Ike Skelton

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I find it rather ironic; no, I find it rather sad that in the wake of a military victory for America and for the NATO forces, we find ourselves in this excellent authorization bill discussing language that cuts off funding for the troops on September 30 of this year. The amendment which I offer will delete subsection A of section 1006, while leaving in place subsection B. Subsection B requires the President to request supplemental appropriations in order to conduct combat or peacekeeping operations in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Subsection B, standing alone, adequately protects the funding authorized by this bill without running the risk of undermining America's and NATO's military and peacekeeping efforts in Kosovo. Mr. Chairman, 2 weeks ago, when we were first scheduled to take this bill up, I would have argued that the language in this bill sent the wrong message at the wrong time. Now the withdrawal of Serb forces, which is under way from Kosovo today, the message that we would send by rejecting my amendment would be a horrific message. The timing of the message would make it even worse. We must pass this amendment so that we can proceed further and not cut off the troops for the wonderful job that they have done. We cannot cut them off on September 30 of this year. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, my first question is how much time is left under the regular order for debate?

Mr. SKELTON. My second question is, do I have 5 minutes in opposition to the gentleman's request?

Mr. SKELTON. Then I so claim. My third inquiry is, would I be entitled to an additional 5 minutes should I seek to strike the last word at a later moment?

Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. SKELTON. The 1 minute that was just eaten up came out of the 5 minutes in opposition to the gentleman from California's motion, is that correct?

Mr. SKELTON. So I have 4 minutes left of that 5 minutes, am I correct?

Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde). (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to mention to my friend from Illinois that the time for the President to make such a supplemental is hardly here. Number one, we have not even passed this bill. Number two, peace just broke out yesterday. I fully believe, based on my conversation with the President, that he is going to ask for a supplemental for peacekeeping in Kosovo in a very timely manner. I am convinced of it. He said so to me. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. SKELTON. I have 1 minute in opposition to the motion made by the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), I have 2 minutes in regular time, and should I seek additional time on a striking of the last word, I would have 5 minutes there?

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for yielding me this time. We have examined the amendment on this side, we fully understand it and find it acceptable.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I first must say to my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), that no one in this Chamber admires more what he has done and what he does for his country, so I compliment him in his past and present actions, though from time to time we will vary on issues. And I appreciate the gentleman's comments earlier. But let me say this to my friend from California, as well as my friend from Texas. When we first started the debate on this bill, I stated that this was the best bill that we have put forward to the Congress of the United States since the early 1980s. That included the language regarding the military-to-military contacts regarding China drafted by the majority under the guidance of our chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence). We have done the job. It is well worth it. We have protected the interests of the United States. I do not think it could be better. The amendment that the gentleman from Texas offers, in my opinion, gilds the lily. I think that what is in there is excellent. I stand by it, I embrace it, I compliment the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and those that worked it out and I agree with it. I hope that we stand by it and approve it.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Underwood).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I must point out this amendment is unnecessary. The committee did its work. The language in section 1203 of our bill more than adequately protects American national security in the area of military-to-military exchanges with the Chinese People's Liberation Army. The majority wrote this language, we agreed to it, it is good language. Let me tell you what it does, what is already in the bill. First, it provides that these contacts be governed by the principles of reciprocity and transparency. Second, it establishes limits that would prevent Members of the PLA from inappropriate access to advanced technologies and capabilities of the United States Armed Forces. Third, it requires the Secretary of Defense to certify prior to the start of any operation that military-to-military contacts with the PLA will be conducted in accordance with such principles of reciprocity and transparency that such contacts are in the national security interests of the United States, and prohibits members of the U.S. Armed Forces from participating in any military-to-military contacts until such certification is given to Congress. Fourth, it requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a detailed annual report to Congress that provides an assessment of the military- to-military contacts with the PLA. In addition to being unnecessary, this amendment would actually harm American security interests. The truth is that military-to-military contacts are more beneficial to the U.S. than to the PLA. Our military operates every day in an open, democratic society. The PLA operates in China's closed society. With military-to-military contacts we gain insight in the PLA's structure, its culture, its mode of operation and its influence on Chinese internal politics and foreign policy decisionmaking. It is a matter of intelligence. We enhance our understanding of China's strategic doctrine and can reduce the potential for miscalculations and access between the PLA and U.S. or other Western forces. Moreover, routine senior level defense contact in times of relative calm can help ensure open communications during times of tension. The language that is already in the bill, that is already there, written by the majority and agreed to by the minority, protects U.S. national security, while keeping open lines of communication, which is very essential to the American national interests. I intend to vote against the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello). (Mr. COSTELLO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt). (Mr. SPRATT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)