.
``(4) In carrying out this subsection, the Secretary shall
ensure that--
``(A) a person who is authorized to provide applied
behavior analysis or other structured behavior programs is
licensed or certified by a state, the Behavior Analyst
Certification Board, or other accredited national
certification board; and
``(B) if applied behavior analysis or other structured
behavior program is provided by an employee or contractor of
a person authorized to provide such treatment, the employee
or contractor shall meet minimum qualifications, training,
and supervision requirements consistent with business best
practices in the field of behavior analysis and autism
services.
``(5)(A) This subsection shall not apply to a medicare-
eligible beneficiary.
``(B) Except as provided in subparagraph (A), nothing in
this subsection shall be construed as limiting or otherwise
affecting the benefits provided to a medicare-eligible
beneficiary under--
``(i) this chapter;
``(ii) part A of title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1395c et seq.); or
``(iii) any other law.
``(6) In this section:
``(A) The term `autism spectrum disorders' includes
autistic disorder, Asperger's syndrome, and any of the
pervasive developmental disorders as defined by the most
recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders.
``(B) The term `habilitative and rehabilitative care'
includes--
``(i) professional counseling;
``(ii) guidance service;
``(iii) treatment programs, including not more than 40
hours per week of applied behavior analysis; and
``(iv) other structured behavior programs that a health
care professional determines necessary to develop, improve,
maintain, or restore the functions of the beneficiary.
``(C) The term `health care professional' has the meaning
given that term in section 1094(e)(2) of this title.
``(D) The term `medicare-eligible' has the meaning given
that term in section 1111(b) of this title.''.
(b) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out
section 1077(a)(18) of title 10, United States Code, as added
by subsection (a).
(c) Funding.--
(1) Funding increase.--The amount otherwise provided by
section 1403 for TRICARE funding is hereby increased by
$50,000,000 to provide funds to carry out section 1077(a)(18)
of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a).
(2) Offsetting reduction.--
Reduce the amount of Operation and Maintenance, Army, by
$25,000,000 to be derived from the Service-wide
Communications.
Reduce the amount of Operations and Maintenance, Navy, by
$15,000,000, to be derived from Service-wide Communications.
Reduce the amount of Research Development Test &
Evaluation, by $10,000,000, to be derived from Advanced
Aerospace Systems Integrated Sensor IS Structure, PE 68286E
Amendment No. 66 Offered by Mr. McDermott
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle C of title XII of the bill, add the
following new section:
SEC. 12XX. MAP OF MINERAL-RICH ZONES AND AREAS UNDER THE
CONTROL OF ARMED GROUPS IN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
OF THE CONGO.
(a) In General.--Not later than 120 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, shall, consistent
with the recommendation from the United Nations Group of
Experts on the Democratic Republic of the Congo in their
December 2008 report, work with other member states of the
United Nations and local and international nongovernmental
organizations--
(1) to produce a map of mineral-rich zones and areas under
the control of armed groups in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo; and
(2) to make such map available to the public.
The map required under this subsection shall be known as the
``Congo Conflict Minerals Map''. Mines located in areas under
the control of armed groups in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, as depicted on the Congo Conflict Minerals Map, shall
be known as ``conflict zone mines''.
(b) Updates.--The Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, shall update the map required by
subsection (a) not less frequently than once every 180 days
until the Secretary of Defense certifies that no armed party
to any ongoing armed conflict in the Democratic Republic of
the Congo or any other country is involved in the mining,
sale, or export of columbite-tantalite, cassiterite,
wolframite, or gold, or the control thereof, or derives
benefits from such activities.
Amendment No. 67 Offered by Mr. Schiff
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 86, after line 16, insert the following new section:
SEC. 248. AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
ADMINISTRATION FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT CENTERS TO PARTICIPATE IN MERIT-
BASED TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMS.
Section 217(f)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat 2695) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) A federally funded research and development center of
the National Aeronautics
[[Page H7377]]
and Space Administration that functions primarily as a
research laboratory may respond to broad agency announcements
under programs authorized by the Federal Government for the
purpose of promoting the research, development,
demonstration, or transfer of technology in a manner
consistent with the terms and conditions of such program, for
activities including, but not limited to, those conducted by
the center under contract with or on behalf of the Department
of Defense or through transfer of funds from the Department
of Defense to the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.''.
Amendment No. 68 Offered by Ms. Bordallo
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of division A of the bill, insert the following
new title:
TITLE XVI--GUAM WORLD WAR II LOYALTY RECOGNITION ACT
SEC. 1601. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Guam World War II Loyalty
Recognition Act''.
SEC. 1602. RECOGNITION OF THE SUFFERING AND LOYALTY OF THE
RESIDENTS OF GUAM.
(a) Recognition of the Suffering of the Residents of
Guam.--The United States recognizes that, as described by the
Guam War Claims Review Commission, the residents of Guam, on
account of their United States nationality, suffered
unspeakable harm as a result of the occupation of Guam by
Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II, by
being subjected to death, rape, severe personal injury,
personal injury, forced labor, forced march, or internment.
(b) Recognition of the Loyalty of the Residents of Guam.--
The United States forever will be grateful to the residents
of Guam for their steadfast loyalty to the United States of
America, as demonstrated by the countless acts of courage
they performed despite the threat of death or great bodily
harm they faced at the hands of the Imperial Japanese
military forces that occupied Guam during World War II.
SEC. 1603. PAYMENTS FOR GUAM WORLD WAR II CLAIMS.
(a) Payments for Death, Personal Injury, Forced Labor,
Forced March, and Internment.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations authorized to be appropriated under section
1606(a), after receipt of certification pursuant to section
1604(b)(8) and in accordance with the provisions of this
title, the Secretary of the Treasury shall make payments as
follows:
(1) Residents injured.--The Secretary shall pay compensable
Guam victims who are not deceased before any payments are
made to individuals described in paragraphs (2) and (3) as
follows:
(A) If the victim has suffered an injury described in
subsection (c)(2)(A), $15,000.
(B) If the victim is not described in subparagraph (A) but
has suffered an injury described in subsection (c)(2)(B),
$12,000.
(C) If the victim is not described in subparagraph (A) or
(B) but has suffered an injury described in subsection
(c)(2)(C), $10,000.
