Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 8 o'clock and 39 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Friday, June 14, 2013, at 9 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 1960.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1960, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, which overwhelmingly passed the Committee on Armed Services. In keeping with the committee's tradition of bipartisanship, Ranking Member Smith and I worked collaboratively to produce this bill and solicited input from each of our members. We've already adopted 169 amendments during markup and look forward to a robust debate the remainder of the week on the floor.

The legislation advances our national security objectives, provides support and logistical resources for our warfighters, and helps the United States confront the national security challenges of the 21st century. The bill authorizes $552.1 billion for national defense in the base budget. It also authorizes another $85.8 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations, consistent with the House budget, and the bill contains no earmarks.

Of critical importance, the bill takes serious and significant steps to end the crisis of sexual assault in our military. This includes stripping the commanders of their authority to dismiss a finding by a court-martial; prohibiting commanders from reducing guilty findings to lesser offenses; establishing minimum sentencing requirements for sexual assault; extending whistleblower protections to those who report rape, sexual assault, or other sexual misconduct; and other vital measures. Based on the years of work and oversight our committee has done on this critical issue, I share Senator Levin's reluctance to remove the commander from the decision process for crimes under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The only way to change the culture is to hold commanders responsible and accountable for their actions and decisions.

Elsewhere in the bill, despite historic cuts to our Armed Forces, we prevent military readiness shortfalls from becoming a readiness emergency. We restore flying hours for the Army and Air Force squadrons, direct money to help reset equipment returning from Afghanistan, and relieve some of the military's maintenance backlogs.

The bill also provides our warfighters with resources and authorities they need to win the war in Afghanistan and to pressure al Qaeda and its affiliates. We fully fund a series of important authorities that support the transition in Afghanistan and U.S. national security interests. However, we prohibit the use of the majority of those funds until the Secretary of Defense certifies that U.S. priorities have been accommodated in a bilateral security agreement.

We have made controlling costs a top priority. However, the mark guards against achieving false, short-term savings at the expense of vital, long-term strategic capabilities. For example, we prohibit the premature retirement of Navy cruisers and amphibious assault ships, critical vessels that are vital to the Pacific-focused strategy. The bill also continues investments in oversight for key systems while preserving our capacity to meet future challenges.

The bill continues our care for our warfighters, veterans and their families with the support they earned through their service; and it mandates fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability within the Department of Defense.

The bill reduces the number of general officer billets and works to end redundancies in military headquarters and task forces.

For 51 straight years, the National Defense Authorization Act has been passed and signed into law. Congress has no higher responsibility than to provide for the common defense. And with that in mind, I look forward to passing this bill for the 52nd consecutive year.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the vice chairman of the Armed Services Committee, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Emerging Threats and Capabilities, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby), my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem), my friend and colleague and a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski), my friend and colleague, and a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Might I inquire how much time we have remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.

At this time, I'd like to thank Mr. Smith. This is our third bill that we've worked on in these positions, and I think we've become better friends over the years. We understand each other. We know that we, at times, will have disagreements.

I have to confess, I've been married now 50 years, and my wife and I have had a couple of disagreements. I was always wrong, and she's stood by me, and we've had a great relationship.

And we have a great relationship working in this committee. Likewise, our staff. I think they have done yeoman's work to get us to this point. And our subcommittee chairmen and ranking members that we've heard speak here today.

And I have to agree with Mr. Smith on the sequestration.

We, I think, all understand that this is bad for our Nation. We voted on it, those of us who did, knowing that, understanding that it would never happen. Well, reality set in, and it happened. I've had a few people come to me and say, gee, sequestration isn't that bad. They really haven't seen the full impact to this point. We're just starting into the first year of sequestration. And I was meeting with General Breedlove today, our new European commander. And he's just a month into his new job, and he's starting to feel the sequestration.

I think what we need to understand is--and I've talked to each of our military leaders as they came in and secretaries as they came before our committee for the hearings that led up to this bill--that if something doesn't happen between now and September 30, all of this work, everything that we're working on is, as Mr. Smith has pointed out, going away. We are cutting $487 billion out of defense over the next 10 years. That's in the bill. We also, through sequestration, cut another $500 billion out of defense over the next 10 years. That is not reflected in--this year's portion is not reflected in this bill. Our Budget Committee in the House passed a budget, and they kept the top line number from the Budget Control Act of $967 billion, and they gave us additional money for defense, which we've used in this bill. But if we're not able to resolve the differences between us and the Senate on September 30, it will be like Cinderella and that magic shoe. Everything goes away. The carriage becomes a cantaloupe, or a pumpkin, and it's bad times.

We've got to deal with that, we've got to deal with raising the debt limit, and there are a lot of very serious things on the table. So I would encourage all of our colleagues to join in the debate tomorrow.

