Cardiomyopathy Health Education, Awareness, Risk Assessment, and Training in the Schools (HEARTS) Act of 2013

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2014. In a time of tight budgets, it is important that we provide the resources to make sure that our forces are properly trained, equipped, and appropriately manned. That is the essence of military readiness. Our military must maintain a high level of readiness to address a wide range of threats across this globe. This bill helps to achieve that goal. This is all about keeping our Nation secure and safe.

In particular, this bill makes significant progress in advancing our posture in the Asia-Pacific region. The bill upholds the U.S. commitment to modernizing our force posture which is a critical component of the strategic rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region. In particular, Mr. Speaker, freeing up Japanese funds for the realignment of marines from Okinawa is financially prudent and confirms our support of the Guam International Agreement.

I thank Chairman McKeon; Ranking Member Smith; my chairman, Mr. Wittman; our partners in the Senate; the staff on the committee and in my personal office for their support in developing this important bill.

I urge my colleagues to support this measure and pass it so the Senate can act on this critical measure which is so important to our men and women serving this Nation in defense.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, H. Res. 441 which provides for concurrence in the House to amendments to H.R. 3304 with amendment, the text of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. I appreciate the efforts of Chairman Buck McKeon, Ranking Member Adam Smith, Chairman Carl Levin and Ranking Member Jim Inhofe for their work to ensure we have a compromise package that keeps our 51-year streak of passing defense authorization bills alive. It is unfortunate that the Senate was unable to proceed under regular order in completing a defense bill which would have allowed for a true Conference Committee to negotiate outcomes. Nevertheless, this compromise package is not perfect but has many elements that are critical for supporting our service members and our nation's defense posture.

In particular, I appreciate the provisions in this bill that send a clear signal of the U.S. commitment to the rebalance to the Asia- Pacific region. The most tangible defense component of our rebalance effort is the realignment of Marines from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam. The bill authorizes nearly $86 million in construction of a U.S. Marine Corps aviation hangar that directly supports the realignment efforts. Most importantly, the bill provides greater exemptions for the use of Government of Japan direct contributions to the realignment. It allows Japanese funds to be used for a $114 million site improvements project at the North Ramp on Andersen Air Force Base. It also allows does not constrain the use of Japanese or U.S. funds for planning and design for realignment projects. We continue to hold the Department of Defense (DoD) accountable

for providing Congress with additional cost information about the realignment. The bill authorizes an additional $233 million in other Navy military construction projects on Guam. One such project is the construction of a hangar for the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) MQ-4C platform on Guam. Guam's strategic location provides significant benefit to stationing unmanned aerial vehicle assets at military installations on-island.

Further, the bill fully authorizes $176.2 million in authorization of appropriations for Air Force military construction projects at Andersen Air Force Base which support the Air Force's Pacific Airpower Resiliency (PAR) program. Additionally, the bill authorizes $128 million for the hardening of a fuel cell hangar that was authorized as an unhardened hangar in last year's bill. The PAR program provides for selective hardening and dispersal of Air Force assets and facilities in the Western Pacific. This program is an important component of an overarching strategy to respond to anti-access area of denial capabilities in the region. Some have questioned the cost of this program, but as Air Force Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh stated to the Senate Armed Services Committee on November 7, 2013, ``In this particular case, the hardened facilities on Guam are a response to a combatant commander request to provide more resilient capability on Guam because of an increased threat of surface-to-surface missile attack. He (Admiral Locklear) didn't request that everything be hardened, just those key facilities you couldn't improvise if there was damage--improvise for if there was damage on an air field. And that's what those facilities are based on. So we are trying to support U.S. Pacific Command in that effort to meet his war plan requirements.'' The PAR program provides long-term improvement in our posture and readiness in the Western Pacific for years to come. It is a wise investment for the security of our country and allies.

These actions taken together send a clear message that the United States is committed to our rebalance strategy. Moreover, the bill is a clear indication that the United States is willing to put significant resources to this important national strategic initiative. To be clear, the rebalance strategy is broader and farther ranging than just military construction, but these projects are real, tangible, and immediate evidence of our commitment.

