Mick Mulvaney

Mr. MULVANEY

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize LPL Financial and celebrate the grand opening of their new campus in my district in Fort Mill, South Carolina. I have had the privilege to work with employees of LPL Financial through my service on the House Financial Services Committee. LPL Financial is the largest independent broker-dealer in the United States, with more than 14,000 financial advisors and approximately $500 billion in assets. Through their advisors, LPL Financial helps my constituents and those across the country save to meet their financial goals, such as retirement or college, through investments in stocks, bonds, mutual funds and insurance. Today, LPL Financial is celebrating the grand opening of their new campus in my district. I am sorry that I am not able to be at the ceremony in Fort Mill, but I have visited the new location and it is indeed impressive. It is a state of the art facility and incorporates sustainable design strategies to have minimal environmental impact. The campus will provide its employees with access to nature trails and proximity to retail shopping and restaurants. Onsite they included a health clinic and gym. I know that with this campus, LPL Financial has made a significant commitment to work-life balance and quality for its employees. The new campus hosts more than 1,400 current LPL Financial employees, and the company has shared that this Fort Mill location will be the center for its continued growth and long-term expansion. I am honored that LPL Financial selected my district and our state, and I am excited about the numerous opportunities this relocation will bring to South Carolina in the form of jobs and economic growth. I warmly welcome LPL Financial and all of its employees to South Carolina and wish them every success at this new location.

Mr. MULVANEY

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Speaker, Monday, October 10, is Taiwan's National Day--also known as Double Ten Day. As the House will not be in session that day, I would like to take this opportunity to offer my early best wishes to the people of Taiwan. Taiwan is a friend, an ally, and a vital security partner of the United States. As such, it should be able to participate and engage fully in the international community, and in international forums, such as the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Three years ago, I supported legislation--that the President signed into law--directing the Secretary of State to develop a strategy to obtain observer status for Taiwan in ICAO. Taiwan was indeed invited to attend as a guest that year. However, the ICAO's 39th Triennial Assembly will be taking place shortly in Montreal, and to date, there has been no indication that Taiwan will be able to participate. ICAO works to secure the development of civil aviation throughout the world, and as a key aviation hub in East Asia, Taiwan should be an indispensable member of that dialogue. Unfortunately, as of today, it is not. Up to 58 million people each year enter, leave, or pass through the Taipei Flight Information Region, and Taiwan is connected to over 100 cities around the world with hundreds of air-passenger and air-freight routes. If an international organization is to set the standards and regulations necessary for aviation safety and security across the globe, then Taiwan must be at the table. Taiwan's absence neither serves Taiwan nor the international community. Taiwan's invitation to participate in 2013 came virtually at the last minute. I hope we are not kept waiting as long this time and the current leadership of ICAO gives this prompt attention. I call upon my colleagues and the Administration to prioritize Taiwan's observer status at ICAO. Again, I wish the people of Taiwan a Happy Double Ten Day. I hope we may also celebrate Taiwan's presence at ICAO in Montreal this year.

Mr. MULVANEY

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and mark the passing of Fred Sheheen, one of my constituents, a civil rights activist, and a true servant of our State. Fred was born in 1937 in Camden, South Carolina to Austin and Lucile. He graduated from Camden High School, and later with honors from Duke University. He dedicated his life to serving his fellow South Carolinian and those less privileged. As the head of the State Commission on Higher Education for nearly a decade, he was instrumental in helping to make the dream of higher education for all people a reality. Fred is survived by his wife of nearly fifty years, Rose, his daughters Maria and Margaret, and brothers Austin and Robert, and his grandchildren Austin, Joseph, Anthony, William, Robert, David, Olivia, and Thomas. Fred is also survived by his son, Vincent. Vincent and I served together in the South Carolina Senate, and I consider him a friend. Fred went to his grave knowing that his son is a good and honest man, an earnest public servant, a good father and husband, and a devout Catholic. I can think of no better memorial to any man than to have a son like Vince. Fred changed the lives of many for the better, and he will be missed. My thoughts and prayers are with his family.

Mr. MULVANEY

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and mark the passing of Larry Bigham, one of my constituents and a true servant of our community. A native of Chester, South Carolina and proud graduate of The Citadel, Larry dedicated much of his free time--what little he had--in service to his community. In addition to owning a popular restaurant in Rock Hill, he served on the Rock Hill School Board, the Rock Hill Economic Development Board, the Santee Cooper Board, the Winthrop University Eagle Club Board, was actively engaged in the local Republican Party, and even ran for Congress--twice. His near-victories, in a part of the world long dominated by the other party, set the stage for many future wins, including my own: something that will never be lost on me. Most importantly, Larry was a loving father, grandfather, and husband. I send my deepest condolences to all of them, and especially his wife, Kathy. Please know that Larry's lasting legacy will be the way in which he so positively impacted countless people in our community, and his memory will live on for years to come.