(2) Survivors of residents who died in war.--In the case of
a compensable Guam decedent, the Secretary shall pay $25,000
for distribution to eligible survivors of the decedent as
specified in subsection (b). The Secretary shall make
payments under this paragraph after payments are made under
paragraph (1) and before payments are made under paragraph
(3).
(3) Survivors of deceased injured residents.--In the case
of a compensable Guam victim who is deceased, the Secretary
shall pay $7,000 for distribution to eligible survivors of
the victim as specified in subsection (b). The Secretary
shall make payments under this paragraph after payments are
made under paragraphs (1) and (2).
(b) Distribution of Survivor Payments.--Payments under
paragraph (2) or (3) of subsection (a) to eligible survivors
of an individual who is a compensable Guam decedent or a
compensable Guam victim who is deceased shall be made as
follows:
(1) If there is living a spouse of the individual, but no
child of the individual, all of the payment shall be made to
such spouse.
(2) If there is living a spouse of the individual and one
or more children of the individual, one-half of the payment
shall be made to the spouse and the other half to the child
(or to the children in equal shares).
(3) If there is no living spouse of the individual, but
there are one or more children of the individual alive, all
of the payment shall be made to such child (or to such
children in equal shares).
(4) If there is no living spouse or child of the individual
but there is a living parent (or parents) of the individual,
all of the payment shall be made to the parents (or to the
parents in equal shares).
(5) If there is no such living spouse, child, or parent, no
payment shall be made.
(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this title:
(1) Compensable guam decedent.--The term ``compensable Guam
decedent'' means an individual determined under section
1604(a)(1) to have been a resident of Guam who died or was
killed as a result of the attack and occupation of Guam by
Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II, or
incident to the liberation of Guam by United States military
forces, and whose death would have been compensable under the
Guam Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (Public Law 79-224) if a
timely claim had been filed under the terms of such Act.
(2) Compensable guam victim.--The term ``compensable Guam
victim'' means an individual determined under section
1604(a)(1) to have suffered, as a result of the attack and
occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military forces
during World War II, or incident to the liberation of Guam by
United States military forces, any of the following:
(A) Rape or severe personal injury (such as loss of a limb,
dismemberment, or paralysis).
(B) Forced labor or a personal injury not under
subparagraph (A) (such as disfigurement, scarring, or burns).
(C) Forced march, internment, or hiding to evade
internment.
(3) Definitions of severe personal injuries and personal
injuries.--The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall
promulgate regulations to specify injuries that constitute a
severe personal injury or a personal injury for purposes of
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, of paragraph (2).
SEC. 1604. ADJUDICATION.
(a) Authority of Foreign Claims Settlement Commission.--
(1) In general.--The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission
is authorized to adjudicate claims and determine eligibility
for payments under section 1603.
(2) Rules and regulations.--The chairman of the Foreign
Claims Settlement Commission shall prescribe such rules and
regulations as may be necessary to enable it to carry out its
functions under this title. Such rules and regulations shall
be published in the Federal Register.
(b) Claims Submitted for Payments.--
(1) Submittal of claim.--For purposes of subsection (a)(1)
and subject to paragraph (2), the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission may not determine an individual is eligible for a
payment under section 1603 unless the individual submits to
the Commission a claim in such manner and form and containing
such information as the Commission specifies.
(2) Filing period for claims and notice.--All claims for a
payment under section 1603 shall be filed within one year
after the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission publishes
public notice of the filing period in the Federal Register.
The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall provide for
the notice required under the previous sentence not later
than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this title.
In addition, the Commission shall cause to be publicized the
public notice of the deadline for filing claims in newspaper,
radio, and television media on Guam.
(3) Adjudicatory decisions.--The decision of the Foreign
Claims Settlement Commission on each claim shall be by
majority vote, shall be in writing, and shall state the
reasons for the approval or denial of the claim. If approved,
the decision shall also state the amount of the payment
awarded and the distribution, if any, to be made of the
payment.
(4) Deductions in payment.--The Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission shall deduct, from potential payments, amounts
previously paid under the Guam Meritorious Claims Act of 1945
(Public Law 79-224).
(5) Interest.--No interest shall be paid on payments
awarded by the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission.
(6) Remuneration prohibited.--No remuneration on account of
representational services rendered on behalf of any claimant
in connection with any claim filed with the Foreign Claims
Settlement Commission under this title shall exceed one
percent of the total amount paid pursuant to any payment
certified under the provisions of this title on account of
such claim. Any agreement to the contrary shall be unlawful
and void. Whoever demands or receives, on account of services
so rendered, any remuneration in excess of the maximum
permitted by this section shall be fined not more than $5,000
or imprisoned not more than 12 months, or both.
(7) Appeals and finality.--Objections and appeals of
decisions of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall
be to the Commission, and upon rehearing, the decision in
each claim shall be final, and not subject to further review
by any court or agency.
(8) Certifications for payment.--After a decision approving
a claim becomes final, the chairman of the Foreign Claims
Settlement Commission shall certify it to the Secretary of
the Treasury for authorization of a payment under section
1603.
(9) Treatment of affidavits.--For purposes of section 1603
and subject to paragraph (2), the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission shall treat a claim that is accompanied by an
affidavit of an individual that attests to all of the
material facts required for establishing eligibility of such
individual for payment under such section as establishing a
prima facie case of the individual's eligibility for such
payment without the need for further documentation, except as
the Commission may otherwise require. Such material facts
shall include, with respect to a claim under paragraph (2) or
(3) of section 1603(a), a detailed description of the injury
or other circumstance supporting the claim involved,
including the level of payment sought.
(10) Release of related claims.--Acceptance of payment
under section 1603 by an individual for a claim related to a
compensable Guam decedent or a compensable Guam victim shall
be in full satisfaction of all claims related to such
decedent or victim, respectively, arising under the Guam
Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (Public Law 79-224), the
implementing regulations issued by the
[[Page H7378]]
United States Navy pursuant thereto, or this title.
(11) Penalty for false claims.--The provisions of section
1001 of title 18 of the United States Code (relating to
criminal penalties for false statements) apply to claims
submitted under this subsection.
