Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the City of San Mateo for its adoption in 1968 of A Company, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division.

In 1967 a soldier in Vietnam named Sgt. Joe Artavia wrote a letter to his sister, Linda, asking her to convince the City of San Mateo to adopt his company. He thought an adoption would lift troop morale ``as high as the sky.'' Linda rallied the community to support her brother and his comrades. Within three months the San Mateo City Council passed a resolution to adopt the company.

Tragically, Artavia was killed three weeks later rescuing a fellow soldier, and the people of San Mateo joined together in mourning. Artavia's death solidified San Mateo's commitment to its adopted company and, in fact, in 1972 San Mateo was the only city in the United States to hold an official homecoming parade honoring Vietnam veterans.

Since that time the city has continuously supported A Company, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division, visiting them in peacetime, establishing pen-pals and sending care packages. The city has served as a model for other towns, cities or counties to adopt individual military units throughout the country.

San Mateo's adopted company has recently returned from a 12-month tour of duty in Afghanistan and will be redeployed for a third tour. In commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the welcome-home parade for the veterans returning to San Mateo, the city is holding another welcome home parade and festival to honor past and present soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division who have put their lives on the line for our country.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House of Representatives join me in honoring the city of San Mateo for supporting A Company, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division and its brave men and women who filled it ranks, especially those who gave their lives for our freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Raphael Kauffmann, an outstanding teacher who serves as a role model for students and teachers alike. It is only fitting that he has been named San Mateo County Teacher of the Year.

Mr. Kauffmann graduated Cum Laude from San Francisco State University where he earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Broadcast and Electronic Communications in 1995. Since 2005, Mr. Kauffmann has taught at Carlmont High School in Belmont. He was promoted to Chair of the English Department in 2009. He is a member of the National Education Association, the National Council of Teachers of English and he won a PTSA Award of Excellence in 2010.

Under Mr. Kauffman's leadership Carlmont High School adopted the Expository Reading and Writing Course, a school-wide reading and writing program. The program sparked a fruitful collaboration among the teachers within his department. The program helps prepare students for college and advances students' writing skills.

Mr. Kauffmann did not always know he wanted to teach. Starting at age 12 or 13, he was most passionate about music. He played bass in his high school band and also started a band with friends. In college he learned audio production, which helped him apply his passion for music to his professional life. His dynamic career has spanned the music, recording and software industries.

These experiences taught him the skills and qualities necessary for survival in the professional world. They also taught him that he could meld together academic, professional and creative interests while navigating a career path. He brings these lessons into the classroom and offers his students a broad perspective.

Instead of creating an authoritarian atmosphere, he makes students his partners in the process of learning. He promotes an environment of mutual respect and uses his musical background to connect with at-risk youths. He uses music as a tool to communicate with young people who the educational system has left behind. For example, when Mr. Kauffmann met one student who was nearly ready to drop out of high school, Mr. Kauffmann connected with this young man about music, took him under his wing and helped him graduate on time.

Mr. Kauffmann is a devoted husband and father; he is married to Chandra Kauffmann and they have a son, Rami.

Mr. Speaker, I ask this body to rise with me to honor the outstanding service of Raphael Kauffmann to the residents of San Mateo County. For many more years to come he will serve as an inspiration for other teachers, and a beacon for his students.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Officer Robert Andrey for his 27 years of service at the Burlingame Police Department.

Officer Andrey joined the Burlingame Police Department in 1984 and has served in a variety of capacities, such as patrol officer, field training officer, police inspector and evidence technician. In each role he demonstrated integrity, professionalism and honor. He has been recognized for his effectiveness in DUI enforcement and his compassion for donating stuffed animals to children in the Mills Peninsula Hospital Emergency Room.

