Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2559) making appropriations for military construction, family housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 429, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2559) making appropriations for military construction, family housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to present to the House the conference report on H.R. 2559, the fiscal year 2004 military construction appropriations conference report. This legislation provides funds for all types of construction projects on military installations here in the United States and abroad. These projects include family housing, barracks, training ranges, runways, aircraft hangars and fitness facilities.

I would in particular like to thank my ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards), for all the great work that he has worked with me on, all the great activity. I also wanted to thank all members of the committee. Let me thank, in addition, the committee staff, including, and I am going to run down the list, Valerie Baldwin, Brian Potts, Kim Reath, Mary Arnold, Tom Forhan, John Conger, Jeff Onizuk and Lieutenant Commander Scott Gray for their support in producing this report. I would also like to sincerely thank Chairman Young and the chief clerk Jim Dyer for their assistance in bringing this negotiation with the other body to a close. Further, I would like to acknowledge the advice and counsel provided by the House Committee on Armed Services. The bill is the culmination of a joint effort with subcommittee chairman Hefley and full committee chairman Hunter.

The conference report today totals some $9.316 billion which complies with the 302(b) allocation for budget authority and outlays. This recommendation is $199 million more than the President's request. These additional funds address critical infrastructure and quality-of-life requirements above and beyond that request. Excluding funds provided for the global war on terrorism and the Iraq/Afghanistan supplementals, the conference report is nearly $1.4 billion, or nearly 13 percent below fiscal year 2003 enacted levels. This year there were significant differences between the House's military construction bill and that of the other body. While we sought to preserve funding for military construction in Europe and Korea and to support the quality of life and operational readiness of our forces abroad, the other body chose to significantly reduce overseas funding to support projects here in the United States.

I am pleased to inform my colleagues that this conference report strikes a balance between both these approaches. We preserve the most critical overseas requirements for the services, but brought the balance of the funding for other overseas projects back to the United States to fund critical infrastructure here. While the House aggressively supported the President's request and the priorities of the combatant commanders in this conference report, we share the concern of the other body about funding overseas projects in light of the ongoing review of our overseas footprint. The review currently being conducted by the Department of Defense will determine our long- term overseas basing strategy and will thus help us set funding requirements to support our forces abroad. It will be absolutely essential for both military construction subcommittees to have the completed plan prior to moving forward with the military construction appropriation for fiscal year 2005. We look forward to receiving this plan in the very near future.

Though this conference report is below the fiscal year 2003 enacted levels, we are fully supporting the military's mission critical infrastructure needs and quality-of-life initiatives. We are able to do so in large part because we are getting far more ``bang for the buck'' through innovative programs such as the Military Housing Privatization Initiative, barracks privatization and utilities privatization. These programs are enabling the services to rapidly replace family housing and infrastructure at a cost that is dramatically lower than what we could ever have afforded through traditional military construction appropriations. Our motto is to let the military do what they do best, which is defending America.

In short, we are doing it smarter, not harder, and the beneficiaries are single soldiers, military families, men and women serving our country around the world and the U.S. taxpayers. We have and will continue to support sweeping quality of life improvements for those in the military.

This conference report was forged through the compromise of both bodies of this Congress. This report directly supports the men and women in uniform, fully funds projects vital to our national security, provides critical infrastructure support to ongoing operations worldwide, and fully funds our efforts to improve the quality of life of our military personnel and their families. It is a fair report. I encourage my colleagues to support it.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH05NO03.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH05NO03.002

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), chairman of the committee. I just want to say again without Chairman Young's support, we may still be slogging it out, but frankly rising to the occasion as he will and has done numerous times, he helped bring this thing to a closure.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report. It does many good things for our service men and women, providing better housing, health care clinics, day care clinics, training facilities, not only here in the continental United States, in our 50 States, but throughout the world as well, wherever American troops might be training or serving their country. I want to especially compliment the gentleman from Michigan, the chairman, in his first term as the chairman of this important subcommittee, a committee that does work that makes such a difference in the quality of life for our service men and women to whom we know we can never repay our debt of gratitude to them.

