Rodney Frelinghuysen

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, the President's budget requested $208.4 million for these Formerly Used Defense Sites. It is important to clean up these properties that have been used by the Department of Defense. May I say, our bill already provides $25 million for the cleanup of such sites over the President's request, so the administration isn't looking for any more money. While I sympathize with the gentleman's amendment, I cannot support his offset. I understand that his amendment intends to eliminate funding for the long-range standoff weapon, this cruise missile. This program will provide a new air-launched cruise missile to replace a rapidly aging AGM-86. This is essential to our strategic deterrent and our ability to hold enemy targets at risk from standoff distances. The Air Force requested $4.9 million for the program in fiscal year 2015 to continue studies and analysis in preparation for a formal acquisition program. This bill already takes a fiscally responsible $1.5 million cut from that amount. In a year of tight budget, the additional funding the committee has already provided for the cleanup of Formerly Used Defense Sites will accelerate the cleanup of the sites and reduce the long-term government liability, which is important. While I appreciate the gentleman's intent, I cannot support a cut that would eliminate a critical element of our military's future arsenal, so I oppose the amendment and urge a ``no'' vote. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, while I recognize the gentleman's concerns that the wounded warrior care program is effectively and efficiently monitored--and perhaps an outside group taking a look at it would not be a bad idea in and of itself--but removing $20 million from the aircraft procurement account, specifically that Navy account for Growlers, is excessive to fund a study that is really unrelated to the purpose of that aircraft. There are better ways to fund studies. We can request the Government Accountability Office--and our committee would be happy to do that--to do a study, one that will certainly cost less than $20 million. Additionally, the loss of funding for the Growler program will result in the loss of an airframe which is critical for the Nation's airborne electronic attack mission. We probably need more of these Growlers, rather than less. So I would be happy to work with the gentleman on finding another source for an outside study, and I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the ranking member, for any comments that he may care to make.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?

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

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?

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

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?

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

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?

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

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

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

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman bringing this important issue to my attention. A month or two ago you brought me together with some national leaders that are involved in modeling and simulation, and it was a real education for me. So like you, I do place a great importance on ensuring our troops have the best training and support available, and that is a very good way to educate them. I look forward to working with the gentleman to ensure our troops receive the training and equipment they need, and that our Nation's defense needs are met in a fiscally responsible manner.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Amendment Offered by Mr. Garamendi

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?

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

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Well, I am a strong supporter of the Joint Strike Fighter and, indeed, the B-61. We are doing things to make sure that it is everything that we anticipate it should be. I think the issue is worth discussing, but it was my understanding that you were planning to withdraw your amendment. Otherwise, I will make a point of order.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I make a point order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill. Therefore, it violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states, in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' The amendment requires a new determination. I ask for a ruling from the Chair.