We had a great debate in committee. We had differences, and we talked about them. We didn't get personal, and we didn't get rancorous. We came out with a vote of 59-2 because everybody on this committee understands how important our work is, how important our national defense is, and how important the men and the women and their families in uniform are, and we stand behind them. Now we do need to make sure that we have the resources that they need.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I would encourage all of us to support this bill tomorrow. Join in the process. Make it a better bill if we can.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the Path to Prosperity-- our House plan to balance the budget in ten years, restore our economy and grow jobs. As Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, I am particularly gratified to see this plan provide for our men and women in uniform and our national security by replacing deeply harmful sequestration cuts to our national defense with other commonsense reforms.

Since 9/11 our military has been operating at a very high operational tempo around the world keeping this country's citizens safe from those who seek to do us harm--from deadly attacks by al-Qaeda to the sabre rattling of Iran and nuclear provocations of North Korea. But back home as our economy slowed and our deficit rose, this Administration began to question our role in the world and called for substantial reductions to our national defense. While we agreed that everything should have been on the table in order to address this Nation's deficit spending, defense has represented only 18% of our national budget, while our military has absorbed 50% of the cuts to date.

Which is why it is so important today that House Republicans stand unified, both fiscal and national security conservatives, on the goal of replacing arbitrary, automatic across-the-board cuts to our military. This House Republican budget, as does its counterpart from the Republican Study Committee, provides $560.2 billion in defense funding for fiscal year 2014. This is the amount my Committee called for in our views to Chairman Ryan, and an amount consistent with our military responsibilities. Over the next decade, we provide over $6 trillion to fund our nation's defense. While this is significantly less than the levels in previous budget resolutions passed by the House, it is $500 billion more than will be available under sequestration. It allows our military to execute the current national defense strategy and avoids the hollow force and unacceptable level of strategic and operational risk our commanders have warned us about in hearings before our Committee.

I want to thank Chairman Ryan for his unyielding dedication and belief in this country and in American exceptionalism. Absent his vision and absent this House budget, in just four short years, we will be paying more in interest on our debt than our national security. I urge members to support this budget and one of Congress's core constitutional responsibilities--to provide for our common defense.

Madam Chair, I rise today to speak briefly about one of the programs that is being consolidated in the SKILLS Act: YouthBuild. While I support the overall bill on the floor today and look forward to an eventual reauthorization of WIA, I am concerned about the fate of YouthBuild. Let there be no doubt that with the GAO findings on our workforce training system there needed to be some consolidation, but not all programs are created equal. Some work better than others. Some work well in some districts while not so well in others.

Mr. Speaker, I had the great privilege of visiting the local YouthBuild center in my congressional district just a couple weeks ago. The Antelope Valley YouthBuild center is molding teens and young adults into model citizens. The staff works with youth ages 16-24 to help them build the confidence and skills needed to thrive in their communities. Participants work toward acquiring marketable skills to launch them into their careers while ensuring they complete their high school education. Participants give back to their community by building affordable housing in the Antelope Valley.

YouthBuild leverages public dollars as well as private dollars. Community and faith-based non-profit organizations sponsor most of the programs and the staff work tirelessly to make the program well-rounded for the participants and respected in the community.

I spoke to several young people during my visit whose lives had been completely transformed by the program. Instead of dreaming for even a sub-par life, these young people now have the confidence to not just survive in our world, but to thrive. The skills they learned, the bonds they made, and the good they did in their communities is shown through their great pride in what they have accomplished. They are finally feeling hopeful for the future.

I do not want the rug to be pulled out from under them by consolidating this program. At least in my district, this program has a significant impact on many lives and the community at large. I understand that not all programs are best run from Washington. Bureaucrats often don't understand what local communities need and how they operate, so operating every program at the national level is bad policy. But Mr. Speaker, some programs deserve a second look and I believe YouthBuild is one of those programs.

In 2011 alone, nearly 18,000 young people were turned away due to a lack of funds. The program has served over 110,000 young people since 1992 and since 2006 the Deparment of Labor has had twice as many applicants than it can fund.

Madam Chair, this is a popular program that has proven results. It is a program that has changed lives for the better in my district and many other districts across our country. I would urge Chairman Kline and Subcommittee Chairman Foxx to reconsider consolidation of YouthBuild if WIA gets to a conference committee.

I thank the chairman of the Appropriations Committee for yielding, and thank him for the great work that he has done on getting this bill to the floor; likewise, the chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. They have done yeoman's work to help provide for our national defense.

Mr. Speaker, I agree with much of what my good friend, the gentlelady from New York, said: Sequestration is bad. And if we don't pass the CR, we will feel worse than the effects of the sequestration. We will shut down the whole government. Nobody wants to see that, and so I commend her for what she said.

This is not perfect, but it keeps a lot of people working. I think it is very, very important that we get it done.

As chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, I am happy to see us voting to include a full-year defense appropriations bill as well as a full-year Military Construction-Veterans Affairs bill. This is very important. At least we have one committee that can do regular order still, and I think that is very important.

Enacting a full-year DOD appropriations bill is the first step toward restoring funding for our military, which has been whipsawed by the dual combination of the sequester and the CR that we are operating under. None of our currently serving service Chiefs--the Chief of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, including the Chief of all of the services--in their time have ever operated under a real budget. Most of the Members of Congress haven't served under regular order in seeing how we have really done. So this is a step forward to get us back to regular order.

