Summary:
All articles in House section
FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
(House of Representatives - May 17, 2000)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages H3193-
H3274]
FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 503 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill,
H.R. 4205.
{time} 1229
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(
H.R. 4205) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for
military activities of the Department of Defense and for military
construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year
2001, and for other purposes, with Mr. Boehner in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence).
{time} 1230
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, on May 10, the Committee on Armed Services
reported this bill,
H.R. 4205, on a strong bipartisan vote of 56 to 1.
This bill, the first defense authorization bill prepared for the new
millennium, makes a good start toward ensuring that America's military
can meet the challenges that lie ahead and ensure the safety and
security of all Americans well into the 21st century. However, it is
only a beginning, not an end.
In recent years, the committee has called attention to the problems
faced by the men and women who so proudly serve their country in
uniform. Serious readiness deficiencies and equipment modernization
shortfalls, made worse by longer and more frequent deployments away
from home, have placed increasing strains on a military that is still
being asked to do more with less. Moreover, the increasing use of
America's Armed Forces on missions where vital United States national
security interests are not at stake has reduced military readiness and
affected recruiting, retention and morale.
The defense bill before us today seeks to correct many of these
problems. It is the fifth year out of the last six in which Congress
has added to the administration's budget request. I am pleased to
report that, in real terms, after more than a decade of decline in
defense spending, this downward spiral has finally been halted.
Nevertheless, although this bill contains $309.9 billion for defense,
an increase of $4.5 billion over the administration's defense budget
request, a serious mismatch between requirements, forces and resources
continues to exist.
This bill seeks to address the most critical deficiencies faced by
our military today. While some would argue that the end of the Cold War
allows us to cut defense further, the bill we are debating today must
be seen in proper perspective. In reality, the level of resources we
devote to defense remains at an historically low level, roughly 3
percent of this Nation's gross domestic product. This is hardly an
exorbitant price to pay to defend our freedom, our values and our
national interests around the world.
Moreover, the threats we face today are in many ways more difficult
and challenging than those we faced during the Cold War. The increasing
number of states seeking to develop or acquire weapons of mass
destruction, chemical, biological, bacteriological and ballistic
missiles, against which we have no defense, poses a qualitatively new
set of challenges to our national security. Other threats are emerging;
new forms of terrorism, the outbreak of long suppressed ethnic
conflicts, and the spread of sophisticated military technologies to
potential adversaries.
While the United States remains the world's sole military superpower,
we need to adapt to the changing realities and threats that we face in
the new millennium. This requires a growing level of investment in the
tools and the people necessary to keep our country at least one step
ahead of any potential adversary.
As former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger testified recently
before our committee, ``We are resting on our laurels as the sole
superpower.'' He noted that under the administration's current and
planned levels of defense funding, the United States would be unable to
sustain even our current level of military capability. ``This is
[[Page
H3194]]
not a matter of opinion,'' he said, ``it is a matter of simple
arithmetic.''
In fact, the administration has underfunded the United States defense
effort for years. This year alone, the Joint Chiefs of Staff identified
nearly $6 billion in unfunded military requirements. Since last year,
the Chiefs' 5-year estimate of shortfalls has increased from $38
billion to $84 billion. The result of this chronic underfunding has
been an increase in risk to our country, risk to our interests, and
risk to the men and women who defend us. The time has come to reduce
that risk.
This year's debate over the defense budget highlighted a general
consensus that our defense spending has fallen too far too fast. During
the Committee on Armed Services' oversight hearing earlier this year,
the real debate revolved not around whether there is a defense
shortfall, but rather its size, magnitude and implications. Some
observers have characterized the current situation as a coming ``train
wreck.''
Mr. Chairman, this bill is designed to help put America's defenses
back on track. In overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion, the committee has
targeted increases to the administration's budget request on a series
of initiatives to improve readiness, modernize equipment, and enhance
quality of life for our Armed Forces. This bill represents a sound
approach to defense policy that bases the level of resources we provide
on the magnitude of the threats that we face. It is based on a strategy
that seeks to protect America's interests abroad and ensure America's
safety at home. This bill is tailored to provide the minimum level of
resources necessary to carry out our country's global responsibilities.
In a moment, my colleagues on the Committee on Armed Services will
discuss the improvements contained in this bill in greater detail.
However, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the hard
work and support of the chairmen and ranking members of our committees
and subcommittees and the panels. Their strong leadership and
bipartisan commitment to ensuring the best for our service personnel
resulted in the bill that we have before us today. It is a tribute to
their dedication and commitment.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to pay tribute to the
Committee on Armed Services staff. In my 6 years as committee chairman,
I and the other members of the committee have been fortunate to be able
to rely upon their expertise and professionalism. I thank them for
their tireless efforts and support of the committee and our Nation's
military.
Mr. Chairman, this is likely the last defense authorization bill I
will submit to the House as chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services. I have worked very hard to see to it that our military is
second to none, not second to one. I am proud of what we have
accomplished in this bill, and I believe it deserves the support of all
Members. I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to support
H.R. 4205, which is known as the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2001. This is not only a good bill and deserves the support of the
people in this House, it is named for an outstanding American, the
chairman of Our Committee on Armed Services, who, through the years,
has done yeoman's work. As the gentleman mentioned a few moments ago,
this is the last time he will present as chairman the bill coming from
our committee. We thank him for his excellent leadership and
bipartisanship through the years.
Mr. Chairman, at the outset, I would like to thank the gentleman for
the work he did on this particular bill. All of us have worked hard on
it and it has been glued together quite well. I will talk of the
exceptions a moment later. But this bill would authorize $310 billion
for defense programs, including $13 billion for the Department of
Energy defense-related programs. It authorizes a funding level of $4.5
billion above the President's request, which, of course, was $13
billion above last year's level. The bill makes a number of vital
readiness and modernization improvements which will keep our forces the
best trained and best equipped in the world.
The bill also addresses important qualities of life issues that are
at the top of agenda for service members and their families. It gives a
much needed 3.7 percent pay raise, plus a number of key improvements in
the military health care system that will benefit service members and
their families as well as military retirees.
Mr. Chairman, last year was ``the Year of the Troops.'' Congress was
successful in enacting a number of pay and compensation reforms that
have helped to close the pay gap between the military and civilian
society that makes the military a more attractive career choice in a
difficult recruiting environment.
Mr. Chairman, this year is ``the Year of Health Care.'' I am pleased
that the bill provides a number of important health care reforms.
Foremost is the reform to the TRICARE pharmacy benefit. The bill's
provisions authorizing mail order, retail and non-network pharmacy
access for Medicare-eligible retirees goes a long way toward affording
greater health care access and affordability for military retirees. The
bill helps us keep the promise of lifetime health care made to those
service members.
Other major elements of the bill that are noteworthy include
provision of adequate funding to support the Army's transformation to a
lighter, more mobile force, the transition to the next generation of
Nimitz-class aircraft carriers, and continued funding for tactical
aircraft programs. This also makes significant investments in
information technology and information infrastructure.
I do, however, want to express my disappointment, Mr. Chairman, with
the language of the bill regarding the Island of Vieques. The best way
to ensure that the Navy will have access to this important training
area in the long run is to support the agreement worked out between the
President and the Governor of Puerto Rico. This agreement gives the
people of Vieques a voice in the future of the area and provides
economic incentives to allow the Navy to continue live fire training
there. The language in the Chairman's mark would do nothing short of
gutting that agreement.
I know that all of us here today care deeply about the readiness of
our Navy and Marine forces. I think it is fair to say there is
generally a shared desire that this range be returned to its previous
use. However, I believe that only through the implementation of the
agreement between the President and the Governor of Puerto Rico will
all sides to the dispute be accommodated and the range returned to the
use of the military. I fear that the language in this mark will cause
us to squander that opportunity, and I hope the Committee on Rules will
make in order my amendment to correct this ill-advised provision.
Also, Mr. Chairman, I wish to express my disappointment thus far that
the rule does not allow the amendment of the gentleman from Mississippi
(Mr. Taylor) regarding military retirees and Medicare subvention. More
about that later in the debate, but that is extremely important, and I
hope that the second rule will include it.
On balance, this is a good bill. I believe Members should support it.
I sincerely hope that the process under which the bill is considered
will permit the House to work its will on important issues such as
Medicare subvention and the Island of Vieques.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Bateman), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Military
Readiness, and also the Merchant Marine Panel.
Mr. BATEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina
for yielding me time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2001, and am indeed very proud of the fact it is
being named for the chairman of our full committee.
{time} 1245
The committee has, once again, given the funding restraints it faced,
done an outstanding job in fulfilling its role of oversight of the
Department of Defense, and it has done its best to provide the
necessary funding to improve readiness of our military forces.
Does this bill contain enough funding to fix all of our readiness
problems?
[[Page
H3195]]
Unfortunately, no. Does the funding recommended in this bill take us in
the right direction toward improving readiness? Absolutely.
Mr. Chairman, the administration began to publicly express concern
that military readiness was on the decline in October of 1998, though
my subcommittee found very serious readiness problems as early as 1996.
Since then, our military leaders have continued to report to Congress
that the annual budget requests are significantly short of critical
funding. Again, this year the budget request is over $16 billion short
in many critical areas. Unfortunately for our military, the
administration has once again provided a budget that is longer on
rhetoric than it is on substance.
To address the shortages in the budget request, the committee
carefully reviewed the unfunded requirements identified to us in the
Congress by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or the members of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff. The committee review found that most of the unfunded
requirements for day-to-day military operations are spare parts, depot
maintenance and facility maintenance, accounts that should be fully
funded every year.
Due to the successful efforts of the gentleman from South Carolina
(Mr. Spence) and other Members of the committee, additional funds above
the budget requests were made available for many of these pressing
readiness imperatives.
I want to quickly outline those readiness areas of greatest concern
where we were able to increase the level of funding beyond the
President's request. The bill recommends an increase of $660 million
for real property maintenance; $257 million for depot maintenance; $204
million for ship depot maintenance; $157 million for training and
training range improvements; $91 million for war readiness materials so
our military can deploy more rapidly and efficiently; and $45 million
for deployment of spare parts for aircraft squadrons.
This bill provides for several readiness reporting initiatives that
will assist military leaders to ensure that we maintain the best-
trained, best-equipped and most effective force in the world. To do
anything less will allow the readiness of our military to slip further
and could risk the lives of countless men and women in every branch of
the service.
