Mac Thornberry

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds just to make two points. Number one, President Barack Obama was inaugurated in January 2009. The first national security strategy he submitted was in May of 2010, a year-and-a-half later. So I don't think it is completely unreasonable that we haven't yet gotten the national security strategy from the new administration. Secondly, the pay raise for the troops is based on the statutory formula which is related to the cost of living. That is where it comes from. And it seems to me to say, no, you don't really get what the formula says you deserve, is not appropriate. Now, the administration did not request it, and the criticism from some is that we should not provide it. I think if the formula is wrong, we should change it, but if the formula says that is how much the cost of living has gone up, we should provide it. Mr. Chair, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Coffman), the chair of the Subcommittee on Personnel.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to bring before the House H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018. It was reported favorably by the House Armed Services Committee at 11:59 p.m. on June 28, 2017, by a vote of 60-1. Now, that vote is an indication of the bipartisan support that exists to support our troops and to fulfill our obligations placed on us by the Constitution. Mr. Chairman, I think it is always helpful for us to remind ourselves of the authority by which we undertake our responsibilities. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says that Congress has the power and the responsibility ``to raise and support Armies. . . . To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of land and naval Forces,'' and, of course, ``To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers.'' The members of our committee and our staff take those responsibilities very seriously. This year, we seek to carry them out in a world which is as dangerous and complex as any of us have ever seen. One example from the news of the day is the alarming progress North Korea is making towards having an intercontinental ballistic missile that can carry nuclear weapons to our homeland. Now, we have, of course, a number of tools to use, including diplomacy and sanctions, but there is no substitute for military power, and I believe we must develop and deploy more of it to be ready to deal with these growing threats. So the bill before us today substantially increases money for missile defense so we are more capable of protecting our homeland against those ballistic missiles. It also increases funding for key munitions and for intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance so we can have better visibility on what adversary is doing. It increases the end strength for the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force, just as they requested. And it funds more joint exercises with key allies in the Pacific. It boosts our shipbuilding budget to get more ships into the water faster, and also cheaper. So, just as an example, Mr. Chairman, each of those items is important for dealing with this growing threat coming from North Korea, and we could sit here and go through a similar sort of discussion when it comes to Iran, or the provocative actions of Russia and China, or the terrorist organizations of various shades. Of course, we cannot guarantee that the capabilities that we will vote on in this bill will be available by the time the crisis comes for, unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, we are still dealing with defense budgets that were cut by more than 20 percent at a time when the threats around the world were growing. So we can't guarantee that these capabilities will be available when we need them. But what we can guarantee is, if we don't fund these things now, they will not be available when we need them, so that is the priority given to this bill. Mr. Chairman, exactly 1 month ago, on June 12, Secretary Mattis and Chairman Dunford testified before our committee. And I would like to read just one paragraph of the Secretary's testimony where he was comparing what the military was like when he left it and when he came back as Secretary. Secretary Mattis testified: ``Four years later, I returned to the Department and I have been shocked by what I have seen with our readiness to fight. For all the heartache caused by the loss of our troops during these wars, no enemy in the field has done more harm to the readiness of our military than sequestration. We have sustained our ability to meet America's commitments abroad because our troops have stoically shouldered a much greater burden.'' Four years later, shocked, more harm by sequestration than the enemies in the field, and it is only because our folks are so incredible that they have born an increasing burden. That is what the Secretary testified. Mr. Chairman, we have, indisputably, the finest military in the world, but it is also indisputable that it has been severely damaged by continuing resolutions, by sequestration, and by failure of the executive and legislative branches to adequately support the men and women out there on the front lines. We have an urgent need to begin to repair and rebuild our military. And I also believe, Mr. Chairman, it is fundamentally wrong to send men and women out on dangerous missions without providing them the best equipment, in the best shape, with the best training that our country can possibly provide. This bill, if followed by matching appropriation, takes a significant step toward meeting that objective, to support those troops. It also makes major reforms in the way the Pentagon does business. Among other reforms, it enables the military to buy commercial products through online sites such as Amazon, Staples, and Grainger. We require life cycle maintenance costs to be considered at the beginning of a program, as must intellectual property rights, to maximize competition in the maintenance and repairs. Oversight into service contracts has increased, and there is much more, of course, in the bill. Mr. Chairman, this bill is the vehicle by which we usually, for 55 years, at least, fulfill our responsibilities under the Constitution that I mentioned, to provide for the common defense. I believe that is the first job of the Federal Government. I want to just express my appreciation to each of the members of our committee. Each of them has contributed to the product before us. Each of them takes their responsibilities under the Constitution very seriously; no one more so than the Ranking Member, Mr. Smith of Washington. We don't always agree on the judgment calls about issues, but I have no doubt that he and all the members of the committee try to do what is right for the country and put the interests of our troops first. That is exactly the attitude that we must follow, I think, on the floor over the next 3 days as we go through the amendments which we will consider. I also want to express appreciation to the committee and personal staff who have worked on this bill. It has been a challenging year for a variety of reasons, but, as I started, I will finish. I am proud of this product. I hope it will gain the support of the entire House. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the chair of our Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the distinguished chair of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during consideration of H.R. 2810, pursuant to House Resolution 431, amendment No. 88 printed in part B of House Report 115-212 may be considered out of sequence.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to file a supplemental report on the bill, H.R. 2810.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express appreciation for the work of Robert Lee Simmons II, Staff Director of the House Armed Services Committee. True confession--I don't like goodbyes, and I'm not very good at them. So I wrote down a few things I want to say and then will yield to others. Bob Simmons has been a superb leader of the House Armed Services Committee staff for 12 years, across four chairmen. That longevity and continued confidence in him as chairmen come and go, as Committee members come and go, as the challenges that our military and our country face come and too often stay, is pretty remarkable, especially in the business we are in. I would say his greatest achievement is that he assembled, led, and inspired an outstanding group of people to give their best for our country through not only changing security challenges, but through changing political environments. And he has always operated in light of the unique responsibilities that the Constitution places on Congress as a separate, independent branch of government. Our system is messy, difficult, usually inefficient--as Churchill said, it ``is the worst form of government except for all of the others that have ever been tried.'' Over the years, Bob has spent the hours, incurred the headaches, the time in the car, the frustrations of dealing with knucklehead Members like me with the next great idea. And he has done all of that with patience and a cheerful disposition--usually. He has made this Committee, and helped make this Congress and this system of government, work. And our nation has benefited. I believe that there is nothing more noble to which men and women can devote their lives than to the protection of their fellow citizens and the security of our nation. Bob Simmons has devoted his life to that cause, first in industry, then with us, now back to industry. But it has always been the same cause. And the guiding light has always been what's the right thing to do for our country, and for the men and women who serve it. Everyone who serves in jobs like these does so at some sacrifice to family. And so I want to thank Donna and Rob for sharing Bob with us these 12 years and for understanding the missed anniversaries and birthdays. We were on quite a roll there for a while. On behalf of the men and women who have been privileged enough to serve in this room at some point over the past 12 years, we are incredibly grateful for the opportunity to work with Bob, for what you have done for us, and for all you have done for that most noble cause.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 553(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Pub. L. 114- 328), on March 31, 2017, I appointed Ms. Jeanette S. James to serve as a member of the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service. Ms. James served 12 years as part of the staff of the House Armed Services Committee, leading the Subcommittee on Military Personnel for three years until her retirement in 2017. Prior to joining the committee staff, James served in the Army Nurses Corps for 31 years, rising to the rank of Colonel and commanding the medical department activity at Fort Drum. Ms. James was recently awarded the Army Distinguished Civilian Service Award, which is the highest honorary award that the Secretary of the Army may grant to a private citizen. As the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, I have come to trust Jeanette's advice on matters that affect our troops and their families. For nearly a decade and a half, Jeanette has approached some of the Department of Defense's most difficult and controversial issues with the same precision, compassion, and dedication she showed to her patients during her 31 years as an Army nurse. Jeanette has spent 43 years in public service, in which time she has made a real difference for our country and our military. Our troops are healthier and better cared for, their families are more secure, and our policies are better informed because of her service. I can think of few people more qualified to serve on this National Commission to review and reform the Selective Service process than someone who has dedicated her life to serving her nation with the utmost dedication and distinction for more than four decades.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express appreciation for an outstanding Marine, Brigadier General David J. Furness, who has directly supported the Armed Services Committees, this House, and the Congress at-large as the Legislative Assistant to the Commandant. Over the years, I have worked with him on a variety of issues. In each and every case, his focus has been improving our nation's security and bettering of the lives of Marines stationed around the world. General Furness has been the Legislative Assistant to the Commandant since 2013. In that time he has served two Administrations, three Commandants, and four Secretaries of Defense. Through it all, General Furness has delivered a steady message focused on Marines and what the Marine Corps requires to remain our nation's force-in-readiness. As the Corps dealt with the consequences of the Budget Control Act, continuing resolutions, and inadequate funding, General Furness helped Members of Congress and our staffs understanding the real world consequences. He is known for his candor, responsiveness, and passion for his country and the Corps. A big part of the reason that General Furness has been able to describe clearly the challenges facing the Marine Corps is his experience in command. He has led Marines in combat since he was a Second Lieutenant, where he served in Panama. He has also served multiple combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2010, he was the Commander of the 1st Marine Regiment in Helmand Province, when operations in Southwestern Afghanistan were a principal line of effort and the coalition accomplished significant gains in the counterinsurgency mission. General Furness is now returning to the operating forces where he will assume command of the Joint Task Force--Horn of Africa. I have no doubt that he will serve our Nation well in this challenging assignment. This deployment will be the 11th of General Furness' career. Through all of them, his wife Lynda has been by his side. From coast-to-coast moves and years of separation, Lynda has raised four children--David, Elizabeth, Ben and Zachary. She truly is a testament to the reality that it is not just our service members, but also their families, who sacrifice for the safety of us all. In thanking General Furness for his service thus far, I know that I join all our colleagues in wishing him and his family fair winds and following seas as he moves to the next phase of his career.