Steve Knight

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate and honor the 70th anniversary of NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center, which was founded on September 30, 1946. In 1946 a group of officials from NASA's predecessor organization, the NACA, set up an operations base for our nation's effort in the race to achieve supersonic manned flight. A year later, on October 14, 1947, Air Force Captain Chuck Yeager became the first pilot to break the sound barrier in the experimental Bell X-1 aircraft. This achievement, one of many incredible ``firsts'' in our history, inaugurated a national legacy of excellence in aerospace that defines American power today. More X-planes followed the X-1, each building on our understanding of flight and projecting U.S. power further into air and space. Twenty years after Yeager, my father, Pete Knight, flew the X-15 at Mach 6.7. Even today that flight holds the world record for aircraft speed. What we learned from the X-programs was critical to our journey to the moon and paved the way for the Space Shuttle. Today NASA Armstrong continues to play an important role in the advancement of American aeronautics. It is pursuing a new generation of X-planes that will validate technology for faster, cleaner, quieter, and safer air travel over the next ten years. These bold programs are not only an exciting next step for our nation's legacy in aviation pioneering, but a necessary one, to renew our technological and competitive edge in aviation for the 21st Century. I congratulate the men and women of NASA Armstrong on their outstanding achievements over the past 70 years. Their unfailing pursuit of useful knowledge in atmospheric flight and airborne science is essential to the American scientific enterprise, as well as our engagement with international science community, the competitiveness of our private sector air and space companies, and our military's edge over potential adversaries. On behalf of the 25th Congressional District of California, I would again like to thank the NASA Armstrong team for all they do for our country.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, we talk a lot about cybersecurity in the context of national defense, and rightfully so. As a Nation, we ought to take steps now to ensure our security into the 21st century. But this is an issue that affects so many people. One that often gets overlooked is the small business community. As small businesses increasingly rely on Web-based products and services, they offer themselves more and more attacks from cybercriminals. Increases in technology have resulted in more sophisticated methods of cyber attacks, including hacking, malicious software, physical error, and lost or stolen devices. Even a simple cyber attack can effectively destroy a small business. In fact, 81 percent of small businesses are concerned about a cyber attack, but only 63 percent have a cybersecurity measure in place. Many businesses do not feel that they have the adequate legal protections to share cyber threat indicators with the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center, the NCCIC. It is clear to me that the public and private sector must work together to protect our small businesses. The Improving Small Business Cyber Security Act of 2016 eases the burden on small businesses facing cyber threats by providing access to additional tools, resources, and expertise through existing Federal cyber resources. I am proud to cosponsor this legislation, and it will lead to increased security for our small businesses, which will lead to greater growth and opportunities for them. I urge this Chamber to support this important measure.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to be here today to talk about what is very essential in America, and that is getting people to work and creating opportunities. Small businesses are essential to America's economic competitiveness. Not only do they employ half the Nation's private sector, but they also create two-thirds of the net jobs in our country. Unfortunately, in recent years, small businesses have been slow to recover from a recession and credit crisis that has hit them especially hard. Unlike large enterprises that can obtain funds from commercial debt and equity markets, small businesses must often rely on their own personal assets, retained earnings, community banks, and credit unions for needed capital. Last month, in the great city of Santa Clarita, I hosted my annual small business conference and expo. The conference was designed to hear from constituents exactly what was happening and their problems in small businesses. After listening to small-business owners and employees talk about the challenges they face, it was very evident that overregulation and lack of access to capital were the biggest issues. That is why I applaud and support Mr. Hurt's work on H.R. 5424, the Investment Advisers Modernization Act of 2016. The Investment Advisers Act has proven to be a duplicative burden that not only drives up costs but also blocks an efficient allocation of capital. We need to modernize these laws so that we can remove existing barriers and tailor our policy to help facilitate capital formation. H.R. 5424 would do exactly that. The legislation takes into consideration the business model of today's private equity and not one from 70 years ago. I look forward to continuing my work with Mr. Hurt, and with all of my colleagues here in the House, on commonsense measures like the Investment Advisers Modernization Act of 2016, so that we can ensure our small businesses can grow and employ more of our neighbors. Again, Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 5424, and ask my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill because access to capital is not a partisan issue, it is something that we need and will help our small businesses.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 441. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber), the chairman of the Energy Subcommittee.

