Ron Wright

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my amendment which would remove harmful language that seeks to upend religious freedom protections for organizations across America. Earlier this year, the Department of Labor took an important step in preserving the Constitution and ensuring the rights of religious employers. It is simple: Faith-based groups should be on equal footing as they compete with other employers without having to give up their sincerely held religious beliefs. Organizations such as the Salvation Army and Catholic Charities should not be afraid to partner with the Federal Government to help Americans. Unfortunately, if House Democrats have their way and roll back these important religious protections, these organizations will face uncertainty and confusion in the Federal contracting process, possibly opting out altogether. Beyond the fact that it is wrong to tell these organizations that they cannot work with the Federal Government to provide essential services, it is flat-out unconstitutional. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand by their commitment to the Constitution and protect religious liberty for all Americans by supporting my amendment.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, while I am not able to attend the vote for H.R. 6800, the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act on May 15, 2020. I want to express my strong opposition to this legislation, and I plan to vote against it. This 1800-page bill is anything but heroic. It reads more like a Democrat Christmas list. Instead of crafting law, the Speaker wrote and dropped a political bill that she and the rest of her party know is dead on arrival in the Senate. This is not a serious attempt to pass more relief for American workers, businesses, and health professionals. Changing election laws, incentivizing illegal immigration, bailing out mismanaged pensions, and spending the cap on state and local tax deduction for the top 1 percent have nothing to do with the Wuhan Virus and do not address the real needs of the American people. As usual there are positive elements upon which there could be bipartisan support: more small business relief, help for our agricultural sector, additional resources for front line health care workers, and more funding for testing development and deployment. No doubt, these provisions will be cynically heralded as others ensure the bill's demise. Writing a politically inspired bill behind closed doors without meaningful negotiations with the minority, the Senate, or the White House is not how law is crafted. Rather, it's how mockeries are made that further erode the faith and confidence of the American people in Congress. Rather than spending another $3 trillion to push a socialist agenda and further expand government, we should be working together to assess how effectively the previous $3 trillion has been spent, and then identify the needs that are appropriate for the federal government to fill. Enough with the political stunts. Let's get back to working in a bipartisan manner so that we can re-open the economy, hold China accountable, secure our supply chain, and bring an end to the COVID-19 pandemic. I continue to be inspired by the steadfast commitment from the men and women that leave their families, risk their health, and go to their essential jobs every day so that we can continue fighting this war.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2474, the next in the long line of job-killing legislation that we have considered this Congress. Dubbed by the National Retail Federation as ``the worst bill in Congress'' and referred to by the Chamber of Commerce as a ``major threat'' to American jobs, the bill's faults are almost too numerous to count. Repealing state right-to-work laws, codifying harmful and burdensome Obama-era regulations, and violating employee privacy are truly just the tip of the iceberg. Democrats are selling this legislation as pro-worker, but, in fact, it's the opposite. This bill is anti-worker choice and freedom. They would like you to believe that while they need secret ballot elections to choose their own Party leadership, workers do not deserve that same fundamental American right when voting to unionize. To see the potential effects of this legislation look no further than California. AB5 is already wreaking havoc on small business and independent contractors across the state. Workers are having to reevaluate their careers and livelihoods. The PRO Act includes all of AB5's flaws but none of its numerous carveouts. I urge my colleagues to vote no on H.R. 2474.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Congressman Smith for his incredible leadership on the life issue in the Congress. Mr. Speaker, 47 years ago the moral and religious fabric of the United States was tragically torn. As a result of the Roe v. Wade decision, 61 million unborn children have lost their lives, and millions of women and families have been torn apart by abortion. I promised my constituents that I would be a voice for the voiceless in Washington, and I have no intention of breaking that promise. Over the past year my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have time and time again blocked legislation that protects the unborn and women's health. Last year we saw lawmakers block the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act over 80 times, explicitly endorsing infanticide. A number of important pro-life bills have been introduced in this Congress, including, as Mr. Smith mentioned, my Teleabortion Prevention Act and the Child Custody Protection Act that protects young women who are being taken across State lines for an abortion. Both have been stalled by partisan politics. We also saw lawmakers in New York and Virginia cheer legislation that would allow abortions in the ninth month of pregnancy when most babies are viable. This is an outrage. Protecting the voiceless unborn is one of the most significant contributions we can make in our lives, and we, as a nation, need to get back to protecting it.