Mr. Chairman,
H.R. 4205 is a responsible, meaningful bill that fairly
allocates resources for the sustainment of readiness and an improved
quality of life for the men and women of our military forces. I
strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes on this bill, vote yes to
maintain military readiness.
I would like to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), the
ranking minority member of the subcommittee and, in fact, thank all the
Members of the subcommittee who, throughout my tenure as its chairman,
have made it possible for us to operate in a thoroughly and totally
bipartisan manner. They have been truly partners in all that we have
done, and also to thank very deeply and sincerely the staff of the
subcommittee for their good work.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Sanchez), an outstanding member of our committee.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the House Committee on
Armed Services, I rise in strong support of the national defense
authorization bill,
H.R. 4205. I would like to thank the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and my ranking member, the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the committee staff for all the hard work
they have done on this bill. This year's bill makes great strides
towards improving modernization, quality of life and military
readiness, all within the confines of the budget caps. One area I am
particularly pleased with are the improvements we have made to military
health care, and I would like to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr.
Buyer) and the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie) for their
exemplary work addressing health care shortcomings, specifically the
TRICARE health care system and lack of permanent health care for the
military retirees.
Although this bill makes significant inroads, there is still a lot of
work that needs to be done. Recruiting and retention are becoming
problematic, with fewer seeing the call to duty during these prosperous
times. While this bill makes improvements in military compensation, do
the younger service members fully understand the value of their total
compensation, that beyond their basic pay? Benefits this Congress has
worked hard to provide, such as health care, housing and retirement,
have a significant value, and I hope that the Department of Defense
will do a better job informing service members of the value of these
and other benefits received.
Finally, I would like to bring attention to research and development
funding. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Pickett) did heroic work in improving the R
accounts, specifically science and technology. R is the future of
this Nation's defense. We should not be stealing from our future to pay
for the current year's shortfalls.
R is critical in maintaining the technological edge for combatting
the growing and changing threats to this Nation's security. This bill
restores R accounts to acceptable levels.
In closing, I commend all the committee chairs, ranking members, the
staff for working within the confines of this budget resolution to
produce a bipartisan bill that goes a long way towards strengthening
our Nation's defense, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert)
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of
H.R. 4205.
Mr. Chairman, I am in full support of this important legislation that
honors our men and women serving our nation's armed services. I believe
this bill properly addresses the needs of our servicemen and women by
providing needed quality of life programs and revamping the procurement
shortfalls our military has been suffering since the Kosovo campaign.
I am particularly thankful to Chairman Spence and the Armed Services
Committee for their continued support of the C-17 Globemaster. This
legislation contains language focusing on the aging C-141 aircraft
fleet and replacing this aircraft with C-17's. This legislation directs
the Secretary of the Air Force to consider placing C-17's at bases with
reserve units, especially those that could accommodate a reverse-
associated unit, like March Air Reserve Base in Riverside, CA.
Mr. Chairman, I believe this bill is good for U.S. servicemen and
women, good for the national security needs of our country and a sound
investment for the people of the United States.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Military
Procurement.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank our chairman, the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), for whom the bill is named, and our
ranking member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for the great
bipartisan leadership that they gave us, and my great colleague and
partner, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sisisky), who worked with me
on the Subcommittee on Military Procurement to try to do what was right
for the troops.
One thing that we derived from our hearings was that we are still
badly underfunded. Whether one ascribes to the GAO recommendation or
their evaluation that we are $20 billion to $30 billion per year
underfunded in modernization or Bill Perry, President Clinton's own
Secretary of Defense, that it is somewhere closer to $15 to $20
billion, or even former Secretary Jim Schlesinger that it may be close
to $100 billion per year short, we acknowledge that we are short, that
we need to modernize the force and we have a lot of programs that are
aging.
Now, we carried out a number of programs this year. It is a fairly
vast piece of the defense bill. A couple of things that we worked on
that were important were ammunition and precision munitions. We took
the lessons of Kosovo and the most recent conflicts in which precision
munitions, coupled with our tactical and long range aircraft and
stealth aircraft that provided great power projection, so we tried to
shore up the precision munition and ammunition accounts. We think that
is important.
We preserve the submarine option for the next President; that is, if
he feels that the 50 submarines that the administration is moving
toward attack submarines is not enough, that he can retain some of the
688s that were going
[[Page
H3196]]
to be decommissioned. So we left money in there for the early work on
refueling for the 688s, refuelings that would allow them to continue to
march, and also we left some early money in for changing the boomers,
the so-called boomers, or the ballistic missile submarines, to cruise-
missile carrying submarines. It gives us great power projection
capability.
We sustained those options for the next President, should he decide
to go in that direction.
We moved this extra money around and tried to solve as many of the
$16 billion in shortages that the services gave us as we could with the
money we had available.
I want to thank again the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sisisky) for
his great partnership and help in getting that done.
So I would say to my colleagues, I think we at least held the bar
without slipping this year. We need to put more money in next year. We
are at least treading water. We are still very short in the procurement
accounts, Mr. Chairman, but we are going to keep the wheels turning
with this budget.
I would urge all Members to vote for this bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Sisisky), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on
Military Procurement.
(Mr. SISISKY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SISISKY. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to congratulate
the chairman of the full committee. He has been chairman now, my
chairman, for 6 years. The love for the military and the love for his
State and his country has just shone through and I, on behalf of the
people that I represent, want to thank him for his service, and also to
the ranking member who has been very good and very easy to deal with.
I would like to follow the remarks of the gentleman from California
(Mr. Hunter) and say that I do not always find it easy to follow him,
and I mean that in the kindest way, but in this case he has laid out a
sound synopsis of the procurement title. As noted, we made a simple
rule to govern consideration of changes to the President's budget: What
does the military need? And that one question took precedence over all
other considerations.
No House Member can be unaware of the high operational tempo that
U.S. forces face around the globe. That tempo is hard for the troops,
hard for their families, and hard for the equipment as well. We took it
as a point of honor to give the military services what they told us
they needed, not in the complete dollars, because we did not have the
complete dollars, but I should note that in addition to an
administration request for over $60 billion for procurement, with $2.6
billion added from the Committee on the Budget allocations, Members
requested, that is, our Members here, $13 billion in potential add-ons.
Mr. Chairman, I compliment them on their devotion to national
security and, of course, also their creativity, as the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter) well knows. I am pleased to assure my
colleagues that the chairman and his staff were scrupulously fair in
dealing with the minority Members throughout this process, and I
believe that fairness is borne out by a lack of amendments seeking to
make major changes in the work of the Subcommittee on Military
Procurement.
I wish Americans who have a jaded view of Congress could see how this
subcommittee works. It is bipartisan and it is fair.
Finally, I would like to thank the many Members on both sides of the
aisle who voted to add funds, and that is the important thing to add
funds, to this year's defense bill. They made it possible for this
title to be both responsive to the needs of our service personnel and
responsible to the taxpayers who support them.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Hefley), who is the chairman of our Subcommittee on
Military Installations and Facilities.
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, let me say I have been through several
chairmen of this committee. I have been through chairmen that were
partisan. I have been through chairmen that were contentious. I have
never had a chairman like the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Spence), who can finesse this thing with courtesy and respect for every
single Member of the committee, be they Democrat or Republican. I want
to say thanks to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) for the
way he has handled himself. He is a testimony of why we should not have
terms limits for committee chairmen.
Beyond that, down to business, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 4205.
The authorizations for the military construction and military family
housing programs of the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 2001
contained in this legislation continue a strong bipartisan approach to
the efforts of this Congress to enhance living and working conditions
for military personnel and their families and to improve facilities
supporting the training and readiness of our armed forces.
I regret very much the lack of emphasis by the Department of Defense
on what the record, most of which was developed through taking
testimony from senior officials and the uniform leadership of the DOD
and the military departments, clearly indicates is a crying need. This
year's budget request continued the broad trend that began with fiscal
year 1996 MILCON program. The Department of Defense requested fewer
total dollars for these key infrastructure accounts that was enacted by
the Congress the year before. The department's budget request of $8.03
billion for the MILCON program was 4 percent below current spending
levels, and 5.5 percent below the levels authorized for appropriations
in the current fiscal year.
{time} 1300
More significantly, the budget request was 25 percent below the
funding level requested by the Department for fiscal year 1996.
While the Department of Defense has consistently underfunded the
military construction and military family housing programs, the House
has played a key bipartisan role in addressing the needs of military
personnel and their families.
In fact, just yesterday the House passed the Military Construction
Appropriations Act for the coming year by a vote of 386 to 22. The
gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Hobson) and I have worked very closely to
make sure our bills compliment each other, and I am grateful for his
cooperation and hard work on our common approach to the MILCON program.
H.R. 4205 would continue our efforts both to provide additional
investment in military infrastructure and to continue innovation in
facilities acquisition and management. The bill would commit
approximately $8.43 billion to the military construction and military
family housing programs for the coming fiscal year.
Although we all would prefer to do more, we recognize the imperative
to balance the unmet needs in the infrastructure arena with the
additional and growing list of unfunded modernization, readiness, and
personnel requirements confronting our military services.
In closing, I want to express again my appreciation to the members of
the subcommittee, especially the ranking member, the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and the committee who have contributed to our
work this session.
I want to also express my deep appreciation again to the gentleman
from South Carolina (Chairman Spence) for his steadfast efforts to
increase the defense budget, and his willingness to support significant
improvements in the MILCON program over the years.
This is truly a bipartisan effort, and I urge all of my colleagues to
support this bill without reservation. It is a bill we can be proud of.
Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Ortiz).
Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 4205, the National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001. I want to specifically
address the provisions of the bill relating to military readiness.
First, I would like to express my personal appreciation to the
leadership of the Subcommittee on Military Readiness and my colleagues
on both the
[[Page
H3197]]
subcommittee and the full committee for their active participation,
support, and cooperation in addressing critical readiness matters
during this accelerated session, and also to the staff for doing a
great job.
Let me say this, that even though the gentleman from South Carolina
(Chairman Spence) is not retiring, he will not be the chairman of this
Committee on Armed Services any longer but he will be a member of the
committee, and we value his leadership and his input as we continue to
address matters that pertain to service men and women.
My good friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bateman) is
retiring, but we wish him the best and thank him for his leadership.