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Today it is my honor and privilege to bring H.R. 5638, the Solar Fuels Innovation Act, to the House of Representatives with several of my colleagues. This bill, the first solar R&D bill to be considered on the House floor this Congress, will advance the policies of the America COMPETES Act that passed the House last year and establish a basic research initiative and groundbreaking solar fuels. The solar fuel process, also known as artificial photosynthesis, harnesses energy from sunlight to create a range of chemical fuels. Basic research in artificial photosynthesis and related research could lead to a solar fuels system that consolidates solar power and energy storage into a cohesive process and fundamentally change the way we extract energy from our natural resources. This would be a game changer for our country. Scientists up and down the coast of California are undertaking this research, from universities in southern California to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in the bay area. Research authorized in this legislation could solve this key scientific challenge and open the door for American entrepreneurs to develop the next generation of solar technology. The Solar Fuels Innovation Act will also enable universities and the DOE labs to train the next generation of scientists through a multidisciplinary approach, bringing together students in chemistry, physics, and materials science. This legislation provides a framework for more coordination between basic research and early-stage translational research in solar fuels. H.R. 5638 refocuses the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy on the early-stage research where the Federal Government can have the most significant impact. H.R. 5638 reaffirms the Federal Government's key role in research and development. This legislation is also fiscally responsible. By directing DOE to conduct this research using existing funds in the Office of Science and EERE, this legislation ensures the responsible use of limited tax dollars for the kind of research only the Federal Government has the tools to undertake. Today, we hear a lot of enthusiasm for solar power. But far too often, we focus on today's technology, not the fundamentally new approach to renewable energy that is possible with this early-stage research. In Congress, it is our responsibility to take the long-term view and be patient, making smart investments in research that can lead to the next big discovery. DOE must focus on the kind of groundbreaking R&D that can lead to disruptive technology. Solar fuels could someday change the way we think about solar power. I would like to thank my colleagues who joined me in introducing this bill and the many research institutions that offered letters of support. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 5638, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5638) to provide for the establishment at the Department of Energy of a Solar Fuels Basic Research Initiative, as amended.

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the full committee.

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 5638 authorizes innovative basic research that will lead to groundbreaking technology in solar fuels. By harnessing the expertise of our Nation's national labs and universities, now we can lay the fundamental scientific groundwork for the private sector's development of advanced solar fuels technology in the future. This could fundamentally change the way we extract energy from our natural resources. I want to thank Chairman Smith and my other colleagues on the Science, Space, and Technology Committee who have cosponsored H.R. 5638, including Dan Lipinski, Randy Neugebauer, Bill Posey, Randy Hultgren, Randy Weber, Brian Babin, and John Moolenaar. I also want to thank the dozens of researchers and stakeholders who provided feedback as we developed this legislation. Finally, I want to reiterate that H.R. 5638 authorizes no new Federal spending. I think we got that from Chairman Weber. The bill reads: ``No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated under this section. This section shall be carried out using funds otherwise authorized by law.'' I urge the adoption of this commonsense, bipartisan legislation, which is part of Leader McCarthy's Innovation Initiative. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chairman's and ranking member's work on this. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016. The aeronautics research carried out by the Federal Aviation Administration is vital to our Nation's prosperity. This is why earlier this year I introduced the FLIGHT R&D Act to authorize FAA's civil aviation research and development authorization activities. The FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 includes many important research and development provisions. Specifically, the bill incorporates provisions from the FLIGHT R&D Act that pertain to unmanned aircraft systems and cybersecurity. But it is only a stopgap measure. We as a nation must ensure our civil aeronautics research and development activities are fully authorized. I look forward to working with my colleagues in both the House and Senate on completing a multiyear FAA authorization that will incorporate provisions of the FLIGHT R&D Act that are not in today's extension. