Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the further consideration of H.R. 4870, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

I would like to join with the ranking member in commending you for this colloquy and for the purpose of the colloquy.

Mr. Chairman, as you know, we share, love, and represent a number of Ukrainian Americans, and we know their plight, and we salute your efforts. This is an important focus that you have brought to our attention.

Will the gentleman yield?

Let me thank my colleague from New Jersey for raising this important issue. We believe this proposal to be an extremely risky proposition because the KC-10 provides a particularly vital link in the air bridge that enables global operations of our Armed Forces.

We could not have done what we did in Afghanistan and Iraq without this vital link, and to retire the entire fleet would be a huge mistake. This is the only tanker that currently uses the boom to fuel Air Force aircraft and the basket to refuel the Navy and Marine Corps fleet. So it is darn important.

I appreciate the work the gentleman has done to bring this to our attention. We have included, of course, language in our bill which reemphasizes the importance of the KC-10 to national security.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Chair, I seek time in opposition.

Madam Chair, I would first like to recognize Mr. Moran's service on our committee. As just exhibited, in the full committee, he is truly a passionate man, and I must say he has been consistently passionate on this issue, but despite his passion and his reasoning, I stand in opposition to his amendment.

The provisions contained in our bill are the same as current law, and they have been carried in some form since fiscal year 2010, in both the appropriations bill and in the Defense authorization bill. Quite honestly, they need to remain there.

The provisions we carry ensure that the remaining Gitmo detainees who are judged to be the most dangerous will never be brought into our homeland, where U.S. citizens could be threatened. There is a pretty strong and enduring consensus--bipartisan consensus--in Congress that Guantanamo Bay should remain open, that the detainees should not be transferred to the United States for any reason, and that no facility should be built in the United States to house them.

As everyone here is aware and as it has been mentioned in earlier debate, a number of detainees who have been released from Guantanamo have gone back to the fight and killed and wounded Americans. The threat is real. We haven't quite left Afghanistan. The threats there are real.

I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment, and I ask the House to give it a strong negative vote.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, what about justice for the victims of those who died on September 11, 2001? What about justice for those five detainees that were released the other day in the prisoner exchange, how is there justice there?

They were among the worst of the worst. We need to keep the provisions in this bill. I urge a strong ``no'' vote on this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Byrne) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Let me first salute the gentleman from Alabama for his strong advocacy on behalf of the littoral combat ship, and let me say that the littoral combat ship plays an extremely important role in the future of the Navy's fleet.

In fact, the ship represents nearly one-sixth of the 306-ship fleet the Navy has expressed as its stated fleet requirement.

During markup of the bill, the committee spent as much time, if not more, on this issue than any other. In the end, we were extremely concerned with the strong words expressed by the Secretary of Defense with respect to the small surface combat requirements that these ships must have.

Since the littoral combat ship does play a vital role, we want to make sure we are buying the correct version. That is why we slowed the production.

However, we recognize the importance of the industrial base--very much so--and we certainly don't want to let that in any way stagnate, so we have provided funding for two ships to bridge the gap until the Navy can verify the requirements and incorporate them into the production line.

I do recognize that this is an important program for your community, and you have been a remarkable advocate. You have been on my case for quite a long time, and I am hugely admiring of your passion and determination.

I want to assure you that we will continue to work with you to address your concerns. We will continue to monitor, as we proceed to conference with the Senate, and we will work with the gentleman to ensure we adopt the right policy for our national security and the industrial base, including a very important shipyard in the gentleman's district in Mobile, Alabama.

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

Amendment No. 31 Offered by Ms. Lee of California

Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's amendment.

Madam Chair, I withdraw my reservation, and I seek the time in opposition.

Madam Chair, what is occurring in Iraq is complicated and dangerous and violent.

This is a complicated issue that the gentlewoman seeks to address with multifaceted policy ramifications that really cannot be fully debated in an amendment in this short period of time.

The situation in Iraq remains highly complicated, very dangerous, and does, I believe, and many believe, pose an imminent threat to U.S. and allied interests, particularly regional security; witness the fact that the President has sent over a number of advisers to either protect the Embassy or work with the Iraqi military.

This amendment, in my judgment, goes too far as it attempts to tie the U.S. Government's hands, i.e., the Commander in Chief's hands, in navigating the complicated situation we face related to threats emanating from Iraq, recognizing that half of the country is now in the hands of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

We have to be realistic. What this amendment would do is to remove any possibility of the U.S. engaging under any circumstance, even if such engagement would be in the best interest of our own country or allies. For example, this would preclude the U.S. from providing any assistance to the Iraqi Government to defeat a terrorist group inside Iraq, and it appears we may be on the verge of doing exactly that.

Given the ever-changing dynamics in Iraq and the rising terrorist threats coming from within Iraq--and again, almost half the country is in the hands of terrorists--this is a very ill-advised amendment, and I strongly oppose it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, this amendment sends, I think, the wrong message to the Iraqi people, who have suffered a great deal, and of course I recognize the loss of our soldiers and the sacrifice of our soldiers and their families.

I think this is a very ill-advised amendment and I strongly oppose it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I object.

Madam Chair, we do not oppose the amendment.

Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentlewoman's amendment.

As the gentlelady knows, U.S. military action in Iraq came to an end in December of 2011. I want to make sure that she also knows that there are no funds in this act for military action in Iraq, pursuant to the Iraq AUMF resolution. Its grant of authority has both practically and legally ended.

This amendment is an amendment in search of a problem, a problem that doesn't exist. This amendment is not about substance. To a great extent, it is about symbolism. It is intended to send a message that the United States has washed its hands of Iraq, which we haven't.

At a time when sectarian tensions are at the highest level since we left and terrorists have, once again, succeeded in capturing large swaths of territory in Iraq and brutalizing the Iraqi people after our troops essentially fought to protect them, what kind of message are we sending with this amendment to both the Iraqi people and to the men and women of our Armed Forces and our international armed forces who so valiantly served?

Let me repeat that there are no funds in this act for the purpose the gentlelady is seeking to limit. The only thing this amendment would accomplish is to make, quite honestly, a political statement.

I recognize, from time to time, that needs to be done, but I think it sends the wrong message at the worst possible time. I don't believe that such an amendment has any purpose on our bill, and I urge strong rejection of the amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, stay tuned as our Commander in Chief and our allies contemplate future action in Iraq. As things get worse, things go south, a lot of innocent people are killed.

I am respectful of the gentlewoman's passion and her continuing battle to get this matter straightened out, but the President is still going to request for Congress to look at things. I think we should stay tuned.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

We accept your amendment.

Will the gentleman yield?

Madam Chairman, let me say I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. But we appreciate the passion in which they make their case and certainly, Mr. Fortenberry, in the committee, did a very fine job recognizing congressional concerns regarding potential U.S. involvement in Syria.

Our bill, as you are aware, contains a provision, section 9013, which prohibits the introduction of U.S. military forces into hostilities in Syria, except in accordance with the War Powers Act.

The situation in Syria is as dire as you have described it. We have about 4 million refugees outside the country, doing incredible things, destabilizing one of our best allies, Jordan, in a huge way.

The ranking member and I had an opportunity to visit one of those refugee camps. We need to be mindful of the actions we take here and, perhaps, what we might be doing to limit the President's assistance and our U.S. support for one of our greatest allies, two of our greatest allies in the Middle East, both Israel and Jordan.

So I think we ought to move with caution. We understand your underlying sentiment. In some ways we agree with it.

We don't think we ought to tie the administration's and the Commander in Chief's hands in the way that you have suggested.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Department of Defense Excess Property Program provides surplus military equipment to State and local civilian law enforcement agencies for use in counternarcotics, counterterrorism operations, and to enhance officer safety.

