Adam Smith

Mr. SMITH of Washington

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Elfreth), who is a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Goodlander), who is a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the ranking member of the House Committee on Financial Services (Ms. Waters).

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I have no further speakers, and I am prepared to close. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Again, I think, and we have heard from both sides, just an excellent description of what the bill does as it came out of committee and why it is so important. It is what the Armed Services Committee does. We exercise oversight of the Department of Defense to make sure that we can properly meet our national security needs and crucially make sure that the men and women who serve in our military have all the tools they need. Nothing is more important to that effort this year than acquisition reform, getting them the tools they need quicker and more efficiently, and making sure they get innovative technologies as soon as they need them. I look forward to that part of it, but the problem is, as I said, the amendment process is very partisan. It is going to lead to a partisan outcome at the end of it. Also, I do hope that Members on both sides of the aisle will take seriously the concerns about the executive overreach that we are seeing from President Trump and from Secretary Hegseth. I mentioned some of them in my opening remarks, but there are a lot more. The attack on the boat in the Caribbean just last week, there was no particular legal justification for that. I want to make sure we understand the implications of that. If the President is saying he has the right to use the U.S. military to strike out against any drug cartel anywhere in the world, that is a massive expansion of executive power in the use of his war powers ability, and it is dangerous. Congress is supposed to exercise some oversight of that. We do not want to be dragged into war with Venezuela, with Mexico, with Colombia, with any number of different countries. If we take the position as the U.S. that we can do military strikes in any country around the world, it is dangerous. It is something we should exercise oversight on. Also, another thing I didn't mention in as much detail as I would have liked are the efforts to ban books and ban speakers--I did mention the firing of people--all around the basic idea that nobody in the military should say anything critical of Donald Trump. That is a direct undermining of our constitutional republic and of the crucial neutrality of the United States military in doing their jobs. We have speakers now who are being disinvited from speaking to our military academies if they said something critical of President Trump on social media. That is not a reason to ban a speaker. Most recently, we have had the instance where even a group of people from the service academies were going to give an award to Tom Hanks, basically for his support for servicemembers, something they have done repeatedly in a number of different instances. He has been very supportive of servicemembers and veterans. The award was pulled because he did a fundraiser for Joe Biden a year ago. That is the politicization of the military and the undermining of our constitutional democracy. I think we need to exercise oversight of that. We had a number of amendments that would have at least given this Chamber the opportunity to debate those. They were all silenced. We need to continue to be a democracy. We need to continue to support free speech. I think part of our obligation as Congress is to exercise that oversight when that impacts certainly what is going on at the Department of Defense, as it clearly is. We will see how the amendment process goes. Again, I will close on a positive note. The bill was put together in a very bipartisan and effective way in committee. It really addresses crucial issues to make sure that we support the men and women in the armed services and their families and also meets our national security and defense needs. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Houlahan).

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I am now pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I urge support for the amendments en bloc, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Wilson amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, this is actually a very, very dangerous amendment. I want people to understand what it does. Broadly speaking, it does two things. One, just for any sort of entry onto a defense property--I want to make sure I get the language exactly right here. It makes unlawful entry onto a defense installation a crime, regardless of intent. Defense installation covers a wide range of areas. Even if a person doesn't have any sort of criminal intent, if that person is on the property and it is determined they weren't basically allowed on there, that makes it a crime. The far worse part of this refers to it makes it a felony to enter a national defense area. National defense areas are enormous. One of the things that the Trump administration has done is they have designated wide swathes of our southern border a national defense area. We are talking thousands of miles here. If a person goes onto that area without permission, they are committing a felony. They are guilty of a felony. The gentleman has focused on immigrants coming across the border without documentation. Across that border, there are a whole lot of people who go out and ride ATVs or they go hunting or whatever. There is no way on Earth we will be able to know all of this land that just suddenly in the last several months became a national defense area. We are going to place people at risk of committing felonies for where they walk across land. This is a horrible idea. Please, Republicans and Democrats, we should not want to criminalize the behavior of people in the United States to this degree. It is a very problematic idea that is going to place many people at jeopardy of being charged with a felony, and felonies are very serious. We should not be doing this. There is a better way to deal with this area. Mr. Chair, I urge opposition to the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Jacobs).