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. I thank the Speaker for letting us talk about such an important issue. Mr. Speaker, this issue has been bantered about in my district for many years, and we are finally getting recourse whereby we are going to have a memorial for the second largest disaster in California's history. It is interesting that this happened about 20 miles from my house, and many people will drive by and not know that the Saint Francis Dam is there. Yet the Saint Francis Dam was there in 1928, and it killed approximately 437 people, becoming the second largest disaster in California's history. Entire families were wiped out in the early hours of March 12, 1928, as nearly 12 billion gallons of water flowed down the San Francisquito Canyon, located in my district, all the way to the Pacific Ocean, which is 54 miles away. The dam was a project by the great William Mulholland, who was best known for creating the L.A. aqueduct system. However, this project of his ended in disaster, and it is one of the biggest civil engineering disasters in our Nation. Subsequently, the failure of the Saint Francis Dam changed the methods that were used to create new dams and to set new safety standards across the Nation, including the construction of the Hoover Dam. The dam site has remained unprotected and hidden for 88 years and needs to be protected. As well, there needs to be a memorial established for the victims and their families. My bill, H.R. 5244, seeks to memorialize these people who perished at the site of the Saint Francis Dam, and it creates a 440-acre national monument to preserve the site for educational purposes and to attract visitors. The remains of the dam are of local and national historical significance and should be protected for the future of all Americans. Mr. Speaker, I urge the support of this bill.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, on October 23, a gas leak was discovered at one of the 115 wells at the Aliso Canyon natural gas storage facility located in my district near Porter Ranch, California. I want to thank Congressman Brad Sherman, who lives in Porter Ranch and was a great partner in this terrible tragedy, making sure that people were taken care of and we could move past this and move quickly to getting this taken care of. This leak persisted for 118 days and was recognized as one of the largest disasters of 2015. During this time, residents of the surrounding neighborhoods suffered. Some temporarily relocated their families. Two schools were permanently relocated, at least for that semester, and many businesses were put on hold. As the Representative for Porter Ranch, my immediate priority was to protect my constituents who live there and then ensure that this situation was resolved as quickly as possible. At the same time, I wanted to make sure that a crisis like this can never happen in our communities again. Today we take a giant step forward in doing just that. In February, I introduced the Natural Gas Leak Prevention Act, which would require the Secretary of Transportation to issue adequate safety standards for natural gas storage facilities like Aliso Canyon in Porter Ranch and another very large facility, Honor Rancho in Valencia, which is also in my district. The SAFE PIPES Act contains the language from the Natural Gas Leak Prevention Act as well as provisions to create an Aliso Canyon task force that would investigate the causes of the leak and recommend further actions to prevent such disasters in the future. This is the type of swift and effective action that we need in order to prevent our communities and our families from tragedies like the Porter Ranch gas leak. I want to thank many people who were involved in this situation. A special thanks to Paula Cracium and the entire neighborhood council for providing support to the community in its time of need. I would also like to thank my colleague, Representative Jeff Denham, for his efforts to move this measure forward, including flying down to my district in March to tour the facility with the people involved. I would like to thank, as well, Senator Deb Fischer and Chairman Bill Shuster for their immense support and the many staff members who worked tirelessly on this legislation. This terrible tragedy had real impacts on the lives of thousands of people I represent. We cannot undo the damage that was done in Porter Ranch, but we can and must make sure every effort to mitigate the impacts on their day-to-day lives and assist in the recovery process. It is time to move forward on comprehensive legislation to prevent another incident from happening in our communities ever again. I would like to say that this would never, ever happen again; but without action, without us moving forward, without people working together and Congress working together, this can happen. So this type of legislation is needed, and the people who are affected appreciate this; and the people who have worked on this, I appreciate very much.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, May 13th, I was absent due to obligations in the district. Had I been present for the day's vote series, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 190, on ordering the previous question; ``yea'' on rollcall No. 191, on the rule providing for the consideration of S. 524; ``nay'' on rollcall No. 192, on approval of the journal; and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 193, on passage of S. 524 or the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act of 2016, as modified by the House amendment.