Unfortunately, this bill does not provide authorization of operation and maintenance funds to support civilian infrastructure requirements on Guam. There is a historical context for the Department of Defense providing local governments with support for civilian infrastructure requirements such as at Kings Bay, Georgia, and Bangor, Washington, and I fundamentally disagree with the opposition to this funding because it will support our military servicemembers. However, the bill does provide a compromise that requires the Secretary of Defense to convene a meeting of the Economic Adjustment Committee (EAC) within 90 days of this measure being signed into law. It also requires a report from DoD no later than the signing of a Record of Decision on the realignment of Marines from Okinawa. This provision provides the Government of Guam to reassess their civilian infrastructure requirements in light of recent changes to the size of the Marine realignment yet holds DoD accountable for considering this requirement. Civilian infrastructure improvements on Guam are needed to support and sustain the current military footprint as well as increased military presence on-island. I look forward to working with the Secretary of Defense, Governor of Guam, and other stakeholders as the EAC process moves forward.

I also strongly support the bill's continued prohibition on the retirement or mothballing of Global Hawk Block 30 unmanned systems through 2014. The Global Hawk is a critical intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance asset, and the Air Force's rationale for wanting to retire this aircraft and continue flying an aging aircraft for the foreseeable future remains lacking. In a time of constrained budgets we need to look carefully at what platforms will provide the military with the best capabilities. I strongly believe that the Global Hawk Block 30 program provides the U.S. Air Force with a better capability in the long term. Although not addressed in this bill, I support the Appropriations Committee's effort to provide additional funding to the Air Force to investigate the potential to modify the Global Hawk Block 30 aircraft to adapt to certain sensor programs. The long-term endurance surveillance missions are served well by UAVs, and I believe the Global Hawk supports that mission well.

I also greatly support the additional $1.1 million in funding for the Sea Cadet Corps program. This funding is in addition to $1.7 million that was programmed by the U.S. Navy in the Fiscal Year 2014 budget. The Sea Cadet program facilitates professional development for almost 9,000 Sea Cadets ages 11-17, in 387 units nationwide. The Naval Sea Cadet Corps instills in every Cadet a sense of patriotism, courage, and a foundation of personal honor and significantly assists in promoting the Navy and Coast Guard, particularly in those areas of the United States where these Services have little presence.

As Ranking Member of the Readiness Subcommittee, I support this bill which provides the resources to ensure our forces are properly trained, equipped, and manned, all of which are the essence of military readiness. In particular, the bill provides $176.5 billion in operation and maintenance funding to help mend some of the damage that has been done to overused equipment and neglected facilities. The mindless and arbitrary cuts imposed by sequestration have challenged our operation and maintenance accounts, yet this funding helps mitigate that impact. The bill authorizes $62.5 billion for operation and maintenance for Overseas Contingency Operations, with $2.9 billion in additional funding for depot-level maintenance, fuel costs, and equipment spares and reset. As we put these significant resources into accounts that support our readiness, the bill takes steps to strengthen and improve the reports that the House Armed Services Committee receives each quarter detailing readiness metrics. In particular, it enhances the Committee's visibility of geographic and functional combatant commanders' ability to execute the full range of operational and contingency plans to meet worldwide threats. The bill also extends the waiver of limitations on premium pay for federal civilian employees who work overseas in support of contingency operations and allows payment to DoD civilians serving in combat zones of allowances, benefits, and bonuses comparable to members of the foreign service.

Earlier I discussed investment in certain force posture efforts, but this bill takes other steps that address our ability to react to a wide range of threats worldwide. In particular, it increases funding for Marine security guards at embassies worldwide by $13.4 million. It also increases, by $40 million, the funding for special-purpose Marine Air Ground Task Force to respond to security challenges or humanitarian emergencies, such as the recent humanitarian emergency we responded to in the Philippines. It also establishes the requirement for a strategic policy for equipment and materiel prepositioned throughout the world to respond to emerging contingencies to be aligned with defense strategic guidance. This is of particular importance as we demonstrate our commitment to the Asia-Pacific rebalance strategy.

Finally, I do have some concerns about the provision that authorizes the National Guard State Partnership program. The compromise provision included in this bill is significantly different from legislation that I introduced and included in the House-passed measure in June. I appreciate that we finally authorize this program in law but the requirements for how NGB must execute the program deserve greater scrutiny.