It has provided aircraft, including helicopters and small planes; four-wheel drive vehicles, such as pickup trucks and ambulances that can be used for mobile command vehicles with search warrant; entry teams; it has provided vests and helmets to protect officers, as well as other equipment.

Coming from a State and a region which suffered many deaths on September 11, 2001, we welcome this equipment. It is not misused, and the law enforcement agencies in the Northeast and throughout the country that benefit from this equipment have used it to make sure that all of our citizens are protected.

I now would be happy yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Nugent), who is a former sheriff, for some comments.

I thank the gentleman from Florida for his comments and reserve the balance of my time.

I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Nugent).

I thank the gentleman for his comments.

Madam Chair, these are not weapons of mass destruction. What a ridiculous characterization, respectfully. These vehicles, these aircraft are used to protect American citizens, and the law enforcement community uses them wisely, and they are overseen by responsible elected officials.

I have registered my strong opposition to this amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding.

Thank you for bringing this important issue to our attention. It is important that we get this right, and you put a very personal face on something which needs correction to make sure we don't go through this again. I appreciate your taking up this challenge and doing it so well.

Will the gentlewoman yield?

I served on the Naval Academy Board for 5 years, and I know there is some issues in some people's mind as to whether this executive order either strengthens or weakens the case for rape shield, but I was appalled by what happened there. So I am supportive of what you are doing. There may be some arguments people may have as to whether you are strengthening or weakening it, but your desire is to strengthen and make this unacceptable behavior go away.

I am supportive of that and congratulate you on your efforts.

I was on that Academy Board of Visitors for a number of years. The inability of the leadership of that academy, and to think that this midshipman had to go through this 30 hours is outrageous, so I commend you for what you have put forward here.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

I oppose this amendment. This amendment, while disguised as a funding limitation, is really an attempt to put in place a major policy change that does not belong on our bill. It would essentially repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.

Let me be clear about what this amendment does. This amendment cripples our ability to conduct counterterrorism operations against terrorists who pose a threat to U.S. persons and interests.

In my judgment, this amendment dangerously and erroneously assumes that the terrorist threat from al Qaeda and its affiliates ends once military operations end in Afghanistan.

The terrorist threat today is no less real and, in many ways, is more daunting than it was when Congress overwhelmingly gave to President Bush and to President Obama the authority to protect us against those who want to do us harm.

While some would argue that core al Qaeda has weakened, as events in Yemen and most recently Iraq and Syria have not shown, we know that al Qaeda and other terrorist groups are on the rise. This amendment would end our ability to conduct any operations against them at the end of this year--inconceivable.

Core al Qaeda isn't the only threat. Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, operating out of Yemen, is now considered to pose the greatest threat to U.S. citizens.

This amendment would effectively eliminate the President's ability to address the threat or other emerging threats of AQ-affiliated and like- minded groups in north Africa, the Horn of Africa, and elsewhere.

If adopted, this would send terrorists the message that they just need to wait out the military authority to conduct counterterrorism operations, and then they are free to launch their attacks.

The President himself, with all due respect, has reaffirmed the need for this continued authority and uses it, I can assure you, each and every day. It would be a mistake to tie the hands of our Commander in Chief and our military by removing this authority that protects U.S. citizens and our country from terrorist threats.

I strongly oppose this amendment and urge others to do so as well.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Objection.

Will the gentleman yield?

I am pleased to accept your amendment.

I yield to Mr. Visclosky, if you care to make any comments.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

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

Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment.

This amendment is very vaguely crafted. It could have undue consequences. This very short amendment would make no funds available for ``the purpose of conducting combat operations in Afghanistan after December 31, 2014.''

Our bill contains funding for combat operations, not only for United States troops, but provides funding, equipment, lift, and sustainment of allies in the fight.

Further, within the overseas contingency operations funding account-- when the OCO budget finally arrives, and we have been asking for it for months--there will be funding for combat operations for Afghanistan troops, and I suspect other troops, American troops, or international troops, through what we call the Afghan Security Forces Fund. I think there is a degree of inevitability that that will happen. Certainly we are going to have troops there I think for some time.

This amendment, in my judgment, goes too far, as it attempts to tie the U.S. Government's hands in navigating the complicated situation we face related to threats emanating from Iraq.

Let's be realistic. What this amendment would do is it would remove the possibility of the U.S. engaging under any circumstances, even if such engagement would be in the best interest of our country or allies.

I strongly oppose the amendment. It doesn't make sense.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I am not actually opposed to the amendment, but I would like to talk about some of the assertions or allegations made by the gentleman, and I do that respectfully. I am not in opposition to the amendment, but I think there are some things that have been said that need to be replied to.

The National Security Agency has participated in standards setting with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, known as NIST. Of course, they would participate.

Wouldn't we want our Nation's best cryptographers to help strengthen and secure the Internet?

Their participation in setting standards is a no-brainer. You want the standards to be designed by the people who best understand the threat. They recommended the standards that they themselves use.

As the National Security Agency stated on September 30 of last year:

NSA is responsible for setting the security standards for

systems carrying and transporting the Nation's most sensitive

and classified information. We use cryptography and standards

that we recommend, and we recommend the cryptographic

standards we use.

We do not make recommendations that we cannot stand behind

for protecting national security systems and data. The

activity of NSA in setting standards has made the Internet a

far safer place to communicate and to do business.

Indeed, our participation in standards development has

strengthened the core encryption technology that underpins

the Internet.

The idea that NSA has deliberately sabotaged security is ridiculous. These folks know the threat we face and are helping to secure the Internet we all rely on so heavily.

Again, I don't oppose the amendment, but the assertions need to be rebutted.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I think the National Institute of Standards and Technology, aka NIST, has always enjoyed a good reputation. I served on the committee as a ranking member, and we heavily invested in the work they do. They enjoy an incredible reputation, and the suggestion that somehow they have lost their luster and their reputation is totally inappropriate, but let's move on.

I support the bill with the reservations that I have made about some of the earlier assertions that have been basically within the media that have been pumped up, maligning not only NIST but the National Security Agency, which I think does an incredible job of protecting national security and all of us.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

Let me thank the gentleman for his incredible service on the House Armed Services Committee.

May I say that the Defense Appropriations Committee has worked very closely with Chairman McKeon as well as with you, and as you know, our bill contains no funding for a future BRAC. I think all of us are still digesting the last BRAC and understand how expensive it was. I think it is important for you to know that we will repeat in our bill, through your amendment, what you put in the authorization bill, which would make it quite clear to the administration.

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

Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.

Our Nation has invested millions of dollars in building state-of-the- art, humane, safe, and I may say, air-conditioned facilities to detain and prosecute the terrorist detainees at Guantanamo.

In order to close that facility, we need to know what the President intends to do with those terrorist detainees who are too dangerous to release but could not be tried.

They had an opportunity to prosecute. What has been going on for the last 6 or 7 years?

How will he ensure that the terrorists transferred overseas don't return to the fight?

No way, apparently, he can reassure us of that because plenty have, and they have killed a lot of our soldiers in the process.

And what will he do with terrorists we capture in the future, like the one we captured the other day in Libya?

Well, we know what he does. He brings them back to this country, and they are prosecuted as common criminals, not as enemy combatants.

He hasn't answered those questions, so our committee is just as adamant as the authorizing committee in opposition to this amendment. I strongly oppose this amendment, and urge my colleagues to do so.

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

Let's remember the innocent people who were killed on September 11, 2001. How about justice for them?

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment. This is our Appropriations bill. There is nothing in this amendment about funding. You won't see one dollar sign or numeral. The goal was to change policy--that is why they are here--and the application of the law without the oversight of the authorizing committees. The authorizers ought to be dealing with this issue.