The readiness provisions in the bill reflect some of the steps that I
believe are necessary with the dollars available to make some of the
improvements needed. But it still does not provide all that is needed.
As I have said before, while the readiness of the force has shown some
improvements in some areas, we are nowhere close to getting where we
should be. Much more needs to be done if we are going to support our
forces with the equipment and material they deserve to perform the
missions that we require of them.
Also, I look forward to continuing to support the committee's effort
to address two areas that have been neglected for a number of years,
the readiness of our dedicated civilian employees and the modernization
of our failing infrastructure.
Mr. Chairman, the readiness provisions in this bill represent a step
in the right direction. They permit the Department to build upon the
improvements that have been started in an area that is crucial to our
national security.
I encourage my friends, all my colleagues, to vote for this bill. It
is a good bill. It will do a lot for our troops.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), chairman of our Subcommittee
on Military Research and Development.
(Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished
gentleman from South Carolina and my colleague, chairman and leader,
for yielding time to me. I want to congratulate both he and the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for an outstanding bill. It is
certainly appropriate that we have named it after the gentleman from
South Carolina (Chairman Spence). He is an outstanding patriot and
American.
I want to pay tribute to the ranking member, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Pickett). This is also his last bill, a distinguished
patriot and a tireless advocate for the military, especially the Navy.
He has been an outstanding co-director with me of our Subcommittee on
Military Research and Development for 6 years. I am proud of the fact
that in 6 years, Mr. Chairman, we have not had one split vote.
In all of our deliberations, in everything that is said about how
Congress cannot get along, I think our subcommittee has demonstrated
that we can work together. Even when there are disagreements, we try to
find common ground. Even where there are funding disputes, we try to
resolve those issues.
I extend my thanks to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Pickett) for his cooperation and leadership. The people of Virginia
will surely miss his leadership on these issues and other issues.
The chairman of the committee has done a great job in getting us some
extra money. In the R area, we have been able to plus up the R
portion of our bill by $1.4 billion over the President's request that
has allowed us to fund things like cyberterrorism, information
dominance, missile defense systems like THAAD, Navy area-wide, Navy
upper tier.
We have been able to increase funding for technologies dealing with
weapons of mass destruction, chemical and biological agents. Because of
his leadership, we were able to increase funding for the basic research
accounts, the 6-1, 6-2, and 6-3 account lines. That would not have
happened without the chairman's leadership.
Mr. Chairman, we also have in this bill very important language that
we worked out with the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
asking that the CIA, the Defense Department, and the FBI come together
in creating a national data fusion center so we can have an information
intelligence capability in the 21st century that allows us to do data
profiling, profiling of leaders, rogue groups, terrorist nations, to
allow us to make the right decisions.
I want to thank my colleague and friend, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Andrews). He has been one of our shining stars in the
subcommittee in the area of cyberterrorism. I will be supporting him on
legislation that he intends to offer on this bill later on in the
process.
Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. It is not as far as we would like
to have gone, because we have shortfalls of dollars, but the chairman
has done a commendable job and given us our basic support to meet the
basic needs, albeit not all needs, of the military.
I applaud the chairman for the work he has done and the way he has
done it, allowing Democrats and Republicans to work together without
having significant dissension. In fact, our vote on the bill was the
most bipartisan lopsided vote we have ever had, if I am not mistaken,
in the history of the Committee on Armed Services. I think there was
only one Member that actually voted against the bill when it came out
of the committee. That is a tribute to the gentleman from South
Carolina (Chairman Spence) and to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Skelton).
I thank the chairman. Again I look forward to working with the
chairman on the amendment process. All of our colleagues should support
this bill without hesitation. It is a good bill. It provides for basic
support for our troops. It does not solve all the dollar questions. The
next administration is going to have a terrible problem trying to
rectify those issues, but there is a good start. I urge my colleagues
to vote yes.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Pickett).
Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me, and rise in strong support of
H.R. 4205.
Also, I congratulate the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman
Spence) and ranking member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton),
for their leadership in putting together an excellent authorization
bill.
Let me also thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the
chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development, for
his leadership in that portion of the bill. As ranking member on this
panel, it has been a pleasure to work with him.
With additional resources provided for each of the services and the
various defense-wide accounts, this legislation, in my estimation,
brings us one step closer to fielding a lighter, leaner, stealthier,
more mobile, more precise, and more lethal military capability.
The actions proposed in
H.R. 4205 will mean that leap-ahead
technologies will be fielded sooner, and that the investment strategy
embraced will enable our Nation to field a robust force with a better
chance of avoiding technological surprise in the future.
Let me particularly commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman
Weldon) for supporting additional resources for Apache upgrades, Navy
theater-wide accounts, and a precision-guided miniaturized munitions
capability for future air-to-ground missions.
These initiatives will leverage other programs funded at the levels
requested by the administration. I am, of course, speaking of programs
such as DD-21, Joint Strike Fighter, F-22, Chinook, Comanche, and
LOSAT, just to name a few.
I am also pleased to report that the committee has authorized the
full budget requested for all advanced concept technology
demonstrations. These demonstrations offer significant promise for
fielding improved capabilities in a timely fashion.
I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill. A vote in the affirmative
will be a
[[Page
H3198]]
vote in favor of all U.S. uniformed personnel and in support of
fielding a technologically superior military capability.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Buyer), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Military
Personnel.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina,
the chairman, for yielding time to me.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 4205. This bill
addresses many of the most difficult national security challenges
facing the Nation.
In particular, the military personnel titles of
H.R. 4205 meet two
major national security challenges head on. First, it reforms the
military health care system so it can promote, not detract, from
readiness, recruiting, and retention. The bill breaks down numerous
barriers to access for active and retired military individuals and
their families, and it restores access to a nationwide prescription
drug benefit for 1.4 million military retirees over the age of 65.
It sets the stage for providing Medicare-eligible military retirees a
permanent health care program in fiscal year 2004, and adds more than
$280 million to the defense health programs to fund new benefits. It
also promotes reforms that will save more than $500 million over 5
years.
The Subcommittee on Military Personnel conducted hearings, and what
we learned was that in TRICARE, it is costing us $78 a claim to process
that claim. When we have 39 million claims, that is a lot of money. In
Medicare, it costs us 80 cents to $1 to process one claim, so just do
the easy math. Over a 5-year period, if we actually can get them to
enact the best business practices and move to online billing, we can
save over $500 million, and take those monies and pour them back into
the health program. It is the right thing. It is pretty exciting that
we are able to do this.
The bill also aggressively attacks the major challenge of sustaining
the viability of America's all volunteer military force. Therefore, the
bill contains numerous recommendations for improved pay, bonuses,
benefits, that continue the broad-based approach that Congress
undertook last year.
We also target certain specific problems like recruiting and
retention, and with regard to the food stamp program.
In short, this bill provides a strong, comprehensive set of
initiatives that go to the heart of fixing some of the toughest
problems confronting our military today. I urge all Members to support
the bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I want to take this opportunity to compliment the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), particularly on that part of the
markup involving prescription drugs and the work the gentleman did
overall to help this move forward. Of course, we do not agree on
whether it went far enough, but I compliment the gentleman on a major
step in that direction. We thank the gentleman for that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding
time to me.
I am very pleased and honored to rise in support of the aptly named
Floyd D. Spence defense authorization bill. I congratulate our chairman
on his service to our country. I thank my friend and ranking member,
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), for his leadership.
I also extend, as a member of the Subcommittee on Military Research
and Development, my appreciation to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Chairman Weldon) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Pickett).
Throughout our history, when things seemed to be most safe for our
country, we seemed to get into the most trouble. When we seem to be at
the apex of our power, we seem to be most subject to risk. I believe
that this bill, which is worthy of support, moves us in a direction of
avoiding that mistake this time.
The world is not placid and we are not secure if we ignore the need
to provide for the common defense. This bill does that in three very
important ways. First, it does provide for nearly $40 billion in
research and development funds that will assure us that the best
technology deployed in the most intelligent way will be at our disposal
for years to come.
Second, it recognizes that the most important aspect of our armed
forces and defense structure is the people who work in those forces.
Keeping those people is a function of what we pay them and how we
retain them. The increase in pay, the steps forward in benefits for
retirees, are important, positive steps in that direction. I salute the
committee for that.
I would urge the committee to later accommodate the Medicare
subvention proposal of the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) in
the second rule.
Finally, I am pleased that this legislation includes legislation that
I, along with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Weldon),
introduced that will provide us protection against cyberterrorist
attacks in our most vulnerable places, the air traffic control system,
the banking system, the 911 system.
For the first time, this bill contains language that provides for a
modest loan guarantee program that will help the private sector provide
protection against those risks. I support the bill.
{time} 1315
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. McHugh), who is chairman of the MWR panel. For those who do
not know what that means, that is the Morale, Welfare and Recreation
panel.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Chairman, let me begin by adding my words of deep admiration and
appreciation to Chairman Spence. This naming of the bill in his honor
is the most appropriate act. Frankly, it does not even begin to reflect
the dedication that he has brought to the committee and to its efforts,
and I salute him.
I also want to thank our ranking member, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), and the ranking member of the full
committee, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), and their never-
ending, untiring efforts to working in a bipartisan way to produce
what, as we are hearing on this floor today, is a very, very fine bill.
As the Chair mentioned, I want to discuss for a moment the provisions
in the bill that do pertain to morale, welfare and recreation
activities of the Department of Defense and the military service.
I think it is fair to say that all Members of this great body support
their troops and their families, and that certainly is a very, very
good thing. We can make a difference in the lives of young military
families from each of our districts, as well as retirees across the
country by supporting this bill.
The legislation takes decisive action to protect a critical and
highly-valued benefit for our troops, namely the commissaries. Lost in
the discussions about food stamps is the fact that each military base
operates a grocery store that sells name-brand products to our military
men and women at substantial discounts.
This long-standing military benefit has been endangered by a serious
lack of funding for store modernization. It was primarily caused by the
insidious drains on the building fund initiated by the Pentagon. This
bill firmly shuts those loopholes and protects the commissary benefit
well into the future.
Mr. Chairman, the committee has also included other measures as well,
that serve notice on the Department of Defense that inadequate defense
budgets cannot be shorn up by using funds that properly belong to the
troops.
This is an issue that has been a continuing battle and that all of us
on the committee have championed and through the adoption of this bill.