The National Guard State Partnership Program supports the geographic Combatant Commanders and U.S. Ambassadors via capacity-building partnerships between NGB units across the United States and partner nations. This program provides a long-term capacity-building mechanism that leverages the unique capabilities of the National Guard. However, the provision, as currently written, does not recognize the unique capabilities of the National Guard and has an arbitrary sunset date. Further, the reporting provisions are onerous and will add unnecessary bureaucratic work instead of focusing on accomplishing broader goals. I look forward to working with my colleagues to improve this provision in next year's bill.

The defense bill is a year-long process and is put together with the help and assistance of our outstanding staff. In particular, I appreciate the hard work and coordination of the entire House and Senate Armed Services staffs, and in particular I want to thank Vickie Plunkett, Brian Garrett, Debra Wada, Leonor Tomero, and Doug Bush of the House minority staff for their work with this effort. I strongly support this bill and urge my colleagues to pass this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the FY14 National Defense Authorization Act, and H.R. 3304, the underlying bill that would waive the time limit for the President to consider awarding the Medal of Honor to a handful of American heroes, including Mr. Bennie Adkins of Opelika, Alabama, along with several other deserving veterans. While this honor has long been delayed, we thank them by this action today.

I would also like to thank the hardworking men and women at the Anniston Army Depot and all they do for our

men and women in uniform. This bill will help provide them and all of the installations in the Third District with the certainty they need in the coming years.

As chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, I will highlight some of the important oversight the FY14 NDAA includes.

First, this bill fully funds the B-61 Life Extension program. The bipartisan and bicameral Armed Services Committees agree this program is vital to our national security, our strategic deterrent, and the extended deterrence we provide to our allies in Europe and Asia.

I would also note the agreement makes clear that the Congress will not provide one penny to implement the New START Treaty reductions unless the administration first comes up here and tells us what it plans to do and gives us a chance to say whether or not we agree.

Secondly, this bill provides a $358 million increase above the President's budget for our missile defenses, including our cooperation with Israel.

This bill also includes important national security space provisions. It ensures the U.S. is not relying on space capabilities of the People's Republic of China, and it promotes more cost-effective procurement of commercial satellite services.

Mr. Speaker, we would not be here today without the leadership of Chairman Buck McKeon. I want to thank him for his leadership and all that he does for our men and women in service. I also want to thank my friend and ranking member, Jim Cooper of Tennessee, for his dedication and professionalism this year. With another year, we may even see eye to eye on SEC football; but I doubt it. I ask my colleagues to vote ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of the FY14 National Defense Authorization Act, and H.R. 3304, the underlying bill that would waive the time limit for the president to consider awarding the Medal of Honor to a handful of American heroes including Mr. Bennie Adkins of Opelika, AL along with several other deserving veterans. While this honor has been delayed we thank them for their service today.

I would also like to thank the hard working men and women at the Anniston Army Depot and all that they do for our men and women in uniform. This bill will help provide them the certainty needed in the coming years.

As my colleagues before me have made clear, this bill is a vital piece of legislation for the men and women of our military.

General Dempsey warned the Congressional Leadership this past Monday of the consequences for national security if the Senate were to choose not to take up this legislation.

As the Chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, I would like to highlight the important things this bill does in the areas of missile defense, nuclear weapons, and national security space.

First, this bill fully funds the B61 Life Extension Program (LEP) at NNSA and the associated tail-kit funding at the Air Force.

The bipartisan and bicameral armed services committees agree with the Administration: the B61 LEP is absolutely vital to our national security, our strategic deterrent, and the extended deterrence we provide to allies in Europe and in Asia.

There is simply no good reason to change course in mid-stream on this LEP, and we would incur great risk if a decision was made to do so.

I would also note the agreement makes clear that the Congress will not provide one penny to implement the New START Treaty reductions unless the Administration comes up here first and tells us how it plans to do that and we get a chance to state whether we agree. That is how this process is supposed to work: the President proposes and the Congress disposes.

The NDAA includes several provisions to control costs, improve efficiency, and prioritize nuclear modernization programs at the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).