Officer Andrey is an outstanding detective who is skilled in solving fraud cases. His secret to success is that he takes time to listen and pays attention to details. He says he was taught to ``never leave a call unless you feel comfortable leaving.'' For example, he responded to a call from Child Protective Services and arrived at a Burlingame home on a hot summer day. The young girl answering the door was wearing a long-sleeved heavy sweater. Officer Andrey spent some 20 minutes talking to her and gaining her trust until she eventually told him that she had been cutting herself. Due to his keen observations, the girl received help. He humbly adds that being a police officer is not rocket science, it's about developing relationships and trust with people.

Before I ever met Officer Andrey, I heard about him in the early '90s when he recovered construction materials from local pawnshops that had been stolen from my brother. A few years later I had my own--and very memorable--encounter with him. While I was in the California State Senate, I reported a suspicious envelope under my car's windshield wiper and he responded to the call. This incident put him in the ``entirely uncomfortable'' situation where he had to take my fingerprints.

Robert Andrey was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and went to Allis Central High School. He earned his B.A. in marketing management from Milton College in Wisconsin. He moved to the Bay Area in 1982.

In his well-deserved retirement, he is looking forward to spending more time with his wife Lona, family, friends and their two dogs.

Mr. Speaker, I ask this body to rise with me to honor the outstanding service of Officer Robert Andrey to the people of Burlingame. For almost three decades, he made our community a safer and better place every single day. He will be deeply missed by his colleagues and residents alike.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the late Lanty Molloy, Sr. who passed away June 11, 2012 in South San Francisco at the age of 79. Mr. Molloy leaves behind a legacy as an extraordinary family and business man.

Mr. Molloy is survived by his beloved wife of 51 years, Blanid Doyle, seven of their eight children, three of his five siblings and 19 grandchildren.

He was born in San Francisco in 1932 as the son of Frank Molloy of Ardara, County Donegal in Ireland, and Martha Loftus of San Francisco. His father Frank Molloy came to the United States in 1901 as a 18-year- old who pursued--and realized--the American dream. After spending a few years in the Pacific Northwest, Frank came to California shortly after the big earthquake in 1906. He tended bar in San Francisco and in 1909 opened his first pub, ``Molloy's'' on Lafayette Street. In 1927, he relocated Molloy's to a building he bought in Colma and started the family history of three generations of tavern owners.

Lanty Molloy attended Our Lady of Perpetual Help in Daly City and graduated from Saint Ignatius High School in San Francisco in 1950. He served in the U.S. Army as an MP. While stationed in Germany he made many lifelong friends and developed a love for history.

In 1955, Frank turned the bar over to Lanty, his youngest son. He and Blanid raised their family in South San Francisco and at age 21, their youngest son Owen started tending bar at Molloy's. Owen picked up the family tradition and to this day is managing the tavern.

Located in Colma, Molloy's has seen thousands of patrons toasting those who passed away. Posted on the wall is a fitting quote from the Irish Herald which reads: ``Though the Molloy's dwell in the valley of death, at the very gates of the marble orchard, the lights are always twinkling in the window and a steady stream of black clad mourners duck in for a soothing pint after bearing the drunken cousin or the elder aunt. You should drop by and get your drink too and get to know Lanty, Owen and the bar.''

Lanty is now the one to be toasted and remembered at this landmark in Colma. He was the second generation in a family tradition that I hope will live on for many more generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to rise with me to honor the memory of Lanty Molloy for the love for his family and friends and his lasting contributions to our community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the city of Burlingame for its adoption in 2007 of B Company, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division.

In 1967 a soldier in Vietnam named Sgt. Joe Artavia wrote a letter to his sister, Linda Patterson, asking her to convince the city of San Mateo to adopt his company. He thought an adoption would lift troop morale ``as high as the sky.'' Patterson rallied the community to support her brother and his comrades. Within three months the San Mateo City Council passed a resolution to adopt the company.

Tragically, Artavia was killed three weeks later rescuing a fellow soldier, and the people of San Mateo joined together in mourning. Artavia's death solidified San Mateo's commitment to its adopted company and, in fact, in 1972 San Mateo was the only city in the United States to hold an official homecoming parade honoring Vietnam veterans.