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in staunch opposition to H.R. 3. I can add to what my colleagues have said with statistics and legalese, but I would rather offer you my personal experience. I was diagnosed with Stage 4 lung cancer. I was told that the average life expectancy was 16 months. That was 16 months ago. By the grace of Almighty God and American biotech ingenuity, I am still here, and I will get to spend another Christmas with my family. I was prescribed a rigorous regimen of chemotherapy and an immunotherapy wonder-drug called Keytruda, which had only just been approved for my regimen in May of 2017. Keytruda's discovery is as a result of significant financial investment by the private sector, not the government. Today, I feel great. My last CAT scan showed nothing in my liver and lymph nodes, and the primary tumor had shrunk to about the size of a raisin. Now, 5 years ago, my diagnosis would have been a death sentence. Today, I am beating it. Millions of Americans are diagnosed with life- threatening illnesses every year. And thanks to medical innovation in the United States, miraculous outcomes like mine are not uncommon either. If H.R. 3 becomes law, stories like mine would be rare. If these socialist policies had been implemented earlier, I probably would not be here. For too many in this Chamber, this has become part of their political agenda, but for me and millions of Americans, this is a matter of life or death. H.R. 3 will not save American lives. It will end them. I urge my colleagues to think of their loved ones who will face deadly diseases in the future. Many cures are on the horizon. We cannot stop. We cannot slow down. We cannot stifle research and development of new cures by onerous government control. Too many lives hang in the balance. Mr. Speaker, I beg my colleagues to support this motion to recommit, and let's take action that will actually save lives.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce the Veterans Back to Work Act of 2019. It is not hard to see that our economy is booming. We have the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years, and hourly wages continue to rise. Despite the record-breaking economic numbers we continue to see every month, 326,000 veterans remain unemployed around the country. We should be doing everything we can to facilitate veterans' transitions back into the civilian workforce to help fill the over 7 million open jobs we have here in the United States. The Veterans Back to Work Act would make the work opportunity tax credit, which is set to expire at the end of the year, permanent. This tax credit is issued to businesses and nonprofits that hire individuals who consistently face significant barriers that prevent them from obtaining employment. Making the work opportunity tax credit permanent is a great way to ensure our veterans are set up for success. There is no reason not to incentivize businesses to fill jobs with the men and women who have served and sacrificed so much for our Nation. I urge my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to come together and support this critical legislation. Recognizing Bill Zedler

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, a lion of the Legislature in Texas is serving his last term in office. Since 2003, State Representative Bill Zedler has been a champion of liberty, a champion of free enterprise, a champion of religious freedom, a champion for life. He has been a champion like few others in the Texas Legislature. Whether the issue was taxes, education, healthcare, veterans benefits, whatever it was, his was a voice to which others listened because that voice has always been a voice of truth and wisdom. That voice will be greatly missed. All of us in public office at the end of our time of service have to answer the question, did we leave things better than we found them? For my friend Bill Zedler, that answer is a resounding yes because Texas today is better because State Representative Bill Zedler served in the Texas Legislature. At the end of the movie ``Troy,'' Odysseus is commenting about how history will be written. He says that he lived among giants, that he wanted it to be said that he lived in the time of Hector, that he lived in the time of Achilles. Well, members of the Texas Legislature can be proud that they served in the time of Bill Zedler. I thank Bill for all of his magnificent service to the Texas Legislature.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Madam Chair, I thank Ms. Foxx for yielding. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3. This Congress, we have seen on multiple occasions that Democrats and Republicans are able to agree on and move powerful and beneficial legislation when we put aside politics in favor of bipartisan pragmatism. Members on both sides of the aisle agree that rising drug prices are a major concern for all Americans, and you would think we would be able to deliver for the American people on this issue. Unlike the radical bill before us, H.R. 19, the Lower Costs, More Cures Act, contains bipartisan solutions and has a real chance of being signed into law. Sadly, we are wasting the taxpayers' time debating a hapless Federal takeover of America's innovative biotech industry that will result in more harm than good. H.R. 3 represents the first step of a government takeover, all under the guise of helping. But threatening companies is not helping; restricting future cures is not helping; threatening the jobs of 89,000 Texans employed by the biotech industry is not helping. This bill would slap manufacturers with a 95 percent excise tax for not negotiating its prices with the Federal Government. That is not negotiating; that is dictating. Speaker Pelosi's price-setting legislation gives manufacturers a stark choice: comply or exit the U.S. market entirely. Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath to do no harm. Public officials should do the same. If one thing is clear to me, it is that H.R. 3 will absolutely do harm. This bill has one assured outcome: the stifling of medical innovation here in the United States. Experts from the Congressional Budget Office, the Council of Economic Advisers, and the California Life Sciences Association have all warned of the disastrous impact H.R. 3 will have on future cures. Specifically, they warned that up to a third of new cures could be lost over the next 10 years. Fortunately, we don't have to rely solely on expert estimates about the impact of government price setting. We can look at the real-time results in other countries. Between 2011 and 2018, 89 percent of new treatments introduced were available to Americans, compared to 62 percent in Germany and 60 percent in the United Kingdom. We have seen, to the United States' benefit, the migration of R&D activity from Europe in the aftermath of their price controls. Now is not the time to slow down medical innovations in the United States. We must stop this radical government overreach.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have introduced the K-9 Hero Act last week. Military and law enforcement K-9s work in tandem with the brave men and women who serve our great Nation. Once these heroes retire from service, the medical treatment they need is often significant enough to create a financial hardship for the individuals who care for them. The K-9 Hero Act creates a grant program to assist nonprofits that take in retired working dogs or provide financial assistance to the owners of retired working dogs. These grants will cover medical costs, such as veterinarian visits, medical procedures, diagnostic tests, and medications, which tend to average around $3,000 per year per dog. As most know, just a few weeks ago, a K-9 played a crucial role in the capture and ultimate killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. This K-9 took off, racing down an underground tunnel before cornering Baghdadi, leaving him nowhere to run. It is stories like these that inspired me to introduce the K-9 Hero Act. These dogs assist our Federal Government in ways that no man or machine could, and it is unacceptable to me for them to live with inadequate medical care--or even be euthanized, in some cases--after sacrificing so much for our country. This bill helps ensure these heroes are well taken care of during retirement and that their need for medical care never prevents them from finding a loving forever home. My K-9-loving colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I believe, should support this legislation. Stop the Practice of Teleabortion

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my outrage over the practice of teleabortion. This practice, which gets its name from practitioners conducting abortions over the phone or computer, occurs when chemical abortions are induced with no healthcare provider present. This practice sounds simple, except the woman taking the drugs isn't in a medical facility, no certified medical personnel are present, and if the drugs don't work as planned and the baby is not stillborn, it may still end up in a dumpster and the mother may end up in an emergency room. The obvious danger is why I filed H.R. 4935, the Teleabortion Prevention Act. This legislation protects women's health by making it a Federal offense for healthcare providers to perform a chemical abortion without first physically examining the patient, being present during the chemical abortion, and scheduling a follow-up visit for the patient. Chemical abortions are induced using a two-step abortion pill regimen that can be taken up until the ninth week of pregnancy. Given the serious risks, the FDA has put regulations in place, but pro-abortion groups are looking for ways to get around the law. If these FDA regulations are ever lifted, chemical abortion drugs could become available by prescription, enabling a single healthcare provider to mail chemical abortion pills to women and young girls across the country, regardless of State pro-life protections and whether they have seen a doctor and had an ultrasound performed. This legislation ensures these much-needed FDA regulations will not be lifted. No doctor should feel comfortable prescribing a life-ending pharmaceutical drug without physically being there to administer it to the patient. If the woman's health argument is really more than subterfuge that puts dressing on a tragedy, I urge my colleagues to join me in passing H.R. 4935, the Teleabortion Prevention Act. National Medal of Honor Monument Act