Mr. MULVANEY

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, again, with all due respect to my friend, the gentleman from New York, to suggest that if my amendment passes, that somehow readiness will go down admits that we are spending money in violation of the law. Contingency operations are not meant for readiness. That is what the base military budget is for. We should be doing that anyway. I share in the concern of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle about the size of the military and our readiness, but that is not war. Readiness to go to war is not war. This is not supposed to be a replacement for the base budget. This should be, as my colleague from New York correctly pointed out, part of the war on terror. The OCO budget should be used to fight ISIS overseas, and it should be used to fight in Iraq and to fight in Syria. It should not be used for items that are not contingency operations. I go back to the example of the MILCON-VA bill that we had here a couple of weeks ago. We had no direction as to where money was being spent. I had a subcommittee chairman get up and say, ``Well, it is going to be a health facility in Djibouti.'' Nothing in law says that-- nothing. The only thing we passed out of this House was X number of dollars to be spent overseas before 2022. That is it. You could sit here and say, ``Well, this money is for the troops, or this money is for a base.'' No, it is not. This money is for whatever we decide we want to spend it on, and that is not right. The OCO budget came into existence for a good reason. We were caught in 2011 without the ability to fund a war on terror, and we started spending money off budget to solve that problem. It is no longer an emergency. We should be having this money for readiness in the base budget. We should pass this amendment so that the OCO budget returns to what it is meant to be. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chairman, I am here, once again, to talk about the overseas contingency operations budget. My opinion of it by now should be no secret to anybody. I don't like it very much. There are other folks who agree with me. Unfortunately, not enough. But I will continue to come here and try to draw attention to what I believe to be a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars. There are folks, by the way, who agree with me. I don't often come to this microphone and cite John McCain as somebody who agrees with me on something, but he has described it as a gimmick and thinks that we can do better. The CBO described it as a method of spending with ``relatively little backup.'' Other folks in this Chamber from both parties have described as a slush fund. I happen to agree with all of those statements. In the past, I have come here, Mr. Chairman, to try and simply get rid of the OCO budget because of the weaknesses that I think it contains. We are not doing that today. We have tried something different. We have tried to drill down a little bit and be a little bit more detailed in how we address the OCO budget by simply trying to define what it means to be OCO. We call it the war budget, but we don't really know what it means. We tried today to figure out a way to define what it means. Lo and behold, we found out that in law, it is already defined. If you turn to title 10, section 101 of the U.S. Code, the definition of the Armed Forces section of the U.S. Code, General Military Law, Organization and General Military Powers, Chapter 1--Definitions, lo and behold, in section 13, the term ``contingency operation'' is defined. It reads as follows: ``The term `contingency operation' means a military operation that: ``(A) is designated by the Secretary of Defense as an operation in which members of the armed forces are or may become involved in military actions, operations, or hostilities against an enemy of the United States or against an opposing military force; or ``(B) results in the call or order to, or retention on, active duty of members of the uniformed services . . . or any other provision of law during a war or during a national emergency declared by the President or Congress.'' Contingency operations are defined in law, and have been for quite some time. Mr. Chairman, we have been ignoring that. My amendment is very simple. It puts a stop to that. My amendment simply says that none of the funds available under title IX of this bill should be used in contravention of section 101(a)(13) title 10 of the United States Code. That is it. That is all it does. It simply says, in layman's terms, the overseas contingency operations will be used for contingency operations. To change the words a little bit to the stuff that ordinary people can understand, what the amendment does is make sure that the war budget is used for warfighters in the war effort and is no longer used as a slush fund to hide government spending from the taxpayers. I urge my colleagues, even those who have opposed my efforts before, to completely discontinue the OCO budget, to bring some modicum of discipline to spending the war budget, making sure that it is spent on what the law provides, and not used on things that we have no idea where the money is being spent, which is so often the case. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MULVANEY

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday in Hanoi, under a giant bronze statue of Ho Chi Minh, the President of the United States announced that he was formally rescinding our country's decades-long prohibition on the sale of military equipment to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Without input from Congress, in one grand, unilateral action, the President decided to reward Vietnam for its egregious record on human rights and its continuing crackdown on religious freedoms. But worse than that, he has surrendered a diplomatic opportunity to find out what happened to the 1,500 Americans still unaccounted for in Vietnam and Southeast Asia. It was unfortunate to see where this President's priorities lie, but there is still time to correct that wrong. Before he leaves Vietnam, I have a message to the President, a message from the Rolling Thunder vets, Chapter 1, of South Carolina. They asked me to ask him this: Instead of using this opportunity to reward Vietnam or to apologize for what he sees as past American wrongs, please, please, please, Mr. President, use this time instead to do something productive and positive and patriotic-- help find our missing vets and help bring them home.

Mr. MULVANEY

Mr. MULVANEY. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my amendment.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment to the amendment.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment to the amendment.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I move approval. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, it is hard to argue with that. This money is going for counterterrorism. It is going for the preposition of assets. It is going for reassuring our allies. It is going to combat Mr. Putin or constrain him in Ukraine. I am a little hard pressed as to how $178- odd-million is going to do all of those things. Face it, we have to take the gentleman's word for it. And as much as I trust the gentleman, why isn't that in the document? Why doesn't it say $18.9 million for this counterterrorism program or that repositioning of assets? It doesn't say that. We have no idea what this money is for. None whatsoever. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania, and I appreciate the opportunity to have my say. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I move approval. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk, No. 4.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.