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. I want to thank Congresswoman Kuster and Congressman Guinta for taking a leadership role in this epidemic. This is something that has gone across the country. We have seen huge rises in the Northeast and across the Midwest, but this is something that is not immune from any one of our districts. I, along with Representatives Esty and Costello, are sponsoring legislation to establish education programs for both consumer awareness and practitioner training to get at the root of most of these addictions. As a police officer for 18 years with the LAPD, I have seen an awful lot of drug addiction and drug addiction problems in our streets. We saw rock hit our streets many, many years ago, and that is still infiltrating many of our urban areas in America. Then we moved on to other drugs like meth and heroin. Heroin was always one of those kind of taboo drugs, but today it is not. We have seen a lot of the kids that get addicted because they got a sports injury or they got some other issue and have gotten a prescription drug, and they have moved on from the oxys when they have run out of these opioids and they have moved on to heroin. So it has not become a taboo drug. It has actually been a new drug that they can continue on their addiction; and they don't understand what it is doing to their body, and they don't understand the addictions that are hurting them and, in some instances, killing them. We have seen heroin and fentanyl taking over our streets and not just moving from California to Maine, but absolutely taking over America and hurting our kids and killing our kids in record numbers. My wife is also an NICU nurse. She has been an NICU nurse for about 20 years, and she has seen the effects of little babies that have come in and are now addicted to these drugs, and they are addicted to heroin. Seeing what this does to a baby that is born premature and now addicted to this drug makes your heart go out, but you also understand the problems that these babies are going to have probably for a very long time in their young lives. If we don't do something, this will continue to ravage our kids, and it will continue to kill our kids on our streets. If Congressman Guinta and Congresswoman Kuster had not brought this forward, then somebody would have had to. But who? So I say I thank you to them both for doing this. I know it ravages your State of New Hampshire, but it also affects our States and our cities across the country. Without leadership, this would have continued to go on. These bills that we are voting on will do something. They will have an effect. The local administrations have to have an effect. Our counties and our States have to have an effect or this will continue on. So I say I thank you to the gentlewoman and the gentleman, and I encourage everyone to vote on these.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Gibson for taking a leadership role in making sure that the military has a voice, and that is exactly what he has done in his tenure here in Congress. I rise in support of H.R. 4534. The POSTURE Act is not just something that we are asking for. It is basically the bare necessities. We are getting down to the limits. I can say, just on personal experience, when I enlisted in 1985 as a young person graduating high school and enlisting into the Army, I expected that we had such a great military and we had all of these things that were going to help me in my endeavors. As I went to Germany, my job was if something happened, if the Russians were going to come over, we were supposed to guard what was known as the Fulda Gap. I know that anyone who has ever served in the Army in the '80s knows what the Fulda Gap is. It was basically that line where we were going to stop the Russian Army. Unfortunately, they told us that we were going to be outrun about 11 to 1 at that time from the Russian Army. That is not something that an 18-year-old wants to know, is that the very first assignment that might happen in the cold war is you are going to go to a spot and you are going to be up against an 11-to-1 army. At that time, we had about 781,000 active Army folks. If we fast forward to today, we are sending people in rotations every 12 months or every 18 months. We are sending these people two, three, or four different rotations during their 4- or 6-year enlistments, and we have such a smaller active Army. I know that now folks out there will be talking about the total Army structure and the total structure. I think that is great that we have the Reserves and National Guard as part of the total structure. I believe in that. I think that is something that absolutely should happen. But if we are just doing apples to apples from 1986 to today, we go from about 780,000 to less than 500,000. That is getting down to a point where, can we fight on two fronts, can we help, can we do all of the missions that the Army has done for the last 200 years? I would say that we are getting down to that point where if we don't pass the POSTURE Act, we will go underneath that level and we will not be able to send our warriors into combat and into humanitarian situations with our best effort, with our best foot forward. I would say that this is the absolute--the absolute--end to where we should draw down. Let's look at what we are looking at today. We are not looking at some of the larger countries, but we are also looking at rogue states. Russia and China, obviously, are out there and they are, obviously, doing things that we keep our eye on. Their technology has advanced, their amount of money that they spend on the military has jumped dramatically over the last 20 years. Some of the things that they are bringing forward are as technologically advanced as we have. I would say that if we went back 20 years, we would never say that. We would say technologically we are ahead every step of the way. Today we can't say that. Today we also have rogue nations and rogue leaders out there that want to do things to us and to our allies. So I say at a time where we are drawing down and continuing to draw down, where we have these types of rogue nations, where we have these types of superpowers out there, and we have these types of groups that want to do bad things to us and to our allies, is this actually the time that we should draw down to an unsafe level? I would like to thank Mr. Gibson for everything that he has done in his tenure here in Congress and what he has done for the United States of America because, honestly, he is a true hero. But in this regard, he is trying to unite all of Congress behind what he has believed and what he has done for his entire life. I think that Congress should listen, I think that Congress should say, yes, we absolutely have these levels, and we can't go below them. In fact, as we are watching everything that is happening on the news on a daily basis, we would say that maybe those levels are too low, too. So I would like to thank Mr. Gibson for his leadership.