The Armed Services Committee has been pursuing much-needed reform at the NNSA for several years, and this bill will continue to advance toward the end goal of an effective and efficient nuclear enterprise.

In response to major and repeated security failures at NNSA nuclear facilities, including the shocking incursion by an octogenarian nun at one of the supposedly most secure nuclear sites in the world, the bill contains several measures to improve security at NNSA.

These measures include a requirement for the NNSA Administrator to annually certify the security of nuclear weapons, materials, and classified information and the creation of a new Center for Security Technology, Analysis, Response, and Testing.

We will continue to watch the security issue very carefully, and ensure that those responsible for past failures are held accountable.

This bill takes several important steps to ensure U.S. strategic forces remain a top priority.

It ensures the Air Force will maintain the capability to deploy multiple nuclear warheads on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), should technical problems or deteriorating international relations require doing so, and restricts efforts to unnecessarily or arbitrarily reduce U.S. ICBM forces.

The bill also requires that the long-range standoff cruise missile currently under development has both nuclear and conventional variants; the bill provides the Air Force the flexibility to develop these variants in a cost-effective manner.

I also highlight Section 266 of the bill, which expresses a strong Sense of Congress that the OHIO-class replacement ballistic missile submarine program, in particular the common missile compartment of this program, must remain on track so that it delivers on-schedule to support our British allies.

Britain and the United States have been partners in sea-based strategic deterrence for decades, and we must fulfill our commitment to this essential ally.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to ensure there is no confusion with respect to Section 3112 of this bill.

This provision would create a Cost Estimating and Program Evaluation office within the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).

This office is intended to bring some rigor to an agency that has regularly seen major nuclear facility construction projects hit with major cost increases.

My hope is that the office will lead to more accurate and timely cost estimates, and thereby help restore credibility to the NNSA.

Importantly, the purview of this office is not intended to cover the Naval Reactors program within NNSA.

Naval Reactors has a long history of program management excellence, and this new office is not meant to interfere with this success.

I have spoken to Chairman Mark Udall of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces and he and I agree that this provision should have no impact at all on the function of the Naval Reactors office.

I will be working with Senator Udall and the NNSA to ensure there is no uncertainty about section 3112.

We both agree that if there is any such uncertainty, it will be clarified in the FY15 National Defense Authorization Act.

I also note Section 3117 of the bill would authorize the NNSA to carry out a ``modular'' approach to replacing critical plutonium capabilities at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

The replacement of these capabilities is at the core of President Obama's commitment to build a responsive nuclear infrastructure.

Further delay is unacceptable.

The Department of Defense has reviewed the modular approach, and the Nuclear Weapons Council has endorsed it.

The NNSA must begin executing this strategy immediately, and the Nuclear Weapons Council must ensure NNSA puts behind the effort the resources needed.

I understand a reprogramming proposal related to the plutonium strategy is still pending, and I will work with Chairman McKeon to continue to leverage this reprogramming to ensure NNSA begins executing this program immediately.

Second, this bill provides a $358 million increase above the President's budget for our missile defenses.

These funds are essential to reverse the damage done to our missile defenses under this Administration.

We have included authorization for a new homeland missile defense sensor and a new kill vehicle, as well as $20 million to continue the planning we started last year for the East Coast missile defense site.

Additionally, this bill includes funding for missile defense cooperation with our allies, including $188 million on top of the President's budget request for Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow missile defenses.

These increases are a reflection of the commitment of this nation to the security of our ally Israel.

And, it draws a line in the sand when it comes to allies entering into missile defense deals with China or in terms of the Obama Administration's efforts to induce Russia to join a missile defense deal.

The bill also includes important national security space provisions, such as a provision I authored to ensure the United States is not relying on space capabilities of the People's Republic of China; a provision to ensure the State Department is unable to proceed with an agreement to locate Russian satellite ground stations in the United States; and it promotes more cost-effective procurement of commercial satellite services.

This bill provides the continued support and advancement of critical national security space programs.

Our military forces have come to depend on space capabilities, such as missile warning, communications, and GPS.

Potential adversaries have taken note of strategic reliance on these systems, and they are developing a range of weapons to destroy and disable our satellites.

