Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5122, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. As my colleagues have stated, this bill includes so many provisions important to our national security and to the…
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5122, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. As my colleagues have stated, this bill includes so many provisions important to our national security and to the fighting men and women who serve our great nation in uniform. Many of them are deployed in combat zones around the world today. I have visited servicemembers in Iraq seven times now and my commitment, like the commitment of this Congress, remains to do everything necessary to provide the heroes sacrificing for our country with the resources they need to fight, to win, and to survive. We continue our important commitment to their quality of life including to their families with this bill.
I take this opportunity to thank Chairman Hunter and Ranking Member Skelton for the work that they and their staff members have done to include within this bill provisions important to the people of Guam and to servicemembers who serve on Guam.
For many years leaders on Guam have worked to grow the capability and capacity of the Guam Shipyard, an asset recognized to be of ``vital strategic importance'' to the Pacific Fleet. We learned over the past year that twice as many vessels in support of our Navy are repaired in foreign shipyards in the Pacific, particularly in Singapore, than are repaired in Guam. We also learned that Apra Harbor in Guam is treated as a foreign harbor although Guam and its shipyard are properly treated as a U.S. location. This bill includes important language to remedy these conflicts. I am deeply grateful to members of the committee staff who traveled to Guam and Hawaii in January of this year to review this issue. I am also grateful to the many members of this committee who have visited Guam, including our colleague from Maryland, Roscoe Bartlett, and our colleague from Mississippi, Gene Taylor. Both Members visited the Guam Shipyard in March of this year and learned first-hand of the value the facility offers to the U.S. Navy.
In rewriting Section 7310 of Title 10, the Committee on Armed Services has made clear that Guam, including Apra Harbor, is fully and properly a U.S. location, and has further made clear that foreign ship repair for reasons of cost alone is unacceptable, particularly when shipyards like the Guam Shipyard are underutilized. Our first commitment must be to sustaining and growing the ship repair industry in America even if such endeavor costs slightly more money. We cannot depend on foreign yards or harbors in time of war for safety, security, reliability and availability. We must therefore remain committed to America's ship repair industry by ensuring stable work, and by extension, the stability of skilled workforce that is the backbone of the ship repair industry. On Guam this is especially true given that the Guam Shipyard represents a particularly important asset because of its strategic forward location. This bill makes a commitment to the Guam Shipyard and its skilled workers whom the people of Guam are so proud. This is a reflection of the great value these workers offer to the Pacific Fleet and to our national security. It is also a reflection of this Congress' unwillingness to outsource our national security. Finally, the language in this bill regarding ship repair is a reflection of the recently released Quadrennial Defense Review which indicates the growing strategic importance of the Pacific with increased Naval activity in the Pacific and therefore the likelihood of increased demands on facilities like the Guam Shipyard.
Mr. Chairman, I would also like to note that this bill requires a comprehensive study on the future of the Guam Shipyard. It is important that the Navy fully evaluate, during this time of change, how best to utilize, manage and grow the asset that is the Guam Shipyard. The report required by this bill is a responsible measure that ensures that the future of the Guam Shipyard is coordinated with the future of our Navy's national security needs in the Pacific.
Also included within this bill is an important provision that makes a commitment to our active duty servicemembers and their families. I worked closely with the committee and with military advocacy groups to secure inclusion of a measure to authorize servicemembers assigned to non-foreign areas outside the continental United States, areas that include Guam and Alaska, to ship a second personally owned vehicle to and from these locations upon assignment. This measure has long been sought by our active duty servicemembers. In an era when we say that we retain the family not just the servicemember, we have now passed a provision focused on the family. With military spouses pursuing their own careers and families venturing off bases for community activities, school commitments, and so much more, one car families are simply impractical--they are a thing of the past. Servicemembers assigned to non-foreign overseas areas, unlike their CONUS counterparts, are permitted to bring only one vehicle with them to their new duty station at DOD expense. This created a situation in which many servicemembers had to hastily sell a car prior to reassignment, usually at a loss, only to buy a new car on arrival at their new duty location, again at a loss. This activity as repeated upon assignment back to a CONUS location. This practice placed an unacceptable burden on military families. I am pleased that this Congress has made a commitment to end this inequity. I know this provision is broadly supported by active duty servicemembers and further has the support of The Military Coalition. I hope that this provision will be accepted in conference and remain in the final bill.
