Tom Cole

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday the Rules Committee met and reported a rule for consideration of the House Report for H.R. 2863, the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2006. Mr. Speaker, when the Rules Committee met, it granted an open rule, providing 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations. This rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. For the purposes of amendment, the bill shall be read by paragraph. Additionally, this rule waives all points of order against provisions in the bill which fail to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI, and it authorizes the Chair to accord priority in recognition to Members who have pre-printed their amendments in the Record. It provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, the committee believes this rule will provide ample opportunity for Members to fully debate the funding of our national defense. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule for H.R. 2863 and the underlying bill. This important legislation takes dramatic steps to further prosecute the global war on terror, enhance our security, and improve the lives of our servicemen and women. It is a bill that fundamentally addresses many of the transformative challenges faced by our military in the future and implements many measures needed to meet those challenges. Mr. Speaker, the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and the full Appropriations Committee have presented us with an excellent bill. This bill provides us with a way to meet many of the current challenges that we face by addressing the immediate requirements of our forces as well as the ongoing need to transform our military through the adoption of new technology, advanced methods of warfare, and innovative changes in military doctrine. To fully appreciate the significance of H.R. 2863, one must understand the four long-term challenges that we seek to address in this legislation. The first long-term challenge is a direct result of the procurement holiday that was taken by our country in the 1990s. To understand the consequences of shortchanging our military during this era, one need only to recall the ammunition accounts as they were funded, or perhaps better described as not funded, during this period. The failure to maintain adequate stocks of ammunition is a shortcoming we are only now beginning to overcome. Additionally, one can see the adverse effects that a constant surge in deployments in the 1990s had upon the maintenance levels of our hardware. This bill takes important steps to rectify that problem associated with the procurement holiday. Mr. Speaker, the second long-term challenge we must address on a continual basis is related to the transformation of our military forces. The famous Goldwater-Nichols legislation of 1986 altered the manner in which we organize to fight wars and committed us to transforming the nature of our forces, transformation demands an ongoing strategic, operational, and tactical review of our needs in relation to technology, procurement and the development of joint warfighting capabilities. Each service, all our units and all our equipment must complement one another and contribute to the increased effectiveness of our forces. Transformation is not a goal in and of itself. It is a process of continuous change and adaptation that makes our forces more effective. This is an issue we must address on an ongoing basis. H.R. 2863 does just that. Mr. Speaker, the third long-term challenge we face is related to our force structure and manpower requirements. This legislation, while meeting the request of the President's budget, also continues to fund additional forces required to prosecute the global war on terror. This is a good start. In future years, we will need to closely examine and, I believe, increase the size of our forces. There is no short-term easy solution to recruiting and maintaining the larger forces I personally believe we will need in the dangerous world in which we live. Still, H.R. 2863 is a good interim step and one which we should take and support and build on in the coming years. The fourth long-term challenge faced by the military results from the global war on terror. This is not a conventional war. We are not fighting a nation state. We are fighting the adherents of a fanatical ideology that transcends national borders and takes root whenever and wherever it can. We are involved in a generational war against these fanatics that will last for decades. It will require a wide range of diplomatic, developmental, intelligence, communications, and civil affairs tools and activities to win. The military component of this effort will be expensive and ever- changing. Hence, I believe we took a wise and important step when we added $45.3 billion in bridge funding in ``Emergency Wartime Appropriations'' to this defense bill. It is something that indicates our understanding of the long-term nature of the challenge we face and our determination to commit the resources needed to be successful. Today, some Members may wish to have a broad discussion on the situation in Iraq. I welcome that debate, and the open rule attached to this legislation will allow that discussion. However, in the end, this bill is not about Iraq. It is about providing the men and women who defend our country with the tools they need to prevail against those who would do harm to the United States. After the collapse of the old Soviet Union, we took our security for granted and we underfunded the military for a decade. September 11, 2001, taught us the folly of our assumptions in this regard. Since that time, the administration and the Congress have made the tough decisions needed to rebuild our military and expand its capabilities while waging a war on terror. This bill is another step in that process. It is well crafted, essentially bipartisan, and moves us in the proper direction. Once passed, this legislation will enhance our security, enable us to fight the war on terror, and improve the quality of life for our servicemen and women. Mr. Speaker, to that end, I urge support for the rule and the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 315 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on H. Res. 293.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 293 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, to my good friends on the other side, I would simply point out that most of the speakers are actually members of the authorizing committee and passed out this bill 61 to 1, had opportunities to offer those amendments at the committee level, presumably did so, and if they did so, were not successful, and still felt the bill was worthy of being sent on to the floor for further consideration. In addition, the Rules Committee actually considered and has allowed 29 amendments, a majority of which are Democratic amendments. There is always going to be a judgment debate as to what should or should not be considered and how much time should be devoted in a process to any particular piece of legislation. So I respect the gentlewoman from California's opinion, but obviously we have a difference on this. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, in closing, I again want to draw the attention of the Members to the strengths of H.R. 1815. It takes many steps forward in reforming the procurement and acquisition systems, increasing end strength, and provides $49.1 billion in supplemental funds for the war on terror. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to respond just briefly to some of the concerns expressed on the other side of the aisle. First, about the process by which the Committee on Rules operated. I remind my good friends that this bill was again reported out of the House Committee on Armed Services by a vote that was nearly unanimous, only one dissent; that 29 amendments have been made in order; that the majority of those amendments are Democratic amendments; and that we will, obviously, have an additional opportunity to debate the full merits of the bill as we move forward. I think there is more than ample time for discussion and debate. Second, on the Reservist health care issue. This is a difficult issue, to say the least. It is an emotional issue and an important issue. I would like to point out that under the leadership of the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the Committee on Armed Services has made important progress in this particular area. It has extended the amount of time that members that are going to be deployed are eligible for TRICARE. It has extended the amount of time that those who are leaving service are able to enjoy the benefits of TRICARE. It has allowed additional time granted for time served in deployment and combat situations. So I think the Committee on Armed Services has expressed a continuous desire to keep looking at these issues. I have personally visited with the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), who is the subcommittee chairman responsible for this particular area; and he has assured me he wants to continue the progress that has been made over the last several years. Again, I remind my good friends there were many opportunities when they were in the majority to address these type of issues. While we have been in the majority, we have addressed concurrent receipt in a step-by-step process that is moving us in the right direction. We have addressed survivor benefits in a step-by-step process moving us in the right direction. And now we are addressing the critical issue of health care as well. So I think important progress is being made on all these fronts, Mr. Speaker. Finally, I would like to note that this legislation would not have been possible without much hard work on the part of the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter); the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member of the committee; and the other subcommittee chairmen, and finally the members of the Committee on Armed Services themselves. As evidenced by their hard work, this is a bipartisan bill that the vast majority of the House should be able to agree is a good product. H.R. 1815 passed in the committee, again by a vote of 61 to 1. It deserves the same strong bipartisan support on the floor, as does its underlying rule. Mr. Speaker, many today have complained about what they consider to be critical shortcomings in this legislation. No legislation is ever perfect; and as I said in my opening statement, the defense authorization specifically is more of an ongoing process than a final product. However frustrated some may be with particular aspects of H.R. 1815, it undoubtedly moves our military in the direction it needs to evolve and enhances the security of our country and the well-being of our men and women in uniform. I would urge the Members on the other side of the aisle to consider carefully what a ``no'' vote would mean and say to our servicemen and - women in the field. Therefore, I once again urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. That is correct.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. I am aware of that.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Reclaiming my time, I am also aware that the item the gentleman mentioned was actually stricken on the parliamentary question. I would like to submit for the Record the chairman of the committee's letter to that effect and also the statement from CBO upholding that decision. Committee on Armed Services, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC, May 20, 2005. Dear Armed Services Committee Colleague: This morning the Congressional Budget Office informed me via letter (copy attached), that the amendment agreed to during the committee's mark-up of H.R. 1815, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, extending TRICARE coverage to all reservists will result in additional direct (or mandatory) spending. As a result, the inclusion of this provision would cause the bill to exceed the mandatory spending allocation provided under the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget. Exceeding the mandatory allocation will cause H.R. 1815 to violate the Congressional Budget Act and subject the bill to a point of order against its consideration on the House floor. I have consulted the Chairman of the House Budget Committee on this matter and he informs me that if the bill is brought forward to the floor in violation of the Budget Act, he will exercise his prerogative to raise the applicable point of order and thus prevent its consideration on the floor. Accordingly, after informing Mr. Skelton and the sponsor of the amendment, I am exercising the authority granted to me by the committee to remove this section in order to bring the bill back into compliance with the Budget Act and eliminate this impediment to its floor consideration. In summary, if this action is not taken, a point of order will be raised and sustained against the bill and its consideration will be blocked. Sincerely, Duncan Hunter, Chairman. Attachment. U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Washington, DC, May 20, 2005. Hon. Duncan Hunter, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: As requested by your staff, we are sending you this letter containing our preliminary estimate of a provision in H.R. 1815, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, as ordered reported by the committee on May 19, 2005. The provision would provide access to TRlCARE health insurance benefits for reserve component personnel. Implementing that provision would have significant effects on both spending subject to appropriation and direct spending. The provision would affect direct spending by increasing mandatory expenditures in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program. On a preliminary basis, CBO estimates that enacting this provision would increase direct spending for the government's share of FEHB premiums for retirees by $5 million in 2006, $94 million over the 2006- 2010 period, and $269 million over the 2006-2015 period. Under the provision, all reservists in the Selected Reserve would be eligible to enroll in TRlCARE, the health insurance system for the Department of Defense (DoD). Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates that about 120,000 reservists work for the federal government. CBO expects that some of these reservists who are currently enrolled in the FEHB program would leave that program and enroll in the new TRlCARE for Reservists program because the premiums would be lower than for FEHB and the coverage would be more generous. Generally, TRICARE premiums are lower because medical costs are highly correlated with age--the average reservist is age 34 while the average for enrollees in the FEHB program (including retirees) is closer to age 60. Because the estimated health care costs for reservists switching to TRICARE are likely to be lower than the average per capita costs for all other enrollees in the FEHB program, average costs for the FEHB program would rise, even though its total costs would decline. Thus, CBO expects premiums for the remaining enrollees in the FEHB program would rise to cover the higher average cost. The government's share of premiums for annuitants (about 72 percent) is direct spending. In addition to the direct spending effects, this provision would affect spending subject to appropriation. CBO estimates that implementing this provision would increase spending by DoD for this new benefit by about $230 million in 2006, and $4.6 billion over the 2006- 2010 period, assuming appropriation of the estimated amounts. In addition, we estimate that spending for reservists in the Coast Guard would increase by $2 million in 2006 and $46 million over the 2006-2010 period, assuming appropriation of the estimated amounts. Finally, under this provision, spending by the federal government for active workers in the FEHB program would decline by an estimated $340 million over the 2006-2010 period. If you have any questions, the CBO staff contact is Sam Papenfuss, who can be reached at 226-2840. Sincerely, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.