In response to these threats, the bill requires that an independent panel be established to review the U.S. space security and defense efforts, and provide recommended paths forward.

The bill also requires improved information sharing within the United States government concerning any intentional adversary counter-space actions against U.S. national security space systems.

Additionally, Section 220 and Section 915 provide support for the Operationally Responsive Space program, including responsive launch activities, to ensure that the Department is developing capabilities and means to respond to urgent warfighter space needs.

The Department's acquisition of commercial satellite services is in need of reform.

Over one billion dollars a year are spent on these services, and the Department currently procures them in the most inefficient manner possible, through one-year leases.

This year's NDAA directs the DoD to develop a strategy to enable multi-year procurement approaches and encourages the pursuit of a variety of methods to reduce cost and meet military requirements.

And our space capabilities would not be possible without an effective space launch program.

As the Air Force's Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program moves into the next phase, which is planned to be competitive, we will maintain close oversight to ensure the taxpayer's and warfighter's interests are protected. We can accept nothing less than the highest mission reliability when it comes to critical, multi-billion dollar national security space payloads.

Mr. Speaker, we would not be here today without the leadership of Chairman Buck McKeon.

I would like to thank him for his leadership and all that he does for the men and women of this country's armed services.

I would also like to thank my Ranking Member, Jim Cooper of Tennessee, for his dedication and professionalism this year.

While we may not see eye-to-eye on SEC football, he has been a pleasure to work with and I look forward to working with him to build on our successes this year in next year's bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.

I want to thank the chairman and echo his words about how important it is that we pass this piece of legislation. It is critical to our national security and critical to supporting our troops, to make sure they get the pay and the support that they need to do the job that we all have asked them to do.

This is never an easy process. We worked between the two of us and between our committees, and we worked with the Senate, House Republicans, bipartisan and bicameral. I am sure if any one of us were so designated as god of this piece of legislation, there are things we would change about it, but that is the nature of the legislative process. You come together, you compromise, and you put together the best product that all of you can agree on, and that is what we have done.

To not pass this at this point is to jeopardize our national security and to not support our troops.

I think this is an excellent compromise and something that needs to be passed. I think that we would all agree that we wish we could have done this through the normal conference committee process, but the Senate has their rules, and they had difficulty getting to that point.

I want to assure everybody that this was a fully negotiated piece of legislation. We engaged the Senate, both Republican and Democrat. Chairman McKeon and I worked very closely together. Our staffs worked very closely together. This is an excellent, important bill that needs to be passed for all of the reasons that Chairman McKeon mentioned: the steps forward it makes on sexual assault, the support it gives to our troops as they are in battle in Afghanistan in trying to protect our national security elsewhere. I really want to urge everyone to make sure that they vote for this and support this.

I want to use my remaining time to talk a little bit about the budget resolution, or the budget conference committee, that we are going to talk about later. I completely agree with Chairman McKeon. In the spirit of what I said about the NDAA about the necessity of getting our job done, we need to pass a budget. I know it impacts all manner of different other pieces of government, but I am most familiar with what it does to the Department of Defense to not have a budget, to not have appropriations bills, to have to go from CR to CR to government shutdown threat to actual government shutdown to another government shutdown threat.

You simply cannot function as well as you should, or as well as you would, if you had a dependable budget that said here is what you have. It will never be what all of us want, but it is better to have the predictability of having an appropriations process.

So it is critical that we pass the National Defense Authorization Act; it is critical that we pass the budget. We have to function as a government. We all know how low our approval ratings are. I think it is great: Democrats take great comfort in the fact that Republicans aren't popular and the Republicans take great comfort in the fact that Democrats aren't popular. But all it means to me is none of us are popular.

We need to get our job done. We have two great opportunities today to do that, to show the American public that this body functions, it works, and it will, in fact, live up to its responsibilities, and in the case of the National Defense Authorization Act, one of the most important responsibilities, and that is to provide for the common defense.

I urge everyone to vote for this important piece of legislation and to support the budget resolution coming later today.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Sanchez), the ranking member of the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Davis), the ranking member on our Military Personnel Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), the ranking member on the Readiness Subcommittee.

