Paul Gosar

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to my distinguished colleague from the State of Florida (Mr. Posey).

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 451, introduced by my colleague, Representative Bill Posey of Florida, would designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 500 North Brevard Avenue in Cocoa Beach, Florida, as the Richard K. Salick Post Office. Richard Salick was a devoted and charitable member of his community in Cocoa Beach, Florida. Salick was an internationally-renowned surfer who competed on both the U.S. and world surfing teams in the 1960s and 1970s. Tragically, Salick was diagnosed with kidney disease in 1973, but he persevered and was able to touch the lives of everyone who had the pleasure of meeting him. He became a tireless advocate with the National Kidney Foundation, to assist their efforts to support patients and to raise money for their care. Salick founded the National Kidney Foundation Surf Festival in 1986, which donates its proceeds to the National Kidney Foundation. Mr. Salick passed away at the age of 62 in 2012. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 451) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 500 North Brevard Avenue in Cocoa Beach, Florida, as the ``Richard K. Salick Post Office''.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. I urge all Members to join me in support of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This legislation, introduced by Ms. Norton, would provide increased flexibility to the District of Columbia courts and related entities. Among other provisions, H.R. 4185 would allow the D.C. courts to collect outstanding employee debts or overpayments, and authorizes its executive officer to purchase and provide uniforms for employees whose responsibilities warrant wearing uniforms. The bill authorizes the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency to develop and operate incentive programs for sentenced offenders, such as vocational and educational training, and it allows the Public Defender Service to accept volunteer service. I want to thank Ms. Norton for all of her work on this bill, and I urge all Members to support this. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to save taxpayers money, help the Department of Energy avoid duplicative programs, and to ensure its limited resources focus on programs directly related to its mission to ensure energy security for the United States. This simple amendment would prohibit the use of funds to be used towards the proposed Climate Model Development and Validation program within the Department of Energy. The duplicative and wasteful nature of this new program has been recognized by several outside spending watchdog groups. My amendment is supported by the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, the American Conservative Union, Eagle Forum, and the Taxpayers Protection Alliance. The committee has recommended no funding for the new climate model development and validation activity in the report. I commend the committee for this recommendation and their work on this issue. I feel strongly that the full House of Representatives needs to support the committee recommendation and send a strong message to the Senate that we should not be wasting taxpayer resources on new programs that compete with the private sector and should be funded through private investment. If funded, this program would be yet another new addition to the ever-growing list of global warming programs that have been instituted and funded all over the Federal Government in recent years. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service estimates this administration has already squandered $77 billion from fiscal year 2008 to 2013 studying and trying to develop global climate change regulations. Consequently, I am very concerned by ongoing efforts by this administration to waste even more taxpayer dollars on new programs for Climate Model Development and Validation. The President's budget request for this program states: New investment in Climate Model Development and Validation will enable restructuring the model architecture, new software engineering and computational upgrades, and incorporating scale-aware physics in all model components. Climate modeling and all of these things are being done by dozens of government, academic, business, and nonprofit organizations across the globe. While research and modeling of the Earth's climate and how and why the Earth's climate is changing can be of value, it is not central to the Department's mission. Considering the extensive work that is being done to research, model, and forecast climate change trends by other areas in government, in the private sector, and internationally, funding for this specific piece of President Obama's climate agenda is not only redundant, it is also inefficient. I thank the chairman and committee for their work on this bill, and this issue specifically. This amendment is about effective use of taxpayers' money, and I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have amendment No. 173 at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to save taxpayer money and get the government out of the business of subsidizing expensive toilet exchanges and upgrades that yield highly questionable returns. This amendment has support from several spending watchdog groups, including the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, Eagle Forum, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, and Generation Opportunity. If toilet exchange programs were as efficient as the EPA and Bureau of Reclamation claim, then such products would save consumers so much money and water over time that they would sell themselves in the private marketplace and would not need taxpayer subsidies. According to the House Committee on Natural Resources, the Bureau of Reclamation's own data show that the agency has awarded a number of questionable grants on these projects since 2005, totaling almost $2 million. The Federal expenditures spent on toilet exchange programs include a $200,000 grant to San Francisco in 2007 and a $300,000 grant to Texas and California during 2011. Further, in 