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise because yesterday I had the privilege of introducing the National Medal of Honor Monument Act, with my fellow Texan, Congressman Marc Veasey. Over the course of our history, over 3,500 United States servicemen and -women have been honored with our Nation's highest military decoration, the Medal of Honor. The Medal of Honor is awarded to U.S. servicemembers who have distinguished themselves with extraordinary acts of valor. These men and women I am referring to went above and beyond the call of duty on the battlefield in order to preserve our families and way of life. This legislation ensures that their contribution and patriotism are never forgotten. These heroic individuals deserve to be memorialized with a monument in our Nation's Capitol, among the other great Americans that have helped shape our Nation. In Texas, we celebrate patriotism, American ideals, and our Nation's heroes. Earlier this fall, the National Medal of Honor Museum Foundation chose my hometown of Arlington, Texas, as the location for the new National Medal of Honor Museum. This legislation makes it official. Congratulations to Mayor Williams and the rest of Arlington's leadership for bringing it to the 6.8 million Dallas-Ft. Worth residents and the over 14 million visitors Arlington welcomes each year and, most importantly, the 1.8 million veterans and Active-Duty military that call Texas home.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, what are the best things an American can do for his or her country? Public service, military service, community service. What does a true public servant look like? Someone who possesses exemplary character, integrity, and inspires confidence. Someone who has the network of relationships on both sides to be both respected and effective. How do you honor a man who gave 20 years to the United States Government and the House of Representatives, the United States Marine Corps Infantry, and dedicated his free time to bringing Democrats and Republicans together in the name of charity? Ryan Thompson, my trusted chief of staff and dear friend, who sits here with me, joins us on the House floor for the final time today. He has accompanied me and our former boss to the floor countless times and always helped us look and do our best. Today is different, though, because this is his moment. Mr. Speaker, there are proud members of the United States Marine Corps and there are proud graduates of Texas A&M University--Texas Aggies. Occasionally, God blesses the world by combining both of those things in one person. Such is the case with Ryan Thompson. Ryan is a proud, sixth-generation Texan of the Aggie variety, who serves as a past president of the Texas State Society. A true philanthropist, Ryan has dedicated thousands of hours over the past decade to organizing the bipartisan, bicameral Congressional Baseball Game, which raises millions of dollars for local charities each year. Furthermore, Ryan founded and leads the Congressional Sports for Charity Foundation, which was created to ensure that the Congressional Baseball Game and other congressional charity events live on for decades to come. Ryan wisely understands that the game is not only essential to the many charities it helps but serves another cause in need, the Congress itself. Today, on behalf of the Boys and Girls Clubs of Washington, D.C.; the Washington Nationals Dream Foundation; and the Washington Literacy Council, which honored him with the Champion for Literacy Award--not to mention a grateful institution and Nation--thank you and happy trails to Ryan Scott Thompson. Like a Texas live oak, he is strong from the roots up.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Madam Speaker, the right to terminate a pregnancy has become framed as a woman's health issue, and yet, more and more voices argue in favor of methods of abortion that place a woman's health at great risk, such as tele-abortion, a means of killing an unborn child by acquiring abortion drugs and then being coached, through telemedicine, on how to use them. Simple, except the woman taking the drugs isn't in a medical facility. No medical personnel are present. If the drugs don't work as planned, and the baby is not stillborn, it may still end up in a dumpster, and the mother may end up in an emergency room. The obvious danger is why I have filed the Tele-Abortion Prevention Act, H.R. 4935. This is commonsense legislation, even more so when one considers an FDA report that states that there have been more than 4,000 cases of serious adverse events, including more than 1,000 that required hospitalization. If the woman's health argument is really more than subterfuge that puts dressing on a tragedy, please join me in passing H.R. 4935, the Tele-Abortion Prevention Act.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Madam Speaker, 15 years ago a future gridiron star named Owen Allen was born. He was born with a gift, and that gift was superior athletic ability. At 15 he is already a standout running back for the Southlake Carroll varsity football team. In last week's game alone, he rushed more than 200 yards and scored four touchdowns. Madam Speaker, Texans love competition, we love champions, and we love winners. We find the best of all these things in high school football. If you want to know why Texans are crazy about those Friday night lights, look no further than Owen Allen. His performance on the field excites and inspires. Running back Allen was just named the Dallas-Fort Worth High School Offensive Player of the Week. But athleticism is only one of young Mr. Allen's qualities. He is also a young man of great character, integrity, and decency. As a Member of Congress, I congratulate Mr. Allen and wish him many years of success as an athlete and as a human being. I have prayed God's blessings on him and his family.