It is my pleasure to yield such time as he may wish to consume to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), the chairman of the Judiciary, to respond to this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger), the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 4870, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

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

Mr. Chairman, as we begin consideration of this important legislation, all of us in this Chamber want to pay tribute to the men and women of our Armed Forces--all volunteers. They deserve our heartfelt thanks for their incredible service and sacrifices, and that of their families. Everything we do over the next few days should be dedicated to them.

My colleagues, the fiscal year 2015 Department of Defense Appropriations bill was reported out unanimously by the full Appropriations Committee on June 10. This recommendation is a product of countless staff hours, 10 official briefings, and 13 hearings.

Most of our hearings related to assuring success and reducing risk for our warfighters in their mission. It is worth noting that one of these hearings was exclusively dedicated to taking testimony from Members of the House on their views, opinions, and priorities for this year's Defense Appropriations bill.

I want to thank those Members who took time to inform and educate the committee, as well as other Members who made specific requests.

At the outset, I would also like to thank Chairman Hal Rogers and Ranking Member Lowey for their support of our committee's work. As they know, this bill is a product of a bipartisan and cooperative effort, for which I thank my good friend, the ranking member, Pete Visclosky. He has been a valuable partner throughout this whole process. Thanks to all members of the committee and to our incredible staff.

The base funding recommendation is $491 billion, which is $202 million above the President's request and $4.1 billion above last year's enacted level.

As many Members are aware, the committee has not yet received the President's recommendation for overseas contingency operations--the OCO budget, as it is known--so we are forced to include a $79.4 billion placeholder in our legislation.

Our committee operates in a completely transparent and accountable manner, so clearly, this is not the way we wanted to proceed to the floor--with no details, with no context, with no facts for those accounts.

We have pressed the administration at every opportunity to get us the OCO plan. The administration has told us for months that it is finalizing its plan for the enduring U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, which will have a serious impact on the size of that funding request.

Three weeks ago, the President announced his plans for U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan beyond this year. The Army and Marines have already closed down bases and removed tons of equipment. Still, we have no request and are forced to debate a placeholder of nearly $80 billion.

While the Afghan Presidential elections are still unsettled, the leading candidates support the bilateral security agreement, supposedly the anchor for this funding request.

What is the holdup? We need to get on with it. I have to say that many people find it just a bit bizarre that the administration has proclaimed its opposition to the bill yesterday, when they have failed to do their job and lay out their game plan for overseas operations.

Whatever the recommendation we ultimately receive, we will closely examine their request because we still have troops and civilians on the ground, and no matter the number, they need to be protected.

Of course, we will also consider the deepening war and conflict in Iraq, the continuing disintegration of Syria, the aggressiveness of Russia in Eastern Europe and China in the Pacific, and the growing influence of Iran, increased terrorist attacks around the globe, especially in Africa.

While the administration feels the pending OCO request will have a great deal to do with our enduring U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, in reality, their request will have a great deal to do with our enduring role in the fight to protect Americans and our homeland from a growing list of global threats.

Even though we have returned to regular order this year, the committee faced many challenges in crafting this year's defense bill, but we have held firm to two guiding principles: ensuring that our men and women in uniform have the resources they need to defend our Nation and support their families; and, secondly, ensuring that the Department of Defense and our intelligence community have the resources they need to carry out their mission in the most efficient and effective manner.

Our goal throughout this bill is to support our warfighters, now and in the future, whenever the next crisis arises.

At the same time, our committee clearly recognizes the Nation's debt crisis. We found areas and programs where reductions were possible without adverse impact. Finally, it is important to note that we make every dollar count, without harming readiness or increasing risk incurred by our warfighters.

The bill before you attempts to meet those responsibilities within current fiscal restraints, while leaving no question for our allies and adversaries about our will and our ability to defend ourselves and our interests around the world. America must continue to lead, and this bipartisan bill enables that.

Let me highlight, briefly, just a few items included in this fiscal year 2015 Defense Appropriations request. It includes an additional $1.2 billion to fill readiness shortfalls; $534 million to fully fund the authorized 1.8 percent pay raise for our troops; $789 million to begin the refueling of the USS George Washington--a vital power projection platform; $5.8 billion for a total of 38 Joint Strike Fighters; $975 million to buy 12 additional electronic attack Growlers; $120 million to upgrade M1 Abrams tanks; $351 million for the very important Israeli Cooperative Program; and an additional $39 million for suicide prevention activities--$19 million of it targeted specifically to our Special Forces.

These are but a few examples of our commitment to the U.S. military dominance across the air, land, and sea, our commitment to our allies and partners, and our commitment to our servicemembers--all volunteers--and their families.

Mr. Chairman, I understand all--all of us do--that Americans are weary after 13 years of war. Despite the proclamations of some that al Qaeda and its followers have been decimated, the American people must understand the reality that terrorism is actually spreading worldwide.

Yes, our enemies have sustained serious damage, inflicted by the most skillful and powerful military intelligence organization on the globe, but in many cases, these enemies have adapted and grown to become even more dangerous.

We are witnessing an alarming collapse in Iraq. The central government now controls less than half of its sovereign territory, as it reels before a full-blown insurgency. The concept of an autonomous jihadi state or caliphate determined to attack the West is an unacceptable development that demands a response. We pivot elsewhere at our peril.

National defense is the priority job of the Federal Government. Our Constitution grants Congress the full range of authorities for establishing the defense of our Nation.

Our task in this House is to ensure that our military is ready to respond when the Commander in Chief calls. This legislation moves us towards a state of current and future military readiness that will protect America, and I urge its passage.

I reserve the balance of my time.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH18JN14.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH18JN14.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH18JN14.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH18JN14.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH18JN14.005

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH18JN14.006

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH18JN14.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH18JN14.008

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the full Committee on Appropriations.

I am pleased to yield to the chairman an additional minute.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw), a member of our Defense Subcommittee.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack), a member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to my colleague from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, my colleague, for yielding on this important issue. I agree that upgrading these legacy aircraft is vital to our Nation's defense. It is our job, as elected officials, to protect our citizens, and the mission of the Aerospace Control Alert aircraft does just that.

I will work to ensure that we include report language in conference, or take other appropriate steps regarding this issue, as we work through the appropriations process.

I thank my colleague and friend from New Jersey for bringing this vital concern to my attention.

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

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from New York's kind words.

The committee recognized that suicide remains a very serious problem in the military, particularly among National Guard and Reserve troops.

I am proud to say that our bill strongly supports the efforts of the services to address this crisis. The report includes language which speaks directly to the gentleman's interest in the pilot program that was created to treat servicemembers suffering from mental health disorders in the National Guard and Reserve components through community partnerships.

In addition, the bill provides $158 million in requested funding for suicide prevention, mental health, and risk resiliency programs for the services. This includes an extra $39 million for suicide prevention programs, including the $19 million specifically for our special operators.

All the military services have taken significant steps to make suicide prevention a top priority and to improve the resiliency and health of our servicemembers.

We support those efforts, and I will continue to work with the gentleman from New York and his colleague, Mr. King, to address these important issues.

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

The committee has a long history of support for international sporting competitions. Ranking Member Visclosky and I will work with you to ensure that the remaining prior year balances appropriated for this purpose are spent for their intended purpose.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.

I understand the Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office's mission is to provide the families of servicemembers lost in battle or taken as prisoners of war with information and, in applicable cases, to recover personnel from World War II, the Korean war, the cold war, the Vietnam war, and the Iraqi theater of operations.