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Weber and Mr. Beyer for their congenial work on this issue. I do rise today in support of H.R. 4084, the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act, as I am a cosponsor. Some of us believe a nuclear energy policy is important to the State of California, which is home to private companies and universities pursuing advanced nuclear technologies. I am proud to support this legislation because it would provide capabilities for our technology innovators to develop new reactors that will yield amazing benefits to society through increased resistance to proliferation, minimizing waste, and perhaps even consuming existing waste stockpiles. The possibilities are endless when we allow our engineers to creatively tackle the world's challenges, and this is no different for nuclear energy. This is important because in my district we have recently seen the issues that can arise when an area is dependent on a single energy source. California is home to many of the companies seeking to partner with the DOE and benefit from our Nation's unparalleled supercomputer capabilities. Leveraging the Department's assets will help our domestic industry capture a significant share of a growing, multibillion-dollar industry. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record letters of support from Tri Alpha, a California-based fusion company, and UPower, a California- based advanced fission reactor company. Tri Alpha Energy, February 24, 2016. Hon. Lamar Smith, Chairman, House Science, Space & Technology Committee, Washington, DC. Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Member, House Science, Space & Technology Committee, Washington, DC. Hon. Randy Weber, Chairman, Energy Subcommittee, House Science, Space & Technology Committee, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, and Representative Weber: Tri Alpha Energy is a fusion energy science research company headquartered in Foothill Ranch, California. Our purpose is to deliver world-changing clean fusion energy for economical, commercial power generation as fast as possible. Tri Alpha started as a research project at the University of California-Irvine in 1990. Today we have 150 employees, over 350 patents issued or pending, and are conducting experiments on a state of the art plasma generation device. We are writing to express support for your bill H.R. 4084, the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act. Global market and environmental conditions demand that new sources of clean, baseload electricity be developed. New nuclear designs hold tremendous promise as a sustainable and cost-competitive power solution, but the United States government must provide a favorable policy environment for the necessary technology developments to take place. H.R. 4084 would make several improvements at the Department of Energy to help move advanced nuclear technology concepts, including fusion, out of the laboratory and toward commercialization. The Nuclear Innovation Center, for example, would enable shorter development and permitting timelines by allowing private companies to work hand-in-hand with federal researchers and regulators on design validation. We commend you and your staff for recognizing the enormous positive potential that advanced nuclear, including fusion, holds in the United States and for offering thoughtful, bipartisan legislation to move the industry forward. We hope that H.R. 4084 will be offered for floor consideration soon and offer our support to help move the bill to final passage. We also look forward to working with your Committee on other fusion energy issues in the future. Please contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Richard C. Barth, Ph.D., Senior Vice President, Government Relations, Tri Alpha Energy.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, January 13th, I had to return to the district to attend to urgent constituent business related to the Aliso Canyon gas leak. Had I been present for the day's vote series, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 44, the passage of S.J. Res. 22, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency relating to the definition of ``waters of the United States'' under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 45, the passage of H.R. 3662 or the Iran Terror Finance Transparency Act.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to commemorate the retirement of Stu Witt. Stu is retiring from the commercial Mojave Air and Space Port in Mojave, California. He started his career at CSUN and went on to a naval career where he flew F-14s off the John F. Kennedy and F/A-18s. He then followed it up by flying B-1s, F-16s, and the YF-23. But I knew Stu as a person who took the Air and Space Port in Mojave and put it on the map. He talked to me early in my legislative career in California and said: I have got a bill. This bill has never gone anywhere. It has never even gotten a committee hearing, but I want you to run it. So we did. That bill turned into the indemnification law in California, which allowed private spaceflight to happen in California. Without that leadership, California would not be on the map for private spaceflight. I believe that today, without Stu Witt, California would probably have lost out to other States in the Union. I would like to say as to Stu Witt's retirement: We know we are going to have great things in the future; we know what you have done in the past; and we look forward to your exploits for the advancement of aerospace in America.