It is a fight we can effectively wage in the future.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by
complimenting the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman Spence). I
think it is very appropriate that the bill is named after him. He is
truly a gentleman who has been a great patriot and a great Congressman.
[[Page
H3199]]
The bill overall does a heck of a lot of good things. The bill,
unfortunately, fails to address adequately the problem of dealing with
health care fraud and the Nation's military retirees. It is for that
reason that eight of us, Democrats and Republicans alike, went to the
Committee on Rules and asked for an opportunity to have an up or down
vote on the prospect of Medicare subvention for our Nation's military
retirees.
Unfortunately, the Committee on Rules has failed to even vote on
that. For the citizens who are watching, we have but one chance a year
to change that. Medicare subvention involves Medicare. It involves
something going out of the Committee on Commerce, and it involves Armed
Services. So we really only have one chance a year to address that, and
that is today.
Mr. Chairman, and it is for that reason if by 2 p.m., the Committee
on Rules has not ruled on this amendment and giving the Members an
opportunity to vote on it, I will begin a series of procedural moves to
tie up the House of Representatives, because all we are asking for is
for the sake of those people who served our Nation so well for 20 years
or more in horrible places away from their families, all we are asking
for is the opportunity for 435 Members of Congress to decide whether or
not we are going to improve their health benefits and give them what
they were promised.
We just want an up or down vote, and this is the only chance we get
all year long to do that. If we do not get it today, we do not get it
at all; otherwise, it is a wonderful bill.
I am looking forward to the opportunity that once we further address
health care needs for military retirees, to support it. But until then,
we want an up or down vote of giving to our Nation's military retirees
that what was promised to them so many years ago.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I have great respect for the gentleman that
just spoke, but I extend my even greater admiration to the chairman of
the full committee, who extended the ability of this committee to
finally put our arms around all of those demo programs.
This bill provides the road map actually to extend and remove these
barriers and extend that benefit the military retiree is entitled to.
Any Member can stand in this well and embrace the military retiree and
the Veteran, it is easy. But how do we finally put our arms around all
of these demos and actually deliver the right program that is in the
best interests? That is what this bill lays out, the road map, and I
thank the chairman for giving me the ability to do that.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Alabama (Mr. Riley).
Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my strong support of
H.R. 4205, the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2001.
Before I speak to the bill itself, I feel it is important to
recognize the outstanding work of six very distinguished Members of our
Committee on Armed Services. We will certainly miss the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Kasich), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bateman), the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Talent), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Pickett) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Fowler). I applaud
their great work and their tireless work on behalf of the men and women
in uniform, and I wish them the very best.
Mr. Chairman, I believe it is fitting that this bill will bear the
name of our distinguished chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina
(Mr. Spence). He has guided us through recent lean years and his
leadership and tenacity has resulted in our men and women in uniform
ending up every year more than what had been proposed at the outset.
Some have been quick to scream pork, but everyone on this committee,
Mr. Chairman, knows what shape our military would be in if those
funding victories had not been won.
Mr. Chairman, I applaud the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman
Spence), the subcommittee chairman and their staffs for the hard work
they put in to securing the $4.5 billion additional funding.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I appreciate the
chairman for yielding me the time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to talk about the young men and the young
women in uniform. Largely based upon what the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) has said, this is one time a year when we
consider the defense bill. It is our time to tell them, through our
words and through our votes, that they are important to us; that those
in uniform who sacrificed daily, hard training away from home, away
from family, pay could probably be better, although we have done better
here in Congress lately, all of those items cause us to have the deep
admiration for the young men and women in uniform.
True, there are series challenges when it comes to recruiting and
serious challenge when it comes to retention, but I hope this bill this
year will give added confidence to those who are considering joining
the military and to those who are in the military to look at as
possible because they are so important to our country, so important to
the future of this grand democracy and this land that is known as the
grandest civilization ever known in the history of mankind.
But I have a concern, Mr. Chairman, that because of the victory in
the Cold War, because fewer and fewer families are being touched by
sons and daughters and cousins and aunts and uncles who wear the
uniform, that the fact that there is a need for a strong national
security might be out of sight, out of mind.
So this is our one chance to say on this floor to those folks who
serve us well, whether they be in Bosnia, Kosovo, aboard ship, in the
Far East or here in one of the posts or camps or bases in this country,
that we appreciate their efforts; that we hope that the work that we do
today will meet with their approval; that they will continue to serve
and those that are considering serving will think possibly upon the
challenges of the military.
Mr. Chairman, it is a true opportunity for those of us who serve on
this committee to work with and for the young people. And many of us
make trips to visit with them aboard the ship at the post, the bases. I
had the opportunity along with my wife, Susie, to have Thanksgiving
dinner in Bosnia and Kosovo with the young folks, and they are
tremendous.
The morale is good. We hope to keep those folks doing what they do so
well for our country, and this is our one chance in this bill, this
bill named after the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Spence
), our chairman, that we can give added confidence to
those young people who are in uniform to let them know that we work
with them and for them, and that we wish them continued success as they
serve the United States of America.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to another good member of
our committee, an able Member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Pitts).
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act. Over the past 8 years, the
current administration has not only cut defense spending in our
military, the readiness of our force has been permitted to deteriorate.
This is unfortunate. It is unacceptable.
Thankfully, the defense authorization bill today before us continues
the Congress' effort to rebuild our military and improve the quality of
life of our military personnel and their families.
Specifically, I am pleased that this bill authorizes funding for
several electronic warfare initiatives, which is very important to the
defense of our aircraft, most notably, the funding for upgrades in the
EA-6B Prowler. The Prowler fleet is over-committed and aging fast.
Maintenance is frequently deferred.
Mr. Chairman, the U.S. military supremacy in the 21st century
promises to be even more dependent upon control of the EW spectrum,
than it was in the past few decades. Unfortunately, EW requirements are
often overlooked, and this is not the case in this authorization bill.
[[Page
H3200]]
I thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman Spence) for his
support of the vital electronic warfare assets and capabilities in this
bill, and I urge support of the bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Larson).
Mr. LARSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this legislation. And
I want to commend our distinguished chairman, the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Spence) and, of course, the great leadership of the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) as well.
This is an important bill in so many respects, but I rise this
afternoon concerned about a very important segment, a segment that
addresses the concern of veterans and their health care and the
benefits that they so richly have earned and deserved.
This committee has distinguished itself in the nature of its
bipartisan accord and the way that we have been able to come together
around important issues that concern this Nation's defense and the
quality of life that is needed within our military.
But at the heart of what this committee has stood for is a morale
commitment to those men and women who wear the uniforms. I stand in
support of this bill and hope that we address the concerns raised by
the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the
Georgia (Mr. Chambliss).
(Mr. CHAMBLISS asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Floyd
Spence National Defense Authorization Act. Mr. Chairman, for 7 years,
America's Armed Forces has suffered the strain of doing more with less.
Funding shortfalls have left a legacy of readiness problems that plague
our military on a daily basis.
This bill not only provides a pay raise for our troops, but we
enhance health care benefits and improve the quality of life for our
military men and women and their families who sacrificed daily to
protect and defend America's freedom.
Mr. Chairman, we must invest in technologically-advanced equipment
that our soldiers, sailors and airmen will need to meet the national
security challenges of the 21st century. Aircraft like JSTARS, the C-
17, C-130J and the F-22 are critical platforms that will help ensure
successful military missions from Korea to Kosovo.
{time} 1330
Every day our military men and women risk their lives to provide us
with peace of mind and a safe Nation. It is crucial we repay their
sacrifices by providing them with the resources and supports they
deserve. After all, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and this
bill is critical to meeting that challenge. I urge my colleagues to
support this very important bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Sweeney).
(Mr. SWEENEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SWEENEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the ranking member, the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), and the great chairman, the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), and particularly the
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) for their hard work and
dedication in developing the defense authorization for fiscal year
2001.
I also want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for his
leadership in the arms initiative, and my neighbor, the gentleman from
New York (Mr. McNulty), for working with me to secure the future of the
Watervliet Arsenal, which serves the 21st and 22nd Congressional
District in upstate New York.
I am pleased to point out that
H.R. 4205 dedicates $3.6 million for
the storage and maintenance of laid away equipment and facilities at
Hawthorne Army Depot in Rock Island and the Watervliet Arsenal. These
arsenals are an asset to our military and our region.
It is important to expand the arms initiative to allow for the option
of attracting commercial tenants to these arsenals. I am incredibly
thankful for the help of this committee and its great work.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SWEENEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank the gentleman for his
great leadership on behalf of his constituents and the U.S. Armed
Forces for helping to put this thing together. He did a lot of great
work on it and we appreciate it.
Mr. SWEENEY. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman
from California (Mr. Hunter) for his kind words.
Mr. Chairman, this is vital to our national security, and I have to
tell my colleagues that, as a representative of the people who have
given their lives to this facility, it is important to their lives, and
I want to really thank all my colleagues very much for the hard work
they have put in, and thanks again to the ranking member for yielding
me this time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Cunningham), our top gun on another committee now, but
he was on our committee at one time.
And I also wish to thank, Mr. Chairman, the ranking member, the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), for yielding some of his time to
our people, as I do not have enough time left.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, first of all, there are no better
committees that one can serve on than the authorization or
appropriations defense committee. Once we get to the floor, that is
different, because there are those people that do not support national
security.
Mr. Chairman, I want to talk about the health care issue. And if the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and the gentleman from Missouri
(Mr. Skelton) would listen, this is important.
The subvention bill is my bill, my original bill. I put it through to
get 100 percent of coverage for the subvention that the gentleman from
Mississippi wants to do. But I want to tell my colleagues that, even
though it is my bill, and I have the most to gain, I would love to have
the veterans saying, ``Duke Cunningham's bill is out there and it is
100 percent,'' it has its limitations. If someone lives close to a
hospital, then subvention is good, but it is just a Band-Aid.
I put it in because we were not doing enough for our veterans and we
could not get movement. Tri-Care is the same thing. We could go ahead
and make that 100 percent right now, but I want to take care of those
veterans that are in the rural areas who do not have access to Tri-Care
or subvention. If we do this, we could mess up the whole program and
what we are trying to do to help veterans.
Do not demagogue the issue with the Democrat leadership. And those
people that support what the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) is
doing are mistaken.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).
Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from
Missouri for yielding to me, and I rise in support of
H.R. 4205, the
National Defense Autho
Major Actions:
All articles in House section
FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
(House of Representatives - May 17, 2000)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages H3193-
H3274]
FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 503 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill,
H.R. 4205.
{time} 1229
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(
H.R. 4205) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for
military activities of the Department of Defense and for military
construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year
2001, and for other purposes, with Mr. Boehner in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence).
{time} 1230
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, on May 10, the Committee on Armed Services
reported this bill,
H.R. 4205, on a strong bipartisan vote of 56 to 1.
This bill, the first defense authorization bill prepared for the new
millennium, makes a good start toward ensuring that America's military
can meet the challenges that lie ahead and ensure the safety and
security of all Americans well into the 21st century. However, it is
only a beginning, not an end.
In recent years, the committee has called attention to the problems
faced by the men and women who so proudly serve their country in
uniform. Serious readiness deficiencies and equipment modernization
shortfalls, made worse by longer and more frequent deployments away
from home, have placed increasing strains on a military that is still
being asked to do more with less. Moreover, the increasing use of
America's Armed Forces on missions where vital United States national
security interests are not at stake has reduced military readiness and
affected recruiting, retention and morale.
The defense bill before us today seeks to correct many of these
problems. It is the fifth year out of the last six in which Congress
has added to the administration's budget request. I am pleased to
report that, in real terms, after more than a decade of decline in
defense spending, this downward spiral has finally been halted.
Nevertheless, although this bill contains $309.9 billion for defense,
an increase of $4.5 billion over the administration's defense budget
request, a serious mismatch between requirements, forces and resources
continues to exist.
This bill seeks to address the most critical deficiencies faced by
our military today. While some would argue that the end of the Cold War
allows us to cut defense further, the bill we are debating today must
be seen in proper perspective. In reality, the level of resources we
devote to defense remains at an historically low level, roughly 3
percent of this Nation's gross domestic product. This is hardly an
exorbitant price to pay to defend our freedom, our values and our
national interests around the world.
Moreover, the threats we face today are in many ways more difficult
and challenging than those we faced during the Cold War. The increasing
number of states seeking to develop or acquire weapons of mass
destruction, chemical, biological, bacteriological and ballistic
missiles, against which we have no defense, poses a qualitatively new
set of challenges to our national security. Other threats are emerging;
new forms of terrorism, the outbreak of long suppressed ethnic
conflicts, and the spread of sophisticated military technologies to
potential adversaries.
While the United States remains the world's sole military superpower,
we need to adapt to the changing realities and threats that we face in
the new millennium. This requires a growing level of investment in the
tools and the people necessary to keep our country at least one step
ahead of any potential adversary.
As former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger testified recently
before our committee, ``We are resting on our laurels as the sole
superpower.'' He noted that under the administration's current and
planned levels of defense funding, the United States would be unable to
sustain even our current level of military capability. ``This is
[[Page
H3194]]
not a matter of opinion,'' he said, ``it is a matter of simple
arithmetic.''
In fact, the administration has underfunded the United States defense
effort for years. This year alone, the Joint Chiefs of Staff identified
nearly $6 billion in unfunded military requirements. Since last year,
the Chiefs' 5-year estimate of shortfalls has increased from $38
billion to $84 billion. The result of this chronic underfunding has
been an increase in risk to our country, risk to our interests, and
risk to the men and women who defend us. The time has come to reduce
that risk.
This year's debate over the defense budget highlighted a general
consensus that our defense spending has fallen too far too fast. During
the Committee on Armed Services' oversight hearing earlier this year,
the real debate revolved not around whether there is a defense
shortfall, but rather its size, magnitude and implications. Some
observers have characterized the current situation as a coming ``train
wreck.''
Mr. Chairman, this bill is designed to help put America's defenses
back on track. In overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion, the committee has
targeted increases to the administration's budget request on a series
of initiatives to improve readiness, modernize equipment, and enhance
quality of life for our Armed Forces. This bill represents a sound
approach to defense policy that bases the level of resources we provide
on the magnitude of the threats that we face. It is based on a strategy
that seeks to protect America's interests abroad and ensure America's
safety at home. This bill is tailored to provide the minimum level of
resources necessary to carry out our country's global responsibilities.
In a moment, my colleagues on the Committee on Armed Services will
discuss the improvements contained in this bill in greater detail.
However, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the hard
work and support of the chairmen and ranking members of our committees
and subcommittees and the panels. Their strong leadership and
bipartisan commitment to ensuring the best for our service personnel
resulted in the bill that we have before us today. It is a tribute to
their dedication and commitment.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to pay tribute to the
Committee on Armed Services staff. In my 6 years as committee chairman,
I and the other members of the committee have been fortunate to be able
to rely upon their expertise and professionalism. I thank them for
their tireless efforts and support of the committee and our Nation's
military.
Mr. Chairman, this is likely the last defense authorization bill I
will submit to the House as chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services. I have worked very hard to see to it that our military is
second to none, not second to one. I am proud of what we have
accomplished in this bill, and I believe it deserves the support of all
Members. I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to support
H.R. 4205, which is known as the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2001. This is not only a good bill and deserves the support of the
people in this House, it is named for an outstanding American, the
chairman of Our Committee on Armed Services, who, through the years,
has done yeoman's work. As the gentleman mentioned a few moments ago,
this is the last time he will present as chairman the bill coming from
our committee. We thank him for his excellent leadership and
bipartisanship through the years.
Mr. Chairman, at the outset, I would like to thank the gentleman for
the work he did on this particular bill. All of us have worked hard on
it and it has been glued together quite well. I will talk of the
exceptions a moment later. But this bill would authorize $310 billion
for defense programs, including $13 billion for the Department of
Energy defense-related programs. It authorizes a funding level of $4.5
billion above the President's request, which, of course, was $13
billion above last year's level. The bill makes a number of vital
readiness and modernization improvements which will keep our forces the
best trained and best equipped in the world.
The bill also addresses important qualities of life issues that are
at the top of agenda for service members and their families. It gives a
much needed 3.7 percent pay raise, plus a number of key improvements in
the military health care system that will benefit service members and
their families as well as military retirees.
Mr. Chairman, last year was ``the Year of the Troops.'' Congress was
successful in enacting a number of pay and compensation reforms that
have helped to close the pay gap between the military and civilian
society that makes the military a more attractive career choice in a
difficult recruiting environment.
Mr. Chairman, this year is ``the Year of Health Care.'' I am pleased
that the bill provides a number of important health care reforms.
Foremost is the reform to the TRICARE pharmacy benefit. The bill's
provisions authorizing mail order, retail and non-network pharmacy
access for Medicare-eligible retirees goes a long way toward affording
greater health care access and affordability for military retirees. The
bill helps us keep the promise of lifetime health care made to those
service members.
Other major elements of the bill that are noteworthy include
provision of adequate funding to support the Army's transformation to a
lighter, more mobile force, the transition to the next generation of
Nimitz-class aircraft carriers, and continued funding for tactical
aircraft programs. This also makes significant investments in
information technology and information infrastructure.
I do, however, want to express my disappointment, Mr. Chairman, with
the language of the bill regarding the Island of Vieques. The best way
to ensure that the Navy will have access to this important training
area in the long run is to support the agreement worked out between the
President and the Governor of Puerto Rico. This agreement gives the
people of Vieques a voice in the future of the area and provides
economic incentives to allow the Navy to continue live fire training
there. The language in the Chairman's mark would do nothing short of
gutting that agreement.
I know that all of us here today care deeply about the readiness of
our Navy and Marine forces. I think it is fair to say there is
generally a shared desire that this range be returned to its previous
use. However, I believe that only through the implementation of the
agreement between the President and the Governor of Puerto Rico will
all sides to the dispute be accommodated and the range returned to the
use of the military. I fear that the language in this mark will cause
us to squander that opportunity, and I hope the Committee on Rules will
make in order my amendment to correct this ill-advised provision.
Also, Mr. Chairman, I wish to express my disappointment thus far that
the rule does not allow the amendment of the gentleman from Mississippi
(Mr. Taylor) regarding military retirees and Medicare subvention. More
about that later in the debate, but that is extremely important, and I
hope that the second rule will include it.
On balance, this is a good bill. I believe Members should support it.
I sincerely hope that the process under which the bill is considered
will permit the House to work its will on important issues such as
Medicare subvention and the Island of Vieques.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Bateman), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Military
Readiness, and also the Merchant Marine Panel.
Mr. BATEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina
for yielding me time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2001, and am indeed very proud of the fact it is
being named for the chairman of our full committee.
{time} 1245
The committee has, once again, given the funding restraints it faced,
done an outstanding job in fulfilling its role of oversight of the
Department of Defense, and it has done its best to provide the
necessary funding to improve readiness of our military forces.
Does this bill contain enough funding to fix all of our readiness
problems?
[[Page
H3195]]
Unfortunately, no. Does the funding recommended in this bill take us in
the right direction toward improving readiness? Absolutely.
Mr. Chairman, the administration began to publicly express concern
that military readiness was on the decline in October of 1998, though
my subcommittee found very serious readiness problems as early as 1996.
Since then, our military leaders have continued to report to Congress
that the annual budget requests are significantly short of critical
funding. Again, this year the budget request is over $16 billion short
in many critical areas. Unfortunately for our military, the
administration has once again provided a budget that is longer on
rhetoric than it is on substance.
To address the shortages in the budget request, the committee
carefully reviewed the unfunded requirements identified to us in the
Congress by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or the members of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff. The committee review found that most of the unfunded
requirements for day-to-day military operations are spare parts, depot
maintenance and facility maintenance, accounts that should be fully
funded every year.
Due to the successful efforts of the gentleman from South Carolina
(Mr. Spence) and other Members of the committee, additional funds above
the budget requests were made available for many of these pressing
readiness imperatives.
I want to quickly outline those readiness areas of greatest concern
where we were able to increase the level of funding beyond the
President's request. The bill recommends an increase of $660 million
for real property maintenance; $257 million for depot maintenance; $204
million for ship depot maintenance; $157 million for training and
training range improvements; $91 million for war readiness materials so
our military can deploy more rapidly and efficiently; and $45 million
for deployment of spare parts for aircraft squadrons.
This bill provides for several readiness reporting initiatives that
will assist military leaders to ensure that we maintain the best-
trained, best-equipped and most effective force in the world. To do
anything less will allow the readiness of our military to slip further
and could risk the lives of countless men and women in every branch of
the service.