2013, Reclamation awarded nearly $210,000 for high- efficiency flush valves to be installed on urinals in one city in California as part of its WaterSMART program, despite the fact that the investment on this project is estimated to save only 123 acre-feet of water per year. For 2014, the agency wishes to grant funds toward a nearly million- dollar project for indoor water-efficient fixtures and toilet upgrades in California. At the same time, Federal policies have allowed for more than 300 billion gallons of water to be diverted into the San Francisco Bay and Pacific Ocean to protect a 3-inch fish, known as the Delta smelt. If we are truly concerned about saving water, then we should, instead, invest in new infrastructure and water storage projects, including reservoirs, which would yield significantly higher returns on our investment. Our country's Federal multipurpose dams and reservoirs provide abundant amounts of water and allow for clean hydropower generation. This infrastructure investment helps provide the foundation for economic growth and long-term job security. Unfortunately, the Obama administration continues to focus solely on conservation and has actually taken action to reduce water storage capacity--actions which include calling for the removal of four privately held dams. This defies common sense. We should, instead, have a balanced approach that includes both conservation and storage. Expensive toilet exchange programs are not the answer, and here are the facts and figures about those programs. Customers are eligible for a $100 rebate for installing 1.28-gallon toilets in exchange for their 1.6-gallon toilets. These new toilets cost between $200 and $500 each. An average toilet is flushed six times per day, while each federally- subsidized upgrade yields about $7 per year in water and utility savings. Thirty-year mortgages provide quicker returns on investments. The kicker is these taxpayer-funded toilets are significantly smaller and, in many cases, have to be flushed twice. Furthermore, these government-subsidized toilets are a bad investment, as they eventually leak. If people are going to spend $200 to $500 on new high-efficiency toilets, a $100 rebate from the Federal Government is not what makes their decisions to purchase the toilets in the first place. At the rate we are subsidizing this program, we may as well be flushing taxpayer dollars down these upgraded toilets. With this ludicrous return on investment, it should go without saying that these projects are a waste of hard-earned taxpayer money. I ask you to ponder on the countless ways this money could be spent more wisely, including on investments to increase water storage capacity. This amendment is about the effective use of taxpayer money, and I ask my colleagues to support it. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is not about making a statement on climate change or the validity of climate science. This is an amendment about fiscal responsibility and efficiency. More than 50 universities and academic institutions around the globe are engaged in climate modeling. This particular issue has been addressed very well by the academic and the nonprofit sectors with much greater efficiency and speed than any government bureaucracy can ever look at. The President has already spent $77 billion since 2008. This is on top of the billions of dollars being spent by institutions and organizations around the world. Let's start talking about that. The Nation is currently $17.5 trillion in debt. The Federal Government spends a trillion more dollars than it takes in. Fact: more than 50 of the world's leading scientific institutions are already deeply engaged in climate modeling and spending billions of their own dollars on this research. Fact: Congress must make tough choices to cut duplicative programs in government and get Federal spending under control. Let's look at these prestigious universities that obviously don't know what they are doing: the University of Colorado at Boulder, Harvard University, MIT, Princeton University, the University of Arizona, Arizona State University, the University of Chicago, the University of California at Berkeley. Mr. Chairman, the last I looked, these are some of the leading institutions in the country, and I think they know a little bit better than the Federal Government. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a simple amendment to save precious taxpayer resources and to reduce the amount of money spent on paying inefficient bureaucrats with a history of mismanagement and disorganization. Specifically, my amendment reduces net outlays for the administration of the Army Corps of Engineers by $1 million from the fiscal year 2014 level, which reduces the budget authority in this bill for the Corps' administration by 2.25 percent. The Corps of Engineers received an overall increase of $25 million in the bill above the fiscal year 2014 level. While I can support more funds going to worthwhile projects, I take issue when the Corps continually receives the budget request level for administrative officials who fail to curb their bad behavior and competently perform their jobs. I would like to read a quick excerpt from the committee report for this bill that highlights some of the continued mismanagement from within the Corps of Engineers: The Corps of Engineers has suffered several significant failings in recent years that have resulted in cost increases for projects, such as the massive cost escalation associated with the Olmsted Locks and Dam project. In some cases, the administration has not requested authorization increases in time for the Congress to act before projects experience delays. The committee enacted new requirements in fiscal year 2014 intended to address these problems, but to date--5 months after enactment--the Corps has not complied with the committee's directions. In addition, the committee notes that the Corps still has not submitted a complete work plan for fiscal year 2014 nor complied with several other oversight initiatives necessary to safeguard taxpayer dollars. Another blatant example of the administrative ineptitude within the Corps is the agency has now been working on one chief's report for a