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of a man who dedicated his life to the continued advancement of American aerospace. Witt was born in Bakersfield, California and raised on the Scodie Ranch in the Kern River Valley. He graduated from Cal State Northridge in 1974, from the Naval Aviation Schools Command in 1976 and from the Naval Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN training) in 1980. He is also a 1996 graduate of the University of Maryland's Center for Creative Leadership. Upon graduating college, Witt embarked on a storied military career in the Navy, where he spent time as an F-14 Tomcat pilot based on the U.S.S. John F. Kennedy and as an FA-18A Hornet project pilot at the Naval Air Warfare Center in China Lake, CA. After the Navy, Witt continued to fly professionally for nearly nine years as an engineering test pilot on the B-1B, F-16C and F-23. In 1993 he joined Computer Technology Associates, where he managed a $100-million contract as Executive Vice President. Since 2002, Witt was CEO and General Manager of the Mojave Air & Space Port, which lies just outside of my district, where he was the defining factor in making that Port the crucial institution that it is today. In addition to his efforts at Mojave, Witt also served as the Chairman of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation (CSF) from 2012-2014 where he worked tirelessly to promote the development of commercial human spaceflight and to bring about a 21st century space age for America. I have worked with Stu on multiple occasions to develop legislation that would allow the commercial space industry to innovate and expand in the state of California, and can attest to his skills as a pioneer and leader. His legacy will be felt by space lovers, entrepreneurs, and explorers for generations.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of a man who dedicated his life to serving his family and his community: Duane Harte, who passed away on Monday, November 23rd, at the age of 68. Harte was born in 1947 and moved to the Santa Clarita Valley in 1974, where he and his wife Pauline raised their two daughters. He retired in 1990 as Senior Chief Petty Officer from the U.S. Naval Reserve after 23 years of service and owned a small business called Academy Addressing and Mailing. Harte's contributions to the Santa Clarita Valley were numerous. He was president of the Santa Clarita Valley Veteran's Memorial Committee and founding president of the SCV Senior Center Charitable Foundation. He was also active in the Friends of Mentryville, SCV Historical Society, was the President of the SCV Veterans Memorial Committee, past chairman of the SCV Chamber of Commerce, SCV Committee on Aging, Newhall Redevelopment Committee, Friends of the Libraries of the SCV, Canyon Theatre Guild Board of Directors, and the Vice-Chairman of the Santa Clarita Parade Committee. In 2008, Harte was selected to serve as a Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commissioner, where he served until he passed away due to a massive heart attack in his Santa Clarita home. Harte is survived by his wife of 43 years, Pauline, their two daughters, Donna and Denise, and grandson Evan Alexander.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to address an issue of critical importance to our Nation's security: the Long Range Strike Bomber. Since World War II, our defense has relied on the ability to respond quickly to any threats to our national security anywhere in the world. The bedrock of this strategy has always been the strategic bomber. This past week, it was announced that Northrop Grumman would be producing our next strategic bomber for future generations. Potential adversaries are deterred because only the United States possesses the capability to strike any target in the world with precision weapons within 24 hours. Last week, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Air Force made the announcement that Northrop Grumman won the contract to build the Long Range Strike Bomber. This bomber will be produced in my district. The B-1, the B-2, and now the Long Range Strike Bomber will all follow in the same role of being built in the Antelope Valley in southern California. Congratulations to the Air Force and the men and women of Northrop Grumman on this contract. I have seen firsthand the work that Northrop Grumman employees do in support of our men and women in uniform at Plant 42 in my district. I am here to congratulate them on the opportunity to bring the expertise and commitment to the Long Range Strike Bomber. This means thousands of jobs to this country. It means thousands of jobs to southern California, in a much-needed area in my district where jobs are very scarce. Both Plant 42 and the many surrounding small businesses Northrop Grumman will have a contract with will have support in this area. The road that led to Tuesday's announcement was a long one paved with hard work by many people in our community and State. The Antelope Valley has long since been the home to the aerospace industry and has built B-1s, B-2s, all of the space shuttles, and currently builds the F-35. Naturally, it would be a good selection for the next bomber being built there. On any given day, the F-22, F-35, the F-16, B-1, or B-2 will be flying over the Antelope Valley in their test missions. I am confident that the Long Range Strike Bomber will help us continue this legacy, and I thank everyone who has helped bring its production to our community. The Air Force has called the Long Range Strike Bomber a top modernization priority, and there are sobering facts behind that. Today, only 10 percent of our Nation's bomber force is capable of penetrating sophisticated adversary air defense systems. The average age of our bomber fleet is 32 years old, with most of our bombers more than 45 years old. Only the B-2 stealth bomber, proudly built, maintained, and modernized in my district, can penetrate advanced air defenses; however, we only have 20 B-2s. Given Northrop Grumman's 35 years of expertise designing, building, delivering, and modernizing the B-2 stealth bomber at Plant 42, I know the men and women who work there are incredibly qualified to build our Nation's next long-range strike aircraft.