Working with Patterson, the city of Burlingame adopted its own company of the 101st Airborne Division in 2003. Since that time the city has continuously supported B Company, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division, visiting them in peacetime, establishing pen-pals and sending care packages.

In a few months Burlingame's adopted company will be re-deployed for another tour in Afghanistan. In commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the original welcoming-home parade, a new parade and festival will be held to honor past and present soldiers of the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault).

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House of Representatives join me in honoring the city of Burlingame for supporting B Company, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division and its brave men and women who fill its ranks, especially those who gave their lives for our freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), also known as the Bastogne Brigade Combat Team. This brief recitation of the history of these soldiers barely does them justice.

The Bastogne Brigade Combat Team fought in World War I and it was the first American expeditionary force to penetrate the Hindenburg Line, a vast system of defenses built by the Germans in northeastern France. Among many historic contributions during World War II, the Bastogne Brigade Combat Team played a vital role in Operation Overlord in 1944, the largest seaborne invasion in history. Later that year, they were part of the airborne invasion of Holland and secured control of supply routes and bridges in the German-occupied Netherlands.

In 1964, the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division was deployed to Vietnam and participated in more than 40 combat operations and fought for seven consecutive years without respite.

In 1991, they again played a vital role as part of the largest helicopter air-assault mission in military history during Operation Desert Storm. They have since taken part in peacekeeping operations throughout the world. In Iraq, they played a central role in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and in 2007, they were sent to the city of Tikrit, a safe haven for terrorist organizations.

In 2010 they were deployed to some of the most violent territories in Afghanistan and successfully carried out missions that prevented insurgents from carrying out violent acts against civilians and military targets. The soldiers of the Bastogne Brigade Combat Team will soon be re-deployed to Afghanistan where they will continue performing with valor, risking their lives to help make our own country more secure. Many of them will be on the front lines, doing foot patrols, creating security and interacting with Afghan civilians.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House of Representatives join me in honoring the brave soldiers of the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), especially those who gave their lives for our freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 70th Anniversary of the evacuation and internment of Japanese-Americans during World War

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, I rise to introduce an amendment to the Strategic Energy Production Act. This bill is being pitched as an all- of-the-above energy bill when, in reality, it is an oil-above-all bill, which is full of giveaways to big energy companies.

Title IV of H.R. 4480 would impose arbitrary deadlines on the Interior Department's review of applications for permits to drill for oil and gas onshore. After 60 days, if the Interior Department has not completed its review of an application to drill, the permit would be deemed ``approved'' regardless of whether the Department ensured that the drilling was safe.

My amendment is quite simple. It would just strike this unwise and unwarranted provision. First, a little context would be helpful.

The United States is in the middle of a great drilling boom. In fact, the Obama administration has issued more drilling permits in the last 3 years than were issued in the first 3 years of the Bush administration. A recent Citigroup report suggests that the U.S. is already the world's fastest-growing oil and natural gas producer. In counting the output from Canada and Mexico, North America is the ``new Middle East.'' Meanwhile, the top five oil companies made $137 billion in profits last year. They are reaping the benefits of this revival, and they are doing just fine.

Oil and gas companies are currently sitting on 6,700 approved--and I underscore ``approved''--drilling permits that are not being used. Issuing more drilling permits more quickly is not the answer. What we should not be doing is tying the hands of Interior Department regulators by imposing an artificial and arbitrary shot clock in approving these drilling permits, especially when the risks of safety problems remain high. In fact, oil companies are already committing scores of serious safety violations when drilling on public lands onshore.

According to a recent Natural Resources Committee report, more than 2,000 safety and drilling violations were issued to 335 companies drilling in 17 States between 1998 and 2011. Overall, the analysis shows that only a very small percentage of these violations ever receive fines. In fact, of all of the fines issued, it only generated $273,000 out of the 2,000 violations.