SEC. 1605. GRANTS PROGRAM TO MEMORIALIZE THE OCCUPATION OF
GUAM DURING WORLD WAR II.
(a) Establishment.--Subject to section 1606(b) and in
accordance with this section, the Secretary of the Interior
shall establish a grants program under which the Secretary
shall award grants for research, educational, and media
activities that memorialize the events surrounding the
occupation of Guam during World War II, honor the loyalty of
the people of Guam during such occupation, or both, for
purposes of appropriately illuminating and interpreting the
causes and circumstances of such occupation and other similar
occupations during a war.
(b) Eligibility.--The Secretary of the Interior may not
award to a person a grant under subsection (a) unless such
person submits an application to the Secretary for such
grant, in such time, manner, and form and containing such
information as the Secretary specifies.
SEC. 1606. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Guam World War II Claims Payments and Adjudication.--
For purposes of carrying out sections 1603 and 1604, there
are authorized to be appropriated $126,000,000, to remain
available for obligation until September 30, 2013, to the
Foreign Claims Settlement Commission. Not more than 5 percent
of funds made available under this subsection shall be used
for administrative costs.
(b) Guam World War II Grants Program.--For purposes of
carrying out section 1605, there are authorized to be
appropriated $5,000,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2013.
Amendment No. 69 Offered by Mr. Grayson
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VIII, add the following new section:
SEC. 830. REQUIREMENT TO JUSTIFY THE USE OF FACTORS OTHER
THAN COST OR PRICE AS THE PREDOMINATE FACTORS
IN EVALUATING COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS FOR DEFENSE
PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS.
(a) Requirement.--Subparagraph (A) of section 2305(a)(2) of
title 10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (i); and
(2) by inserting after clause (ii) the following new
clause:
``(iii) in the case of a solicitation in which factors
other than cost or price when combined are more important
than cost or price, the reasons why assigning at least equal
importance to cost or price would not better serve the
Government's interest; and''.
(b) Report.--Section 2305(a)(3) of such title is amended by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) Not later than 180 days after the end of each fiscal
year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress, and
post on a publicly available website of the Department of
Defense, a report describing the solicitations for which a
statement pursuant to paragraph (2)(A)(iii) was included.''.
Amendment No. 65 Offered by Ms. Castor of Florida
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title VI (page 230, after line 22), add the
following new section:
SEC. 665. POSTAL BENEFITS PROGRAM FOR SENDING FREE MAIL TO
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES SERVING IN CERTAIN
OVERSEAS OPERATIONS AND HOSPITALIZED MEMBERS.
(a) Availability of Postal Benefits.--The Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the United States Postal
Service, shall provide for a program under which postal
benefits are provided during fiscal year 2010 to qualified
individuals in accordance with this section.
(b) Qualified Individual.--In this section, the term
``qualified individual'' means a member of the Armed Forces
described in subsection (a)(1) of section 3401 of title 39,
United States Code, who is entitled to free mailing
privileges under such section.
(c) Postal Benefits Described.--
(1) Vouchers.--The postal benefits provided under the
program shall consist of such coupons or other similar
evidence of credit (in this section referred to as a
``voucher'') to permit a person possessing the voucher to
make a qualified mailing to any qualified individual without
charge using the Postal Service. The vouchers may be in
printed, electronic, or such other format as the Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Postal Service, shall
determine to be appropriate.
(2) Qualified mailing.--In this section, the term
``qualified mailing'' means the mailing of a single mail
piece which--
(A) is first-class mail (including any sound- or video-
recorded communication) not exceeding 13 ounces in weight and
having the character of personal correspondence or parcel
post not exceeding 15 pounds in weight;
(B) is sent from within an area served by a United States
post office; and
(C) is addressed to any qualified individual.
(3) Coordination rule.--Postal benefits under the program
are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any reduced rates of
postage or other similar benefits which might otherwise be
available by or under law, including any rates of postage
resulting from the application of section 3401(b) of title
39, United States Code.
(d) Number of Vouchers.--A member of the Armed Forces shall
be eligible for one voucher for every month (or part of a
month) during fiscal year 2010 in which the member is a
qualified individual. Subject to subsection (f)(2), a voucher
earned during fiscal year 2010 may be used after the end of
such fiscal year.
(e) Transfer of Vouchers.--A qualified individual may
transfer a voucher to a member of the family of the qualified
individual, a nonprofit organization, or any other person
selected by the qualified individual for use to send
qualified mailings to the qualified individual or other
qualified individuals.
(f) Limitations on Use; Duration.--A voucher may not be
used--
(1) for more than one qualified mailing, whether that
mailing is a first-class letter or a parcel; or
(2) after the expiration date of the voucher, as designated
by the Secretary of Defense.
(g) Regulations.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense (in
consultation with the Postal Service) shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the program,
including--
(1) procedures by which vouchers will be provided or made
available in timely manner to qualified individuals; and
(2) procedures to ensure that the number of vouchers
provided or made available with respect to any qualified
individual complies with subsection (d).
(h) Transfers of Funds to Postal Service.--
(1) Based on estimates.--The Secretary of Defense shall
transfer to the Postal Service, out of amounts available to
carry out the program and in advance of each calendar quarter
during which postal benefits may be used under the program,
an amount equal to the amount of postal benefits that the
Secretary estimates will be used during such quarter, reduced
or increased (as the case may be) by any amounts by which the
Secretary finds that a determination under this subsection
for a prior quarter was greater than or less than the amount
finally determined for such quarter.
(2) Based on final determination.--A final determination of
the amount necessary to correct any previous determination
under this section, and any transfer of amounts between the
Postal Service and the Department of Defense based on that
final determination, shall be made not later than six months
after the expiration date of the final vouchers issued under
the program.
(3) Consultation required.--All estimates and
determinations under this subsection of the amount of postal
benefits under the program used in any period shall be made
by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with the Postal
Service.
(i) Funding.--
(1) Funding source and limitation.--In addition to the
amounts authorized to be appropriated in section 301(1) for
operation and maintenance for Army for fiscal year 2010,
$50,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated for postal
benefits provided in this section.
(2) Offsetting reduction.--Funds authorized to be
appropriated in section 301 in fiscal year 2010 for operation
and maintenance are reduced as follows:
(A) For operation and maintenance for the Army, Army Claims
is reduced by $10,000,000.