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding time and commend him for his continuing leadership on national security. I also thank the chairwoman of this subcommittee, Ms. Granger, and the ranking member, Mr. Visclosky, for their continuing work on national security. Mr. Speaker, it is important that we pass this bill now. The Department of Defense is currently operating under a continuing resolution, which means you have got to spend the same money this year that you spent last year, and you have to spend it on the same things. Even if you don't need to spend money on something this year that you spent last year, you have to. So it is wasteful. But you also can't spend money on new things, even though new threats arise. It is not good for any part of government. It is particularly bad for the Department of Defense. It is important to pass this bill now to remove this continuing resolution and have a regular appropriation bill. Secondly, this bill is consistent with the Defense Authorization Conference Report which passed this House in December. All but four Republicans and all but 30 Democrats in the House voted for that measure in December. This is very consistent with that, and I hope it gets at least as much support as that bill did in December. There are a few differences. We are further into the fiscal year, so the committee was able to fund some additional priorities that were in the House-passed authorization bill that we were not able to put in the conference report. I just think it is important for all of us to remember, Mr. Speaker, that the only answer to some of the readiness problems we are facing is modernization. We have had testimony that it takes twice as long to maintain an old F-18 aircraft, for example, as it does a new one. Well, this bill has some additional F-18s, and that is good for the pilots, good for the services that receive them. It also frees up maintenance to work on other things. Finally, it is important also to remember that this bill is just a first step in repairing and rebuilding the military. I am afraid all of us have underestimated the deep damage that has been done through sequestration, budget cuts, and a high tempo of operations. Just yesterday, I was out at Fort Campbell to see some of this and hear about some of this firsthand from the Army. This is an important essential first step, but shortly we should receive a supplemental appropriation to do more of the work of repair, and then we need to move toward an FY18 bill that really begins the rebuilding that, I think, on a bipartisan basis, most all of us in this Chamber would support. Remember, Mr. Speaker, the first job of the Federal Government is to defend the country. This is an important first step to help us fulfill that responsibility.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, first, let me thank Chairman Bishop for not only yielding me the time, but for his patience and diligence and understanding this issue, and I also want to thank Subcommittee Chairman McClintock for the work that he has put into it. The Natural Resources Committee has conducted hearings on this issue. They have reported out bills related to this issue in the last two Congresses, and last Congress, the whole House voted for a bill that deals with this issue. I am grateful to Chairman Bishop and Subcommittee Chair McClintock for all of that effort. Mr. Speaker, this bill is just a small sliver of what this House has passed before. This bill requires the Federal Government to do what the Federal Government should have done long ago, and that is to conduct a survey along the Red River following the instructions of the United States Supreme Court. That is all this bill does. It does not dispose of any land; it does not alter the rights or claims of any State, any tribe, any individual. It just says the Federal Government has a responsibility to know what the Federal Government is supposed to be controlling. They have never, ever conducted a survey of this area, and so this bill says: You will have a survey conducted using the method that the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held is a method you ought to use. I am a little taken aback, Mr. Speaker, on why that should be controversial. We could go on at some length about how this came to be. It is interesting, historically, and we could go into a variety of details and so forth; but, again, the bottom line is the Federal law currently says the Federal Government has a responsibility to inventory and ascertain where Federal land is. Yet the Bureau of Land Management not only has never done it in close to 100 years after the Supreme Court decision, the Bureau of Land Management has said they never intend to. They will never conduct a survey of this 116-mile area. So this bill, as I say, is very simple. It says the Bureau of Land Management shall commission a survey, jointly agreed upon by Texas and Oklahoma, tribal and other interests a full part of that, but there will, once and for all, be a survey to determine where the Federal claim is and where the Federal claim is not. Now, part of the reason that is so important is because the Bureau of Land Management has, especially in 2013, come out and made a variety of claims that has thrown in doubt the proper title and ownership of land that has been in families for generations, that people have paid taxes on for generations. That has put a cloud on title of private landowners, and it does not help that cloud when the Bureau of Land Management says: We will never conduct a survey to determine exactly where the claim is. So everyone, Mr. Speaker, every State, every tribe, every local government, every individual--even the Federal Government and the BLM itself--deserves to know where the claims rightfully are and where the claims are rightfully not. First step is information. That is all this bill does. I think it is pretty clear that we should at least take this step.