I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas), ranking member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), the ranking member of the Intelligence, Emerging Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee.

(Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hanabusa).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Barber), a member of the committee.

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

I just want to take a quick minute again to thank all the people who worked to make this possible, our staffs on the Armed Services Committee in particular. The bipartisan majority and minority have all done an amazing job over a long period of time, and I really want to thank the chairman, as well, for his determination to get this bill done.

It is never the same path twice, which always makes it interesting, but the one thing that we have very much in common is an absolute determination to get the bill done for the reasons that the chairman and I stated earlier, because of just how important it is that we do our work and make sure we provide for the troops that are serving us. But we could not do it without the incredible expertise and tireless work of our staffs.

I particularly want to thank my staff director, Paul Arcangeli, for pulling all of this together as we bounced back and forth between whether or not we were going to do a formal conference or do this. That work that they have been doing over the last several months was critical in making this possible.

Again, I will close just emphasizing two big points:

We need to do our work as Congress because people depend on it. They depend on the United States Government functioning. Passing the National Defense Authorization Act is a critical piece of that so that we can continue to provide for the common defense as we are constitutionally mandated to do, and I urge everybody to support it.

Every bit as important is the budget agreement that is coming up later on. We have all, to some degree on the Armed Services Committee and elsewhere, railed against sequestration. The vote that is coming up this afternoon is not a choice between this budget agreement and what each one of us individually would like. It is a choice between the budget agreement and sequestration, a CR and further threats of government shutdown. And I will just emphasize that the impact that that would have on the Department of Defense and its ability to do the job that we are asking them to do would be devastating.

I know we have heard everybody claim that sequestration was going to be this big deal and it happened and the sun came up the next morning and everything was fine. Look, there are two things about that.

Number one, it had a profound impact on a lot of people. Not everybody to be sure, but it did have that profound impact.

The second big point is it gets worse. The first year was tough, but there were uncosted balances. There were things you could do. They have kind of been running on fumes for a while, and if we continue with sequestration, those fumes run out and the cuts will be devastating and we will not be able to do what it is that I think we need to do to provide for our national security, which isn't to say the defense budget can't be cut. It is being cut, and it is going to be cut. There are cuts and then there are the nonsensical cuts of sequestration. The only way out of that right now is the budget agreement.

Lastly, I will say that applies to a lot of other aspects of government: transportation, housing, Head Start. We have heard all the stories about the devastating impact of sequestration on all those programs. Later this afternoon, we will have our first real opportunity to reverse that. It is critically important that we do so.

I urge passage of the National Defense Authorization Act. I again thank the chairman. I very much value our partnership, given the desire for bipartisanship out there today. People always ask me if I have any Republicans that I work with. I do; the chairman of our committee, who has done a great job in that capacity. I very much value our friendship and our partnership. Hopefully, we will get the Senate to get this done and we will make it 52 years in a row.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry), my friend and colleague, the vice chairman of the Armed Services Committee and chairman of the Intelligence, Emerging Threats, and Capabilities Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes), my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), my friend and colleague, chairman of the Military Personnel Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner), the chairman of the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman), my friend and colleague, and the chairman of the Readiness Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby), our former chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, who was recently moved from our committee to the Appropriations Committee. She will be sorely missed.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski), my friend and colleague, a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the remaining time?

Mr. Speaker, I will be the concluding speaker here, so I will reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

I want to thank the other committees who worked closely with us all year and members of the Armed Services Committee once again. Especially I want to thank our staff directors, Bob Simmons and Paul Arcangeli. They have worked tirelessly, as have all of these other people that have been putting in countless hours to get us to this point.

This legislation addresses a wide array of policy issues, including supporting operations in Afghanistan, strengthening our partnerships in the Middle East, reinforcing our capabilities in the Pacific, combating sexual assault in the military, enhancing missile defense, and maintaining this Nation's nuclear deterrent.

Though the significant cuts to the defense budget continue to have a profound effect on readiness, our modernization programs, and the defense industrial base, the bill adequately sustains training, critical assembly lines, shipyards, and manufacturing expertise to keep our wartime military properly prepared, equipped, and supplied. Each of these efforts is important for the security of our homeland and our allies.