(B) For operation and maintenance for the Navy, System-Wide
Navy Communications is reduced by $10,000,000.
(C) For operation and maintenance for the Air Force,
System-Wide Air Force Communications is reduced by
$30,000,000.
Amendment No. 60 Offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of subtitle C of title XII of the bill, add the
following new section:
SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO THE STATE OF ISRAEL.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the State of Israel is one of the strongest allies of
the United States;
(2) Israel and the United States face many common enemies;
and
(3) the United States should continue to work with Israeli
Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Israeli Government, and the
people of Israel to ensure that Israel continues to receive
critical military assistance, including missile defense
capabilities, needed to address existential threats.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 572 the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon)
each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to adopt the
amendments en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the
majority and the minority.
At this time, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from
Alabama (Mr. Griffith).
Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[[Page H7379]]
I rise today in support of my amendment in the en bloc amendments to
the National Defense Authorization Act.
This amendment will require the Quadrennial Defense Review to be
completed every 4 years to examine the national defense strategy, the
force structure, the force modernization plans, infrastructure, budget
plan and other elements of the defense program to determine our
strategy for the next 20 years.
Additionally, my amendment reinforces the importance of the Nuclear
Posture Review, which addresses the role that missile defense
capabilities and conventional strike forces play in determining the
role and size of nuclear forces.
These reviews are an essential element of our national security
perspective as are the Ground-based Midcourse Defense missile program,
the Kinetic Energy Interceptor, the Multiple Kill Vehicle and the
Airborne Laser program.
{time} 1345
The Department of Defense is aware that the Ground-based Midcourse
Defense, the GMD, is the only fielded and operational capability that
can defend the U.S. against long-range ballistic missiles. However, the
current budget cuts of $524 million from the program, deploying only 30
of the 44 GMD interceptors that were scheduled, we believe this logic
should be questioned given the events occurring in North Korea and
Iran.
Furthermore, we should reconsider the stop work order for the kinetic
energy interceptor. This project is an essential part of our boost-
phase ballistic missile approach, and I urge my colleagues to continue
to support its development.
Congress should also support the continued development of the
multiple kill vehicle. As rogue nations continue to advance their
missile defense capabilities, multiple kill vehicle technology will be
required to destroy countermeasures, warheads and ultimately the
missiles shot from our enemies.
I support all of these projects because they are a deterrent to our
enemies and they are the programs our warfighters in the field require.
As we look at the missile tests and balance of power occurring in the
Middle East and East Asia, this is not the time to reduce our missile
defense budget and cut back on these programs. North Korea plans to
launch a long-range Taepodong-2 missile in July, and is only a few
years away from deploying a missile capable of hitting the United
States.
We must prepare for the development and the deployment of more
advanced technologies by our adversaries. These missile systems should
all be considered essential elements. I urge passage of this amendment.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield now 1 minute to the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member
and the Chair for the inclusion of our amendment with regard to Israel
in the underlying bill.
I would like to speak for a minute with regard to one of our
strongest allies in the Middle East, and that is the State of Israel. I
am thankful for the strong relationship that we have, that our two
countries share so much in common. We have both faced war and fought
for peace and for freedom. We both continue to pursue liberty, despite
ongoing opposition. We both face many common enemies.
Throughout my time in Congress, I have been a strong supporter of
Israel's right to exist. When you think about it, it is even disturbing
that we have to come here and talk about it in such terms. But the
truth of the matter is, there are few countries, few peoples on Earth
who are more in the cross hairs than Israel. Not even the U.N. can be
called upon to defend Israel. In fact, the U.N. often stands with those
who condemn Israel.
Israel has remained a shining beacon of democracy in a dark part of
the world, standing with the United States against the threat of
Islamic extremism, and we must be unwavering in our continuous support.
In conclusion, the United States should continue to work with Israel
Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli Government and with the people
of Israel to ensure that Israel continues to receive critical military
assistance, including the military defense needed to address this
existential threat.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield one minute to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms.
Castor).
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. I thank the distinguished Chair of the Armed
Services Committee. I rise in support of this en bloc amendment which
includes the Castor-Bilirakis amendment, an amendment I introduced
jointly with my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Bilirakis).
Under the Castor-Bilirakis amendment, each member of the armed
services serving in combat operations would be provided with a monthly
postal benefit that they can transfer to their families or to a
charitable organization so they can afford to send care packages and
other communications while they are serving bravely overseas. Just
think of the benefit to our brave men and women serving in combat
operations, a benefit to their morale, a boost in the morale when they
receive that letter from home, when they receive that all-important
care package.
This effort has been ongoing for many years. It has been included in
past Defense authorization bills. It passed the House last year only to
be taken out in conference. It is time to get this provision enacted as
a stand-alone bill, H.R. 707, the Homefront to Heroes Act. We have more
than half of the House of Representatives as cosponsors. It is time to
get this done finally.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield now to the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Bilirakis) 2 minutes.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
And thank you, Mr. Skelton, for including this in the en bloc
amendment.
I rise today in support of a provision included in this en bloc
amendment which my colleague from Florida, Ms. Castor, and I have
offered to provide postal benefits to our combat soldiers. This
amendment recognizes the sacrifices made by servicemembers and their
loved ones back home. Tough economic times have made it increasingly
difficult for those who send care packages to troops to pay the
resulting shipping costs. This amendment will help address that
problem.
The legislation on which our amendment is based has strong bipartisan
support garnering 237 cosponsors. In addition, it has gained a great
deal of support from our constituents and people all across the
country. It is with great humility that I rise today to honor our
servicemembers and those who tirelessly support them.
I urge all of my colleagues to support this very important amendment.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman of the
committee.
I have an amendment as part of this en bloc that would require the
Secretary of Defense to ensure that members of the Individual Ready
Reserve who have served at least one tour in either Iraq or Afghanistan
receive a counseling call from properly trained personnel not less than
once every 90 days to look at emotional, psychological, medical and
career needs.
Mr. Chairman, the military personnel from the Secretary on down, and
certainly the chairman of our committee, have devoted a great deal of
attention to suicide prevention recognition and treatment. This is
necessary because the IRR is one place where it is just too easy to
fall through the cracks.
