Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the further consideration of H.R. 3219, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 478, as the designee of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), I offer amendments en bloc.

Mr. Chairman, the amendments included in the en bloc were made in order by the rule for consideration of division A of H.R. 3219 and have been agreed to by both sides.

Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment and urge its adoption, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman raising this issue.

I am supportive of efforts to ensure that the Department of Defense takes

responsibility for any potential contamination issues. That is why this bill provides more than $1 billion for environmental restoration accounts, nearly $48 million more than fiscal year 2017.

The bill includes an increase of $10 million specifically to support water contamination efforts. In addition, the committee provided an additional $57 million for those efforts in the fiscal year 2017 supplemental appropriations.

The committee has already provided a generous amount of funding to address water contamination, and the Department of Defense has assured me that they are addressing each side on a priority basis.

The amendment offered by the gentleman provides additional funding that the Department may not be able to execute, and the funding comes at the expense of the warfighter readiness account. Therefore, I must oppose the amendment.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I share many of the gentleman's concerns, and I appreciate him raising this issue. I support environmental remediation efforts that ensure that drinking water is safe in communities across the Nation. That is why this bill includes $1 billion for environmental restoration.

The amount represents $48 million more than the fiscal year 2017 level and includes $10 million above the request to specifically address PFC contamination. In addition, we include an additional $57 million for drinking water cleanup in the fiscal year 2017 supplemental appropriations.

This committee has included significant funding to address drinking water contamination issues, and I am concerned that the Department will not be able to execute the additional $60 million offered by this amendment; therefore, I oppose the amendment.

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

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his amendment. The amendment proposes to add funding back to the JLTV program, cutting the House defense bill due to a lack of information provided by the Army budget justification.

The cut to the JLTV program reflects the committee's concern with the Army's failure to provide the full budget justification information for an $804 million program. Failure to provide this information makes it impossible for the committee to exercise its fiscal oversight responsibilities.

However, the JLTV program is important to the warfighter and is executing well. I do not oppose this amendment.

Mr. Chair, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chair, the committee has no objection. The amendment's funding for major test facilities is critical to ensuring our military retains its competitive lead over our competitors. We are prepared to accept the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's concern to provide adequate funding for this very important research, and we have spoken about it. I am a strong supporter of funding for research in this area, and that is why the bill already provides $125 million toward grants for PTSD and traumatic brain injury research, including CTE, which has previously received millions of dollars in research grants under this program.

A previous amendment would create a new research program, focused solely on CTE research. And since CTE research is already eligible under the PTSD-TBI research program, it is much more appropriate to add funding to the PTSD-TBI program, rather than create a new research program. Therefore, I oppose the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his remarks, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, these important revisions have been included in several appropriations bills for several years running. They represent a strong and enduring consensus in Congress that Guantanamo should remain open and that detainees should not be transferred to the United States for any reason.

Striking these provisions would have unknown consequences for U.S. communities. It is impossible to know how many detainees might be brought here, where they might be held, and the impacts on communities and facilities holding them. It is also impossible to know what the potential costs could be.

Putting detainees in U.S. prisons, as the administration originally proposed, would be disruptive and, potentially, disastrous. Former FBI Director Mueller has stated: ``To transfer detainees to local jails could affect or infect other prisoners or have the capability of affecting events outside the prison system.''

The idea of bringing detainees for trials in the U.S. quickly collapsed as local jurisdictions voiced their strong opposition.

As everyone here is aware, several detainees who have been released from Guantanamo have gone back to the fight and killed and wounded Americans. The threat is real, and Guantanamo is already equipped to handle the detention and military trial of these individuals, as appropriate.

Any proposal that results in these detainees being sent to the United States, for any reason, is simply the wrong policy.

I, therefore, oppose the amendment, and I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.

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

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

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I join Mr. Franks in his remarks, and I urge rejection of this amendment.

Will the gentleman yield?

I want to thank the gentleman for his valuable contributions to the Defense Subcommittee. I join him in opposition to this amendment that would limit the Defense Department's flexibility to achieve efficiency and save taxpayer dollars.

I urge rejection of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, the gentleman proposes an amendment that cuts all funding for the introduction of U.S. Armed Forces in the hostilities in Yemen. U.S. Forces need the flexibility to enter any theater where terrorists target the United States. Just 2 months ago, American Special Operations Forces conducted a ground raid against al- Qaida's Yemen branch, killing seven suspected militants.

We consulted leadership at the Department of Defense regarding this amendment. The Department recommends a more thorough legal review of the implications of this amendment.

Further, the Joint Staff asserts that a U.S. provision of limited support to the Saudi-led coalition might be construed in this context as participation in civil war, in which case, removal of such support could have a damaging effect on the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia and create further implications for regional security.

With Special Operations fighting terrorism around the globe to protect our safety, does Congress want to show its lack of support?