Here is an example: on dozens of occasions, oil and gas companies began drilling on Federal lands without the formal approval to do so. Many violations were issued because companies failed to keep proper records or to conduct routine safety tests. Some significant ones include: in 2009, an operator in Mississippi was found operating a well without any blow-out preventer or any equivalent well-control equipment. In 2010, an inspector at a New Mexico well found that one of the valves in the blow-out preventer, which is responsible for mitigating excessive pressure and flow, was leaking.

We have many examples of when safety was not put first. Instead of preventing these sorts of safety violations, this bill puts profits first and safety and oversight last.

I am pleased that the majority has acknowledged the important role the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act play in the proper review of drilling permits and that it has included language to prevent permits from being deemed approved in cases where reviews under those laws are still ongoing after 60 days.

However, I think it is important for us to look at the unintended consequences. If this provision is enacted, it could actually lead to more applications for drilling permits being rejected because the Secretary may have no choice but to reject any application for a permit to drill that was nearing the 60-day time limit if the safety review were not completed.

The bottom line here is that the United States oil and gas production is at an all-time high.

Allowing for proper safety review of permits is a necessary safeguard for the American people, and this is a prudent step. Taxpayers deserve a process that ensures that any drilling on their public lands is held to commonsense safety standards. Let's not compromise the safety of drilling on public lands in a headstrong rush to give the oil and gas industry the free pass it demands.

I respectively urge all my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I was unfortunately delayed by a meeting and was unable to cast a vote on rollcalls 410 and 411 on Thursday, June 21, 2012. I would have voted ``no'' on both Final Passage of H.R. 4480 and the Republican Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 4348.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to state that my vote against the Tipton amendment to the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013 was made in error. I support this amendment, which prohibits agencies funded under the bill from conducting surveys in which money is included or provided for the benefit of the survey responder. The amendment does not prohibit federal agencies form gathering public input or sending out surveys, which is a necessary process, but I agree with the author of the amendment that we must put an end to the unethical practice of giving away taxpayer dollars to solicit a desired response.

Mr. Speaker, I have now come to the floor some 21 times to tell the story of survivors of military sexual assault and the institution and culture that failed them. Some would tell you that the military has learned from their egregious mistakes and that they are largely now addressing this problem. The situation I'm describing to you today is happening right now and flies in the face of what we are being told by our military and the Members of Congress who believe that they have this problem under control.

Recently, a San Antonio newspaper began reporting on a scandal at Lackland Air Force Base that is growing by the day. So far, at least four Air Force instructors have been charged with sexual misconduct with at least 24 trainees. Like many cases of rape and sexual assault, the perpetrators are not denying that they engaged in sexual misconduct; they simply contend that the sex was consensual. It comes down to the words of the accused and the accuser--the instructor against the trainee. In the military, this usually means the perpetrator gets off or receives a disproportionately small punishment and the victim endures an arduous and humiliating legal process with little sense of justice at the end.

Two of the women that have come forward were called over an intercom 2 days after they graduated from basic training last fall and asked to leave their dorm and to meet their instructors. In a dimly lit supply room, the women said they had sexual relations with their instructor. ``I was frozen,'' one of the women said, explaining that her mind was racing. ``I tried to think.'' Both women said failure to follow orders could cause them to be retained in basic training under the very instructors that assaulted them.

While unnerved about the order to leave their dorms, they told themselves it had to be legitimate. From the day they entered the military, they had been trained--and required--to follow the orders of their instructors, even those that didn't make sense. This may be hard for some in the civilian world to relate to, but it is the constant reality within our Armed Forces. It is ingrained in our military servicemen and -women to follow the orders of their chain of command and never, ever disobey. The justice system is also beholden to this chain of command, but I will get to that a little bit later.

Staff Sergeant Luis Walker, a military instructor, is charged with sexually assaulting 10 women, including sodomy and rape. Staff Sergeant Kwinton Estacio is charged with sexual misconduct with one woman, violating a no-contact order, and obstruction of justice. Staff Sergeant Craig LeBlanc is charged with sexual misconduct of two women trainees. Staff Sergeant Peter Vega-Maldonado has been charged and convicted of sexual misconduct with one woman.