I fully support the office and the work they do in searching and reuniting lost soldiers with their families. Returning the fallen servicemembers to their families is a priority, and I support your strong efforts and advocacy on behalf of Major Smith and his family. It is commendable. We honor it, and I thank you for bringing this to our attention.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.

Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes to amend portions of the bill not yet read.

The amendment may not be considered en bloc under clause 2(f) of rule XXI because the amendment proposes to increase the level of outlays in the bill.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.

Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes to amend portions of the bill not yet read.

The amendment may not be considered en bloc under clause 2(f) of rule XXI because the amendment proposes to increase the level of outlays in the bill.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Will the gentlewoman yield?

First, I commend you on your amendment, and I withdraw my reservation.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Further, SOCOM has provided no information or data to support this costly new endeavor, and Congress has raised questions in both the authorization bill and the appropriations bill about the affordability and efficacy of this program.

As our mark reflects, we have also raised serious concerns regarding SOCOM's prioritization of its requirements. Again this year, SOCOM proposed to fund their flying hour readiness programs at only 67 percent of their requirement, so they could fund these new contractors and facilities. They then made restoration of flying hours their number one unfunded priority.

I believe it is ill-advised to provide a 50 percent increase to hire personal trainers, sports nutritionists, and sports psychologists for special operators at an average cost in excess of $200,000.

With all due respect, all those who serve in our military--men and women, whether they be Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve or whether they are special operators--deserve the type of equipment and programs that keep them healthy and steadfast.

Mr. Chairman, we have $19 million specifically to address the high incidence of suicide among our special operators, so it is not only servicewide, but we recognize the special burdens that special operators bear through their incredible work.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the amendment.

Will the gentlewoman yield?

I withdraw my reservation.

We on the committee commend the gentlewoman for her concern for the health and well-being of all of our brave men and women in uniform. Taking care of the health and welfare of our servicemembers is of paramount importance and a concern to all of us.

I can assure you that both Mr. Visclosky and I will work with you as well as the money we put in our bill to address the concerns you have rightly raised.

I thank you for yielding.

Will the gentleman yield?

I appreciate the gentleman's interest in defending our borders, appreciate your raising this important issue, and we support your amendment.

Thank you for yielding.

Will the gentleman yield?

We on the committee thank the gentleman from New York for his concern regarding funding levels for traumatic brain injury, posttraumatic stress disorder, and psychological health research.

Just for the record, you should know that our bill does include $414 million, including a plus-up of $125 million above the request level of $289 million for all of those important issues.

We appreciate his work and his willingness to work with us, and we accept his amendment.

Will the gentleman yield?

The committee would like to thank you, the gentleman from Massachusetts, the gentleman from North Carolina, and your colleagues for sponsoring this amendment.

The $3 million would be added to the $3 million which the committee, Mr. Visclosky and I, put into our bill for similar purposes.

Will the gentleman yield?

We on the committee thank you for this amendment. Understanding your professional background and many of our constituents suffering under Alzheimer's, we are supportive of it.

Will the gentleman yield?

I am sure the ranking member and I would be pleased to work with you on this issue

Will the gentleman yield?

Let me associate myself with the ranking member's comments earlier. We need to see the amendments. We are not seeing the amendments on a timely basis. As a basic courtesy, it would be helpful if both sides were provided with amendments by our colleagues.

Relative to this amendment, for the last several years, the National Guard has not even been able to spend the amount of money we have provided for counternarcotics, but instead has actually chosen to return funds to the Treasury; hence, the adjustment this year to actually re-source the National Guard.

Also, for the record, Mr. Chairman, the intent of the gentleman's request is to purchase equipment. This account does not provide resources to buy helicopters. This account provides funds for the National Guard's States' plan, operational funding, it is not money that can be used to buy helicopters.

I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Will the gentleman yield?

The committee wants to commend the gentleman for his support of this program. As you know, this program currently operates, I think, at 65 military installations and facilities around the country. This would increase that amount. And what is good about it is military volunteers are, in their own free time and volunteer capacity, doing some remarkable things with these young people.

So we commend you for your efforts. I know I share similar views to Ranking Member Visclosky, if you would yield to him.

Mr. Chairman, could we have it read so we know which amendment we are working on? Otherwise, I will reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my objection.

Will the gentleman yield?

I can say, and I am sure my colleagues would agree, your service in the Congress has been enormously beneficial because you have been perhaps one of the strongest advocates on behalf of those with mental illness. And certainly, your service in the Navy Reserve as a psychologist is one of the reasons when you get up to talk, people listen.

So we are certainly accepting of your amendment and acknowledge your very, very strong and well-reasoned advocacy.

Our bill, of course, does make investments. This will make more investments, and we look forward to working with you and relying on your expertise and your advocacy.

I thank you for yielding.

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

Mr. Chairman, the President's budget requested $208.4 million for these Formerly Used Defense Sites. It is important to clean up these properties that have been used by the Department of Defense.

May I say, our bill already provides $25 million for the cleanup of such sites over the President's request, so the administration isn't looking for any more money.

While I sympathize with the gentleman's amendment, I cannot support his offset. I understand that his amendment intends to eliminate funding for the long-range standoff weapon, this cruise missile.

This program will provide a new air-launched cruise missile to replace a rapidly aging AGM-86. This is essential to our strategic deterrent and our ability to hold enemy targets at risk from standoff distances.

The Air Force requested $4.9 million for the program in fiscal year 2015 to continue studies and analysis in preparation for a formal acquisition program. This bill already takes a fiscally responsible $1.5 million cut from that amount.

In a year of tight budget, the additional funding the committee has already provided for the cleanup of Formerly Used Defense Sites will accelerate the cleanup of the sites and reduce the long-term government liability, which is important.

While I appreciate the gentleman's intent, I cannot support a cut that would eliminate a critical element of our military's future arsenal, so I oppose the amendment and urge a ``no'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, while I recognize the gentleman's concerns that the wounded warrior care program is effectively and efficiently monitored--and perhaps an outside group taking a look at it would not be a bad idea in and of itself--but removing $20 million from the aircraft procurement account, specifically that Navy account for Growlers, is excessive to fund a study that is really unrelated to the purpose of that aircraft. There are better ways to fund studies.

We can request the Government Accountability Office--and our committee would be happy to do that--to do a study, one that will certainly cost less than $20 million.

Additionally, the loss of funding for the Growler program will result in the loss of an airframe which is critical for the Nation's airborne electronic attack mission. We probably need more of these Growlers, rather than less.

So I would be happy to work with the gentleman on finding another source for an outside study, and I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the ranking member, for any comments that he may care to make.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation and seek the time in opposition to the amendment.

It is my understanding the gentleman is going to withdraw his amendment. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Thank you for talking about this very important issue. I appreciate it and yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

It is a small investment which this amendment would eliminate. We want to have air superiority for decades to come. It is money that I think needs to be kept in there. It would be a great mistake to move it. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Will the gentleman yield?

We commend you on your focus on prostate cancer and appreciate your limited remarks.

Will the gentleman yield?

I know all members of our committee appreciate your advocacy and obviously your special knowledge and view of spinal cord injuries. We don't get involved in the process of funding grants, but when you brought to our attention the fact that maybe larger sums within the grants might expedite some of the exciting things that are happening, it seemed to make sense to us, so I very much am in line with the amendment that you put forward.

Will the gentleman yield?

Thank you for yielding.

Our committee has long supported whistleblower protections. May I commend you on your two amendments today. You have got two in the win column and none in the loss column.

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, we have no objection to the gentleman's amendment. Personally, I believe in the nuclear triad. We have checked with the Armed Services Committee, which is the authorizing committee, and they have no problem with the language.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) for a colloquy.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman bringing this important issue to my attention. A month or two ago you brought me together with some national leaders that are involved in modeling and simulation, and it was a real education for me.