Mr. Chairman,
H.R. 4205 is a responsible, meaningful bill that fairly
allocates resources for the sustainment of readiness and an improved
quality of life for the men and women of our military forces. I
strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes on this bill, vote yes to
maintain military readiness.
I would like to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), the
ranking minority member of the subcommittee and, in fact, thank all the
Members of the subcommittee who, throughout my tenure as its chairman,
have made it possible for us to operate in a thoroughly and totally
bipartisan manner. They have been truly partners in all that we have
done, and also to thank very deeply and sincerely the staff of the
subcommittee for their good work.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Sanchez), an outstanding member of our committee.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the House Committee on
Armed Services, I rise in strong support of the national defense
authorization bill,
H.R. 4205. I would like to thank the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and my ranking member, the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the committee staff for all the hard work
they have done on this bill. This year's bill makes great strides
towards improving modernization, quality of life and military
readiness, all within the confines of the budget caps. One area I am
particularly pleased with are the improvements we have made to military
health care, and I would like to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr.
Buyer) and the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie) for their
exemplary work addressing health care shortcomings, specifically the
TRICARE health care system and lack of permanent health care for the
military retirees.
Although this bill makes significant inroads, there is still a lot of
work that needs to be done. Recruiting and retention are becoming
problematic, with fewer seeing the call to duty during these prosperous
times. While this bill makes improvements in military compensation, do
the younger service members fully understand the value of their total
compensation, that beyond their basic pay? Benefits this Congress has
worked hard to provide, such as health care, housing and retirement,
have a significant value, and I hope that the Department of Defense
will do a better job informing service members of the value of these
and other benefits received.
Finally, I would like to bring attention to research and development
funding. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Pickett) did heroic work in improving the R
accounts, specifically science and technology. R is the future of
this Nation's defense. We should not be stealing from our future to pay
for the current year's shortfalls.
R is critical in maintaining the technological edge for combatting
the growing and changing threats to this Nation's security. This bill
restores R accounts to acceptable levels.
In closing, I commend all the committee chairs, ranking members, the
staff for working within the confines of this budget resolution to
produce a bipartisan bill that goes a long way towards strengthening
our Nation's defense, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert)
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of
H.R. 4205.
Mr. Chairman, I am in full support of this important legislation that
honors our men and women serving our nation's armed services. I believe
this bill properly addresses the needs of our servicemen and women by
providing needed quality of life programs and revamping the procurement
shortfalls our military has been suffering since the Kosovo campaign.
I am particularly thankful to Chairman Spence and the Armed Services
Committee for their continued support of the C-17 Globemaster. This
legislation contains language focusing on the aging C-141 aircraft
fleet and replacing this aircraft with C-17's. This legislation directs
the Secretary of the Air Force to consider placing C-17's at bases with
reserve units, especially those that could accommodate a reverse-
associated unit, like March Air Reserve Base in Riverside, CA.
Mr. Chairman, I believe this bill is good for U.S. servicemen and
women, good for the national security needs of our country and a sound
investment for the people of the United States.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Military
Procurement.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank our chairman, the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), for whom the bill is named, and our
ranking member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for the great
bipartisan leadership that they gave us, and my great colleague and
partner, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sisisky), who worked with me
on the Subcommittee on Military Procurement to try to do what was right
for the troops.
One thing that we derived from our hearings was that we are still
badly underfunded. Whether one ascribes to the GAO recommendation or
their evaluation that we are $20 billion to $30 billion per year
underfunded in modernization or Bill Perry, President Clinton's own
Secretary of Defense, that it is somewhere closer to $15 to $20
billion, or even former Secretary Jim Schlesinger that it may be close
to $100 billion per year short, we acknowledge that we are short, that
we need to modernize the force and we have a lot of programs that are
aging.
Now, we carried out a number of programs this year. It is a fairly
vast piece of the defense bill. A couple of things that we worked on
that were important were ammunition and precision munitions. We took
the lessons of Kosovo and the most recent conflicts in which precision
munitions, coupled with our tactical and long range aircraft and
stealth aircraft that provided great power projection, so we tried to
shore up the precision munition and ammunition accounts. We think that
is important.
We preserve the submarine option for the next President; that is, if
he feels that the 50 submarines that the administration is moving
toward attack submarines is not enough, that he can retain some of the
688s that were going
[[Page
H3196]]
to be decommissioned. So we left money in there for the early work on
refueling for the 688s, refuelings that would allow them to continue to
march, and also we left some early money in for changing the boomers,
the so-called boomers, or the ballistic missile submarines, to cruise-
missile carrying submarines. It gives us great power projection
capability.
We sustained those options for the next President, should he decide
to go in that direction.
We moved this extra money around and tried to solve as many of the
$16 billion in shortages that the services gave us as we could with the
money we had available.
I want to thank again the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sisisky) for
his great partnership and help in getting that done.
So I would say to my colleagues, I think we at least held the bar
without slipping this year. We need to put more money in next year. We
are at least treading water. We are still very short in the procurement
accounts, Mr. Chairman, but we are going to keep the wheels turning
with this budget.
I would urge all Members to vote for this bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Sisisky), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on
Military Procurement.
(Mr. SISISKY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SISISKY. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to congratulate
the chairman of the full committee. He has been chairman now, my
chairman, for 6 years. The love for the military and the love for his
State and his country has just shone through and I, on behalf of the
people that I represent, want to thank him for his service, and also to
the ranking member who has been very good and very easy to deal with.
I would like to follow the remarks of the gentleman from California
(Mr. Hunter) and say that I do not always find it easy to follow him,
and I mean that in the kindest way, but in this case he has laid out a
sound synopsis of the procurement title. As noted, we made a simple
rule to govern consideration of changes to the President's budget: What
does the military need? And that one question took precedence over all
other considerations.
No House Member can be unaware of the high operational tempo that
U.S. forces face around the globe. That tempo is hard for the troops,
hard for their families, and hard for the equipment as well. We took it
as a point of honor to give the military services what they told us
they needed, not in the complete dollars, because we did not have the
complete dollars, but I should note that in addition to an
administration request for over $60 billion for procurement, with $2.6
billion added from the Committee on the Budget allocations, Members
requested, that is, our Members here, $13 billion in potential add-ons.
Mr. Chairman, I compliment them on their devotion to national
security and, of course, also their creativity, as the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter) well knows. I am pleased to assure my
colleagues that the chairman and his staff were scrupulously fair in
dealing with the minority Members throughout this process, and I
believe that fairness is borne out by a lack of amendments seeking to
make major changes in the work of the Subcommittee on Military
Procurement.
I wish Americans who have a jaded view of Congress could see how this
subcommittee works. It is bipartisan and it is fair.
Finally, I would like to thank the many Members on both sides of the
aisle who voted to add funds, and that is the important thing to add
funds, to this year's defense bill. They made it possible for this
title to be both responsive to the needs of our service personnel and
responsible to the taxpayers who support them.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Hefley), who is the chairman of our Subcommittee on
Military Installations and Facilities.
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, let me say I have been through several
chairmen of this committee. I have been through chairmen that were
partisan. I have been through chairmen that were contentious. I have
never had a chairman like the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Spence), who can finesse this thing with courtesy and respect for every
single Member of the committee, be they Democrat or Republican. I want
to say thanks to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) for the
way he has handled himself. He is a testimony of why we should not have
terms limits for committee chairmen.
Beyond that, down to business, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 4205.
The authorizations for the military construction and military family
housing programs of the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 2001
contained in this legislation continue a strong bipartisan approach to
the efforts of this Congress to enhance living and working conditions
for military personnel and their families and to improve facilities
supporting the training and readiness of our armed forces.
I regret very much the lack of emphasis by the Department of Defense
on what the record, most of which was developed through taking
testimony from senior officials and the uniform leadership of the DOD
and the military departments, clearly indicates is a crying need. This
year's budget request continued the broad trend that began with fiscal
year 1996 MILCON program. The Department of Defense requested fewer
total dollars for these key infrastructure accounts that was enacted by
the Congress the year before. The department's budget request of $8.03
billion for the MILCON program was 4 percent below current spending
levels, and 5.5 percent below the levels authorized for appropriations
in the current fiscal year.
{time} 1300
More significantly, the budget request was 25 percent below the
funding level requested by the Department for fiscal year 1996.
While the Department of Defense has consistently underfunded the
military construction and military family housing programs, the House
has played a key bipartisan role in addressing the needs of military
personnel and their families.
In fact, just yesterday the House passed the Military Construction
Appropriations Act for the coming year by a vote of 386 to 22. The
gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Hobson) and I have worked very closely to
make sure our bills compliment each other, and I am grateful for his
cooperation and hard work on our common approach to the MILCON program.
H.R. 4205 would continue our efforts both to provide additional
investment in military infrastructure and to continue innovation in
facilities acquisition and management. The bill would commit
approximately $8.43 billion to the military construction and military
family housing programs for the coming fiscal year.
Although we all would prefer to do more, we recognize the imperative
to balance the unmet needs in the infrastructure arena with the
additional and growing list of unfunded modernization, readiness, and
personnel requirements confronting our military services.
In closing, I want to express again my appreciation to the members of
the subcommittee, especially the ranking member, the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and the committee who have contributed to our
work this session.
I want to also express my deep appreciation again to the gentleman
from South Carolina (Chairman Spence) for his steadfast efforts to
increase the defense budget, and his willingness to support significant
improvements in the MILCON program over the years.
This is truly a bipartisan effort, and I urge all of my colleagues to
support this bill without reservation. It is a bill we can be proud of.
Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Ortiz).
Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 4205, the National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001. I want to specifically
address the provisions of the bill relating to military readiness.
First, I would like to express my personal appreciation to the
leadership of the Subcommittee on Military Readiness and my colleagues
on both the
[[Page
H3197]]
subcommittee and the full committee for their active participation,
support, and cooperation in addressing critical readiness matters
during this accelerated session, and also to the staff for doing a
great job.
Let me say this, that even though the gentleman from South Carolina
(Chairman Spence) is not retiring, he will not be the chairman of this
Committee on Armed Services any longer but he will be a member of the
committee, and we value his leadership and his input as we continue to
address matters that pertain to service men and women.
My good friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bateman) is
retiring, but we wish him the best and thank him for his leadership.