A full year appropriation will allow the service chiefs to cancel programs that we've already canceled in the Defense Authorization Act. It allows them to restore critical shortfalls in their operation and maintenance accounts and add back a certain amount of training and flying hours.

This legislation does not by any means solve sequestration, but it gives our commanders some much needed flexibility and gives us time to work on a House budget that restores funding for our military.

Let me give you just a couple of quick examples of why we need to pass this package and encourage the other body to return to regular order: a straight CR stovepipes funding in certain accounts.

General Odierno, Chief of Staff of the Army, is looking at having to curtail 37,000 hours of flying for helicopter pilots at Fort Rucker in Alabama, where all of our helicopter pilots go to be trained. That's about 500 to 750 pilots who will not be trained. Units preparing now to deploy to Afghanistan are not receiving the same training as those who are there now fighting. That is shameful. We need to restore those accounts. This puts those who are preparing to go at greater risk once they arrive in theater. Under a full year DOD appropriation, which we'll be voting on today, General Odierno will have the authority to restore a lot of those flying hours and critical training for those who are preparing to deploy.

I have just another little example. Admiral Greenert, Chief of Naval Operations, has said that if he had the funding that would come from the appropriations bill that we're voting on, he would have the flexibility to move money between accounts, and the Navy would be able to keep a carrier strike group and an amphibious ready group in the Middle East and the Pacific through next year. That is crucial to our national security.

I would encourage all of our colleagues to support this bill. It's not perfect, but it takes us a long step toward helping to secure our national security.

I thank the chairman and the chairman of the subcommittee for their great work.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride and some sadness that I rise to honor Mr. Michael R. Higgins, a Professional Staff Member of the Armed Services Committee, on the eve of his retirement.

For over forty years, Mike has dedicated himself to his country and the Armed Forces. He served in the United States Air Force for twenty years and retired as Lieutenant Colonel. For the next 23 years, it was our great fortune that he chose the Armed Services Committee as the home for his incredible talents.

Mike served 7 HASC chairmen and 8 subcommittee chairmen, helping to steer our committee through war and peace. His sage advice guided members out of the Cold War and through the sporadic conflicts of the 1990s, social changes both large and small, and a tough 11 years of war. For any analyst looking to answer the question, ``How did the all- volunteer military survive those war years?,'' I would urge them to examine the contributions of Mike Higgins.

When the Pentagon struggled to attract quality recruits, Mike helped improve military recruiting and retention programs. When issues arose with outdated military pay and retirement policies, Mike modernized those systems. When the strains of combat brought in Wounded Warriors to rehabilitate, Mike helped guarantee attention to their needs.

Mike encountered an historic array of challenges to the Armed Forces. Some were structural, some were strategic, and some were social. But Mike's consummate professionalism, commitment to the military people that he loved, and perseverance in the face of the toughest political and policy debates helped us meet each issue with wisdom and experience. For that, I am grateful and in his debt.

His legacy is unmistakable. Whenever the military and Congress found themselves at odds, whenever there was a shared obstacle to overcome, and whenever a member of our committee -Republican or Democrat-needed advice or counsel, Mike was there.

Mike Higgins is a giant. He shaped the service of every man and woman of the Armed Forces over the last two decades. Every military retiree, their survivors, and each military family benefited from Mike's commitment to them. Mike will cast a long shadow far beyond his retirement.

His humility is matched only by his intellect, his ability to listen and a fearsome ability to see to the heart of an issue. When oversight is your business, sharp eyes are your sword. And no sword was sharper than that of this modest, unassuming Airman, who served his country with the tenacity of a lion, yet would today be surprised that so much is being made of all that he accomplished. Thank you, Mike.

Mr. Speaker, I submit for publication the attached copy of the rules of the Committee on Armed Services for the U.S. House of Representatives for the 113th Congress, as adopted by the committee on January 15, 2013.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 840, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 4310) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2013 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

I do.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Fiscal Year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act Conference Report. As you know, the NDAA is the key instrument by which the Congress fulfills its primary constitutional responsibility to provide for the common defense.

This year will mark the 51st straight year we've successfully completed our work. We have long prided ourselves on our ability to reach across the aisle and build strong bipartisan legislation on behalf of our troops. This year is no exception.

The bill authorizes $552.2 billion for national defense and $88.5 billion for overseas contingency operations. In fact, though our troops are at war and a significant share of our equipment inventory is exceeding retirement age, this year's funding is a reduction in real terms from last year.

Recognizing the magnitude of the cuts imposed upon the military over the past year is important. We must acknowledge the significant contribution defense has already made to deficit reduction. Half of the savings has come out of defense, even though the defense accounts for only 17 percent of the overall budget.

Yet in a matter of days, sequestration will go into effect and, without further action, will do incredible injury to a military that took generations to build. It will take generations to fix. And the blow will not come from an enemy, but from our own inability to fulfill the basic obligations of governance. That is why I am pleased that today the House not only considers this critical piece of legislation, but will also vote--once more--to stop sequestration. It's imperative that both the President and the Senate show similar leadership and resolve sequestration before the end of this year.