Staff Sergeant Vega admitted in a plea bargain to having sex with one woman. His punishment? Ninety days in jail, 30 days of hard labor, reduction in rank, and forfeiture of $500 a month in pay for 4 months. After striking the deal with prosecutors, Vega admitted that he actually had improper contact with 10 trainees.

Now, mind you, we are not firing these people. They continue to serve in the military. Vega is not immune to further prosecution, but his admission of guilt cannot be used against him in future procedures. Each victim will have to come forward and the prosecution will have to start from scratch. Vega will be forced to leave the Air Force, but without a bad conduct discharge. Imagine that, without a bad conduct discharge.

If the military is as vigilant as they say they are, how could such a repetitive, widespread, and sickening behavior still be occurring? What is being uncovered at Lackland flies in the face of what we are being told by our military. Is this what zero tolerance means in the military?

Former Air Force Secretary Whitten was quoted in the newspaper saying:

The age-old problem is that you're putting very smart,

attractive people, marrying age, together in close quarters.

It's a circumstance that is difficult and really requires

restraint. Sometimes restraint is very difficult.

Secretary Whitten doesn't get it. The age-old problem in the military is attitudes like this. The age-old problem in the military is a broken justice system that delivers weak sentences, if any. The age-old problem in the military is that nine out of 10 women Staff Sergeant Vega has now admitted to committing sexual misconduct with have not come forward because they know that the odds of getting justice are slight and the odds of their careers being finished are great.

What is happening at Lackland Air Force Base should and needs to be a wake-up call. This problem is happening now, and it is systemic.

Victims are still not coming forward because of what keeps happening--backwards attitudes of blaming the victim, and disproportionately weak sentences. Writing off survivors as women who had consensual sex and now have regrets is insulting and I'm afraid how many in our military see this problem.

The Department of Defense has so far been unable to appropriately address this problem--and Lackland is proof of that.

We--Congress--need to act to circumvent the chain of command and give discretion to an impartial office to determine and facilitate the appropriate path for perpetrators and victims. We need to fix the system that

survivors who report are now facing, right the injustices suffered by those that have already gone through this system and provide the care, resources and understanding for these survivors to get better.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share my additional thoughts on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issue raised by my colleagues Mr. Bilbray and Mr. Towns.

The Research Use Only (RUO) and Investigational Use Only (IU0) products draft guidance issued by the FDA last June could result in serious consequences for the future of health care. Patients and doctors want access to validated tests that will guide and improve their medical care. The development of tests by laboratories and their validation and regulation under the Clinical Laboratory Improvements Act (CLIA) are part of a long-standing regulatory framework. I am concerned that this draft guidance, should it be finalized in its current form, could seriously disrupt this process and the development of new technologies and diagnostics.

Another concern about the FDA draft guidance is that manufacturers could be held accountable for the activities of their customers who purchase these RUO and IUO products. It is quite possible that the draft guidance will cause manufacturers to stop offering important components for diagnostic tests. And what would be the end result? Commercial, academic, and public health laboratories may not be able to continue current tests or develop new tests to help diagnose or prevent the progression of diseases and conditions such as cystic fibrosis, ovarian cancer, organ failure and transplantation, and identifying new infectious organisms.

The FDA must consider the potential impact of this guidance on the practice of medicine and patient access to new and existing diagnostics. The concerns raised by the health care community, including the American Hospital Association and the Association of Public Health Laboratories, should be addressed before finalizing this guidance.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Our Nation is great because in times of trial when we do the wrong thing, we will come back and do the right thing.

What this amendment does is attempt to address a wrong that we did many years ago, and right that wrong by restoring a promise that we made to Filipinos that fought side-by-side with us in World War II. We promised them in no uncertain terms that they would enjoy the same veterans benefits that others received for putting their lives at risk.