Mr. THORNBERRY

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman).

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Banks).

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. DeSantis).

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Kelly).

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner).

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 48, I call up the bill (S. 84) to provide for an exception to a limitation against appointment of persons as Secretary of Defense within seven years of relief from active duty as a regular commissioned officer of the Armed Forces and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

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 S. 84.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me get right to the heart of the matter. We have to pass this legislation in order for James N. Mattis to be able to serve as Secretary of Defense. I know of no one more respected and more admired in the field of national security today than General Mattis. It is true that this is an extraordinary thing we are doing to pass a new law to provide a onetime exception to an underlying law so that a particular individual can serve. The last time we did this was 67 years ago. Our predecessors then faced challenging times and believed it was appropriate to go through extraordinary lengths to allow an exceptional individual, George C. Marshall, to serve as Secretary of Defense. History reveals that it was fortuitous that they chose to do so. We face challenging times today. We live in an increasingly dangerous world, and we confront it with a military that has been significantly damaged by budget cuts and other actions. I believe it is appropriate-- in fact, I believe it is necessary--for us to rise to meet the challenges of our time as our predecessors did in theirs and allow an exceptional leader to once again serve our country. Now, there are legitimate complaints about the wording of the resolution, about various procedural flaws, and about not exempting General Mattis from the UCMJ. In that regard, let me correct something I said before the Rules Committee last night. A retired officer can be held accountable for acts after they retire, although never has that happened to someone in civilian office. But there are legitimate complaints about the President-elect's transition team refusing to allow General Mattis to come to a hearing and testify before the House even though he was very eager to do so himself. I share all of those concerns. I think it was a mistake and shortsighted to deny the House the opportunity to question General Mattis on the issues related to this legislative exception. I think it was an opportunity to facilitate giving him a large, bipartisan vote out of this House which reflects the overwhelming bipartisan support that he has in this House. But getting back to the bottom line, even with those concerns, we have a responsibility to the men and women who serve, and I think we have a responsibility for the safety and security of every American to see that there is a fully functional Secretary of Defense on day one of the new administration. The only way we can do that is to pass this legislation today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.