Despite these challenges, this conference agreement ensures that we can safeguard military readiness in a time of declining budgets and increased strains on our Armed Forces. We support missile defense, global strike, strategic and tactical airlift, and were able to preserve critical military capabilities. The bill supports pay and benefits for our military and their families, including a 1.7 percent pay raise, and rejects administration proposals to significantly accelerate increases in TRICARE pharmacy copays for our retirees.

Unfortunately, there has been some inaccurate reporting regarding our detainee provisions. The protections included in the House-passed bill have been preserved in the conference agreement, and we worked closely during the conference negotiations with our House colleagues, who exercised leadership on this issue, to ensure that we retain their support. We did not include an amendment adopted 2 weeks ago on the Senate floor because we could not reach consensus on what the effect of the language would be.

Rest assured, this conference report ensures that every American's constitutional rights, including the right to habeas corpus, remain unaffected, and every American can challenge the legality of their detention in Federal court. The ``great writ'' of habeas corpus is a citizen's most fundamental protection against unlawful deprivations of liberty. This reflects a consensus built after exhaustive debate over several years in both Chambers.

The conference report covers many more critical issues, but I will close in the interest of time. Before I do, I would like to thank all our Members for their hard work, but in particular, my partner on the committee, Ranking Member Smith from Washington.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise an extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on the conference report to accompany H.R. 4310.

I yield such time as he may consume to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).

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

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky for the purpose of a colloquy.

That's correct. This council will be an important mechanism for improving communication, and the rest of section 4102 is defunct.

That's correct. To further affirm that, I've sent a letter to the Secretary of Energy making clear the striking of this section in no way affects the Secretary's authorities.

Yes, you have my commitment and my thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, a member of the conference committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations and a member of the conference committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert), who's been very helpful in putting together the final bill.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I once again rise in support of this bipartisan fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Conference Report, and I concur totally with the concluding remarks of Mr. Smith. Our staff has done a fantastic job. And I have enjoyed working with him, and we will continue to work together in a bipartisan way.

This NDAA bill passed the Armed Services Committee on a vote of 56-5. It passed the full House by nearly 300 votes; and, likewise, the Senate adopted its version of the bill unanimously.

However, I fully acknowledge we had to tackle tough issues in a very compressed timeframe, as Mr. Smith pointed out. Every one of us could find something in this bill that we would rather change, but none of us can deny that this bill has been exhaustively debated. It's the only major authorization bill that's been able to proceed through regular order in both the House and the Senate this year.

The House considered 303 amendments, between the committee and the floor. The Senate considered at least 151 amendments. We've all had a chance to have our say on this bill and to have the Congress act its will.

I urge my colleagues to join me in ushering this bill across the finish line and vote ``yes'' on adoption of the conference report. This is a good piece of legislation that's critically needed by our troops.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for his efforts on this bill.

Today, we will send to the Senate a way out of this fiscal crisis. Rather than react in defense of the President's position, I urge the other body to treat this package as a good faith effort to protect America's middle class and small businesses from harmful tax hikes and to reduce spending to resolve sequestration. We know that the President is willing to put adjustments to entitlements on the table. This proposal provides a framework for us to reach bipartisan agreement on how to do that.

If we fail to act, on January 2 a hammer's strike will fall on America's Armed Forces. It will be one of the most significant and damaging blows to our troops and our national security in history. Without even the stroke of a pen, sequester will do incredible injury to a military that took generations to build. It will take generations to fix. And the blow will not come from an enemy, but from our own inability to fulfill the basic obligations of governance.

We must stop substituting regular order with brinksmanship. We must not allow impasses of our own doing to harm our Armed Forces. I call on the President to lead rather than create a new crisis. We cannot stand idly by while we have American men and women fighting to keep us safe across the globe. It's a disgrace that the President decided to use them as pawns in these negotiations, and it's a disgrace that we haven't managed to rescue them yet.

My leadership made me a promise: sequestration would not happen. Today, for the sixth time, they are bringing a measure to the floor in an effort to keep that promise. I thank them for what they have done and wish we could have done even more. The American people were also promised that sequestration would not happen. Many times over his campaign and in the presence of our troops and veterans the Commander in Chief made that promise: sequestration would not happen. Yet as we stand here today, days away from the catastrophe, the President of the United States hasn't lifted a finger to keep that promise.

If the Senate fails to take our offer seriously, we will likely return to Washington after Christmas. But the 68,000 American troops in Afghanistan don't have that luxury. We ask them to bear the pain of combat. I hope we will not ask them to shoulder the weight of Washington's irresponsibility. Every man and woman who serves in this Chamber, in the one down the hall, and in the Oval Office down the street are the stewards of a sacred trust. We have all put our left hand on a Bible and raised our right hand and made a sacred pledge. Part of that pledge is to defend the men and women who put their lives on the line to defend us. If we allow the year to end without resolving sequestration, we will all be in direct and unforgivable violation of that trust. I have debated and reasoned with my colleagues, and now I beg you, do not let the year end without ending sequestration.