So like you, I do place a great importance on ensuring our troops have the best training and support available, and that is a very good way to educate them.

I look forward to working with the gentleman to ensure our troops receive the training and equipment they need, and that our Nation's defense needs are met in a fiscally responsible manner.

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

Amendment Offered by Mr. Garamendi

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation, with the understanding the gentleman from California will be withdrawing his amendment.

Well, I am a strong supporter of the Joint Strike Fighter and, indeed, the B-61. We are doing things to make sure that it is everything that we anticipate it should be.

I think the issue is worth discussing, but it was my understanding that you were planning to withdraw your amendment. Otherwise, I will make a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill. Therefore, it violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

The rule states, in pertinent part:

``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''

The amendment requires a new determination.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I have one additional comment. It is interesting that many of the press reports on this crisis situation--at least on the east coast--don't point out that many of these children are in military installations.

I want to commend the gentleman for pointing out that, while they are well kept and looked after in those installations, it is totally inappropriate that children be put in that situation and that the Department of Health and Human Services and the administration need to do a better job of finding housing alternatives.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

The rule states in pertinent part:

``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''

The amendment requires a new determination.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Will the gentlewoman yield?

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. I strongly

support her amendment. What was particularly galling in the Guantanamo transfer of these detainees was that the Taliban were able to choose the people they wanted released, and then the picture that we saw of their being greeted in Qatar by their terrorist brothers was enough to make you sick. So I am strongly supportive of her amendment. I am glad that we have renewed this commitment to make sure these people are not released anywhere. I thank the gentlewoman.

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

Mr. Chairman, let me stipulate at the onset that the A-10 Thunderbolt is a tremendous aircraft. We have heard it from somebody who piloted one, and certainly we are listening to our colleagues from the respective States that have A-10s, and they could testify, as I am sure others can, as to their value. But close air support is also provided--actually 80 percent--by other aircraft, and that has been true since 2008.

The Air Force itself has recommended the retirement of the entire fleet. It is not going to happen overnight. It is not going to happen by 2019. At some point in time it is going to happen because this is not about saving millions of dollars, this is about saving billions of dollars--nearly $4 billion. And the money that we will save will allow us to procure the next generation of aircraft.

I understand the desire to keep an aircraft that has been doing incredible work for 30 or 40 years, but it is time we look to the future and make that investment.

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

I yield to the gentlewoman.

I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

I reclaim my time, and I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

The rule states in pertinent part:

``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''

The amendment requires a new determination.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor OneGift Inc., located in the Town of Morristown, County of Morris, New Jersey, as it celebrates its 25th Anniversary.

OneGift was founded in 1988 by Leigh S. Porges and Anne DeLaney, and is dedicated to the memory of their mothers, Carol G. Simon and Ruth Ann DeLaney. The nonprofit organization helps adults who have been diagnosed with cancer to fulfill wishes that they might not be able to achieve on their own. Dedicated volunteers encourage positive thinking and help cancer patients focus their energy on getting better. They work closely with patients, families, and friends to create a memorable, worry-free experience for those who could not otherwise afford it.

Over the last 25 years, OneGift has created over 3500 experiences for adult cancer patients, their families, and their friends. The types of wish requests that OneGift receives vary greatly. Some ask for a vacation to a place they have never been, or a place they have not seen in years. Others ask for a family reunion or a trip into New York City to see their favorite Broadway play. Whatever the wish is, OneGift strives to make that wish into a reality.

OneGift has helped many cancer patients across New Jersey. OneGift caters to eight area hospitals: Clara Maass Medical Center, Morristown Hospital, Newark Beth Israel Medical Center, Overlook Hospital, Saint Barnabas Medical Center in Livingston, St. Joseph's Regional Medical Center, Somerset Medical Center, and Trinitas Regional Medical Center.

OneGift's volunteers work long and hard to make sure that every detail of the wish is addressed so that the patients won't have any worry or stress. All donations go straight to helping a patient receive the best trip or experience possible.

As it celebrates its 25th Anniversary, OneGift Inc. continues to help adult cancer patients fulfill their wishes as they endure their battle with cancer.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating OneGift, its staff, and volunteers, as they celebrate their 25th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Appropriations have until 5 p.m. on Friday, June 13, 2014, to file a privileged report on a bill making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that, one, when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 11 a.m. tomorrow; and, two, when the House adjourns on that day, it adjourn to meet on Tuesday, June 17, 2014, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. Speaker, on almost any day of the year, if you were to find yourself in the middle of Morristown, New Jersey, you would be almost certain to see a remarkable partnership being developed. You might notice a well-behaved, bright-eyed young dog wearing a special vest as it navigates, with a trainer, the crosswalks and sidewalks of the bustling Morristown Green. This dog is being trained to join a long line of dogs that have provided a ``seeing eye'' to thousands of Americans under the tutelage of The Seeing Eye, a remarkable organization that is marking its 85th Anniversary this year.

In 1927, Morris Franlc, a young blind man, read an article about dogs being trained as guides for blinded veterans of World War I. Mr. Frank decided to reach out to the author and dog trainer Dorothy Harrison Eustis for help. Ms. Eustis, who was in Switzerland at the time, agreed to help Mr. Frank if he could come to Switzerland.

He made the trip and a year later Mr. Frank returned to New York City with his dog, ``Buddy.'' Buddy and Mr. Frank captured the attention of many reporters as the two proved the ability of a guide dog and his master. This partnership among Ms. Eustis, Mr. Frank, and Buddy would launch an effort that would change the world for people who could not see.

In 1929, Dorothy Harrison Eustis, who trained the first dog, returned to America, and with the help of Morris Frank, E.S. Humphrey, and Willi Ebeling, founded The Seeing Eye, Inc. on January 29, in Nashville, Tennessee. Two years later, The Seeing Eye moved its headquarters to Whippany, New Jersey, and has remained in the area since then.

A few years after settling into their new headquarters, the organization decided to create a way to reach students, graduates, and other interes-ted people in order to share inspirational stories and updates on new developments and programs. In 1935, the Seeing Eye pubfished the first issue of the Guide magazine, which is published quarterly even today.

On December 8, 1941, the day after the attacks on Pearl Harbor, the Board of Trustees passed a resolution, ``to supply Seeing Eye dogs, without charge, to eligible members of the armed forces who lose their sight in the line of duty.'' Since then, these American heroes have been given priority over all other applicants.

The first women's donnitory opened in 1950, allowing women to become students at the Seeing Eye. Within the first year of the new dormitory opening, one third of the students were female.

In 1952, Warner Brothers brought the inspiration story of The Seeing Eye to moviegoers everywhere with the release of the motion picture called, ``The Seeing Eye.'' The Seeing Eye's story would inspire other moviemakers through the years.

In 1966, Walt Disney filmed the movie, ``Atta girl, Kelly!'' on the Seeing Eye campus. Jim Kutsch, the current president of the organization, watched this film as a young child. Years

later, after losing his vision to a chemical explosion, he remembered that movie and was determined to work toward his first Seeing Eye dog. Jim is the first Seeing Eye graduate to serve as president of the organization.

Twenty years later, Walt Disney Studios returned to the story of The Seeing Eye for another film, ``Loves Leads the Way.'' This 1986 picture depicted the story of Morris Frank and Buddy.

From the beginning, the work of The Seeing Eye has captured the attention of countless Americans, including several who called the White House home. In 1930, President Herbert Hoover met with Morris Franlc to learn more about his work. In 1948, Mr. Frank and his third dog (named Buddy III), visited President Harry Truman at the White House. In 1972, First lady Pat Nixon visited The Seeing Eye at its headquarters in Morristown. And in 1990, President George H.W. Bush named The Seeing Eye the 138th ``Point of Light'' in honor of its corps of volunteers.