Coleman Bean of East Brunswick, New Jersey, enlisted in the Army in
2001, attended Fort Benning, served with the 173rd Airborne. He served
in Iraq. Afterwards, he sought treatment for post-traumatic stress
disorder. Maybe the VA diagnosis should have been accepted by the Army.
In any case, after he was discharged, like other Army members, he still
had 4 years of Ready Reserve commitment. He was called back to Iraq,
served, returned to New Jersey in May of 2008 and committed suicide in
September of 2008. He fell through the cracks. He had no advocate, no
Army machinery to help him find his way through the system. He was
literally on his own.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is to address what I think is a gap in
our suicide treatment efforts to deal with the Individual Ready
Reserve. I urge passage of this amendment.
[[Page H7380]]
Mr. McKEON. We have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of
my time.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield 1 minute to my friend and colleague, a member of
the Armed Services Committee, the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).
Ms. BORDALLO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My amendment helps to build support for the military bill buildup on
Guam by addressing a longstanding issue. We will authorize a
substantial amount of military construction in this bill, but to keep
up the morale and the obligation to the people of Guam, it is only
right to also resolve the issue of war claims as part of this bill.
The war claims program for Guam administered by the U.S. Navy after
World War II had shortcomings, and this amendment would address the
resulting disparity of treatment for war claims for the Chamorros who
endured the occupation of Guam.
The House passed this amendment as H.R. 44 in February, but the other
body has not considered it. Adopting this amendment will provide an
opportunity to resolve this issue.
And, again, many thanks to Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon
for accepting this amendment en bloc and to all of their staff for
their outstanding support in advancing this bill. I urge adoption of
this amendment.
Mr. SKELTON. Let me take this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to recognize
several of our staff who, after wonderful service, are going on to new
challenges in their careers:
Loren Dealy, who will handle communications for the Office of
Legislative Affairs at the Department of Defense; Frank Rose who is off
to work on strategic weapons and missile defense issues at the State
Department; Bill Natter, who recently left to be the Deputy Under
Secretary of the Navy; Sasha Rogers, who is off to get a master's of
public policy; Christine Lamb, who is off to get an MBA; and Ben
Glerum, who will be working on a law degree.
In addition, I wish to recognize those unsung heroes who allow our
staff to put together a bill of this enormous size and complexity.
Those staff members who are called staff assistants: Andrew Tabler,
Zach Steacy, Liz Drummond, Megan Putnam, Rose Ellen Kim, Caterina
Dutto, Kathleen Kelly, Mary Kate Cunningham, Scott Bousom, Trey Howard,
Cindi Howard, Derek Scott and Katy Bloomberg all deserve a special
thanks.
And I also want to thank Joe Hichen for a long effort with us, as
well as Alicia Haley. Without their hard work, coordination, and
patience, we would not be as successful as we are today.
A final thanks to the team in the Office of Legislative Counsel led
by Sherry Chriss, and the Parliamentarians who provide such excellent
support. We thank them, and we are very grateful for their hard work.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, this is probably the last time where I have
enough time to thank the staff. I would like to thank all of the
members of the staff.
I said when I was on the Education Committee, we used to have
everybody's names written out; and so I turned to Tom, and he said, We
don't do that, sir. We give all of the credit to the Members. So rather
than list all of their names on both sides, I would like to thank you
en bloc, all of the staff, for doing such a tremendous job to get me
ready in very short time to do this work. They have done a yeoman's
job, and it has been a real pleasure working with the chairman and
working with the staff on this bill. I look forward to many more years
to do it. Hopefully, we will change off chairman, but I won't get into
that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, let me say a special word of thanks to our
ranking member, Buck McKeon. As we welcome you and you are off and
running, you are doing an excellent job, and we thank you for your
first-class efforts in making this come to pass. You've done
wonderfully, and we should all be very grateful to you.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, earlier today, the House
unanimously passed my amendment to the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2010, H.R. 2647. This amendment expresses the sense
of Congress that the United States and Israel have a shared national
interest, that the latter is one of our strongest and most important
allies, and that our government should pledge our continued support of
Israel's defense and well-being.
In light of this, I would like to take a moment to draw attention to
the ongoing captivity of Israeli Corporal Gilad Shalit. Cpl. Shalit is
an Israeli soldier and a member of the Israel Defense Forces' (IDF)
Armor Corps. Three years ago today, Cpl. Shalit and his fellow soldiers
were attacked by Hamas terrorists on the Israel side of the Gaza Strip.
Two soldiers were killed, and Cpl. Shalit was kidnapped.
Since that day in 2006, Hamas, with the continued protection and
support of the Palestinian leadership, has held Cpl. Shalit in
captivity, in clear defiance of the Geneva Convention and basic human
decency. Hamas has not allowed the Red Cross or others to visit Cpl.
Shalit. Instead, Hamas released videos highlighting the poor treatment
of Cpl. Shalit and mocking Israel and the IDF. Military and diplomatic
efforts to secure the release of Cpl. Shalit have been unsuccessful,
and the Palestinian government continues to exploit his condition and
his family's suffering.
In 2007 and 2008, I called for the release of Cpl. Salit, as well as
Sergeant Major Ehud ``Udi'' Goldwasser and Sergeant First Class Eldad
Regev. On July 16, 2008, Hezbollah returned the bodies of SGM
Goldwasser and SFC Regev in exchange for over 200 convicted terrorists
and other Palestinian prisoners. Hamas claims that Cpl. Shalit is still
alive, and we know that his return is a matter of urgency. The
captivity and poor treatment of Cpl. Shalit, in addition to the murder
of the other soldiers, is unacceptable and only further demonstrates
Hamas's unwillingness to be a responsible member of the global
community.
As a nation that has experienced terrorist attacks, we know that this
issue is not solely a regional issue, nor is it the problem of Israel
alone. I am proud that this Congress today chose to stand with our
friends in Israel, and call for the support of our key ally. Moreover,
I call on President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and Ambassador Rice to
use all available measures to secure the safe and timely return of Cpl.
Gilad Shalit.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the
amendment offered by my distinguished friend and colleague from New
Jersey, Mr. Garrett.