I urge passage of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I speak in favor of S. 925, to name a peak in the Eastern Sierra in honor of Andrea Mead Lawrence. This legislation is a companion bill to my House version, H.R. 1818. I would like to thank Senator Boxer for working with me to ensure the legacy of a great woman who called the Eastern Sierra home. Let me also express my appreciation to the leaders of the Committee on Natural Resources, Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member Markey who worked to help bring this legislation to the floor today, as well as Majority Leader Cantor for allowing this bill to move.

Andrea Mead Lawrence was a remarkable woman. I was honored to know and work with her for the protection of the Eastern Sierra, a cause she championed for much of her life. Born in Rutland County, Vermont on April 19, 1932, she developed a life-long love of winter sports and appreciation for the environment. A skilled skier, she competed in the 1948 Winter Olympics in St. Moritz, Switzerland as well as the 1956 Winter Olympics in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy. She also served as the torch lighter at the 1960 Winter Olympics in Squaw Valley, California. In the 1952 Winter Olympics in Oslo, Norway, she won two Gold Medals in the Olympic special and giant slalom races. For her significant accomplishments, she was inducted into the U.S. National Ski Hall of Fame in 1958, at the age of 25.

These remarkable achievements at a young age, however, were just the beginning of a life of service to her community and environmental preservation. In 1968, Andrea moved to Mammoth Lakes in the spectacularly beautiful Eastern Sierra of California. It was in this special region she spent the rest of her life working to protect the area's natural treasures.

Never one to rest on her accomplishments, she founded the Friends of Mammoth to maintain the beauty and serenity of Mammoth Lakes and the Eastern Sierra. She served for 16 years on the Mono County Board of Supervisors, where she worked tirelessly to protect and restore Mono Lake, Bodie State Historic Park, and other important natural and cultural landscapes of the Eastern Sierra. As a member of the Great Basin Air Pollution Control

District, she worked to reduce air pollution caused by the dewatering of Owens Lake. In 2003, she founded the Andrea Lawrence Institute for Mountains and Rivers to protect the environment and the economic vitality of this important region.

In 2008, she testified before the Mono County Board of Supervisors in favor of the Eastern Sierra and Northern San Gabriel Wild Heritage Act, a bill enacted the day before she died on March 31, 2009 at the age of 76. Andrea left a rich legacy of a family of five children and four grandchildren, as well as a distinguished record in skiing. Her tireless efforts have left a better legacy for the people who live and recreate in the Eastern Sierra.

Andrea Mead Lawrence's life philosophy is summed up in her quote ``Your life doesn't stop by winning medals. It's only the beginning. And if you have the true Olympic spirit, you have to put it back into the world in meaningful ways.'' Mr. Speaker, it is very fitting to name Peak 12,240 ``Mt. Andrea Lawrence''; both in her honor, and as a visible point of inspiration for future generations.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Armed Services, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 4310) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2013 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference requested by the Senate.

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

I rise to thank the gentlelady for her leadership not only on this issue, but on the leadership she helps provide to our committee. We have several women serving on the House Armed Services Committee, and they do an outstanding job.

Over the years, many of us have visited Iraq and Afghanistan, and I've had that opportunity. But I know that the trips that the women have made bring us back a different perspective. In my trip the time before last to Afghanistan, I went to the south. I went to Camp Leatherneck, where they were just setting up the Marines that had just arrived, and they were just pushing out in the desert. We were not able to visit Marja, which was one of the towns in that area. It was totally under the control of the Taliban. The Taliban flag flew over Marja.

The last time I was there, it was totally changed. The Marines had taken over Marja. And the day we were there, we opened a school. It's not like a school that we have here for our young people. They had a few classrooms in an adobe building, and then they had a few tents. It was kind of raining that day, but as we opened that school, 500 children were now going to be able to go to school, and over a third of them were young girls who could not go to school before. They were so excited, 10 teachers and 500 young people. As I said, about a third of them were young girls.

We have made some great improvements in Afghanistan. There are a lot of things we don't hear about. But when these women go on these trips on Mother's Day, they meet with the same women each year. So they give us a whole different perspective. Many of us on the trips, we go to one place, the next time we go to a different place, and we don't get a real feel as to what is actually happening with the people there. I've talked to some of these women after those trips. They've reported back and told me the things that they have seen and learned. This perspective of being able to actually see the same people and hear their perspective change from year to year is invaluable, and I thank you for making those trips.

We have women on both sides of the aisle, both on and off the committee, that have gone on those trips. Martha Roby, one of the freshman Members on our side of the aisle, led the trip this last time, and Vicky Hartzler and Cathy McMorris Rodgers, our conference chair for our new Congress, and Renee Ellmers, another freshman Member on our side. Again, women from the other side of the aisle made that trip. I thank them for it, and I strongly support this effort on this motion to instruct.