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. I thank Congresswoman Hartzler for her leadership in this role. This is of vital importance. I want to start this discussion with just a little bit of reference. When I got elected 9 months ago, everyone said: You have to go to Congress. You have to get some things done. You have to work across the aisle. You have to build some friendships. You have to do these things. I think in the one committee that I sit on, Armed Services, we do that. We talk about the military. We talk about what is best for it, what is best for America, what is best for the readiness, and what are the programs and the projects and the arms and the things that we are going to do to make sure that our men and women are the best prepared to go into battle, if called upon. But today I think we saw a little bit of politics, and maybe we have seen that for the last week or more. But political football shouldn't happen around the military. We should be able to hammer these things out. As you heard from some of the speakers before, this has been vetoed four times, and every time it has been basically an issue that has then been worked out. We have come back, we have taken care of that issue, and it has gone forward. So for 53 years, the NDAA has worked like it is supposed to: put the military first, put America first, and move forward through the disagreements. But as you have heard--and we heard this in the discussion with part of the NDAA--that this was going to be vetoed. The President was forecasting maybe he would veto this. Well, this wasn't a secret operation we were doing. The NDAA was out in the open. I don't know of a chairman that is better than the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services at working across the aisle, working with the issues, and trying to get everything done before we get to a problem like this, including working with the White House. That is exactly what happened. But I would disagree with some of the speakers that came before me when they said that the President came out and he brought his pen and he did a photo op. This was forecasted that it was going to be done today, today. Is there something that is happening today that is going to take up all the news, that is going to be in all of the papers tomorrow, that is going to be on Twitter? That is right. The Benghazi hearing is happening right now, and it has been happening for hours. During this veto, the Benghazi hearing was happening. I just went on Twitter. There are 200 times more Twitter feeds on Benghazi than the NDAA veto. In politics, we would call that cover. We would call that: You know what? I have to do something bad; so, I had better do it when they are not looking at me. That is exactly what happened today. Let's talk about the NDAA a little bit. Yes, we have had some disagreements, and we have figured them out: 60-2 in the House. How do you get something done when you get such a bipartisan vote? Well, you sit there for 20 hours and you work through a chairman and you get the issues worked out. $612 billion was asked for. $612 billion was given. A 1.3 percent pay raise from the President's budget, a 1.3 percent pay raise to our military, that was done. In July, we lost four Marines to a tragic incident in Tennessee. When I went home, many people said: What are you going to do about this? Can you change something? Shouldn't they be armed? Shouldn't something happen? That is in the NDAA. Now we give post commanders the appropriate ability to arm our recruiting and our reserve centers. But let's go a little further. This allows our friends and enemies to know what is happening in America. Now, today they say: Is something happening in America that is weak? Because for 53 years, it has been the military first, America first. We are going to be strong. And today I have got to believe that our friends and enemies might be scratching their head and saying: What is happening in America? That is not something we ever want. We want our friends to know that we are going to be shoulder to shoulder with them, and we want our enemies to know that we are as strong as we possibly can be. I am going to finish thanking the gentlewoman from Missouri. We have a kindredship. In my district, we tested and built every B-2. In her district, she houses the B-2 Spirit that sends them off to do difficult deals, difficult sorties. I am very proud of what the B-2 does, just as I am proud of every man and woman in the military and every mission that they complete. Mr. Speaker, if we are going to stand with the military, then let's stand with the military. If we are going to turn our back and say that this is not what we believe, then that is not what I want to be part of. I think we should work as hard as we possibly can to override this veto. That is the mission. That is the vision.

Mr. KNIGHT

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Speaker, on roll call nos. 545 through 549, I was absent due to obligations in the district. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on no. 545, AYE on no. 546, AYE on no. 547, NAY on no. 548, and AYE on no. 549.