Since its creation in 1948, the State of Israel, surrounded by
hostile neighbors, has been forced to develop technologically advanced
defense capabilities to protect its existence as a democratic, Jewish
state.
While this amendment addresses the totality of the U.S.-Israel
military and security relationship, I would like to focus on the
provision of critical missile defense assistance to Israel.
Israel is about to become the first country in the world to have a
true national missile defense, and perhaps no other country has such a
pressing need for one.
Almost twenty years ago, Iraq launched 93 Scuds at other Middle
Eastern nations, including 39 at Israel.
Most recently, in 2006, Hezbollah launched scores of Katyusha rockets
at civilian targets in northern Israel, imposing a state of siege on
the population.
And we cannot forget the ongoing, relentless, decade-long rocket and
mortar attacks from Palestinian militant groups in Gaza against
innocents in southern Israel.
In addition to killing and injuring a number of Israelis, these
militants have inflicted great psychological damage on the population,
including Israeli children.
But the missile danger to Israel and the United States is even
greater than what has challenged us before.
Today, Israel faces threats from both Iran and Syria--which have made
clear their desires to develop nuclear weapons--and from the ballistic
missile delivery systems that could reach Tel Aviv, other critical U.S.
allies, and U.S. forces stationed throughout the region.
Iran remains committed to developing rockets capable of delivering
warheads to Tel Aviv.
Syria, which has one of the largest missile stockpiles in the region,
has, with Iran's help, reportedly developed a surface-to-surface
missile that would enable Syria to launch attacks on key Israeli
military and civil installations with precision.
Providing missile defense for Israel is obvious: It is a vital U.S.
ally, a small democracy surrounded by foes armed with short, medium,
and long-range projectiles and missiles.
I urge strong support for this amendment.
Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chair, today I rise and am proud to join my
colleagues in supporting the Castor/Bilirakis amendment to the National
Defense Authorization Act for FY2010. This amendment would provide free
mailing vouchers to members of the Armed Forces serving on active duty
in Iraq and Afghanistan, that can then be transferred to loved ones who
will be able to send letters and packages to soldiers at no cost. While
our
[[Page H7381]]
soldiers do not have to pay for the letters they send home, their
families often spend hundreds of dollars to send care packages and
letters of their own.
I introduced similar legislation (H.R. 704) this Congress and a
similar provision was also included in the FY2009 National Defense
Authorization Act that passed the House, only to be stripped out during
conference negotiations. As someone who has long been dedicated to
providing for the needs of soldiers and their families, I welcome this
long-awaited addition to the benefits of those who serve our country.
Mr. SKELTON. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
The amendments en bloc were agreed to.
{time} 1400
Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 20
printed in House Report 111-182.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 20 offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia:
At the end of subtitle D of title III, add the following
new section:
SEC. 3__. EXCEPTION TO ALTERNATIVE FUEL PROCUREMENT
REQUIREMENT.
Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (Public Law 110-140; 42 U.S.C. 17142) is amended--
(1) by striking ``No Federal agency'' and inserting ``(a)
Requirement.--Except as provided in subsection (b), no
Federal agency''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) does not prohibit a
Federal agency from entering into a contract to purchase a
generally available fuel that is not an alternative or
synthetic fuel or predominantly produced from a
nonconventional petroleum source, if--
``(1) the contract does not specifically require the
contractor to provide an alternative or synthetic fuel or
fuel from a nonconventional petroleum source;
``(2) the purpose of the contract is not to obtain an
alternative or synthetic fuel or fuel from a nonconventional
petroleum source; and
``(3) the contract does not provide incentives for a
refinery upgrade or expansion to allow a refinery to use or
increase its use of fuel from a nonconventional petroleum
source.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 572, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Connolly) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would clarify that section 526 of the
Energy Independence and Security Act does not preclude Federal agencies
from purchasing fuel that is not predominantly derived from tar sands
or other high-carbon sources. At the same time, this amendment
maintains the intent of section 526 by ensuring taxpayer money is not
being used to subsidize highly polluting technologies.
Originally contained in the Carbon Neutral Government Act and
incorporated in the Energy Independence and Security Act, section 526
precludes Federal agencies from entering into a contract that would
result in construction of a refinery of fuel that produces more
greenhouse gas pollution than conventional petroleum fuel. This exact
amendment, introduced by Mr. Boren of Oklahoma last year, passed the
House on a voice vote; unfortunately, it was not adopted by the Senate.
This language represents a compromise that preserves the intent of
section 526 without tying the hands of Federal agencies that need to
procure fuel.
Without using carbon capture and sequestration, turning coal into
liquid fuel produces up to twice as much greenhouse gas pollution per
unit of energy as conventional petroleum fuel, and fuel processed from
tar sands generates 14 to 42 percent more greenhouse gas pollution per
unit compared to production of conventional petroleum fuels. Section
526 has successfully protected taxpayers from costly and destructive
subsidies of highly polluting fuel production.
The reality is that fuel derived from tar sands already comprises a
small proportion--roughly 6 percent--of much of the gasoline and diesel
fuel consumers purchase.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment simply clarifies that the hands of the
Federal Government are not tied and that Federal agencies can, in fact,
procure commercially available fuel that is available to them.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Pastor of Arizona). The gentleman from
California is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim this time, but I am not in
opposition to Mr. Connolly's amendment. Although I do support the
gentleman's amendment to clarify the purported intent of section 526 of
the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, I believe it does not
do enough.
The Department is aggressively seeking alternative fuel sources for
their aircraft, vehicles, and naval vessels, and section 526 poses a
serious barrier to these efforts. We need to encourage the Department
to continue these efforts, not shackle them with greenhouse gas
emission limits that are set from arbitrary and ambiguous standards.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my friend
from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
Mr. GRAYSON. I am pleased to have proposed, and have the support of
the chairman, an amendment for a specific purpose, to improve Defense
procurement. That purpose is to identify for the contracting agencies
the correct tradeoff between costs and price and technical factors. As
it stands right now, our statutory scheme for Defense procurement does
not identify what the tradeoff should be.