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, may I ask how much time is remaining on both sides.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, all of those things that have been said are already illegal and already have been taken care of. The Chinese who were doing espionage, as the gentleman said, were caught. Espionage, unsurprisingly, is a crime. There is no need to enhance the criminal procedures. People coming across the border with an intent to commit terrorist acts is also a crime. That is taken care of. What this is doing is criminalizing a wide range of behavior that has nothing to do with that. Please, let's be able to have two thoughts in our heads at one time. Terrorism, espionage, and crime are already dealt with, but now the gentleman is saying that if you enter onto any military installation or any defense area, Madam Chair, which is, again, thousands of miles across our southern border, nobody is going to know whether or not they are walking onto this territory. There is no way on God's green Earth that they are going to know. If they do, under this bill, they will now be guilty of a felony. If their plan was to commit a terrorist act or engage in espionage, they are going to be criminals anyway. We are now going to do this to your average American citizen just walking across territory. Madam Chair, it is a very bad idea, and I urge a ``no'' vote. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the U.S. Virgin Islands (Ms. Plaskett).

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. I will just say I support the amendments en bloc, and I urge passage. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I urge adoption of the en bloc package, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Randall).

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Chair, I support the en bloc package. I urge passage, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Washington

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I missed today's votes due to a flight cancellation. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 213 and YEA on Roll Call No. 214.

Mr. SMITH of Washington

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I missed yesterday's votes due to weather delays. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 191; YEA on Roll Call No. 192; and YEA on Roll Call No. 193.

Mr. SMITH of Washington

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize William ``Bill'' Leonard Chin for his many years of dedication to our country, both through his military service and active involvement within the Seattle Chinese-American and Veterans communities. Bill valiantly served during World War II in the U.S. Army with the 93rd Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron in the Central European Campaign and the Battle of Rhineland, and his dedication to service continued long after his active military duty. Upon graduating from Seattle University, Bill pursued a career as an accountant at Boeing and then as a life and health insurance broker, where he spent over 50 years serving numerous clients in the Seattle Chinese community. He displayed exemplary work ethic and was widely known for his willingness to help others. Outside of his career, Bill carried this same unceasing devotion to serving those around him. He played an instrumental role in creating the Oriental Restaurant Association in 1970, which provided a healthcare plan for Chinese restaurant workers. He was also a committed member of Cathay Post No. 186, where he served as Commander and contributed to fundraising efforts for the Kin On Nursing Home and youth scholarships. Additionally, Bill served as the English secretary for the Gee How Oak Tin Family Association and the Bing Kung Association, and as an officer of the Chinatown Chamber of Commerce. He left a resounding impact on all those around him and was a true leader of the various communities he was part of. Mr. Speaker, I thank Bill Chin for a lifetime of service to the United States of America and to his community. I am deeply grateful for his important efforts towards protecting our country, advancing healthcare access, and fostering connection. His legacy will not be forgotten.

Mr. SMITH of Washington

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the life and legacy of Ruth Clapp, one of my earliest employees and a loyal public servant to the constituents of Washington's Ninth District. Before joining my team, Ruth had already established a life of meaningful service. Her work at the World Association for Children and Parents (WACAP) reflected a lifelong commitment to the belief that families, in all forms, matter. That belief would carry through every piece of work she did from the day she answered the call to join my team as a caseworker. What was supposed to be a temporary, part-time role turned into seventeen years of relentless dedication. Over those years, Ruth became a cornerstone of the office. Her reputation extended far beyond our district. People from around the country reached out--not to the office, but to Ruth--because they knew she would get the job done. Whether it was an immigration case, an adoption, a visa crisis, or helping someone reunite with family, Ruth took every issue personally. She fought for constituents as if they were her own loved ones--and in many ways, they were. She fiercely advocated for individuals and families caught in the immigration system, helped countless people through difficult legal mazes, and never let up. And while her professional accomplishments are remarkable, those of us lucky enough to know her personally know that Ruth also had a softer, deeply generous side. She was a talented quilter who would quietly craft beautiful gifts for staff members welcoming new children. She loved her family deeply. Her commitment to immigration work was a natural extension of her devotion to them. And, of course, we'd be remiss not to mention her favorite drink: a strong gin and tonic, a detail that feels just as Ruth as anything else. Ruth made me and our team better. She made this country better. Her impact isn't measured just in policies or case numbers, but in the lives she touched. Through her work, families were reunited, futures were restored, and faith was renewed in the idea that government can, in fact, work for the people. So today, we remember Ruth not just as a colleague, but as a mentor, a fighter, and a friend. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to recognize Ruth Clapp for her distinguished career and life of service. Her legacy lives on in the work we continue to do, and in every person whose life she changed for the better.

Mr. SMITH of Washington

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 83. personal explanation