One year later, The Seeing Eye marked several significant milestones, including matching its 10,000th dog with a student and hiring its first full-time veterinarian, Dr. Dolores Holle.

The Seeing Eye, Inc. has continuously dedicated itself to the goals of increasing independence and dignity of those who are blind, providing the best guide dogs possible, educating the public, providing ongoing assistants to both graduates and dogs, and to practice fiduciary responsibility.

The Seeing Eye Inc. is ever dedicated to their growing conununity through their continuous care of each individual, both human and canine. As the graduates continue on with their dog guides, The Seeing Eye, Inc. will ensure that help is always provided, as needed. The Seeing Eye, Inc. promises successor dogs to graduates, as well as sends trainers to homes across the U.S. and Canada to help with any training- related problem. This remarkable organization not only raises and trains the dogs, but also provides the best research and care for canine health and development.

As The Seeing Eye marks its 85th Anniversary, it continues to commit itself to providing the best guide dogs, with excellent health and training, and to sustaining excellence in their field while always seeking improvement. The employees, volunteers, students, graduates, and guide dogs, look forward to the challenges and excitement of the future.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating The Seeing Eye as it celebrates its 85th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I come to the floor to recognize the great success of strong local schools working with dedicated parents and teachers. I rise today to congratulate and honor a number of outstanding high school artists from the 11th Congressional District of New Jersey. Each of these talented students participated in the 2014 Congressional Arts Competition, ``An Artistic Discovery.'' Their works of art are exceptional!

Sixty-three young men and women participated. That is a wonderful response, and I would very much like to build on that participation for future competitions.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the winners of our art competition. First place was awarded to Lauren Sciscione from Nutley High School for her digital photography entitled, ``Oil and Water.'' Second place was awarded to Danielle Araneo from Whippany Park High School for her graphite sketch entitled, ``Wide Awake.''

Honorable Mentions were awarded to: Matt Einloth from Hanover Park High School for his graphite sketch entitled, ``Drawing Match'' and Amanda Greene from Pequannock Township High School for her colored pencil sketch entitled, ``In the Hands of Time.''

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize each artist for their participation by indicating their high school, their name and the title of their contest entries for the official Record.

Boonton High School: Giancarlo Venturini, ``My

Imagination''; Franchesca Lebrun, ``Danielle''; Amanda

Nardone, ``Vintage''; Mykhaylo Oreletskiy, ``Homage to Art''.

Chatham High School: Laurel Jude Monks, ``Twisting Through

Time''; Kristen Wu,

``India''; Grace Caroline Hauck, ``Choctaw''; Melissa Danitz,

``The Shawl''.

Delbarton: Matthew Caldwell, ``Vitality''; Matthew

Gambetta, ``Wise Guy''.

Hanover Park High School: Matt Einloth, ``Drawing Match'';

Alexandra Eveland, ``The Brush''; Amanda Baker, ``Saturday

Morning Sketches''; JamiLynn Rose, ``Nalipop''.

Hopatcong High School: Ann Marie Carroll, ``Self

Portrait''; Jessica Corujo, ``Distraught''.

Jefferson Township High School: Kelli Buchholz, ``Layers'';

Rachel Dorrothy, ``Self Portrait''; Emily Henderson, ``Sunset

in the Country''.

Livingston High School: Adina Cosden, ``Public

Introversions''; Sarah Tracey, ``Torn Apart''; Angelica

Patla, ``Diversity''; Gabriela Patla, ``Diversity''; Molly

Nagel, ``Avant Guard''.

Montclair High School: Monique Baltzer, ``Street of the

City''.

Montclair Kimberley Academy: Lauren Charpentier,

``Reflection''; Hannah Kramer, ``You never step into the same

stream twice''; Skye Volmar, ``Marcel, My Love''.

Montville High School: Tyler Becker, ``Desperate and

Respiratory Plight''; Christine Bochiccho, ``Songbird''.

Montville Township High School: Alyssa Turzi, ``The Bay'';

Amanda Zizack, ``A Place Beyond Our Years''.

Morris Catholic High School: Emily Du, ``Collection--Still

Life''; Marc Novillo, ``American Heroes''; Sean Painter,

``Les Miserable--Costume Designs''; Mario Wang, ``The

Capital''.

Morris Knolls High School: Zachary Antonacci, ``The

Apprentice''; Frances Kohler, ``Wrinkles of Time''; Judson

Kolk, ``Escher Inspired''.

Mountain Lakes High School: Casey Tang, ``Reach''.

Nutley High School: Tyler Schoeber, ``Conquered''; Lauren

Sciscione, ``Oil and Water''; Cassandra Rebutoc, ``The

Window''.

Parsippany Christian School: Troy Costa, ``Garden Prayer'';

Jae Hee Lee, ``Motherhood''; Daniel McMillen ``Surprise'';

Nicholas McMillen, ``LIFE''; Nicole Okamuro, ``Freedom's

Plains''.

Parsippany Hills High School: Annie Wang, ``Boy in

Reverie''.

Passaic Valley Regional High School: Eleni Chryssos,

``Longevity''; Ashley Lameiras, ``Prisma Color''; Julie

Roman, ``Untitled''.

Pequannock High School: Amanda Green, ``In the Hands of

Time''; Samantha O'Connell, ``Viral''.

Randolph High School: Josh Lane, ``Filigree''.

Seton Hall Prep: Christopher Giuliano, ``Sailing Away''.

West Morris Mendham High School: Kendall Smith,

``Punchline''; Michael Aromando, ``First and Foremost'';

Katherine Barlock, ``Nefelibata''; Kristine Mahan,

``Anschwellen''.

Whippany Park High School: Danielle Araneo, ``Wide Awake'';

Rebecca Hu, ``Obscure''; Shayna Miller, ``Self Portrait''.

Each year the winner of the competition has their art work displayed with other winners from across the country in a special corridor here at the U.S. Capitol. Thousands of our fellow Americans walk through the exhibition and are reminded of the vast talents of our young men and women. Indeed, all of these young artists are winners, and we should be proud of their achievements so early in life.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in congratulating these talented young people from New Jersey's 11th Congressional District.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Borough of Woodland Park, located in Passaic County, New Jersey, as it celebrates its 100th Anniversary.

The Borough of Woodland Park was created on May 1, 1914. The area which now encompasses the Borough began as a section of the Township of Little Falls, called ``West Park.'' In 1905, the residents of West Park, concerned that they were not being fairly represented within the township initiated a fight to create their own Borough.

On January 7, 1913, the organization proposed the establishment of the ``Borough of West Paterson.'' The proposed name of the new town was chosen in recognition of its location next to the City of Paterson, America's first industrial center and the birthplace of the American silk industry.

Little more than a year later, on March 25, 1914, New Jersey State Senator Peter J. McGinnis' bill, ``An Act to Incorporate the Borough of West Paterson,'' received final approval by Governor James F. Fielder. On May 1, 1914, a referendum was held, and the voters overwhelmingly approved the creation of the new Borough, by a vote of 194 to 20. Twenty four days later, the town elected its first Mayor, Councilmen, Tax Collector, Constables, and two Justices of the Peace.

In its early years, West Paterson's major economic activity was agriculture. The rich, verdant farm lands produced an abundance of dairy products, fruits, and vegetables. The neighboring City of Paterson, which was home to numerous wealthy silk manufacturers, began to see many of its most prominent citizens move to West Paterson to take advantage of its bucolic, small town atmosphere.