At all times the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Knollenberg) put as his first priority what is best for the service men and women. He was fair. He was thorough. He fought hard for military families, our service men and women, as well as their families, and did a magnificent job in working with the other body and kind of working our way through a maze of very difficult issues; and I really salute the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Knollenberg) for his leadership along with his very fine staff. I also want to join with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), chairman, in thanking the chairman of the full committee for his involvement and support in this effort to see that we not only fight for quality of health care and training facilities for our troops here at home but that we also should not forget about the sacrifices made by our service men and women serving overseas that are thousands of miles away from their families, oftentimes in harm's way, risking their lives in duty to country; and I thank the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young) for his many years of leadership in the area of national defense but particularly his deep personal commitment, aside from his title, his deep personal commitment to our service men and women.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to send a message to the administration about this bill today. While the leadership of this committee did a tremendous job in making the most good out of a budget that was underfunded, I would remind the administration for next year that there is an old proverb, I believe it is a Chinese proverb, ``Be careful what you ask for because you just might get it.''

What happened is the administration, probably with a heavy hand from OMB, asked for a $1.5 billion cut in military construction funding compared to last year. I think that is unconscionable to ask for a 14 percent cut in military quality-of-life and training programs at a time when so many American service men and women are at war and, yes, even risking their lives. Because of the good leadership of the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Knollenberg) and his staff and our staff, we were able to take those inadequate funds and stretch them as far as anybody could stretch them. The RCI housing program, the Residential Community Initiative, is an example of trying to take a limited amount of dollars and stretch them a long way to improve quality of life in terms of housing for our service men and women.

But I hope the administration and the Pentagon and OMB are on notice. Do not play this game of sending to Capitol Hill what they know is an unfair, inadequate budget for military construction with the assumption that somehow magically we are going to find an extra $1.5 billion. We did not find an extra $1.5 billion. Had it totally been up to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and me, I think we would have somehow found that money; but that was above our pay grade, that decision on how much money we had to deal with. And I think as someone who has the privilege of representing 42,000 Army soldiers at Fort Hood in Texas, 17,000 of which are presently serving in Iraq, I think it sends a terrible message to them if next year we were to inadequately fund military construction once again.

So all of that having been said, not a word of it takes in any way anything from the tremendous leadership of the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Knollenberg) and the bipartisan effort with which he led this effort. If anything, being given such an inadequate funding request from the Pentagon and the administration and OMB, it even adds more respect from me to him for the leadership he showed to get this bill passed, as it will pass in just a few minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my appreciation for the bipartisan work of the conferees, and especially for the leadership of Chairman Knollenberg and ranking member Edwards, whose long service to meeting the needs of our uniformed men and women is well known to all the Members of this House.

Mr. Speaker, in June when the House passed its version of H.R. 2559, it was $41 million less than the President's request and was a $1.5 billion cut from fiscal year 2003 funding levels. The conference report, while an improvement somewhat over the House-passed bill, is still defective. While it is $199 million more than the amount requested by President Bush, it still reduces funding overall for military construction by $1.38 billion from the fiscal year 2003 levels. Mr. Speaker, we simply cannot continue selling our military men and women short.

We have all seen the pictures from Fort Stewart in Georgia where our Guard and Reserves, returning wounded and sick from Iraq, are warehoused in the most miserable conditions. How can we stand on the floor of this House day after day, week after week declaring how much we support our military men and women when the funding providing for family housing in this conference report is over $400 million less than last year? That total is even worse than what it was in the original House-passed bill. How can we stand on the floor of the House day after day and week after week and say that we are engaged in a long-term struggle against a global enemy and then cut military construction funds by $600 million from last year's level?

Mr. Speaker, poor facility conditions are not only unsafe, they hamper readiness, contribute to low morale and decrease troop retention. According to the Pentagon, 180,000 of the 300,000 units of military housing are substandard. Sixty-eight percent of our military facilities have deficiencies so serious that they might impede mission readiness, or they are so deteriorated that they cannot support mission requirements. The current reductions in funding for construction in these facility categories means that the rate at which buildings are renovated or replaced has increased from 83 years to 150 years.

Mr. Speaker, I said it in June, and I am going to say it again. This is a national scandal. I keep hearing that since the events of September 11, we live in a changed world. I keep hearing how much we appreciate our Armed Forces, how much we appreciate their sacrifice and their service. Then why do we keep cutting and cutting and cutting the military construction appropriations bill? If we truly appreciate our military men and women, should we not give them and their families decent housing? I keep being told, just wait for next year and the funding will get better. Only it never gets any better. It just keeps getting worse. ``Next year'' should be now.

