Duncan Hunter

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Texas. The gentlewoman brought up some points about a ship, which I didn't name. The Coast Guard hasn't built an icebreaker in almost 50 years. We only have one. There is only one Jones Act ship in the entire country. It is the Aiviq, but there is only one. All we say here is that it has to got to be an American-made ship. That is what the Jones Act is. If we are going to build an icebreaker with U.S. taxpayer dollars, we are going to use an American-made, and American-crewed, and American- steel ship. Mr. Garamendi, the ranking member on my subcommittee, has voted for amendments like this in the past, and he supports amendments like this going forward. Anything that puts Americans to work, that gives us more than the one icebreaker that works for 6 months out of the year, this is a step in that direction. This is simply for sea trials. This is so that the Coast Guard, because they haven't made an icebreaker in 50 years, they can take one out besides the Healy, which is a medium icebreaker that they operate and ask: Hey, what do we need here? Do we need to expand the bow, expand the stern? How could we make this what we want? That is all we are doing here, and it is $5 million. This is a step in the right direction. Otherwise, we are never going to have an icebreaker. We are not going to be able to compete in the Arctic. It will be energy exploration for Russia and China, and not us because we are not going to be there unless we start right now in this appropriations bill. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chair, how much time is remaining?

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, my amendment transfers $5 million from the Coast Guard's Operating Expenses account to its Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation account. The intent is to support sea trials for a Jones Act compliant icebreaker so the Coast Guard can determine whether a leased vessel can meet its immediate needs in fulfilling its 11 statutory missions around the globe. I am going to stop my diatribe here. Steve Scalise has a statement. He is in his rehabilitation center, but he actually cared enough to write this. I am going to speak here, and these are his words, not mine: ``I support this amendment that will improve America's strategic, economic, and national security interests in the Arctic. As other countries are advancing their interests in the Arctic, the U.S. continues to lag behind. This amendment makes clear that Congress supports moving forward in identifying options for icebreaking capabilities in the Arctic. ``The Coast Guard has repeatedly stated we need a fleet of icebreakers to maintain the presence necessary in the Arctic and Antarctic to meet and protect U.S. sovereign interests and protect life and property at sea. Currently, the U.S. has two icebreakers--one of which is our Nation's only heavy icebreaker and is over 40 years old. Russia has more than 40 icebreakers, with more under construction. ``As the Arctic becomes increasingly accessible to maritime traffic, tourism, and energy exploration, we cannot continue to defer this much- needed capability--especially at a time when China and Russia are increasing their presence in the Arctic, expanding their icebreaker fleets, and encroaching over the extended U.S. continental shelf. ``I urge support for this amendment that will address this immediate and necessary investment and protect U.S. national security interests.'' That is from Steve Scalise. Now back to my words. To help narrow this capability gap between America and our peer competitors, the Coast Guard should examine the lease of icebreakers that could be deployed in the near term. My subcommittee has held countless hearings on this issue, and I am convinced that a short-term lease of an existing icebreaker is one of the best chances to ensure the Coast Guard can meet its near-term and urgent mission objectives in the Arctic. Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter), the chairman.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2825 includes H.R. 2518, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2017, in division E. The Coast Guard Authorization Act is a product of bipartisan efforts of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, specifically through Chairman Shuster's leadership and the efforts of Ranking Member DeFazio and Ranking Member Garamendi and our great staff, Dave Jansen and John Clark Rayfield. The Coast Guard Authorization Act includes an authorization of funding for fiscal years 2018 and 2019 to support the Coast Guard and its servicemembers. It is important to remember the Coast Guard is one of the five Armed Forces, and even though it is outside of the Department of Defense, the service plays a critical role in protecting our country. It is unique in being the only armed force with law enforcement authorities, and this combination allows the service to perform its multitude of missions. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has been overseeing the Coast Guard for more than two decades and moved legislation to support the service in each Congress since 1995. The text of the Coast Guard Authorization Act is a product of hearings, discussions with the Coast Guard, and regulated industries. The bill does four main things: Clarifies acquisition authorities to be used by the Coast Guard; Updates certain service authorities to provide them parity with the other Armed Forces; Amends a variety of Coast Guard regulatory authorities; and Provides regulatory relief for fishing and maritime transportation industries. The Coast Guard Authorization Act is a great bill. I urge Members to support it and the passage of the broader bill, H.R. 2825.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. This amendment limits the ability of foreign crewmembers working on foreign ships in foreign waters to sue in U.S. courts when a remedy is available in their home country or the country of the ship on which they serve. That is it. They can still sue. Trial lawyers around the world can rejoice because these crewmembers can come back to their home countries and they can sue and sue and sue. They just can't do it in the U.S. if it didn't happen in U.S. waters. It is that simple. Again, a foreign mariner operating on a foreign ship in foreign or international waters should avail themselves of the courts in their home country or the vessel's home country before using U.S. courts. That is it. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, this important amendment would help safeguard U.S. courts against crowding of court dockets by foreign maritime crewmembers. It simply clarifies where the claim must be brought when the case has no meaningful connection to the United States. Specifically, the amendment limits the ability of foreign crewmembers working on foreign ships in foreign waters to sue in U.S. courts when a remedy is available in their home countries or the country of the ship on which they served. If no such remedy is available abroad, the amendment would allow those crewmembers to file suit in the United States, assuming they could meet the same burden needed to file any other suit. To be clear, again, this amendment in no way restricts a foreign crewmember's access to judicial relief if they are injured or suffer some other damage as a result of working on a foreign vessel. It simply says that they need to seek relief in their home country or the home country of the vessel on which they served before seeking relief in U.S. courts. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wilson).