For the sake of saving money and eliciting from contractors more
cost-effective proposals, we are saying that the agencies must allow
cost or price to be at least 50 percent of the evaluation scheme or
explain why not. That is the purpose of this amendment. I anticipate it
will save a great deal of money for the taxpayers and for the troops.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) such time as he may consume.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I do rise in support of Representative Connolly's amendment, but this
amendment, Mr. Chairman, doesn't go nearly far enough. Let me try to
explain in the limited time that I have.
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 has in it a section
526, which does not allow any agency of the Federal Government to use a
fuel source that has one scintilla increased amount of carbon dioxide
footprint other than just standard old bubble-up petroleum. The
Department of Defense uses about 350,000 barrels of refined petroleum
product every day, most of that by the Air Force in the use of jet
fuel.
In this country, we have so much domestic source of nonconventional
bubble-up petroleum, and I'm talking about things like shale, in
particular, and the liquefication of coal, converting coal into
petroleum. In this country, Mr. Chairman, we probably have a 150-year
reserve of coal, and yet we cannot touch that even though the
Department of Defense has done research on the clean liquefication of
coal, the clean mining of shale. Shale is a rock that's just soaked,
it's like a sponge, it's just soaked with petroleum, and there are
literally hundreds of millions of barrels of petroleum within that
shale. And yet, because of this section 526 in the Energy Independence
and Security Act of 2007, we cannot use it. We cannot use that at all.
So what we have found, of course, is that most of the petroleum that
we import from foreign countries is not coming from OPEC; it's coming
from Canada. And what's the problem? That oil that we get from Canada
comes from tar sand. It's got a little sand in it, and it causes a
little increase of production of carbon dioxide, a footprint that's
more than conventional petroleum. So that's all the amendment does from
the gentleman from Virginia.
I support the amendment, but what we need to do is eliminate section
526.
[[Page H7382]]
And I have an amendment that I signed on with the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Hensarling) and the other gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), and
that's what we should have done. That amendment should have been made
in order. We need to eliminate section 526 and take the handcuffs off
the Department of Defense. We're talking about big bucks here, Mr.
Chairman.
I do support the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Just a comment, Mr. Chairman.
I thank the support of my friend, but I want to clarify for the
record that, as a matter of fact, we already have tar sand oil. About 6
percent of the gasoline supply in the United States already has it. And
we already have the liquefication of coal used in the United States,
and the bill I hope we will pass tomorrow or Saturday, in fact, will
allow a lot more of it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished Chair of the
committee, Mr. Skelton.
Mr. SKELTON. I thank the gentleman. And I stand in support of the
Connolly amendment to section 526 of the Energy Independence and
Security Act, which provides an exception for certain generally
available fuels while retaining the greenhouse gas emission standard
that 526 sets for new alternative fuels.
Let me, Mr. Chairman, say a word of thanks. We have thanked the
staff, under the leadership of Erin Conaton. They have just done so
very, very well. And we thank the members, Buck McKeon, who is doing so
well, and the subcommittee chairmen and the ranking members all made
their excellent statements. But there is one group we need to give a
special thanks to, and that's the young men and young women in uniform
as well as the civilian employees of the Department of Defense. They
are very special, and we are appreciative and very grateful for their
efforts.
Mr. McKEON. May I inquire as to the time remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I would just like to second what the chairman was saying
and thank all of those men and women in uniform and the civilian
employees. He was very sincerely wanting to thank all of them.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to my good
friend from California (Mr. Schiff).
Mr. SCHIFF. I am very grateful to the gentleman and want to speak
very briefly on an amendment I've introduced to authorize NASA's
federally funded research and development centers to participate in DOD
research and development programs.
JPL's scientific leadership represents an invaluable source of key
expertise to DOD. JPL has performed research for DOD for decades. This
amendment simply clarifies JPL's authority to continue to work with the
Defense Department and closely parallels an amendment to perform the
same function for the Department of Energy. We have worked with NASA to
ensure this does not interfere with JPL's primary mission to build
spacecraft and perform scientific research for NASA. This way we can
ensure that important collaborations between JPL and DOD will continue.
Mr. Chair, today I am introducing an amendment that explicitly
authorizes NASA's federally funded research and development centers to
participate in Department of Defense research and development programs.
Many of us are familiar with NASA's world-renowned research and
development center, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in Pasadena,
California. JPL, which is managed for NASA by the California Institute
of Technology, has designed, built and controlled many of America's
most successful unmanned spacecraft. Unmanned space probes, from the
Ranger and Surveyor missions that paved the way for Apollo, to the
Voyager spacecraft that explored the outer planets and continue to send
back data even as they leave the solar system, have increased our
comprehension of our celestial neighborhood beyond anything
contemplated half a century ago. Since we first sent robotic emissaries
to our neighboring planets, every American space probe that has visited
another planet was managed by JPL.
The journal Science named JPL's discovery of evidence of past water
on Mars as 2004's ``Breakthrough of the Year''. JPL's spectacular
missions have brought us incalculable scientific data and have
sustained Americans' passion for spaceflight at a time of greatly
diminished human presence in space. These spacecraft have reinforced
America's scientific and technological preeminence.
JPL's scientific leadership represents an invaluable source of key
expertise for the Department of Defense. The Jet Propulsion Lab has
performed research for the Department of Defense for decades by
responding to DoD Broad Agency Announcements. This amendment simply
clarifies JPL's authority to continue to work with the defense
department, and closely parallels an amendment which performed the same
function for Department of Energy National Labs in 1998. I have worked
with NASA to ensure that the amendment does not interfere with JPL's
primary mission, to build spacecraft and perform scientific research
for NASA. By including this amendment, we ensure that important
collaborations between the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the Department
of Defense will continue into the future. I urge my colleagues to
approve this amendment.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the amendment offered by
Mr. Connolly of Virginia.
Mr. Chair, this amendment is an important clarification of section
526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act. This amendment
clarifies that Federal agencies are not precluded from purchasing fuel
that is not predominantly derived from higher carbon sources. While at
the same time, this amendment maintains the original provision's intent
by ensuring that our tax dollars are not spent on inefficient and
highly polluting energy sources.
To my constituents in Colorado this particularly means that energy
sources like oil shale won't be able to take our state's most precious
resource . . . water.
Energy sources like oil shale take excessive amounts of energy to
produce, making the net amount of energy we receive unjustifiable.