We need to do everything we can do to ensure the safety of women. We've made lots of gains for those women and the girls who will become women in that country. When you withdraw the troops, it's a serious time and dangerous time. As we pass the effort over to the Afghan security forces to provide the protections and keep the gains that we've made, it's very important that they don't fall back into the same way that they've treated women in the past and we lose all those gains that we've made. So this is a very important addition to the bill.

I thank you for bringing this forward. I thank you for the support. It's something I hope that everyone in the Congress will support as we move forward.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

The United States' effort in Afghanistan came to us following the tragic events on September 11, 2001. And it has been critical to ensuring that United States' vital national security interests are maintained and the American people remain safe.

The successes that have been achieved in Afghanistan are the result of the noble service and tremendous sacrifice from our military and their families. Those successes include progress toward improving conditions for Afghan women and girls, respect for the rights of women, and inclusion of women in the political and security realms. However, as our commanders frequently remind us, all of our successes are fragile and can be reversed. This is no more true than in the case of Afghan women.

Therefore, I will support this motion to instruct. I believe the coming years will be critical to ensure the progress Afghan women have made cannot be easily undone. While I do not believe it is a primary mission of the U.S. military to work with the Government of Afghanistan to improve the rights of women, there is a role for the military to play as we train and advise the Afghan National Security Forces. Continuous improvements to the security situation can help set the stage for interagency partners and non-governmental organizations to work on women's issues.

In fact, the security of Afghanistan's women can only be damaged by hasty or ill-conceived withdrawal. The military needs to continue to be provided the resources and support that they need to conduct the mission in Afghanistan through 2014 and beyond--primarily to meet U.S. national security objectives, but also not to abandon those whose lives have improved so dramatically.

I appreciate my colleagues' advocacy for our sisters in Afghanistan. I support their efforts and intend to carry a conference report back from negotiations that supports this goal, the United States' national security interests, and provides our military with the resources it needs to accomplish the missions it is given in Afghanistan and around the globe.

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

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlelady.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

I want to thank the gentlelady for bringing this issue. I think it is something that we can totally support on our side, and I would encourage all Members of this body to support this issue. I thank all of the women who have made the trips over there to Afghanistan because they have really added to the cause.

Our men and women in the military that have fought for all these many years--one of the major benefits from this war is the freedoms that these women and girls are able to enjoy right now, and it's my hope that we can leave sufficient force there to complete the mission, to guarantee the safety of these women and children, young girls, going forward. To leave precipitously without having completed that mission and put these women and girls in jeopardy, after they've seen a whole new life emerge, a whole new opportunity presented to them that they never conceived of before, would be a disaster.

So I thank again the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Davis) for her efforts here, and all the women who have spoken on this issue and traveled to Afghanistan, and urge that we all support this issue.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 12 of rule XXII, I move that meetings of the conference between the House and Senate on H.R. 4310 may be closed to the public at such times as classified national security information may be broached, provided that any sitting Member of Congress shall be entitled to attend any meeting of the conference.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an exceptional officer in the United States Army, Colonel Theodore C. ``TC'' Williams. Throughout his 27 years of distinguished service, COL Williams has personified the Army values of duty, integrity and selfless service across the many missions that the Army provides in defense of our Nation. As the Chief of Programs Division in the Office of the Secretary of the Army, many of us on Capitol Hill have enjoyed the opportunity to work with COL Williams on a wide variety of Army issues and programs. It's my privilege to recognize COL Williams and his many accomplishments.

COL Williams, the son of the late Theodore C. Williams, Jr and Phyllis Kane Williams of Potomac, Maryland, attended Winston Church Hill Senior High School in Potomac, Maryland, and was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the Infantry in 1985 after graduating from The Citadel in South Carolina.

He served from 1986 to 1989 as a rifle platoon leader, company executive officer, and reconnaissance platoon leader in 1st Battalion, 27th Infantry ``Wolfhounds'' at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii. From 1990 to 1993, he served as the battalion assistant operations officer then commander of Bravo Company in 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Cotton- Bailers during the Persian Gulf War and at Fort Stewart, Georgia. From 1993 to 1994, COL Williams served as a Senior Infantry Trainer in the 24th Infantry Division Resident Training Detachment assisting the 48th Brigade, Georgia National Guard. From 1995 to 1998, COL Williams was a small group instructor for the Infantry Officers Advanced Course and tactics team chief in the Tactics Department of the Infantry School at Fort Benning, Georgia. From 1999 to 2001, he served as operations officer and then executive officer in 1st Battalion, 23rd Infantry ``Tomahawks'' at Fort Lewis, Washington.

From 2001 to 2003, COL Williams was an Army Congressional liaison in the Office of the Chief of Legislative Liaison where he was principally responsible for overseeing the efficient operation of the division and managing the Army's legislative portfolio on the Chem-Bio Defense program.

