Mac Thornberry

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. Mr. Speaker, I want to take up where the ranking member left off and join him in honoring and thanking Betty Gray for her incredible record of service to our committee and, through our committee, to the country. I think it is important to honor her, but she epitomizes the kind of selfless service to the country that this bill and this committee is really all about. Mr. Speaker, Betty handles the most sensitive information our committee deals with, and she does it with a professionalism that is just beyond reproach from anyone. What you can't put in a job description is the personality--the person--the nurturing that comes to Members and other members of the staff which is irreplaceable. Mr. Speaker, I think too much of the time we--especially Members-- take for granted those people who are essential to getting the work done and through this institution serving the country. I agree completely with what the ranking member said--that Betty Gray epitomizes that sort of service. I think it is a similar but different capacity but a similar sort of service that we have heard about today from the combat veterans who have spoken, starting with Sam Johnson who talked about what happened when he wasn't appropriately supported and then spent the next 7 years of his life in the Hanoi Hilton. Now, we will never know what could have been prevented, but his testimony, really, about what he has endured should stick with us all. I think Mr. Hunter was particularly powerful in saying that this bill is our promise to those people who are out there serving in all sorts of places around the world today in an increasingly dangerous world and that whatever you think about this provision or that provision, those troops deserve to be supported on a bipartisan basis. They deserve to know that the country is behind them. The way we can convey that is by voting on both sides of the aisle as close to unanimously as we can for this measure. The last point I would make, Mr. Speaker, is the troops deserve that sort of support, but the rest of the world also needs to see that sort of support because there are an increasing number of questions around the world about whether the United States is in retreat and about whether we are willing to continue to engage in world leadership. One of the ways that we can demonstrate to adversaries, to friends, and to neutrals who are trying to make up their mind which way they are going to go that we are committed to defending ourselves, our interests, and our allies is by passing this bill for the 54th straight year. And this time, rather than have the President try to use it as a bargaining chip to get more domestic spending, this time have the President sign it. I think our troops deserve it, the world needs to see it, and Members need to support the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1356) to clarify that certain provisions of the Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act of 2014 will not take effect until after the Director of the Office of Personnel Management promulgates and makes effective regulations relating to such provisions, as amended.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as the House departs for the Veterans Day recess, I think it is particularly important that we honor veterans with more than our words. We should honor them and what they sacrificed for with our votes as well. So over the next few minutes, I am going to be honored to yield to some of our colleagues who are combat veterans themselves. I would like to start first, and in many ways foremost with a true American hero. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson).

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Heck), who is a veteran of the Iraq conflict and also chairs our Subcommittee on Military Personnel.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kinzinger), a combat veteran from both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), another combat veteran of America's recent wars, who also serves as the vice chair of our Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers), another veteran of the Iraq conflict.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, if one takes into account the effects of inflation, we cut our military budget 21 percent from 2010 to 2014. Madam Speaker, I think everybody in this body will acknowledge the world is not 21 percent safer today than it was just 4 years ago. As a matter of fact, if you look around the world, whether it is the growth of ISIS into more countries or the continued challenge of al Qaeda and its various affiliates, to the morass of Syria with historic Russian re-insertion today, to China building islands in the South Pacific, to North Korea's saber rattling, to Iran intentionally violating an agreement it made on its missile testing just after the U.S. ratified the nuclear deal, to daily cyber attacks, the world is growing increasingly dangerous. Into that danger we send men and women who wear the uniform of the United States to meet that danger. Yet, we cut their budget 21 percent. We saw last week the President of the United States used them as a political bargaining chip to try to force Congress to comply with his domestic agenda. The bottom line for me, Madam Speaker, is our troops deserve better than that. That is the reason I support this Bipartisan Budget Act of 2014. It stops the cuts in defense. It increases the money going to our troops. It prevents them from being used as a bargaining chip in the future because it sets the military budget for fiscal year 2016 and fiscal year 2017 so that that is decided. They can't be used as leverage for some other agenda. I think that is the sort of stability and predictability they need and that they deserve. I