The presence of the Passaic River, which is a major natural resource for the region, helped attract many hotels, ball fields, amusement parks, and a racetrack to its banks in West Paterson. At the time, one of the leading amusement parks of the town was Idlewood Park. Other amusement parks also located themselves on Garrett Mountain, on the east side of the Borough, where the Garret Mountain Reservation is today.

As the Borough grew, the population continuously rose. In 1920, the population was 1,858. By 1950, it had jumped to 3,931, and more than doubled over the following decade, to 7,602 by 1960. As of 2010, the Borough's population had grown to 11,819.

As the Borough grew, the township's necessary municipal services did as well. Many of these services were and are made possible due to residents volunteering to carry them out. Woodland Park has a long history of active volunteer commitment to the community, reflecting the value that its citizens place on their town and their desire to continue to make it a great place in which to live and work. Over the past several decades, many townhouse and condominium units were built to accommodate the influx of people wishing to make this desirable community their home.

In 2008, the Borough of West Paterson changed its name to the Borough of Woodland Park. Supporters had been attempting to change the town's name for 20 years, and were successful during the General Election of November 4, 2008. On December 17, 2008, the governing body approved Resolution R08- 253, making the town's official name the Borough of Woodland Park, effective January 1, 2009.

Today, the Borough consists of a mixture of retail, office, residential, and industrial properties. A significant portion of the Borough consists of municipal parkland, county parks, and two reservoirs.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Borough of Woodland Park as it celebrates its 100th Anniversary.

Mr. Chairman, as you have so well articulated, the Nation owes an almost unrepayable debt to our men and women in uniform, past and present. As a result of their selfless service, we are absolutely obliged to deliver a full range of benefits that they were promised. That includes quality medical care for members of the military and our veterans at all times.

My colleagues, I want to commend the gentleman from Texas, the ranking member from Georgia, and their staff for their commitment to ensuring that there will be a seamless transition from the Defense medical system into the VA health care system through an integrated electronic medical record.

For nearly a decade, your subcommittee and our Defense Subcommittee have listened to a parade of administration officials tell us, first of all, they recognized the need for interoperability when it comes to electronic health records and, secondly, that we are on it. Mr. Chairman, they were not on it, and as a result, we have lost years as the VA and the Department of Defense struggled to develop either a single unified record or different but interoperable systems.

My colleagues, the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 mandated the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs were required to collaborate to create an electronic health record that would achieve interoperability and streamline the transition process from servicemember to veteran. Now, 7 years later, there is no interoperable record, and the original plan for the two Departments to use the same system has now been scrapped. The Department of Defense plans to acquire a new record system while the VA continues to upgrade its current one. Alternatively, the acquisition program for the Department of Defense has an estimated contract award date of the third quarter of fiscal year 2015 with initial operating capability by the first quarter of fiscal year 2017, nearly a full decade after the initial mandate.

My colleagues, this program has been plagued by inefficiency, poor planning, and apparently even less oversight by responsible members of the Department. The failure to make the significant progress on this issue is a national disgrace.

Thank you for yielding the time.

The failure to make significant progress on this issue is a national disgrace. Not only are the Departments squandering precious taxpayer dollars, but above all, our troops and veterans are suffering as they seek help.

Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you on this situation to end this debacle. It is inexcusable. We need interoperable records. We need the VA and the Department of Defense to work together successfully to serve our veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Homeless Solutions, Inc., located in Morristown, Morris County, New Jersey, as it celebrates its 30th Anniversary.

Homeless Solutions, Inc. is a private, non-profit organization whose mission is ``to offer shelter, services, and supportive housing to homeless and low-income people.'' They help those in need to rebuild their lives and become independent.

Homeless Solutions, Inc. began as an emergency men's shelter in Morristown, through the help of local clergy and business people. Originally known as the Morris Shelter, the organization housed ten men in facilities at the First Presbyterian Church of Morristown. Today, Homeless Solutions, Inc. provides 85 emergency shelter beds for men, women, families, and the homeless that are mentally ill. Since its inception 30 years, Homeless Solutions, Inc. has not only increased the amount of beds offered, but has also created many support programs and services, established the Housing Development division, and opened the Furnishing Solutions store.

The Housing Development division was established in 2004 to provide permanent supportive housing. Housing Development works with various municipalities to create attractive and cost effective housing. Due to its non-profit status, the organization is able to reduce building and project costs through grants, donations, and government project subsidies. The staff within the Housing Development division is selected based on their extensive knowledge and experience. Two of the most important qualities of the staff are their knowledge of green building and neighborhood context.

Homeless Solutions, Inc. opened Furnishing Solutions in 2012. Furnishing Solutions is a resale furniture and design store located in Morris Plains. People donate items they no longer need, and those items will either go towards shelter services, or can be purchased at reduced prices. Since the opening of the store, there have been over 100 volunteers who have helped to sell more than 10,000 items.

Homeless Solutions, Inc. has grown significantly since its start 30 years ago. With the mission to provide shelter and housing to those in need, the organization has helped thousands through the good work of its volunteers and supporters. As Homeless Solutions, Inc. continuous to grow and help the community, it looks forward to the challenges and opportunities of the future.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating Homeless Solutions, Inc. as it celebrates its 30th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor The Greater Morristown YMCA, located in Hanover Township, Morris County, New Jersey, as it celebrates its 140th Anniversary.

The Greater Morristown YMCA was founded by Dr. Frederick Owen and Reverend Thomas Souper on Friday, January 2, 1874. The two founding fathers held their first meeting in the Baptist Church located on The Green of Morristown, lasting until midnight and resulting in the Morristown YMCA.

The original location for the YMCA was a rented second floor walkup. The organization moved in 1881 to provide better facilities. After the purchase of their new building, a night school was created for boys and men. The purpose of this school was to teach reading, spelling, and arithmetic. During this time, the YMCA was only open to males.

In 1883, Mrs. Jacob Sutplen began the Ladies Auxiliary to help raise funds for the facility. The group became an instrumental branch of the organization, both administrative and social, yet women were still not allowed membership. However, this changed around the time of World War I, when the organization decided to open its doors to women part time, offering classes and exclusive time in the gymnasium.

During this period, the gymnasium was described as one of the most complete gymnasiums in the country. Not only was the gym well ventilated and electrically illuminated, but it also offered adjoining bathrooms with hot and cold water for showers. At this time, the building also included classrooms, game rooms, and a bowling alley.

By 1888, the Board of Directors purchased a new lot and building due to the demands of growth. In 1909, the YMCA moved to its third home. Its fourth and current location opened in 1981, located in Cedar Knolls. This facility offers four locker rooms, four racquetball courts, a full gymnasium, an indoor track, an Olympic-sized swimming pool, and much

more. In 2001, with the help of donations, the Morristown YMCA was able to increase the functional space from 37,000 square feet to 48,000 square feet. In 2002, YMCA purchased the property next door, increasing its size to 13 acres.

The Greater Morristown YMCA currently offers more than ninety free fitness classes, child care, an up-to-date fitness center, conference center and library, and much more. The employees and volunteers at The Greater Morristown YMCA continue to focus on growing and improving the Foundation to meet the needs of the community, today, and in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating The Greater Morristown YMCA as it celebrates its 140th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Market Street Mission located in Morris County, New Jersey, as it celebrates its 125th Anniversary.

The Market Street Mission ministers to those who suffer in the battle against alcoholism, drug abuse, and homelessness in the northern New Jersey area. The Mission provides its ministries through physical, emotional, and spiritual support that will guide those who suffer toward responsible and productive lives.