The readiness provisions in the bill reflect some of the steps that I
believe are necessary with the dollars available to make some of the
improvements needed. But it still does not provide all that is needed.
As I have said before, while the readiness of the force has shown some
improvements in some areas, we are nowhere close to getting where we
should be. Much more needs to be done if we are going to support our
forces with the equipment and material they deserve to perform the
missions that we require of them.
Also, I look forward to continuing to support the committee's effort
to address two areas that have been neglected for a number of years,
the readiness of our dedicated civilian employees and the modernization
of our failing infrastructure.
Mr. Chairman, the readiness provisions in this bill represent a step
in the right direction. They permit the Department to build upon the
improvements that have been started in an area that is crucial to our
national security.
I encourage my friends, all my colleagues, to vote for this bill. It
is a good bill. It will do a lot for our troops.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), chairman of our Subcommittee
on Military Research and Development.
(Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished
gentleman from South Carolina and my colleague, chairman and leader,
for yielding time to me. I want to congratulate both he and the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for an outstanding bill. It is
certainly appropriate that we have named it after the gentleman from
South Carolina (Chairman Spence). He is an outstanding patriot and
American.
I want to pay tribute to the ranking member, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Pickett). This is also his last bill, a distinguished
patriot and a tireless advocate for the military, especially the Navy.
He has been an outstanding co-director with me of our Subcommittee on
Military Research and Development for 6 years. I am proud of the fact
that in 6 years, Mr. Chairman, we have not had one split vote.
In all of our deliberations, in everything that is said about how
Congress cannot get along, I think our subcommittee has demonstrated
that we can work together. Even when there are disagreements, we try to
find common ground. Even where there are funding disputes, we try to
resolve those issues.
I extend my thanks to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Pickett) for his cooperation and leadership. The people of Virginia
will surely miss his leadership on these issues and other issues.
The chairman of the committee has done a great job in getting us some
extra money. In the R area, we have been able to plus up the R
portion of our bill by $1.4 billion over the President's request that
has allowed us to fund things like cyberterrorism, information
dominance, missile defense systems like THAAD, Navy area-wide, Navy
upper tier.
We have been able to increase funding for technologies dealing with
weapons of mass destruction, chemical and biological agents. Because of
his leadership, we were able to increase funding for the basic research
accounts, the 6-1, 6-2, and 6-3 account lines. That would not have
happened without the chairman's leadership.
Mr. Chairman, we also have in this bill very important language that
we worked out with the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
asking that the CIA, the Defense Department, and the FBI come together
in creating a national data fusion center so we can have an information
intelligence capability in the 21st century that allows us to do data
profiling, profiling of leaders, rogue groups, terrorist nations, to
allow us to make the right decisions.
I want to thank my colleague and friend, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Andrews). He has been one of our shining stars in the
subcommittee in the area of cyberterrorism. I will be supporting him on
legislation that he intends to offer on this bill later on in the
process.
Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. It is not as far as we would like
to have gone, because we have shortfalls of dollars, but the chairman
has done a commendable job and given us our basic support to meet the
basic needs, albeit not all needs, of the military.
I applaud the chairman for the work he has done and the way he has
done it, allowing Democrats and Republicans to work together without
having significant dissension. In fact, our vote on the bill was the
most bipartisan lopsided vote we have ever had, if I am not mistaken,
in the history of the Committee on Armed Services. I think there was
only one Member that actually voted against the bill when it came out
of the committee. That is a tribute to the gentleman from South
Carolina (Chairman Spence) and to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Skelton).
I thank the chairman. Again I look forward to working with the
chairman on the amendment process. All of our colleagues should support
this bill without hesitation. It is a good bill. It provides for basic
support for our troops. It does not solve all the dollar questions. The
next administration is going to have a terrible problem trying to
rectify those issues, but there is a good start. I urge my colleagues
to vote yes.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Pickett).
Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me, and rise in strong support of
H.R. 4205.
Also, I congratulate the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman
Spence) and ranking member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton),
for their leadership in putting together an excellent authorization
bill.
Let me also thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the
chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development, for
his leadership in that portion of the bill. As ranking member on this
panel, it has been a pleasure to work with him.
With additional resources provided for each of the services and the
various defense-wide accounts, this legislation, in my estimation,
brings us one step closer to fielding a lighter, leaner, stealthier,
more mobile, more precise, and more lethal military capability.
The actions proposed in
H.R. 4205 will mean that leap-ahead
technologies will be fielded sooner, and that the investment strategy
embraced will enable our Nation to field a robust force with a better
chance of avoiding technological surprise in the future.
Let me particularly commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman
Weldon) for supporting additional resources for Apache upgrades, Navy
theater-wide accounts, and a precision-guided miniaturized munitions
capability for future air-to-ground missions.
These initiatives will leverage other programs funded at the levels
requested by the administration. I am, of course, speaking of programs
such as DD-21, Joint Strike Fighter, F-22, Chinook, Comanche, and
LOSAT, just to name a few.
I am also pleased to report that the committee has authorized the
full budget requested for all advanced concept technology
demonstrations. These demonstrations offer significant promise for
fielding improved capabilities in a timely fashion.
I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill. A vote in the affirmative
will be a
[[Page
H3198]]
vote in favor of all U.S. uniformed personnel and in support of
fielding a technologically superior military capability.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Buyer), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Military
Personnel.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina,
the chairman, for yielding time to me.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 4205. This bill
addresses many of the most difficult national security challenges
facing the Nation.
In particular, the military personnel titles of
H.R. 4205 meet two
major national security challenges head on. First, it reforms the
military health care system so it can promote, not detract, from
readiness, recruiting, and retention. The bill breaks down numerous
barriers to access for active and retired military individuals and
their families, and it restores access to a nationwide prescription
drug benefit for 1.4 million military retirees over the age of 65.
It sets the stage for providing Medicare-eligible military retirees a
permanent health care program in fiscal year 2004, and adds more than
$280 million to the defense health programs to fund new benefits. It
also promotes reforms that will save more than $500 million over 5
years.
The Subcommittee on Military Personnel conducted hearings, and what
we learned was that in TRICARE, it is costing us $78 a claim to process
that claim. When we have 39 million claims, that is a lot of money. In
Medicare, it costs us 80 cents to $1 to process one claim, so just do
the easy math. Over a 5-year period, if we actually can get them to
enact the best business practices and move to online billing, we can
save over $500 million, and take those monies and pour them back into
the health program. It is the right thing. It is pretty exciting that
we are able to do this.
The bill also aggressively attacks the major challenge of sustaining
the viability of America's all volunteer military force. Therefore, the
bill contains numerous recommendations for improved pay, bonuses,
benefits, that continue the broad-based approach that Congress
undertook last year.
We also target certain specific problems like recruiting and
retention, and with regard to the food stamp program.
In short, this bill provides a strong, comprehensive set of
initiatives that go to the heart of fixing some of the toughest
problems confronting our military today. I urge all Members to support
the bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I want to take this opportunity to compliment the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), particularly on that part of the
markup involving prescription drugs and the work the gentleman did
overall to help this move forward. Of course, we do not agree on
whether it went far enough, but I compliment the gentleman on a major
step in that direction. We thank the gentleman for that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding
time to me.
I am very pleased and honored to rise in support of the aptly named
Floyd D. Spence defense authorization bill. I congratulate our chairman
on his service to our country. I thank my friend and ranking member,
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), for his leadership.
I also extend, as a member of the Subcommittee on Military Research
and Development, my appreciation to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Chairman Weldon) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Pickett).
Throughout our history, when things seemed to be most safe for our
country, we seemed to get into the most trouble. When we seem to be at
the apex of our power, we seem to be most subject to risk. I believe
that this bill, which is worthy of support, moves us in a direction of
avoiding that mistake this time.
The world is not placid and we are not secure if we ignore the need
to provide for the common defense. This bill does that in three very
important ways. First, it does provide for nearly $40 billion in
research and development funds that will assure us that the best
technology deployed in the most intelligent way will be at our disposal
for years to come.
Second, it recognizes that the most important aspect of our armed
forces and defense structure is the people who work in those forces.
Keeping those people is a function of what we pay them and how we
retain them. The increase in pay, the steps forward in benefits for
retirees, are important, positive steps in that direction. I salute the
committee for that.
I would urge the committee to later accommodate the Medicare
subvention proposal of the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) in
the second rule.
Finally, I am pleased that this legislation includes legislation that
I, along with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Weldon),
introduced that will provide us protection against cyberterrorist
attacks in our most vulnerable places, the air traffic control system,
the banking system, the 911 system.
For the first time, this bill contains language that provides for a
modest loan guarantee program that will help the private sector provide
protection against those risks. I support the bill.
{time} 1315
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. McHugh), who is chairman of the MWR panel. For those who do
not know what that means, that is the Morale, Welfare and Recreation
panel.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Chairman, let me begin by adding my words of deep admiration and
appreciation to Chairman Spence. This naming of the bill in his honor
is the most appropriate act. Frankly, it does not even begin to reflect
the dedication that he has brought to the committee and to its efforts,
and I salute him.
I also want to thank our ranking member, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), and the ranking member of the full
committee, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), and their never-
ending, untiring efforts to working in a bipartisan way to produce
what, as we are hearing on this floor today, is a very, very fine bill.
As the Chair mentioned, I want to discuss for a moment the provisions
in the bill that do pertain to morale, welfare and recreation
activities of the Department of Defense and the military service.
I think it is fair to say that all Members of this great body support
their troops and their families, and that certainly is a very, very
good thing. We can make a difference in the lives of young military
families from each of our districts, as well as retirees across the
country by supporting this bill.
The legislation takes decisive action to protect a critical and
highly-valued benefit for our troops, namely the commissaries. Lost in
the discussions about food stamps is the fact that each military base
operates a grocery store that sells name-brand products to our military
men and women at substantial discounts.
This long-standing military benefit has been endangered by a serious
lack of funding for store modernization. It was primarily caused by the
insidious drains on the building fund initiated by the Pentagon. This
bill firmly shuts those loopholes and protects the commissary benefit
well into the future.
Mr. Chairman, the committee has also included other measures as well,
that serve notice on the Department of Defense that inadequate defense
budgets cannot be shorn up by using funds that properly belong to the
troops.
This is an issue that has been a continuing battle and that all of us
on the committee have championed and through the adoption of this bill.