think the great question, Madam Speaker, is: If not this, then what? We know that this budget agreement at least comes close to meeting what the President has asked for on defense and comes close to the Congressional budget, within $5 billion. Now, that is not enough money to repair all the damage that has been done over the past 5 years, but it is in the ball park. If we do not approve this budget, then what? Well, then we are back to continuing resolutions and sequester, which means, for example, the Army has said they will have to cut another 40,000 troops out of their ranks on top of the 70,000 they have already cut. Now, that is just a sampling of what not passing this bill could well mean. If we go back to CRs and the sequester level, it would be drastic reductions to the military, a much less safe world for the United States and its interests. I believe that this measure, on that basis alone, deserves our support.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that if a veto message on H.R. 1735 is laid before the House, then after the message is read and the objections of the President are spread at large upon the Journal, further consideration of the veto message and the bill shall be postponed until the legislative day of Thursday, November 5, 2015; and that on that legislative day, the House shall proceed to the constitutional question of reconsideration and dispose of such question without intervening motion.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from New York.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself an additional 30 seconds. We take steps in this bill to help defend our country against missile attacks, which is particularly important now that Iran is going to have a bunch more money to put into their missiles. But what we also do is support the Israeli missile defense program with more money than was asked for by the President. So, Mr. Speaker, my point is this bill is good for the troops and it is good for the country, and that ought to override everything else. It should be passed today. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes), the chair of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Washington really makes the case when he talks about appropriations, OCO will not happen that way. This is not an appropriations bill. He is exactly right. There is more to do to figure all of that out. But that is not a reason to vote against this bill. This bill can't fix what he is complaining about. But it does do something. My point is why not do what it can. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler), the distinguished chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on the conference report to accompany H.R. 1735.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, the first and most important thing I can say today is that this conference report is good for the troops and it is good for the country, and nothing that I or anybody else is going to say in this next hour is going to be more important than that one basic proposition. Now, we may hear a variety of excuses, ifs, ands and buts about this, that or the other thing, and I certainly don't agree with every provision in this conference report. But in pulling this bill together, I had to put aside personal preferences and party considerations and other things because getting a bill passed and enacted that is good for the troops and good for the country is more important than anything else. The second point I want to make is that this bill is the product of work from Members from both sides of the aisle and both sides of the Capitol. About half of the amendments that were adopted in committee and on the floor were from Democratic Members. Democratic conferees played a substantial role in shaping this final conference report. And if you look at the substance of what is in the bill, you can see major contributions from both sides. As a matter of fact, we hear a lot these days about regular order. Well, this bill went through regular order through the committee, with 211 amendments that were adopted on the floor, when 131 amendments were adopted through a regular conference, with a Senate-passed bill for the first time in years, and now it is back here for approval. So after going through regular order and all that that entails, if there is still partisan opposition, it leads some to ask why. Why bother? The third point I want to make, Mr. Speaker, is just a reminder to Members that this is a dangerous world, and it is getting more dangerous by the minute. Just look at the headlines that are in today's papers. Russia has conducted airstrikes in Syria not against ISIS, but against the moderate opposition forces, and Russia is telling us, the United States, when and where we can fly our airplanes in Syria. Meanwhile, the Palestinians have decided they are going to back away from all the agreements that they have with Israel. Meanwhile, the Taliban is on the move in Afghanistan, and U.S. American troops are sent in to help turn the tide. That doesn't even count the things that are happening in Ukraine, North Korea, Iran, China building islands out in the Pacific. So the point of that is that this is no time for political games. This is the time to come together and pass a bill that helps provide for the country's security. I think that is exactly what this bill does. Mr. Speaker, this bill authorizes the exact amount of money that the President requested for national defense. Now, we did not agree with every single program request. We made some different judgments, like preserving the A-10, and it is being used today in the Middle East. We thought we needed not to retire some of the ships that the President wanted to retire. So there were some adjustments. But at the end of the day, the total is exactly the amount the