Established in 1889 by the Reverend Dr. F.W. Owen and his wife, Mrs. Louisa Graves Owen, the Market Street Mission began as a residential program for alcoholic husbands in the Morristown area. With support from the South Street Presbyterian Church, the Mission provided meals, lodging, clothing, and temporary employment for homeless men. Throughout its first decade, the Mission started support meetings and programs for the homeless and drug addicted.

In 1926, a series of explosions at the Picatinny Arsenal left many families homeless and without food or clothes. The Mission was able to help these displaced families by providing them with shelter and other basic necessities.

During the Great Depression, the Market Street Mission ended its affiliation with the Presbyterian Church and added the ``Industrial Department,'' a self-supporting thrift store that provided jobs during difficult economic times.

Today, residents of the Mission continue to work at the Industrial Department as part of the successful ``New Reality of Recovery'' program, as well as attend chapel and classes. The Market Street Mission has added an Emergency Assistance program that provides meals and lodging for disadvantaged men, women, and children. In addition to its growing development thoughout the years, the Mission continues to focus on alcohol and drug treatment programs, incorporating new treatments each year.

The Market Street Mission is proud to celebrate its history and looks forward to its continuous growth in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I urge you and my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Market Street Mission and their dedicated employees as they celebrate 125 years of serving the northern New Jersey community.

Mr. Speaker, every year, more high school seniors from the 11th Congressional District trade in varsity jackets for navy pea coats, Air Force flight suits, and Army brass buckles than most other districts in the country. But this is nothing new--our area has repeatedly sent an above average portion of its sons and daughters to the nation's military academies for decades.

This fact should not come as a surprise. The educational excellence of area schools is well known and has long been a magnet for families looking for the best environment in which to raise their children. Our graduates are skilled not only in mathematics, science, and social studies, but also have solid backgrounds in sports, debate teams, and other extracurricular activities. This diverse upbringing makes military academy recruiters sit up and take note--indeed, many recruiters know our towns and schools by name.

Since the 1830's, Members of Congress have enjoyed meeting, talking with, and nominating these superb young people to our military academies. But how did this process evolve? In 1843, when West Point was the sole academy, Congress ratified the nominating process and became directly involved in the makeup of our military's leadership. This was not an act of an imperial Congress bent on controlling every aspect of Government. Rather, the procedure still used today was, and is, a further check and balance in our democracy. It was originally designed to weaken and divide political coloration in the officer corps, provide geographical balance to our armed services, and to make the officer corps more resilient to unfettered nepotism and handicapped European armies.

In 1854, Representative Gerritt Smith of New York added a new component to the academy nomination process--the academy review board. This was the first time a Member of Congress appointed prominent citizens from his district to screen applicants and assist with the serious duty of nominating candidates for academy admission. Today, I am honored to continue this wise tradition in my service to the 11th Congressional District.

The Academy Review Board is composed of six local citizens who have shown exemplary service to New Jersey, to their communities, and to the continued excellence of education in our area--many are veterans. Though from diverse backgrounds and professions, they all share a common dedication that the best qualified and motivated graduates attend our academies. And, as true for most volunteer panels, their service goes largely unnoticed.

I would like to take a moment to recognize these men and women and thank them publicly for participating in this important panel. Being on the board requires hard work and an objective mind. Members have the responsibility of interviewing upwards of 50 outstanding high school seniors every year in the academy review process.

The nomination process follows a general timetable. High school seniors mail personal information directly to the Military Academy, the Naval Academy, the Air Force Academy, and the Merchant Marine Academy once they become interested in attending. Information includes academic achievement, college entry test scores, and other activities. At this time, they also inform my office of their desire to be nominated.

The academies then assess the applicants, rank them based on the data supplied, and return the files to my office with their notations. In late November, our Academy Review Board interviews all of the applicants over the course of 2 days. They assess a student's qualifications and analyze character, desire to serve, and other talents that may be hidden on paper.

This year the board interviewed over 40 applicants. The Board's recommendations were then forwarded to the academies by January 31, where recruiters reviewed files and notified applicants and my office of their final decision on admission.

As these highly motivated and talented young men and women go through the academy nominating process, never let us forget the sacrifice they are preparing to make: to defend our country and protect our citizens. This holds especially true at a time when our nation is fighting the war against terrorism. Whether it is in Afghanistan or other hot spots around the world, no doubt we are constantly reminded that wars are fought by the young. And, while our military missions are both important and dangerous, it is reassuring to know that we continue to put America's best and brightest in command.

Academy Nominees for 2014, 11th District Congressional District

air force academy

Justin M. Blumas, Roseland, West Essex H.S.

Jennifer E. Lam, Boonton, Air Force Academy Prep

Sean M. Lyons, Morristown, Morristown H.S.

Angela E. Martone, Lincoln Park, Trinity Christian H.S.

Michael J. Predojevic, Woodland Park, Passaic Valley H.S.

merchant marine academy

Justin C. Corio, Bloomfield, Bloomfield H.S.

Clay C. Dundas, Sparta, Massachusetts Maritime Academy

Zachery F. Flake, Denville, Morris Knolls H.S.

Seung H. Hwang, Wayne, Wayne Hills H.S.

Scott R. Johnston, Wayne, Wayne Valley H.S.

Tyler G. Macejka, Pompton Plains, Pequannock H.S.

Jennifer L. Pezzuti, Riverdale, Pompton Lakes H.S.

military academy

Chris-John H. Bosch, Wayne, Seton Hall Prep

Anthony Costagliola, Wayne, Wayne Hills H.S.

Michael T. Herbert, Whippany, New Mexico Military Institute

Daniel K. Iskander, Madison, Madison H.S.

Parker F. Meytrott, Montville, MAPS

Dylan V. Panicucci, Sparta, Sparta H.S.

John C. Phillips, Sparta, Blair Academy

Andrew S. Vena, Chatham, Chatham H.S.

Nicholas D. Wilde, Madison, Madison H.S.

Austin JC Williams, Verona, Verona H.S.

naval academy

Joshua C. Corbett, Mendham, Gill St. Bernards

Patrick E. Dugan, Morristown, Oratory Prep

Jacob S. Ferraro, Kinnelon, Kinnelon H.S.

Jack W. Frey, Sparta, Pope John XIII H.S.

Nicholas R. Maletto, North Haledon, Passaic County

Technical Institute

Michael B. Meisel, Sparta, Sparta H.S.

Nicholas A. Markferding, Florham Park, Seton Hall Prep

Michael E. McGlone, Boonton, Iona College

Dylan P. Pennell, West Orange, West Orange H.S.

Patrick K. Stanton, Hopatcong, Hopatcong H.S.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation to provide critical loan guarantees to Ukraine as it struggles against Russian oppression.

A large and proud Ukrainian community has been part of my congressional district for well over a century. Initially, Ukrainians came to New Jersey in waves of immigration because of persecution under the czars, then later after the Soviet Union crushed an independent Ukraine in the 1920s.

Yes, from the days of my youth I have come to understand that Ukrainians have always cherished freedom almost more than any descendants of other Nations, peoples, and cultures. Even after living in America for decades, they remain devoted to their homeland, to independence.

Fiercely proud of their independent Nation, my constituents are now watching history repeat itself as Vladimir Putin occupies Crimea, and seems to be threatening other parts of eastern and southern Ukraine.

Mr. Speaker, the people have the right and obligation to decide what they feel is best for their Nation--either closer ties to the EU, the European Community, and the West, or shift back to Russia. That is their choice, and it cannot and must not be decided through the force of arms.

Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, I am pleased that the President has proposed and the House will soon approve these loan guarantees for Ukraine. This measure is not enough. The Ukrainian people need strong leadership from the United States.

This bill sends the right message, it sends the needed loan guarantees, and I urge strong support for its passage.