particular project in Arizona for 5-plus years now. Throughout the country, this is the norm and not the exception to the rule. This failure to perform even the most simple of tasks drives up the costs of projects and leads to projects not being completed in a timely manner. Due to frustrations with these delays, Congress was forced to enact a provision that recently passed WRRDA that requires Chiefs' reports to be completed within 3 years. Let me provide another example of mismanagement by the Corps in Arizona. An important flood control project was initially estimated by the Corps to cost roughly $24 million. Now, several years past the deadline for completing this project, the total cost estimate for the project exceeds more than $100 million. I realize projects have issues sometimes, but this is a clear example of failed leadership within the agency. Unfortunately, mismanagement has become prevalent in the Corps for quite some time now. Several years ago, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, a Democrat from South Dakota, said the Corps is ``one of the most incompetent and inept organizations in all the Federal Government.'' One final example of significant malfunction within the Corps' administration was cited by the Government Accountability Office. The GAO had nothing but negative things to say about a Corps study justifying a $332 million project in the Delaware River. GAO found that the study ``was based on miscalculations, invalid assumptions, and outdated information.'' GAO found that projected benefits for this project were nearly 75 percent fraudulent. With an almost $18 trillion debt that continues to grow, it is irresponsible to throw more money at a department that cannot manage its own affairs. My amendment does not reduce funding for important projects. Again, my amendment simply reduces net outlays for incompetent Corps of Engineers bureaucrats from the fiscal year 2014 level. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank the chairman and ranking member for their continued work on the committee. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 1-year anniversary of the tragic Yarnell Hill Fire, which claimed the lives of 19 elite Granite Mountain Hotshot firefighters in late June of 2013. The Yarnell fire began when lightning struck approximately 30 miles southwest of Prescott, Arizona, off of Highway 89 on June 28, 2013. The blaze burned approximately 8,400 acres and damaged more than 1,000 structures over a 15-day period. During the disaster, 19 firefighters from the Granite Mountain Interagency Hotshot Crew lost their lives battling the fire, the sixth deadliest American firefighter disaster overall and the deadliest wildfire ever in Arizona. Indeed, this dark day yielded the largest loss of firefighter life since September 11, 2001. To this day, words cannot express my sadness and the depth of my condolences to the families of these brave 19 first responders who gave their lives protecting our community. I will certainly remember this horrible tragedy for the rest of my life, as well as the public memorial service that was attended by more that 1,200 members of our community. These brave men made the ultimate sacrifice fighting to protect our citizens, and for that we will be eternally grateful. Even though a year has passed, please continue to keep the families of these Hotshot firefighters in your prayers. Furthermore, I ask that the Federal agencies responsible for actively managing our forests not forget this tragedy and take the steps to prevent similar catastrophic wildfires from reoccurring. The citizens of Yarnell, Arizona, and the surrounding communities know all too well the importance of proactive wildfire management. While the wildfire that claimed the lives of 19 brave souls was one of the worst tragedies in the history of Arizona, millions more across the country are also impacted by these disasters. Looking back over the past year, it is important to highlight what progress has been made in finding commonsense solutions to preventing wildfires while still acknowledging the reality that more must and can be done. We owe it to our local heroes who risk everything in order to protect our lives, our communities, and our homes. Congress still needs to consider additional legislation that will work to get the executive branch out of the way when action must be taken swiftly. This problem can be mitigated by empowering the private sector to create rural jobs and resurrecting the timber industry as loggers thin millions of acres of badly overgrown Arizona forests. Although we are never going to prevent all forest fires, these legislative efforts will help make fires less frequent, less intense when they do occur. I remain optimistic that, above all else, the heroic actions of the Granite Mountain Hotshots will continue to inspire our leaders to make the necessary changes to prevent future devastation and destruction. We owe nothing less to these heroes. More importantly, I will continue to do everything in my power to ensure that their legacies live on and yield substantial forest management changes. I would like to conclude my remarks by reading the names and ages of these 19 firefighters in tribute to their service: Andrew Ashcraft, age 29; Robert Caldwell, age 23; Travis Carter, age 31; Dustin Deford, age 24; Christopher MacKenzie, age 30; Eric Marsh, age 43; Grant McKee, age 21; Sean Misner, age 26; Scott Norris, age 28; Wade Parker, age 22; John Percin, age 24; Anthony Rose, age 23; Jesse Steed, age 36; Joe Thurston, age 32; Travis Turbyfill, age 27; William Warneke, age 25; Clayton Whitted, age 28; Kevin Woyjeck, age 21; Garret Zuppiger, age 27. All these brave men were taken from us way too young leaving behind families and friends. Let us never forget their sacrifice. Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I rise to offer a commonsense amendment to the Department of Defense Appropriations Act which will further hold accountable foreign terrorist organizations in addition to those foreign governments that support their efforts. I will be brief as the cases made against these entities and governments are well-documented. Iran is possibly the largest known state sponsor of terrorism in the world, and the Obama administration is throwing out the baby with the bathwater in its negotiations with Iran on its nuclear aspirations. Syria has been listed as a state sponsor of terrorism since the State Department list was created in 1979. The ongoing atrocities on the ground in Syria should be more than enough to prohibit foreign assistance to this nation. Before moving forward, let me say that I recognize that these two nations are already ineligible for most forms of foreign assistance already, but we have seen the Obama administration's track record in terms of following the letter of the law. It enforces only the laws it agrees with. Now, speaking to the prohibition of assistance to the Palestinian Authority, on June 2, the Palestinian Authority announced a new unity government, which was supported by the Islamic militant group Hamas. To quote recent reports: The merger also appears to skirt, barely, U.S. prohibitions on aid to a Palestinian Government that has ``undue'' Hamas presence or influence. The Obama administration has worked behind the scenes to suggest terms for the new coalition government that would not trigger the U.S. ban, reasoning that the money helps preserve American leverage. Republican Senators Mark Kirk and Marco Rubio have called for a suspension and review of U.S. aid, saying the Palestinian announcement shows that Israel ``does not have a viable partner for peace.'' The unity government is an ``end run'' around U.S. restrictions, they said. I agree with those statements. With so much blood on its hands, this newly founded coalition of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas is not worthy of U.S. assistance. Just to be clear as day, I have included the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria--again, already listed as a foreign terrorist organization--to this list, in addition to all organizations currently designated by the Secretary of State. I understand the law, and I understand that the U.S. already has laws to prevent the transfer of assistance to these foreign terrorist organizations. It is just that I am not convinced that the President, his Attorney General, or any other member of his Cabinet Secretaries understands the laws of this Nation the way that I do or will follow those laws as U.S. citizens must. This is just one more attempt to double down on the letter of the law. I can only hope that the President sees the dangerous ways in which he has jeopardized our Republic's system of checks and balances and that he submits to the rule of law as do all Americans. It is long past time that this Congress checks this President and balances the powers of our national government. I urge the passage of this amendment, which will hold accountable those governments which are most hostile to the United States, Israel, and their allies. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I have amendment No. 153 at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I rise today to offer a cost-saving amendment to the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for the fiscal year 2015. This is a straightforward amendment that will help bring defense spending priorities in line with the fiscal realities that the United States currently faces. Specifically, this amendment would prohibit the Department of Defense from wasting precious taxpayer dollars on the purchase of more expensive fuels made out of biofuels that are not cost competitive. When our country is more than $17 trillion in debt, and every year the Federal Government continues to spend nearly $1 trillion more than it actually has, it is incumbent upon this Congress to get this reckless spending under control and to carefully scrutinize every dollar that is spent. The Department of Defense has been purchasing biofuels to substitute traditional petroleum-based fuels to run its ships, aircraft, and other vehicles. The problem is that currently, these fuels are more expensive than traditional fuels. Until a time when biofuels are cost competitive without any Federal subsidy, no Federal entity should be utilizing this fuel source. Let me be clear: I support a true all-of-the-above energy strategy which includes renewable energy sources like wind and solar, as well as traditional resources like natural gas and clean coal. I have nothing against biofuels that do not need significant Federal subsidies to exist in the open market. Unfortunately, the Department of Defense and other Federal agencies continue to waste precious taxpayer dollars to prop up this industry. Last year, the Defense Logistics Agency wanted to buy almost 15,000 gallons of biofuel. This year, the Defense Logistics Agency is seeking up to 37 million gallons of biofuel. Biofuels without Federal subsidies are nearly 15 times more expensive than conventional jet fuel. The biggest problem with this year's solicitation of nearly 37 million gallons is there is a $27.2 million Federal subsidy to make the biofuel blends ``cost competitive with their conventionally-derived counterparts.'' The purchase of biofuels which are not cost competitive has been so wasteful that a popular news site recently listed the practice on its list of ``Five Insanely Wasteful Projects the Pentagon is Spending Your Money On.'' I will read a brief excerpt from the article: In a nod toward sustainability, the U.S. Navy has been attempting to create a ``green fleet'' by adopting alternative biofuels. The catch is that the cleaner fuel costs $26 per gallon, which is much more expensive than the $2.50 the Navy pays for each gallon of petroleum. Despite reports that there isn't a clear long-term cost benefit of adopting biofuel, the Department of Defense has spent millions on private companies that are developing alternative fuels. And green projects aren't confined to a single branch of the military; last year, the Air Force paid for 11,000 gallons of biofuel at a rate 10 times higher than the price of regular jet fuel. Using the military as a vehicle to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on unproven green experiments is clearly a wasteful use of taxpayer money that must be stopped. We all must understand that the number one priority of the United