Furthermore our western states understand that the most valuable
resource we have isn't fossil fuels but water.
The process of developing oil shale is incredibly water intensive and
our communities, rivers, and taxpayers simply can't afford it.
I thank Mr. Connolly for his work on this amendment and to Mr. Waxman
in creating the original provision.
This amendment is a responsible step for taxpayers, for western
communities, and our energy policy alike.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of
my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 3 by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 9 by Mr. Franks of Arizona.
Amendment No. 15 by Mr. Akin of Missouri.
Amendment No. 34 by Mr. Holt of New Jersey.
Amendment No. 20 by Mr. Connolly of Virginia.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. McGovern
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) on which further proceedings were
postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 138,
noes 278, not voting 23, as follows:
[[Page H7383]]
[Roll No. 453]
AYES--138
Abercrombie
Baca
Baldwin
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Coble
Cohen
Costello
Courtney
Dahlkemper
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Doggett
Doyle
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Eshoo
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Heinrich
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Jones
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kucinich
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Loebsack
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (MA)
Massa
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Michaud
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murtha
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Richardson
Rohrabacher
Rothman (NJ)
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Slaughter
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wexler
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--278
Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Capito
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Cleaver
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Etheridge
Fallin
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hoekstra
Holden
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jordan (OH)
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Mitchell
Moore (KS)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Nye
Olson
Ortiz
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pierluisi
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Sablan
Salazar
Scalise
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stearns
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Titus
Tonko
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Wu
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--23
Becerra
Berman
Cantor
Cao
Capuano
Clyburn
Conyers
Crowley
Diaz-Balart, L.
Flake
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Kennedy
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Putnam
Reyes
Sanchez, Loretta
Smith (TX)
Sullivan
Velazquez
Weiner
{time} 1447
Messrs. GARRETT of New Jersey, SPACE, BUTTERFIELD, Ms. GIFFORDS,
Messrs. CLEAVER and POE of Texas changed their vote from ``aye'' to
``no.''
Messrs. QUIGLEY, LARSON of Connecticut, COHEN, BOSWELL, ABERCROMBIE,
OBEY, and ISRAEL changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. McGovern
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) on which further proceedings were
postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 224,
noes 190, not voting 25, as follows:
[Roll No. 454]
AYES--224
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Berkley
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Costello
Courtney
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Giffords
Gonzalez
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Heinrich
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (MA)
Massa
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Perriello
Peters
Petri
Pierluisi
Pingree (ME)
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sablan
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Sutton
Tauscher
Taylor
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
NOES--190
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Capito
Carney
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Childers
[[Page H7384]]
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Dahlkemper
Davis (KY)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dreier
Emerson
Fallin
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hoekstra
Holden
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paulsen
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson
Pitts
Platts
Posey
Price (GA)
Radanovich
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Stearns
Stupak
Tanner
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--25
Becerra
Berman
Cantor
Cao
Capuano
Clyburn
Conyers
Crowley
Diaz-Balart, L.
Flake
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Kennedy
Kingston
Larson (CT)
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Putnam
Reyes
Sanchez, Loretta
Smith (TX)
Sullivan
Velazquez
Weiner
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1452
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Franks of Arizona
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Franks) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 171,
noes 244, not voting 24, as follows:
[Roll No. 455]
AYES--171
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dreier
Emerson
Fallin
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Harper
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMahon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paulsen
Pence
Peters
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Radanovich
Rehberg
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Souder
Space
Stearns
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--244
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Adler (NJ)
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Berkley
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Massa
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peterson
Pierluisi
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sablan
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--24
Becerra
Berman
Cao
Capuano
Clyburn
Conyers
Crowley
Davis (TN)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Flake
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Kennedy
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Putnam
Reyes
Sanchez, Loretta
Smith (TX)
Sullivan
Velazquez
Weiner
Welch
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1456
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Akin
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri
(Mr. Akin) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186,
noes 226, not voting 27, as follows:
[[Page H7385]]
[Roll No. 456]
AYES--186
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Childers
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doggett
Dreier
Duncan
Emerson
Engel
Fallin
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hodes
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Radanovich
Rehberg
Richardson
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Souder
Stearns
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Wu
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--226
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Adler (NJ)
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Berkley
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Heinrich
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Massa
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Pierluisi
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sablan
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--27
Becerra
Berman
Boyd
Cao
Capuano
Clyburn
Conyers
Crowley
Davis (IL)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Flake
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Kennedy
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Meek (FL)
Putnam
Reyes
Sanchez, Loretta
Smith (TX)
Stark
Sullivan
Velazquez
Weiner
Woolsey
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1459
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chair, on June 25, 2009, I was unavoidably detained
and was not able to record by vote for rollcall No. 456. Had I been
present I would have voted: ``No''--Akin of Missouri Amendment No. 15.
Amendment No. 34 Offered by Mr. Holt
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Holt) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 224,
noes 193, not voting 22, as follows:
[Roll No. 457]
AYES--224
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Adler (NJ)
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Bartlett
Bean
Berkley
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costello
Courtney
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Doggett
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Giffords
Gonzalez
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Heinrich
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Massa
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McMahon
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pierluisi
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rohrabacher
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sablan
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
NOES--193
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Arcuri
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carter
Chaffetz
[[Page H7386]]
Chandler
Childers
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duncan
Ellsworth
Emerson
Fallin
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Holden
Hunter
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson, Sam
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Radanovich
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Souder
Space
Stearns
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--22
Becerra
Berman
Cao
Capuano
Clyburn
Conyers
Crowley
Diaz-Balart, L.
Flake
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Kennedy
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Putnam
Reyes
Sanchez, Loretta
Smith (TX)
Sullivan
Velazquez
Weiner
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1505
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Connolly) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 416,
noes 0, not voting 23, as follows:
[Roll No. 458]
AYES--416
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Berkley
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Guthrie
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Massa
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pierluisi
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sablan
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--23
Becerra
Berman
Cao
Capuano
Clyburn
Conyers
Crowley
Diaz-Balart, L.
Flake
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Kennedy
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Maffei
Putnam
Reyes
Sanchez, Loretta
Smith (TX)
Sullivan
Velazquez
Weiner
{time} 1509
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
____________________