We have worked on a bicameral, bipartisan basis to get this legislation done. It is my sincere hope that we can continue working together to limit the damage to our military and their readiness resulting from sequestration.

What we are considering here today is a step in the right direction. It is a solid product thoroughly debated and deliberately considered. I urge my colleagues to support and vote in favor of this legislation.

As Adam said, we have a great partnership. I think the thing that makes our committee work so well together is it is not about jobs. Sometimes people say, well, we just have a defense so that we can provide jobs. We have a defense because the Constitution says that we provide for the common defense. We have to be kind of the ones that keep the ceilings open, the skies free, this Nation free from terrorism.

I talked to General Odierno, the Chief of our Army last week, and he said in 2008, the budget for the U.S. Army was $250 billion. This year, it is $150 billion. For people who are saying we are really not cutting, we are just slowing the growth rate, we are cutting. The thing that has been most affected is our readiness, and that is what causes lives to be lost because our troops aren't getting sufficiently trained before they go to Afghanistan, before they go into harm's way. This budget will help. I talked to General Dempsey yesterday, and this will help them get back on their feet in readiness.

I want to thank Adam for his true friendship and partnership, and I encourage all of our colleagues to vote for this bill, to sustain the efforts of those who are willing to put themselves in harm's way to protect us.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on House consideration of the The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014.

I thank Chairman McKeon. Ranking Member Smith and the Rules Committee, and the Armed Services Committee's for their work on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014.

The National Defense Authorization Act's purpose is to address the threats our nation must deal with not just today, but into the future. This makes our work vital to our national interest and it should reflect our strong commitment to ensure that the men and women of our Armed Services receive the benefits and support that they deserve for their faithful service.

This is the 52nd consecutive National Defense Authorization Act, which speaks to the long term commitment of the Congress and successive Administrations to provide for National Defense. This bill encompasses a number of initiatives designed to confront sexual assault in the military, making more efficient the work of protecting America, addresses the mental health needs of men and women in the armed services, and extends economic opportunity to small minority and women owned businesses.

We do live in a dangerous world, where threats are not always easily identifiable, and our enemies are not bound by borders. The resent Boston Terrorist Attack reminds us of how fragile our nation's security could be without a well trained and equipped military.

The definition of war has changed and with it our understanding about what is needed to combat a unique type of enemy that fights under no flag or for any nation.

U.S. Special Operations Command, a vital part of our military, provides much of the special skills needed to defend our nation today. This legislation continues to build on previous efforts to support their important work.

I am still deeply concerned about the President's authority, as stipulated by the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force

(AUMF), to indefinitely detain individuals apprehended in the United States--including citizens of the United States--without due process and with little independent review or oversight. As a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, I am committed to making sure that the Constitution and its protections are enforced. The purpose to defend this nation is not just on the grounds of this capitol, but also the foundation that supports the principles of liberty, freedom and democratic values.

The bill includes several provisions that recognize the strain of more than a decade of war has placed on our troops and the equipment, technology, and tools that they use.

It supports a 1.8 percent pay raise. I had wanted a 2 percent raise for our troops.

This Congress must communicate its wholehearted support for the security of the nation by addressing mindless cuts created by sequestration, the $174.6 billion in operation and maintenance funding the bill provides will help mend some of the damage that has been done to overused equipment and neglected facilities. It also strengthens our ability to confront cyber threats, and provides important authorities to protect vital information. The bill also continues to lay the foundation for enabling competition in military space launch.

I am also pleased that so much has occurred to improve the bill during its consideration on the House Floor, including the adoption of seven amendments that I offered. Combined, these amendments will help our military families have access to mental health counseling when needed and that contracting opportunities with the Department of Defense are extended to women and minority owned businesses. In addition, the bill has been improved to include provisions that are critically important to women, including provisions to prevent and respond to sexual assault and research to combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer.

The bill amended on the House floor now also contains provisions that will help secure our borders and make the defense logistics management system more efficient.

Let me discuss briefly the amendments I offered that were either included in the final bill or strongly supported in the Conference Report.

The Conference Report strongly encourages the DOD and NIH to collaborate in an effort to combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer in identifying specific genetic and molecular targets and biomarkers for