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the minority leader's words. I did three tours as a U.S. marine. This is the silliest opposition to this amendment that I have ever heard. You are joining the U.S. military. Choose what gender you are before you join. We are not saying that transgender people can't serve, but if you are going to take the big step of serving in the U.S. military, figure out whether you are a man or a woman before you join up. We are not stopping transgender people from joining. We are saying taxpayers in this country right now are not going to foot the bill for it. This is a silly thing. It is time to put this to bed. I support the gentlewoman's amendment. Let's Make America Great Again.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I would like to associate myself with the gentleman's remarks and thank him for all of his hard work, and especially Dave Jansen and John Rayfield, the two Coast Guard savants of the staff on the Transportation Committee. Those are the gentlemen who did this, who really understand this code, and who made it better for future Congress and future staff, so they can actually see what is going on with the Coast Guard, and maybe the Coast Guard might understand what is going on with the Coast Guard a little bit better. I would like to reiterate that H.R. 1726 is a straightforward bill. It reorganizes title 14 and does not make any substantive changes. Madam Speaker, I urge Members to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUNTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. After 68 years, H.R. 1726, the Coast Guard Improvement and Reform Act will reorganize and modernize title 14, Coast Guard, United States Code. Title I of the bill reorganizes existing sections of the code within the title to provide a more uniformed, logical structure. It makes no substantive changes to the reorganized sections. Title II includes amendments to title 14. The Coast Guard requested uniformity in how its advisory committees operate. Title II transfers the advisory committees to title 14 from title 46 and includes changes to ensure uniformity in committee operations. Title II also transfers sections in title 33 and 50, dealing with port safety into title 14, to colocate them with similar authorities. In 2002, port security provisions were similarly reorganized, and this follows that pattern. No substantive changes were made to those sections either. The transfer allows for better organization of the code and makes it easier for the public and the Congress to find the governing laws of the Coast Guard. Lastly, the title also amends the primary duties of the Coast Guard to clarify their defense readiness status, and it repeals an unused authority. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks, and to include any extraneous material on H.R. 1726.

Mr. HUNTER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1726) to amend title 14, United States Code, to improve the organization of such title and to incorporate certain transfers and modifications into such title, and for other purposes.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mariachi Legend Oscar Amezcua who, from his humble beginnings in Jalisco, Mexico, immigrated to San Diego in 1945 and quickly became an icon in Hispanic culture. Oscar's skills earned him a spot on the renowned Mariachi Vargas de Tecalitlan, which was just the start of his distinguished career. Oscar would go on to establish his own group, Mariachi Guadalajara, all while raising his three sons Carlos, Oscar, Alex, and his daughter Lucia with his wonderful wife Gloria. Oscar Amezcua has dedicated his life to creating and providing us with music that has made significant contributions to San Diego's music and culture and is credited by many with bringing Mariachi music to San Diego. Recently, at the age of 87, Oscar celebrated this past Cinco de Mayo celebration by performing at a special concert in San Diego's famous Balboa Park and was recognized by San Diego Mayor Kevin Falconer, who declared May 5, 2017, as ``Oscar Amezcua Day--The Father of San Diego Mariachi Music.'' I ask my fellow colleagues to join me in recognizing Oscar's contributions to San Diego's music and Hispanic culture and I look forward to his continued involvement for years to come.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, each of us that serve in this distinguished body has the deepest and most profound respect for the men and women who serve in America's Armed Forces. It's because of their service and sacrifice that this great nation is able to carry the banner of freedom across the globe and the American people sleep safe at night. Throughout history, Americans have faithfully answered the nation's call through periods of conflict and peace--and each of the service branches have earned their place as pillars of America's defense shield. That shield first and foremost starts at America's shores and it's the Coast Guard that is the nation's first line of protection against criminals and contraband entering the country through the seas. The Coast Guard's backbone is its personnel and I've had the great honor of serving as Chairman of the House Subcommittee with direct purview over this great organization, which has afforded me the privilege to observe our Coast Guard in action. But on this specific occasion, I want to recognize one Coast Guardsman in particular who's had not only an immense impact on the organization itself, but also this entire institution. Commander JoAnn Burdian has led the Congressional Affairs office for the Coast Guard for the last several years and today marks her last day serving in a capacity that has made us wiser and even more appreciative of the immense work shouldered by the Coast Guard each and every day. Her career in the Coast Guard will continue in her new assignment in Seattle, Washington, but her departure no doubt is a great loss for the entire Congress. Even