In 2003, LTC Williams left OCLL to take command of the 2nd Battalion, 6th Infantry ``Gators'' during Operation Iraqi Freedom and at Smith Barracks in Germany from June 2003 to June 2005. For twelve months, Force Gator conducted combat and stability operations in southeast Baghdad. In April 2004, while conducting transfer of authority to the follow-on unit, the tactical situation in Iraq deteriorated and the battalion task force was alerted to conduct combat operations in Najaf and Al Kut. Following decisive combat operations in south-central Iraq, the task force was extended in Iraq for three months to conduct combat and stability operations in the infamous ``Triangle of Death.'' For operations conducted April to July 2004, the battalion received the Presidential Unit Citation as part of

the 2nd Brigade, 1st Armored Division. Upon redeploying to Germany after fifteen months in Iraq, the battalion conducted reset and full- spectrum operations training in preparation to deploy again in late 2005.

From 2005 to 2007, LTC Williams returned to the Office of the Chief of Legislative Liaison to serve as the Legislative Assistant to the Vice Chief of Staff, Army (VCSA). He stood out amongst his peers and made himself an indispensible part of the VCSA's personal staff.

From 2007 to 2009, he was promoted to Colonel and led the division within OCLL that develops the congressional engagement strategy for the Secretary, Chief of Staff, Under Secretary, Vice Chief of Staff, and Sergeant Major of the Army. He performed exceptionally. He personally improved the Army's strategic communication with the Congress, and developed the engagement strategy and legislative objectives for the Army's Senior Leadership.

From 2009 to 2012, COL Williams performed duties as the Chief of Programs. He expertly led the planning of the Army's congressional engagement strategies between senior Army Staff leaders and Members of Congress, leading directly to a defense authorizations bill that enhanced the Army's ability to recruit, retain, and reset the world's premiere fighting force.

Through these varying assignments, COL Williams provided outstanding leadership, advice, and sound professional judgment on critical issues of enduring importance to both the Army and Congress. On behalf of Congress, I thank COL Williams, his wife Helen, and his entire family for the commitment, sacrifices, and contribution they have made throughout his honorable military career. Congratulations on completing an exceptional and successful career.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the National Security and Jobs Protection Act offered by Mr. West from Florida. I have the privilege of serving on the Armed Services Committee with him, and I thank him for his leadership in bringing this important bill forward at this time.

It boggles my mind, Madam Speaker, that we are standing here ready to wipe out our national defense at a time when we turn on the TV in the morning and see the Middle East erupting, when we see Iran moving forward on their plans to achieve a nuclear weapon, when we see China increasing their defense spending while we're cutting ours.

People need to understand that we have cut $487 billion starting October 1 over the next 10 years out of our defense. And on top of that, we have added this problem of sequestration, which adds another 500, $600 billion over the next 10 years starting January 2.

The first $487 billion, some thought was put into, and plans. Even though we had to adjust our strategy that we've had since World War II, we've had to cut back. We know that we won't be able to carry out the missions that we've been called on to do in the future, but we will be able to survive, according to our military leaders.

But the sequestration--we held five hearings last September with all of our former military leaders, our current military leaders, former chairmen and Secretaries of these committees, and to a man, every single one said that the sequestration would hollow out and wipe out our national defense.

We would take the Navy back to the size it was in World War I, the Armed Forces, the ground forces back to the size they were in 1940, and the Air Force back to the smallest it's been since it was created. How does anybody think that given these times that is not a stupid thing to be doing?

The way the sequestration would take effect is you just pull out the budget and take a percentage--the administration hasn't told us yet what percentage; it's probably going to be about 15, 20 percent--off of every single line item. So mowing the lawn at Fort Dix will have the same priority as ammunition for the troops in Afghanistan. How can anybody think that that is a smart idea?

You know, we have a Constitution of the United States, and it tells us how we should operate here in this Congress. It says one body passes a bill, the other body passes a bill, a conference is formed, you work out your differences, you take it back for final passage, and send it to the President to be signed into law.

The House has acted. We took tough votes. We accomplished our objective of paying for the first year of sequestration, not just the defense cuts, but all of the cuts across the board, to move it back, pay for the first year, move it back into a time where we're

less stressed with the election upon us, where we could do it in a less political environment, and the Senate hasn't acted. In 126 days, the Senate hasn't acted. Excuse me. The other body hasn't acted.

Madam Speaker, they don't like our bill; I understand that. All they have to do is pass another bill, get it to conference, and then we'll work out the differences. We accomplished ours through cuts, they can accomplish theirs through increasing taxes, and then we can work out a difference. All the gentleman on the other side says is, They've presented a plan and we don't like their plan.

Well, a plan is nothing. What they have to do is pass a bill. Show us. Get the votes, pass a bill, and then go to the conference. It's in the Constitution. That's how we operate. And it's important enough that we should all act like adults and follow the Constitution and get it done. Our Nation, our security depends on it, and we don't have much time left to do it.

Madam Speaker, I think it's very important that we pass this bill. I encourage my colleagues to vote for it. Let's act like adults. Let's earn our salaries here. Let's get this job done.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the National Security and Jobs Protection Act offered by Mr. West, whom I have the pleasure of serving with on the Armed Services Committee. We all know that in less than 4 months, the automatic across-the-board cuts known as sequestration will go into full effect, significantly reducing funding for our national defense and vital domestic programs.