This amendment is poorly timed and overly restrictive and has many unforeseen complications. Therefore, the committee strongly opposes this amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the ranking member.

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

Mr. Chairman, I urge opposition to the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, today we consider the Make America Secure Appropriations Act which includes the Defense Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2018. I ask all Members for their support of this very important legislation.

Congress' number one responsibility is to provide for the defense of this Nation. It is this bill that fulfills that most fundamental constitutional duty. This is urgent because the world is more dangerous and unstable than any time in recent history.

North Korea is increasing the frequency of their missile tests, threatening American soil and our allies. On the Fourth of July, they launched an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Russia continues to create instability in Ukraine, the Baltics, and the Balkans. They recklessly support and protect President Assad, the tyrant who has murdered thousands of Syrian men, women, and children. These actions hinder our fight against ISIS.

China is militarizing the South China Sea and modernizing their military at an alarming pace. Just this week, Chinese fighter jets flew close to a U.S. reconnaissance aircraft in an aggressive and dangerous manner.

Iran is increasing its influence in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, and they remain hostile. Just yesterday, an Iranian vessel pursued a U.S. Navy ship at a high speed in the Persian Gulf, forcing our ship to fire warning shots to halt the aggression.

Meanwhile, ISIS and al-Qaida terrorists continue to spread their perverted version of Islam across Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.

All of our adversaries are acting in an aggressive and emboldened manner. We must ensure that the U.S. military is prepared to confront anyone who threatens us. This can only be done by reversing the years of budget instability, sequestration, and continuous cuts.

Since becoming chair, I have made it my priority to listen first and foremost to our defense and intelligence experts, and this bill before you reflects their expert advice. This bill provides Secretary of Defense Mattis the resources he needs to rebuild our military and form a new national defense strategy.

It has been an honor to work with my ranking member, Mr. Visclosky, who has played a valuable role in this process. I want to thank Mr. Frelinghuysen, Ranking Member Lowey, and all the members of the Defense Subcommittee for their involvement and their contributions.

I would also like to thank the staff of the Defense Subcommittee: Jennifer Miller, Sherry Young, Walter Hearne, Brooke Boyer, B.G. Wright, Adrienne Ramsay, Allison Deters, Cornell Teaugue, Collin Lee, and Matt Bower; as well as Rebecca Leggieri, Jennifer Chartrand, and Chris Bigelow on the minority staff.

From the personal staff, I thank Johnnie Kaberle, Jason Schenck, Joe DeVooght, and Adam Kahnke.

In closing, I must remind the House of Joint Chief of Staff Chairman Dunford's words when he told us that ``without sustained, sufficient, and predictable funding, I assess that within 5 years we will lose our ability to project power; the basis of how we defend the homeland, advance U.S. interests, and meet our alliance commitments.''

To ensure this doesn't happen, the bill includes $28.6 billion above the President's request for a National Defense Restoration Fund. We must keep this funding intact.

We need to heed Secretary Mattis' warning and give our military what it needs--no less. This is not a partisan issue. Again, I ask all my colleagues for their support.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to attend votes in the afternoon of July 18, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 385; NAY on Roll Call No. 386; NAY on Roll Call No. 387; NAY on

Roll Call No. 398, and NAY on Roll Call No. 389

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to attend votes in the afternoon of July 18, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 390 and YEA on Roll Call No. 391.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the service of Colonel Thomas Tickner who is coming to the end of his assignment as the Chief of the Congressional Budget Liaison for the Secretary of the Army.

Tom is a native of Wayne, Pennsylvania. He received his Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering from Pennsylvania State University in 1990, his Masters of Civil Engineering Degree from University of Colorado at Boulder in 1999, and a Masters of Science in National Resource Strategy from the Eisenhower School, National Defense University in 2013.

Over the last year, Tom has made significant and lasting contributions while liaising with the House and Senate Appropriations Committees to provide critical resources for Army Warfighters. Tom and his liaison team worked closely with every appropriation office in Congress; ensuring accountability to Congress and our Nation's taxpayers.

Through 26 years of active duty, Tom has served in a variety of tactical, operational, and strategic assignments. In 1989, Tom was commissioned a Distinguished Military Graduate through the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps. He began his military career in the 326th Engineer Battalion, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) followed by an assignment to the 84th Engineer Battalion (Combat Heavy), Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, where he held company command. Following graduate school he served in various assignments with the Sacramento District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from January 2000 to July 2002, to include a deployment to lead the Los Alamos Fire Recovery Office. From June 2003 to May 2005, Tom served as the Operations Officer and Executive Officer for the 52nd Engineer Battalion (Combat Heavy), Fort Carson, Colorado, where he deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. From June 2005 to June 2008 he served as an Engineer Branch Assignment Officer at the Army's Human Resources Command followed by command at the Philadelphia District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from June 2008 to July 2010. Tom worked as the Military Assistant for the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) from July 2010 to July 2012. After graduating from the Dwight D. Eisenhower School for National Security and Resource Strategy, Tom commanded the Savannah District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from July 2013 to June 2015. Most recently, Tom returned from a one-year tour in Afghanistan serving as the Engineer Director for the Combined Security Transition Command--Afghanistan.