so, our loss here is the Coast Guard's gain--and I have all the confidence that Commander Burdian's exemplary leadership and talents will provide tremendous value to the next generation of leaders that will continue serving the nation's interest as members of the Coast Guard. And when I think of the type of leader that this nation depends on to lead America's men and women in uniform, Commander Burdian is the example to follow. Her reputation has been forged through years of operational experience and leadership, and her sense of commitment to service and country has always defined her approach to representing the best interests of the Coast Guard. Commander Burdian is a relentless advocate for her service. Her pioneering spirit and deep understanding of Coast Guard programs and priorities have informed me and others in our collective work and the Coast Guard is on better footing today thanks to her immense contributions. I'm honored to have served with such an outstanding patriot and I want to wish Commander Burdian the best of luck as she endeavors on a new assignment and the next chapter of her life. She's a Coast Guardsman at heart--but I'm also proud to call her a friend. And I ask today that we all recognize this great American for all the work she's done and will continue doing on behalf of the nation.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and celebrate the service of Lieutenant Commander John J. Parma, who will retire from the United States Navy this month after 21 years of distinguished and faithful service to our nation. Since graduating from class 214 of Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training, LCDR Parma has participated in numerous combat missions around the world. His service has taken him from West Africa to Bosnia. Additionally, he has executed many combat special reconnaissance missions behind enemy lines in Afghanistan and sensitive site exploitations in Iraq, which have earned him numerous awards and accolades. By his side throughout his successful career and arduous deployments have been his wife, Megan, and their children Madison, Brooklyn, Dominic, and Kennedy. Their love and support has aided and strengthened LCDR Parma throughout his service, and I congratulate them as well on this special occasion. I am proud to share in the celebration of LCDR Parma's military career, and as he and his family move to this next chapter of his life, I wish LCDR Parma fair winds and following seas as he embarks on his future endeavors.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. He turns to me and he says: Lieutenant Hunter, good to see you. I said: good to see you, sir. I was already sweating and shaking, speaking to a one-star general officer. For a lieutenant, that could be very trying. He said: Did you kill him? I said: Kill who, sir? He said: the guys who ambushed you. I said: no, sir. We followed procedure and drove out of the ambush area. He said: next time, son, you need to kill them. Hearts of every single man and woman in the U.S. Armed Forces will be filled with pride when John Mattis is sworn in as the next Secretary of Defense.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 84. Here is what I think this is about. We feel slighted. We in Congress feel slighted that the Trump administration did not deign to have General Mattis come and speak to us, the House, which is not required by any law, not required by any statute. We feel slighted. I do feel the same way that the ranking member feels, in terms of how the administration is treating the House of Representatives and this body. But it is times like this where we need to rise above the slights from the future Trump administration. I think there are going to be a few more. I think this future administration does not hold this body in the highest regard. That is going to become evident over the next 4 years. I think we are going to have to take things like that as a body and do what is best for this Nation. That is why they argue with the process and that the House was slighted by the future President. I understand it. I feel that as well. But it is time for us to say: hey, we need to be above that. This is about the future of our Nation, it is about our men and women who are serving in conflict right now, under fire, and they need General Mattis as their Secretary of Defense. For those who assert that the Marshall prohibition, which bars, in the absence of a waiver, a general from becoming Secretary of Defense, a glance at the operational chain of command is in order. Under the U.S. Constitution and statute, the command of the Armed Forces flows from the President to the Secretary of Defense to the combatant commanders around the world. The idea that a link in the chain of commanding operations--namely, the Secretary of Defense-- cannot be a military leader is nonsensical. General Mattis will bring insight to a job that no background in academia or business could ever provide. Lastly, when I met General Mattis for the very first time, I was going to Iraq from Kuwait. We got ambushed by machine gun. I got shot in the arm. He drops into my Humvee. We pull out of the ambush area. My convoy gets up to Dewaniya where Jim Mattis is. I had never met him. I had heard of him a little bit. I was a lieutenant in the Marine Corps. I didn't know much about much at that point. There is General Mattis in the operation center.