States military--and, indeed, the Federal Government at large--is to defend the Nation from security threats. I would also like to bring up Admiral Mike Mullen, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He stated in July of 2010 that: The biggest threat that we have to our national security is our debt. Therefore, it is essential that we scrutinize every dollar we appropriate to ensure we are spending our limited resources prudently and judiciously. This amendment will help accomplish this goal. Madam Chairman, this amendment was carried last year by our newly elected majority whip, Steve Scalise; and it was adopted by this body by unanimous consent. As the Defense Logistics Agency is now proposing to purchase almost 2,500 times more fuel than last year, it only makes sense this agreement is agreed to yet again. Think about it. Last year, they wanted 15,000 gallons. This year, they want 37 million gallons of Federally subsidized fuel sources, just to meet an unnecessary mandate. This defies common sense, and we should not be wasting millions of dollars of taxpayer money in this manner. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I think in my statement it is all about balance. When we are talking about 37,000 times more biofuels at this time, I think that is out of whack. I think the gentleman also has to understand that some of the pollutants that actually are created by some of these biofuels may actually be even worse than what we see with carbons. The emerging technology shows that the pollutants actually created by burning these may be more insolvent than what we see in petroleum. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, this is common sense. Balance is everything. We have a balance of problems with spending. We have acknowledged that we want to see a proper balance in all the utilizations of energy. This country can be energy independent. What it means is not picking winners and losers, but actually using a conservative type of balance. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I want to remind the gentleman as to the ``one size.'' Really, one size? Terrorism is one size. There is a right and a wrong, and it all starts with big money. There has to be consequences for actions. Therefore, I ask for the adoption of this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I rise today to offer a commonsense, cost- saving amendment to the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2015. Specifically, my amendment prohibits the Federal Government from wasting more money on storage for eight patrol boats which have cost taxpayers $3 million, have never been used, and have been sitting in storage for almost 4 years. Recent media reports and an inspector general's report brought this issue to my attention, and the wasteful spending involved is deplorable. In 2010, the Federal Government spent more than $3 million on patrol boats for the Afghan National Police that were never shipped to landlocked Afghanistan. Even more troubling, the cost of each patrol boat was more than $265,000. The Washington Post has reported that similar patrol boats can be purchased in the United States for approximately $50,000 each. The Office of the Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, also known as SIGAR, was so concerned about this waste of taxpayer money that it conducted an investigation and recently released a report. The report includes a letter dated April 24, 2014, from the inspector general to the commanding general of the Combined Security Transition Command for Afghanistan. I would like to share a few excerpts from letter: I am writing to request information on a $3 million procurement of patrol boats for the Afghan National Police initiated by the Combined Security Transition Command for Afghanistan in 2010. My focus is on the operational requirements that initiated the procurement of the patrol boats for the Afghan National Police and the reasons for the cancelation 9 months later. Additionally, I am also interested in the requirement for the United States Government to pay for the storage and related expenses for these boats for the last 3 years, boats that apparently have no planned use. According to official at the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the patrol boats were manufactured and delivered to the Navy in 2011 and have been in storage at the Naval Weapons Station/Cheatham Annex, Yorktown, Virginia, ever since. The full report goes on to detail some other troubling findings, which include missing storage records, missing expenditure authorizations and justifications, and missing documents which should detail the reason for canceling the procurement order. The inspector general's June 6, 2014, letter is even more harsh as it stated: I continue to have concerns because the Combined Security Transition Command for Afghanistan was unable to answer a significant number of my questions regarding the patrol boats. The list of unanswered questions is particularly troubling. Further, the Combined Security Transition Command for Afghanistan's response indicates that its Security Assistance office led a review board that determined that the boats do not fill a valid requirement for Afghanistan. To help the inspector general better understand how these decisions were made and to help us prepare lessons learned reports intended to avert the waste of U.S. taxpayer funds in the future, please provide a detailed accounting of all the elements of the Security Assistance office review boat's proceedings which led to that decision, including transcripts, testimony, and exhibits. By letter today, I have also requested the Department of the Navy to provide their plans for disposition of the boats. I wholeheartedly agree with the inspector general, and not another penny of Federal taxpayer money should be spent on these boats that cost $3 million to produce, were never utilized, and have been sitting in storage since 2011. These boats either need to be put in the water or resold, per Federal law. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support passage of my commonsense amendment that will ensure better use of taxpayer money. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.