It is a fight we can effectively wage in the future.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by
complimenting the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman Spence). I
think it is very appropriate that the bill is named after him. He is
truly a gentleman who has been a great patriot and a great Congressman.
[[Page
H3199]]
The bill overall does a heck of a lot of good things. The bill,
unfortunately, fails to address adequately the problem of dealing with
health care fraud and the Nation's military retirees. It is for that
reason that eight of us, Democrats and Republicans alike, went to the
Committee on Rules and asked for an opportunity to have an up or down
vote on the prospect of Medicare subvention for our Nation's military
retirees.
Unfortunately, the Committee on Rules has failed to even vote on
that. For the citizens who are watching, we have but one chance a year
to change that. Medicare subvention involves Medicare. It involves
something going out of the Committee on Commerce, and it involves Armed
Services. So we really only have one chance a year to address that, and
that is today.
Mr. Chairman, and it is for that reason if by 2 p.m., the Committee
on Rules has not ruled on this amendment and giving the Members an
opportunity to vote on it, I will begin a series of procedural moves to
tie up the House of Representatives, because all we are asking for is
for the sake of those people who served our Nation so well for 20 years
or more in horrible places away from their families, all we are asking
for is the opportunity for 435 Members of Congress to decide whether or
not we are going to improve their health benefits and give them what
they were promised.
We just want an up or down vote, and this is the only chance we get
all year long to do that. If we do not get it today, we do not get it
at all; otherwise, it is a wonderful bill.
I am looking forward to the opportunity that once we further address
health care needs for military retirees, to support it. But until then,
we want an up or down vote of giving to our Nation's military retirees
that what was promised to them so many years ago.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I have great respect for the gentleman that
just spoke, but I extend my even greater admiration to the chairman of
the full committee, who extended the ability of this committee to
finally put our arms around all of those demo programs.
This bill provides the road map actually to extend and remove these
barriers and extend that benefit the military retiree is entitled to.
Any Member can stand in this well and embrace the military retiree and
the Veteran, it is easy. But how do we finally put our arms around all
of these demos and actually deliver the right program that is in the
best interests? That is what this bill lays out, the road map, and I
thank the chairman for giving me the ability to do that.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Alabama (Mr. Riley).
Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my strong support of
H.R. 4205, the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2001.
Before I speak to the bill itself, I feel it is important to
recognize the outstanding work of six very distinguished Members of our
Committee on Armed Services. We will certainly miss the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Kasich), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bateman), the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Talent), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Pickett) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Fowler). I applaud
their great work and their tireless work on behalf of the men and women
in uniform, and I wish them the very best.
Mr. Chairman, I believe it is fitting that this bill will bear the
name of our distinguished chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina
(Mr. Spence). He has guided us through recent lean years and his
leadership and tenacity has resulted in our men and women in uniform
ending up every year more than what had been proposed at the outset.
Some have been quick to scream pork, but everyone on this committee,
Mr. Chairman, knows what shape our military would be in if those
funding victories had not been won.
Mr. Chairman, I applaud the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman
Spence), the subcommittee chairman and their staffs for the hard work
they put in to securing the $4.5 billion additional funding.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I appreciate the
chairman for yielding me the time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to talk about the young men and the young
women in uniform. Largely based upon what the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) has said, this is one time a year when we
consider the defense bill. It is our time to tell them, through our
words and through our votes, that they are important to us; that those
in uniform who sacrificed daily, hard training away from home, away
from family, pay could probably be better, although we have done better
here in Congress lately, all of those items cause us to have the deep
admiration for the young men and women in uniform.
True, there are series challenges when it comes to recruiting and
serious challenge when it comes to retention, but I hope this bill this
year will give added confidence to those who are considering joining
the military and to those who are in the military to look at as
possible because they are so important to our country, so important to
the future of this grand democracy and this land that is known as the
grandest civilization ever known in the history of mankind.
But I have a concern, Mr. Chairman, that because of the victory in
the Cold War, because fewer and fewer families are being touched by
sons and daughters and cousins and aunts and uncles who wear the
uniform, that the fact that there is a need for a strong national
security might be out of sight, out of mind.
So this is our one chance to say on this floor to those folks who
serve us well, whether they be in Bosnia, Kosovo, aboard ship, in the
Far East or here in one of the posts or camps or bases in this country,
that we appreciate their efforts; that we hope that the work that we do
today will meet with their approval; that they will continue to serve
and those that are considering serving will think possibly upon the
challenges of the military.
Mr. Chairman, it is a true opportunity for those of us who serve on
this committee to work with and for the young people. And many of us
make trips to visit with them aboard the ship at the post, the bases. I
had the opportunity along with my wife, Susie, to have Thanksgiving
dinner in Bosnia and Kosovo with the young folks, and they are
tremendous.
The morale is good. We hope to keep those folks doing what they do so
well for our country, and this is our one chance in this bill, this
bill named after the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Spence
), our chairman, that we can give added confidence to
those young people who are in uniform to let them know that we work
with them and for them, and that we wish them continued success as they
serve the United States of America.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to another good member of
our committee, an able Member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Pitts).
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act. Over the past 8 years, the
current administration has not only cut defense spending in our
military, the readiness of our force has been permitted to deteriorate.
This is unfortunate. It is unacceptable.
Thankfully, the defense authorization bill today before us continues
the Congress' effort to rebuild our military and improve the quality of
life of our military personnel and their families.
Specifically, I am pleased that this bill authorizes funding for
several electronic warfare initiatives, which is very important to the
defense of our aircraft, most notably, the funding for upgrades in the
EA-6B Prowler. The Prowler fleet is over-committed and aging fast.
Maintenance is frequently deferred.
Mr. Chairman, the U.S. military supremacy in the 21st century
promises to be even more dependent upon control of the EW spectrum,
than it was in the past few decades. Unfortunately, EW requirements are
often overlooked, and this is not the case in this authorization bill.
[[Page
H3200]]
I thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman Spence) for his
support of the vital electronic warfare assets and capabilities in this
bill, and I urge support of the bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Larson).
Mr. LARSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this legislation. And
I want to commend our distinguished chairman, the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Spence) and, of course, the great leadership of the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) as well.
This is an important bill in so many respects, but I rise this
afternoon concerned about a very important segment, a segment that
addresses the concern of veterans and their health care and the
benefits that they so richly have earned and deserved.
This committee has distinguished itself in the nature of its
bipartisan accord and the way that we have been able to come together
around important issues that concern this Nation's defense and the
quality of life that is needed within our military.
But at the heart of what this committee has stood for is a morale
commitment to those men and women who wear the uniforms. I stand in
support of this bill and hope that we address the concerns raised by
the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the
Georgia (Mr. Chambliss).
(Mr. CHAMBLISS asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Floyd
Spence National Defense Authorization Act. Mr. Chairman, for 7 years,
America's Armed Forces has suffered the strain of doing more with less.
Funding shortfalls have left a legacy of readiness problems that plague
our military on a daily basis.
This bill not only provides a pay raise for our troops, but we
enhance health care benefits and improve the quality of life for our
military men and women and their families who sacrificed daily to
protect and defend America's freedom.
Mr. Chairman, we must invest in technologically-advanced equipment
that our soldiers, sailors and airmen will need to meet the national
security challenges of the 21st century. Aircraft like JSTARS, the C-
17, C-130J and the F-22 are critical platforms that will help ensure
successful military missions from Korea to Kosovo.
{time} 1330
Every day our military men and women risk their lives to provide us
with peace of mind and a safe Nation. It is crucial we repay their
sacrifices by providing them with the resources and supports they
deserve. After all, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and this
bill is critical to meeting that challenge. I urge my colleagues to
support this very important bill.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Sweeney).
(Mr. SWEENEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SWEENEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the ranking member, the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), and the great chairman, the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), and particularly the
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) for their hard work and
dedication in developing the defense authorization for fiscal year
2001.
I also want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for his
leadership in the arms initiative, and my neighbor, the gentleman from
New York (Mr. McNulty), for working with me to secure the future of the
Watervliet Arsenal, which serves the 21st and 22nd Congressional
District in upstate New York.
I am pleased to point out that
H.R. 4205 dedicates $3.6 million for
the storage and maintenance of laid away equipment and facilities at
Hawthorne Army Depot in Rock Island and the Watervliet Arsenal. These
arsenals are an asset to our military and our region.
It is important to expand the arms initiative to allow for the option
of attracting commercial tenants to these arsenals. I am incredibly
thankful for the help of this committee and its great work.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SWEENEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank the gentleman for his
great leadership on behalf of his constituents and the U.S. Armed
Forces for helping to put this thing together. He did a lot of great
work on it and we appreciate it.
Mr. SWEENEY. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman
from California (Mr. Hunter) for his kind words.
Mr. Chairman, this is vital to our national security, and I have to
tell my colleagues that, as a representative of the people who have
given their lives to this facility, it is important to their lives, and
I want to really thank all my colleagues very much for the hard work
they have put in, and thanks again to the ranking member for yielding
me this time.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Cunningham), our top gun on another committee now, but
he was on our committee at one time.
And I also wish to thank, Mr. Chairman, the ranking member, the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), for yielding some of his time to
our people, as I do not have enough time left.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, first of all, there are no better
committees that one can serve on than the authorization or
appropriations defense committee. Once we get to the floor, that is
different, because there are those people that do not support national
security.
Mr. Chairman, I want to talk about the health care issue. And if the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and the gentleman from Missouri
(Mr. Skelton) would listen, this is important.
The subvention bill is my bill, my original bill. I put it through to
get 100 percent of coverage for the subvention that the gentleman from
Mississippi wants to do. But I want to tell my colleagues that, even
though it is my bill, and I have the most to gain, I would love to have
the veterans saying, ``Duke Cunningham's bill is out there and it is
100 percent,'' it has its limitations. If someone lives close to a
hospital, then subvention is good, but it is just a Band-Aid.
I put it in because we were not doing enough for our veterans and we
could not get movement. Tri-Care is the same thing. We could go ahead
and make that 100 percent right now, but I want to take care of those
veterans that are in the rural areas who do not have access to Tri-Care
or subvention. If we do this, we could mess up the whole program and
what we are trying to do to help veterans.
Do not demagogue the issue with the Democrat leadership. And those
people that support what the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) is
doing are mistaken.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).
Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from
Missouri for yielding to me, and I rise in support of
H.R. 4205, the
National Def