This conference report, while a small improvement overall from the House-passed bill, continues to be, in the

words of Chairman Knollenberg, woefully inadequate. This is what happens when our priorities are wrong. This is what happens when we deny our Nation the most basic revenue needed to adequately fund our national priorities. We rob our valiant military personnel of decent homes and facilities. We rob our veterans of their basic benefits. We cut back funding for schools and child care for military families, and we are faced with passing a bill like this.

I call upon the President to include in his fiscal year 2005 budget request a budget figure that genuinely begins to meet the military construction and family housing needs of our Armed Forces. Mr. Speaker, I regret that this is the best that this Congress can do for our military and their families.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this Member rises in strong support for the conference report on H.R. 2559, the Military Construction appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004. This Member would like to offer particular thanks to the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Construction Appropriations, the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), and the Ranking Minority Member on the Subcommittee on Military Construction Appropriations, the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) for their work on this important bill. Furthermore, this Member would like to thank the Chairman of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Readiness, the very distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley), and the Ranking Member of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Readiness, the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), for their critical work in authorizing this appropriation.

Furthermore, this Member is very appreciative that the Committee has approved the appropriations of $3 million for the frontage levee segment protecting the Nebraska National Guard Camp at Ashland, Nebraska.

Mr. Speaker, the Nebraska National Guard Camp Frontage Levee Segment is a central element of the Clear Creek portion of the Western Sarpy Levee project. Completion of the Guard camp segment must coincide with the other elements of the Western Sarpy project to assure mutual protection and support from the beginning of the project to its completion. Indeed, without building this section of the levee along the Platte River, the entire levee system will not work; there would be a gap in the levee that would only accentuate the flooding risks and flood volume that would affect the Nebraska National Guard Camp unless this project moves forward with the rest of the levee construction project.

Previously, the Clear Creek Project was authorized at $15.6 million in the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (WRDA 2000) to provide protection to the City of Lincoln's water supply, I-80, and U.S. 6, BNSF RR (Amtrak Line), telecommunication lines and other public facilities. In the fiscal year 2003 omnibus appropriations bill, Congress included $500,000 for construction start-up costs.

The Nebraska National Guard Camp at Ashland, Nebraska, provides training for Nebraska and other States' Army guard units to maintain mission readiness. The Guard camp levee is an essential element of the Clear Creek structure on the western side of the Platte River since it also is that part of Clear Creek nearest to the Lincoln wellfield. Planning and design funds for the Guard's segment have been previously provided by the Congress to the Department of Defense through the Military Construction appropriations bill. Planning has resulted in development of a more cost-effective frontage levee to replace a previous ring-levee approach.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, this Member urges his colleagues to vote in support of the conference report for H.R. 2559.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 429 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

The rule waives all points of order against the conference report to accompany H.R. 2559, Military Construction Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2004, and against its consideration. The rule provides that the conference report shall be considered as read.

This conference report provides funds for all types of construction projects on military installations here in the U.S. and abroad. The projects range from barracks and housing to training ranges and runways.

Mr. Speaker, we are asking a lot of our military today, and our military personnel on active duty know they will be deployed overseas and perhaps on dangerous missions. So we want to provide them a quality of life for themselves and for their families that will allow them to serve, knowing their families will be taken care of with good health care and good housing.

We must honor the most basic commitments we have made to the men and women of our Armed Services. We must ensure a reasonable quality of life to recruit and retain the best and the brightest to America's fighting forces. Most importantly, we must do all in our power to ensure a strong, able, dedicated American military so that this Nation will be ever vigilant and ever prepared.

I would like to take a moment to highlight some of the key areas of the bill. First, $1.2 billion is provided for troop barracks. This is a $58 million increase from last year's level. This sends a positive message to our unaccompanied personnel stationed all around the world that their quality of life is a priority. It also provides $2.7 billion to operate and maintain existing housing units and $1.1 billion for new housing units. Military families also have a tremendous need for quality child care, especially single parents and families in which one or both parents may face lengthy deployments. To help meet this need, the bill provides $16.5 million for child development centers.

In conclusion, we have focused our efforts on programs that directly support the men and women in our Armed Forces. We would like to do more, of course. We always have and we will always try to do that. The bottom line is this: With this conference report, we meet the military's critical infrastructure needs and their efforts to improve the quality of life for our men and women in the Armed Forces.

To that end, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and support the conference report.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.