More than 200,000 Filipinos fought in defense of the United States in the Pacific theater against the Japanese in World War II, and more than half of them were killed. As citizens of a commonwealth of the United States before and during the war, Filipinos were legally American nationals, and they were promised the same benefits afforded to those serving in the United States Armed Forces.

But in 1946, Congress passed the Rescission Act, a law that stripped Filipinos of the benefits that had been promised them by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The Rescission Act created a wrong that will not be righted unless our Nation restores the veteran status it promised to Filipino soldiers more than 65 years ago.

Now the irony here, Mr. Chairman, is that there were other countries that provided us with men and women who served during World War II, and they were also promised veterans benefits. In fact, there are 65 countries that provided servicemembers to fight alongside us. Every one of those other soldiers were provided veterans benefits from other countries. And yet the Filipinos, who were part of a commonwealth at the time, who were nationals of this country, who were promised veterans benefits, were denied them by the Rescission Act that was passed in 1946.

What this amendment does is make all Filipino veterans fully eligible for

veterans benefits, similar to those received by U.S. veterans. Specifically, the amendment eliminates the distinction between regular or old Filipino scouts and the other three groups of veterans-- Commonwealth Army of the Philippines, Recognized Guerilla Forces, and New Filipino Scouts. Veterans that have received lump sum payments would be eligible for these benefits.

Now, we tried to sort of cover this all up by giving them a $15,000 stipend. Frankly, that's not good enough. And there are about 15,000 living Filipino veterans of World War II right now. They're 85 years old. They're not going to live much longer, but they certainly deserve the benefits that we promised them but we then rescinded with the Rescission Act of 1946.

For these veterans and their families, I believe the time has come to right this horrific wrong, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding and the chairman for his leadership as well.

As has been mentioned, this bill is important in our efforts to make sure that mass transit is under the umbrella for the sharing of information. Let us not forget that in 2004 al Qaeda detonated multiple explosives during rush hour on a packed commuter train in Madrid, Spain, killing 191 people. A little more than a year later in London, a terrorist cell linked to al Qaeda carried out four suicide bombings, three of them on the London Underground, killing more than 50. To date, the United States has not experienced the death and destruction associated with dirty bombs or a mass transit attack. But that doesn't mean we haven't had close calls. In fact, in September of 2009, Najibullah Zazi was arrested in New York City for allegedly plotting to blow up New York City subways.

In October 2010, the FBI arrested a man who was plotting a large- scale attack here in Washington, D.C. on the Metro system. Last year he was sentenced to 23 years in Federal prison.

Most recently, we learned through documents taken from the compound of Osama bin Laden following the successful Navy SEAL raid that al Qaeda was plotting to attack U.S. mass transit systems to commemorate the 10th anniversary of 9/11.

Millions of Americans travel each day on mass transit to work, but these systems, such as subways, have relatively few security measures. This bill will change that. It will make sure that fusion centers bring together Federal, State, and local law enforcement and emergency management agencies to share information and protect communities. The bill further requires that officers assigned to these fusion centers create mass transit intelligence products. One of the key lessons of 9/ 11 is information-sharing is key to terrorism prevention.

I urge my colleagues to support this measure. The CBO has determined that this bill would have no significant impact on the budget. I also would like to pay special respect to the chair of the Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, who I enjoyed working with immensely

Mr. Speaker, I was unfortunately unable to cast a vote on rollcall vote 291 on Friday, May 18, 2012 because I was tending to a family matter. H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2013 does not sufficiently address the strategic or fiscal realities we are facing and I would have voted ``no'' on its passage. I would not in good conscience have been able to vote for this authorization bill that forces the Pentagon to accept $8 billion that it neither requested, needs, nor wants. Many weapons programs, like upgrades to the Army's ground vehicles, were funded not only above the

President's request but the Pentagon's. Some programs, like Block 30 of the Global Hawk, the Pentagon doesn't want at all. Funding for East Coast missile defense dumps money into systems that don't work against a remote, unlikely threat. Lastly, there are not sufficient safeguards in place to ensure that we are not only funding the right programs, but receiving a fair price for them.