Mr. West and members of our committee understand just how much these draconian cuts will undermine our constitutional obligation to provide for the common defense. They will result in the United States having the smallest Army since World War II, the smallest Navy since World War I and the smallest Air Force in U.S. history. That is why President Obama's own Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, has said the pending sequester is devastating and akin to shooting ourselves in the head.

So the natural question is--what is our government doing to stop sequestration? On May 10, 2012, the United States House of Representatives passed a measured and responsible proposal to deal with this impending threat, H.R. 5652, the Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act of 2012. Yet, 126 days later the Senate has not acted. The President has not acted.

Madam Speaker, the House is prepared to work with the President and the Senate on alternatives to sequestration. We urge them to come to the table. That's what Mr. West's legislation does. Our colleagues in the Senate tell the press that they are negotiating a deal. Well they have been talking about that for a year now. It is time to put something down on paper and get it passed. We must not allow the well being of our troops and our national security to be used as a bargaining chip in this debate.

Just this week we were reminded at how unstable and dangerous our world is. The killing of Americans in Benghazi on the anniversary of Sep 11th is a reminder and a challenge to every member of this body that we must put our national security and our national interests first.

As one senior military official recently told me, America's inability to govern ourselves past sequestration plays directly into the hands of those who spread a narrative of American decline and will ultimately thrust us into a more dangerous world.

This legislation will require President Obama to live up to his obligation as Commander-in-Chief and submit his alternative plan to replace sequestration, while encouraging the United States Senate to do the same. Let us also not forget that it was the President who put defense ``squarely on the table'' last summer in the negotiations for the Budget Control Act.

Madam Speaker, we are running out of time before the draconian cuts in sequestration take effect. There are 111 days remaining. We need to work together to find a solution. I urge members to vote ``yes'' on this legislation.

Will the gentleman yield?

You presented something that I said when I was asked after a speech what I would do, given two bad choices. But you don't have anything on the floor yet. You haven't passed a bill, so I don't even have the opportunity to vote for increased taxes because you haven't passed a bill yet.

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my legislation, H.R. 2467, the Bridgeport Indian Colony Land Trust, Health, and Economic Development Act of 2012. I want to thank Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member Markey, as well as subcommittee Chairman Young and Ranking Member Lujan, for giving my legislation a fair hearing and moving the bill through the committee.

Mr. Speaker, the Bridgeport Indian Colony is a Federally recognized Indian tribe with a reservation located near the town of Bridgeport in Mono County, California. The tribe's reservation is approximately 40 acres and was established by Federal law in 1974. However, the size of the current reservation is insufficient for the tribe's housing and community development needs.

In order to create space for economic development and housing, my legislation proposes to transfer from the BLM to the BIA to hold in trust for the tribe one parcel of land contiguous to the tribe's existing reservation, totaling approximately 31 acres. On this parcel, the tribe plans to construct an RV park, gas station, convenience store, and residential housing for tribal members, as well as a recreational center to serve the greater community.

Mr. Speaker, many tribal members have expressed interest in moving back to the reservation if housing and job opportunities can be made available. And this bill will create jobs in a part of my district where unemployment is over 10 percent.

Additionally, my legislation would promote the health care of the tribe and community by taking into trust a 7-acre BLM parcel where the Toiyabe Indian Health Project previously served the community, allowing the clinic to be reopened and returned to service. Currently, members of the tribe have to drive 90 miles to Bishop to obtain health care services.

In the 1980s, the tribe applied for and received a community development block grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development in order to build a health care facility in Mono County. With Toiyabe Indian Health Project directing the project, the Camp Antelope Health Clinic was built on a 7.16-acre parcel of Federal land one mile north of Walker, California, approximately 30 miles from the tribe's reservation--60 miles closer than the Bishop health clinic. Unfortunately, the Toiyabe Indian Health Project closed the Camp Antelope Health Clinic in 2006.

The tribe and the Toiyabe Indian Health Project have agreed that the health clinic needs to be reopened, and the investment of the Federal funds in the development of the health clinic from the CDBG grant adds to the importance of maintaining the parcel under Federal ownership.

Mr. Speaker, throughout the process of developing this legislation, I worked closely with the tribe and the Bridgeport Public Utility District to mitigate any concerns that the utility district had regarding the rights of way of an easement which crosses the first parcel proposed for transfer from the BLM to the BIA in trust to the tribe. The services provided by the utility district, both to the community of Bridgeport as well as to the tribe, depend on the infrastructure where this easement is located. Currently, the easement is managed by the BLM and is subject to periodic renewal. I clarified in my legislation that this easement should continue to be managed by the BLM, as this has proven successful.

The Mono County Board of Supervisors voted to support the land transfer in October of 2009 and agreed unanimously in April of 2010 to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the tribe, thus supporting the tribe's efforts to have these parcels of land transferred into trust. Additionally, there is language contained in my bill that clarifies that there will be no new gaming on lands that are acquired by the tribe.

Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving my bill time on the floor. The additional land will be greatly beneficial to the Bridgeport Indian Tribe, and I urge Members to support this vital legislation.