National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2022
Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding. I want to preface by saying that I do not agree with everything in this bill, but the committee-passed bill is worthy of support. I want to especially thank Ranking Member Rogers and…
Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
I want to preface by saying that I do not agree with everything in this bill, but the committee-passed bill is worthy of support.
I want to especially thank Ranking Member Rogers and Chairman Smith for their attention to minimizing extraneous provisions in the markup that have little to do with our national security or supporting our servicemembers. Our struggle to close conference last year because of these issues were wholly associated with provisions that are not connected to national security. And these attempts, I believe, were offensive, and similar attempts to include these unnecessary provisions this year should be rebuffed.
Unfortunately, Speaker Pelosi has not listened to the lessons learned from last year's conference and has decided to add several non-germane bills to the NDAA at Rules that have nothing to do with defense.
I want to make this clear for my colleagues offering these amendments: We should not use servicemembers as a tool to achieve partisan gain. I repeat: We should not use servicemembers as a tool to achieve partisan gain. And I voted in opposition to the rule, but I hope that I can vote for final passage of this year's NDAA.
As to the committee mark, we started with an anemic budget request from the Biden administration that in the Seapower portfolio requested only eight ships, two of which were fleet tugboats. How the administration can set China as the pacing threat and reduce Navy force structure is simply baffling.
Fortunately, with the leadership of Ranking Member Rogers and others on the committee, we were able to authorize additional funds to the defense top line to provide the real growth necessary to dissuade future conflict. With this, we authorized 13 battle force ships and rebuffed the administration's request to retire three cruisers.
Additionally, we sought to expand the submarine industrial base by authorizing funds that enable a submarine construction build rate of three by 2025. The mark also includes critical capabilities to support our Nation's deterrence with continued strong investments in the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine and the B-21 Raider bomber.
I think this is a good bill in its current form, and it is worthy of my colleagues' support.
MR. SMITH of Washington. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes just to address a couple things the gentleman from Virginia said.
I want to be clear, it is the longstanding practice of our committee that we take issues that are not in our jurisdiction. We have done it under Republican leadership. We have done it under Democratic leadership.
It is also the longstanding practice of our committee to work with the committees of jurisdiction, and only if in a bipartisan, bicameral way those committees of jurisdiction agree, does it ultimately go into the conference report. So you don't need to be afraid of stuff that you don't like. Work with
your committees of jurisdiction and it goes into the conference report if we get agreement. If it doesn't, it doesn't.
Second, last year that is not what held us up. The two things that held us up last year were one thing that was very much within the jurisdiction of this committee, and that was whether or not to rename military bases; to change the names of the bases named for Confederates, very much in our jurisdiction.
And the second thing was President Trump's last-second desire, out of nowhere, to add section 230 to the bill. We weren't held up by these things, and we will not be held up this year. If the committees of jurisdiction do not agree, we don't do it. We just have that negotiation. If they can, we give them a ride. So don't need to worry about that. It is a good bill. Go ahead and vote for it.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier), the chairwoman of the Military Personnel Subcommittee.