President asked for. Now, some of those programs are under different labels. But, frankly, whether you call it base funding, OCO funding, or pumpernickel--it doesn't matter--it is money that goes to the troops. If you are a U.S. soldier today on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan or if you are a soldier, sailor, airman, or marine who are supporting them from the United States or anywhere else, do you really care what the label on the money is? What you care about is that the money to help for provide your operation and maintenance is provided. Of course, there are many other parts of this bill, Mr. Speaker: acquisition reform, which is a significant first step to make sure the taxpayers get more value for the money they spend; personnel reform, including a new retirement system. Today 83 percent of the people who serve in the military walk away with no retirement at all. That changes under this bill. So Members who are going to vote against this bill are going to tell 83 percent of the people who serve in the military: You are going to continue to walk away with nothing. This bill requires the DOD and VA to have a joint formulary for sleep disorders, pain management, and mental health issues. We have been told those are some of the most important steps we can take. It takes additional steps to combat sexual assault. It authorizes defensive weapons for Ukraine. It gives the President more tools to battle ISIS in Iraq, to provide weapons directly to the Kurds and Sunni forces. We take steps to help defend this country against missiles.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I want to start with one of the points I made at the beginning, and that is to thank the staff, especially on both sides of the aisle, who spent a lot of hours, disrupted a lot of plans, put in incredible effort back and forth to come up with this conference report. Members on both sides of the aisle and both sides of the Capitol contributed to the product that we are about to vote on. Mr. Speaker, for 53 straight years Congresses of both parties have passed and Presidents of both parties have signed into law Defense Authorization bills. There were a handful of times--and it is exactly four--when a President vetoed a Defense Authorization bill, and every single time it was because of something that was in the bill. So it came back to Congress, there were adjustments made, it went back to the White House, and he signed it into law. Never before has a Defense Authorization bill been held hostage, not because of something that is in it, but trying to force Congress to take action on some other matter. Now, we have talked a lot today about appropriations, about budget, even about taxes. None of those things can happen with the Defense Authorization bill. The reason it has never happened before is because it would be irresponsible to hold defense hostage to another domestic agenda, a political agenda, even a broader budget agenda. And it unnecessarily threatens the national security of the United States. This is a first, and this first is happening at a particularly dangerous time. There is nothing in this bill that could solve the problem that we have heard so much about. It is an authorization bill. It is not appropriations. It is not budget. It is not a tax bill. It is a defense policy bill. We have heard from time to time the military opposes it. No. They say, ``I would rather do it differently,'' and I would, too. But I have specifically asked general after general, Would you rather have the money or not, and they always say they would rather have the money. Even though it is not an ideal way to do budgets, it is better to have the money than not. By the way, there is a provision in here so that if we can, as I hope we do, reach a budget agreement in a different appropriations matter, the authorizations are adjusted accordingly. The bottom line is, if Members vote against this bill, they are voting against everything in it. You may say you are for it, but you are voting against it. So what I think our troops deserve and what the world needs to hear, especially at this point in time, is that Washington can work. We may not solve all the problems today, but we can do something that is good and that we are willing to stand up and take action to help defend ourselves. That is what this bill is about. I hope Members will support it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 449, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 1735) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2016 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, I would just make three brief points. Number one, as this debate goes on, it is increasingly clear that the real debate is about budget and appropriations, not about this bill. Secondly, I am one of those who voted to continue to fund the government because I think it is essential that we pay our troops and that there be no lapse in that. Unfortunately, we have today the White House playing politics with national security, and I think that is what makes an ultimate agreement harder. Finally, Mr. Speaker, the President was short in funding Israeli missile defense. We fully fund Israeli missile defense in this bill, and it should be supported. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner), the distinguished chairman of the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the distinguished chair of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. THORNBERRY. The gentleman is correct. The total is exactly the amount that the President asked for.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. THORNBERRY. As the gentleman from Ohio just said, it was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs that said that this is the lower ragged edge of what it takes to defend the country.