Mr. Speaker, as Colonel Tom Tickner moves on to a new assignment, he leaves behind a legacy of professionalism and friendship. I want to extend my thanks for his service and wish him and his family continued success in his future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, due to a personal conflict, I was unable to make votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 318 and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 319.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote on rollcall No. 313. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, due to a personal conflict, I was unable to make votes. Had I been present, I would have voted yea on rollcall No. 302, yea on rollcall No. 303, yea on rollcall No. 304, nay on rollcall No. 305, and yea on rollcall No. 306.

Mr. Speaker, due to a personal conflict, I was unable to make votes. Had I been present, I would have voted yea on rollcall No. 307

Mr. Speaker, due to a personal conflict, I was unable to make votes. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 300, and YEA on Roll Call No. 301.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a cosponsor of H.R. 60.

Madam Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 269 and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 270.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill.

This bill is where we take the first big step to begin rebuilding our military. The world is more dangerous and unstable than at any time in recent history. Iran, Russia, and China are increasingly challenging our vital interests and those of our allies. The threats coming from North Korea are more ominous than anything we have faced in decades. At the same time, terrorists from ISIS, al-Qaida, and their affiliates endanger our very way of life.

Our number one responsibility as Members of Congress is to provide for the defense of this Nation. Since becoming Defense Appropriations Subcommittee chairwoman, I have spent time talking to senior defense leadership to find out what they need to combat these threats. They have unanimously stated that the only thing our adversaries respect is strength and they need this bill passed to ensure our military is as strong and effective as possible.

The bill today brings total FY17 defense funding to $25 billion more than last year and $22 billion more than the Obama administration's original request. The bill includes $21 billion for critical military requirements, as requested by the new administration. The bill provides the resources for Secretary Mattis to implement his plan to restore our military so that we can fight the adversaries we face today and those we will face in the future.

Today we take the first critical step in Secretary Mattis' plan to fix the potholes in our military readiness. We do that by reversing the cuts to manpower proposed by the Obama administration and increase military pay. We provide $7.3 billion over the Obama budget to support operations, training, equipment maintenance, and military facility repairs.

We reverse steep cuts to equipment and modernization. The bill provides $12 billion more than the previous administration's request for additional aircraft, ships, vehicles, munitions, and all the other needs of our troops. The bill also adds $2 billion above the Obama budget for research programs to ensure that we preserve our technological edge against increasingly capable adversaries.

Mr. Speaker, we provide additional funds to support the healthcare needs of our military personnel and their families, including medical research programs. We provide additional funds requested by the President for a reinvigorated strategy to defeat ISIS and other terrorist groups.

I urge the House to support Secretary Mattis by giving him this long

overdue funding. We cannot turn our backs on our troops by forcing them to work under a continuing resolution. To paraphrase the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, there is no enemy that can do more damage to our military than a full-year continuing resolution. Our military is counting on us to pass this bill now. It is the only way to ensure the United States will be strong and able to lead in this very dangerous world.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize United States Navy Captain Mike Steffen and his leadership as the 11th Commanding Officer of Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base, which is located in the 12th District of Texas that I represent.

Over his naval career, Captain Steffen has served numerous deployments overseas--including two combat tours conducting special operations forward deployed in Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and earned a number of decorations for his service.

In August 2015, I was pleased to speak at the ceremony when he assumed command of Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base, Texas. Captain Steffen has since worked tirelessly to grow the base and ensure it fully supports the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps commands to help them prepare for deployment around the world in these dangerous times. He has also done an excellent job of fostering a spirit of collaboration to make sure the base and the communities surrounding it grow and thrive.

Fort Worth is proud of our nation's military and proud of our base. It's in our genes since the city started as a fort. Like Captain Steffen says whenever the roar of a fighter jet is heard overhead, ``Texans love the sound of freedom.''

Captain Steffen will be turning over command of Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base this month on new orders. He will leave the base well-positioned for the future. On behalf of the people of the 12th Congressional District of Texas, I wish him and his family fair winds and following seas.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Texas Christian University's men's basketball team on their National Invitational Tournament championship.

After a 12-win season last year, the Horned Frogs showed the grit and tenacity my hometown of Fort Worth is known for. They finished the season with 24 wins.

With their win over the Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets in the title game last week, the Horned Frogs capped off a memorable and historic comeback season. In fact, this 2017 NIT title is Texas Christian University's first postseason championship in school history.

I want to recognize the TCU players and coaches for a job well done. Go Frogs.