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1296, a bill to amend the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act to clarify certain settlement terms, approves and ratifies a settlement agreement entered into among the United States; five Bands of Mission Indians in northern San Diego County; the City of Escondido, California; and the Vista Irrigation District. The settlement agreement was contemplated by the 1988 San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act, in which Congress, seeking to end decades of litigation, created a $30 million trust fund to be provided to the Bands with interest upon execution of a settlement. That amount was appropriated for the trust fund in 1989. The parties' settlement agreement requires ratification and approval by Congress in order to be effective, hence the introduction of H.R. 1296. After the House Natural Resources Committee reported H.R. 1296, the Congressional Budget Office concluded that the bill would increase net direct federal spending by $18 million over the 2017 through 2026 period. After further discussions, the bill was amended in a way that CBO concluded would eliminate the $18 million spending effect. Specifically, the amended H.R. 1296 provides that the money in the trust fund--rather than becoming fully available to the Bands immediately upon the settlement taking effect as the 1988 Act provided--would be made available at the rate of $3.7 million per year, with the Bands having the option to withdraw less than that amount. The House passed H.R. 1296 with this amendment on September 22, 2016. The only change regarding the trust fund that H.R. 1296 as amended makes to the 1988 Act is to change the rate at which the money in the trust fund is made available to the Bands. The full amount of the fund that Congress appropriated in 1989, including the interest that has been and will continue to be earned on that money, is unchanged. And crucially, the agreement to limit the annual allocations to no more than $3.7 million does not affect the Bands' right to eventually receive all of the money in the trust fund once the settlement takes effect.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We need polar icebreakers. This body is going to push; Mr. Garamendi and I are going to push and push until we have polar icebreakers and we have at least \1/140\ the capability of Russia. That is a pretty low bar that we are setting for ourselves, but we are going to set it right here, right now, in this body. Let's at least have \1/140\ of the capability or Russia, build those polar icebreakers. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support H.R. 5978. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5978.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, now we are going to get back to H.R. 5978, which is a very good bill in and of itself that, once again, doesn't have the language that we tried to get in. H.R. 5978, the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Amendments Act of 2016, is a catch-all bill that addresses a number of different Coast Guard and maritime transportation issues. The bill involves improvements to the Coast Guard acquisition authorities to ensure the acquisition program keeps in mind the needs of Coast Guard operating units when acquiring assets. This provision also requires an analysis on the use of multiyear procurement and block buy authorities related to the purchase of Fast Response Cutters, Offshore Patrol Cutters, and polar icebreakers, but just a report. We already know from watching the Navy do business for the last few decades that block buys save hundreds of millions of dollars. At the request of the GAO, the bill repeals a GAO report regarding disbursements from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. The information that was collected by GAO will be incorporated into an existing Coast Guard report. Due to certain recent weather events impacting a Coast Guard pier in Wilmington, North Carolina, the Coast Guard is required to issue a one- time report detailing short- and long-term plans to replace and maintain the pier. Certain fishing industries will be assisted by the bill, including those that would be affected by a prescribed Alternative Safety Compliance Program to be issued by the Coast Guard by January 1, 2017. If the service does not issue the program by January 1, 2017, which is hopefully the case, the bill would provide a 3-year window for industry compliance from the date the Coast Guard issues the program. It has been a long-term interest for many, including Ranking Member Garamendi, who has been instrumental--and I would say more instrumental than myself--in preparing the language included in this legislation that there be a reliable land-based positioning, navigation, and timing system to complement, supplement, and back up the Global Positioning System that we now use, the GPS. We have all seen what the Chinese can do now in knocking down satellites. If our GPS goes out, there is no other way for us to navigate the oceans or to navigate land. The eLoran system does this to ensure the continuous availability of uncorrupted or non-degraded signals for military and civilian users. The bill directed the Coast Guard to establish and maintain such a backup system. Aids to navigation are important tools that allow vessels to safely navigate waterways. The bill would allow the Commandant, subject to appropriations, to reimburse a non-Federal entity for costs incurred by that entity to construct and establish an aid to navigation that would otherwise be constructed by the Coast Guard. Aids to navigation facilitate safe and efficient maritime transportation on federally authorized navigation channels. Specific conditions for reimbursement are outlined. Reimbursements for a single project are limited to $5 million, and the authority expires 4 years after the date of enactment of the bill. There are concerns with the Coast Guard's Western Alaska Captain of the Port Zone approving alternate planning criteria for areas covering only a portion of the zone. This action would create two adjacent areas with different levels of prevention and response preparedness. This bill requires public notice, an economic study, and a report to Congress on the study before approval of any criteria not covering the full Western Alaska zone. Lastly, the bill makes a variety of technical changes to provisions in enacted Coast Guard Authorization Acts. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.