Mr. Chairman, a third provision in this bill is important to Guam and to a recently reached agreement between the United States and Japan. This bill repeals a measure added in law some years ago to prohibit the hiring of foreign labor to work on military construction projects on Guam. Next year $209 million in military construction projects are authorized by this bill to take place on Guam. Over the next ten years $10.3 billion in military construction will be undertaken on Guam. The concern is now whether Guam can deliver the workforce necessary to accomplish these goals on this short timeline, not whether Guam's workforce is being supplanted or bypassed by foreign labor. Therefore, this authorization bill offers the opportunity to repeal this restrictive provision. Its inclusion will ensure contractors on Guam will be able to access the labor market needed for them to compete for and complete government contracts for military construction in the future. Additionally, without the ability to meet the upcoming workforce demands, there is some concern that agreements recently made with the Government of Japan for relocating Marines from Okinawa to Guam on a set timeline would not be able to be realized according to the envisioned, desired, and agreed upon schedule. Ensuring the availability of a workforce necessary to accomplish the construction required for Marines to move to Guam from Okinawa is an important part of meeting both the workforce demand on Guam and United States international commitments.
I have also worked to provide relief to military retirees residing on Guam whom have been disadvantaged by a Department of Defense interpretation of standing law. Retirees on Guam are only able to participate in TRICARE Standard due to the unavailability of TRICARE Prime on Guam. Retirees on Guam were previously reimbursed for travel they were required to make to Hawaii or elsewhere for specialty medical care otherwise available on Guam. Now, in light of a change in policy some 16 months ago and unfavorable DOD interpretation of TRICARE laws, when a retiree is referred by their TRICARE health provider off-island to receive specialty care that is unavailable on Guam a retiree must pay ``out of pocket'' for their travel expenses. Travel from Guam to Hawaii is costly and this creates a large and unfair burden on Guam's retirees. Additionally, this situation results in inequitable treatment for the veteran communities on Guam. A retiree, having served at least 20 years in the military, cannot receive reimbursement for travel necessary to receive medical care available only off of Guam. However, a veteran receiving care from the Department of Veterans Affairs referred for off-island care is reimbursed for his or her travel expenses.
I have raised this issue with the Department of Defense several times and continue to work with DOD for an equitable solution. Retirees on Guam deserve some relief. While this bill contains provisions important to the TRICARE system for members of the military community, it does not specifically address the outstanding issue for retirees on Guam. I will continue to work to resolve this issue. I filed an amendment to this bill with the Committee on Rules that would have provided some relief to retirees. This amendment was unfortunately not made in order and cannot be considered on the floor today. This amendment sought to provide an interim solution. It proposed to give retirees the ability to travel on military aircraft on a space available basis to and from the location of their referred healthcare at an increased priority level. Retirees are currently in the lowest priority category for space available travel. I will continue to work with the Department of Defense on this issue.
Finally, the island of Guam has a robust military recruiting program and many Chamorros and Guam residents join the Armed Services. In fact, Guam has a higher per capita service rate in the Guard and Reserve than any other U.S. location. However, for quite some time, these men and women have had to travel to Hawaii to process their enlistments at a Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS). Included in this bill is language requiring the USMEPCOM to study the feasibility of establishing a MEPS station on Guam. The burden of processing each recruit through Hawaii significantly extends the time period for processing a recruit and adds additional cost for travel expenses. It is my hope that this review will lead to the re-establishment of a MEPS station on Guam responsive to Guam's Guard and Reserve and to U.S. active duty recruiters. I believe this would also reduce costs of processing a recruit and expedite enlistment.
I was pleased to work with the committee leadership to amend a current requirement in this legislation in such a way to require the Department of Defense to more closely evaluate the transformation it is undertaking of the National Guard and Reserve. It is important that the Department of Defense study closely how it will execute and fund Guard and Reserve transformation, including evaluating budgeting of the costs for equipment repair, transfer and procurement as well as an evaluation of the timeline the transformation will prove achievable. I have long advocated for full parity between active duty and Guard and Reserve forces. Transformation is an aggressive plan to achieve this parity although with significant reorganization of brigades and units within the reserve elements. The task, the cost and the risks must be fully evaluated to ensure transformation is achieved and that it is done in a way that makes our Guard and Reserve forces, who have shouldered so much of the burden in the war on terror, a better force. This transformation promise cannot be yet another in a long line of unfulfilled promises by the active duty components to their reserve counterparts.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I urge adoption of H.R. 5122.