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to think it is appropriate to conduct an impeachment inquiry behind closed doors, shutting out the American people. They have denied Republican Members of Congress the right to fully participate in the inquiry process but expect them to cast a vote to impeach a duly elected President of the United States without seeing all the facts. In addition to all that, Democrats denied us the right to vote on a resolution to censure Chairman Schiff for his deception of Americans day in and day out. This morning, I joined dozens of my colleagues as we stormed into the SCIF demanding transparency, shedding light on this corrupt process. Instead of having a conversation, Chairman Schiff abruptly ended the deposition, taking the witness with him out of the room. The Speaker of this House is putting her hatred of the President above what is best for her constituents. She is harming the entire Nation by conducting this inquiry in such a manner. Mr. Speaker, enough is enough. We are better than this; our country is better than this; and the American people certainly deserve better than this. They deserve better than an impeachment inquiry in a secret room based on assertions of a phantom whistleblower.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Madam Speaker, I rise to express my outrage over the ongoing parliamentary inquiry against our President. Impeachment is the House's most solemn and serious responsibility. It should not be undertaken haphazardly. Although I strongly believe in Congress' oversight duties and agree that no public official, including the President, is above the law, I have serious concerns about the partisan nature and procedure of this inquiry. Beyond the fact that this inquiry was launched before the transcript of the call to Ukraine was released, the Speaker's decision to launch an inquiry without a full vote of the House and attempts to restrict the involvement of Republicans and the American public in the impeachment proceedings defy precedence. From the beginning, this effort has been mired by the Democrats' partisanship and a complete lack of transparency. The American public deserves the truth. Instead, all they are getting are cherry-picked leaks in classic Washington fashion. Madam Speaker, in its current form, this process is an outrage and counter to our interests and the values of our Republic. I urge my colleagues to abandon this political charade and adhere to the Constitution and congressional precedent.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Department of State Authorization Act of 2019. For our government to function as efficiently and effectively as possible, it is critical for us to revisit the resources and responsibilities of each department from time to time. As everyone has noted, but it is worth repeating, it has been 17 years since we enacted a comprehensive authorization bill for the State Department. H.R. 3352, which enjoys broad bipartisan support, will bring our diplomacy into the future and save valuable taxpayer dollars by reasserting congressional authority, streamlining programs, eliminating duplicative reporting, and requiring measurements of programs' success. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Engel and lead Republican McCaul for including my bill, the Energy Diplomacy Act, in H.R. 3352. Since 1977, when Congress formally gave the Secretary of State primary authority over energy-related foreign policy, there have been significant changes in the global energy landscape: The United States is now the world's top producer of petroleum natural gas; We have also seen increased weaponization of energy by Russia against our EU and NATO allies, transforming energy into a critical national security issue. This new challenge requires reaffirmed dedication and focus. The Energy Diplomacy Act does just that by authorizing an Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Resources and defining our energy security and diplomatic priorities. This will ensure the State Department has adequate personnel to carry out its mandate and protect and advance the energy security interests of the United States, as well as those of our allies abroad. Finally, this will advance U.S. energy exports by instructing our diplomats to work in tandem with U.S. energy companies operating abroad. Combating Russia's maligned influence in Europe has been at the forefront of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs' agenda this year, and I firmly believe pushing back on Russia's energy dominance in Europe must be part of our strategy. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank, again, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), the chair, and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), the lead Republican, for including the Energy Diplomacy Act in this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support the Department of State Authorization Act.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 397. The Rehabilitation for Multiemployer Pensions Act is nothing more than a false promise to American workers, retirees, and their families. House Democrats, instead of working together with us as they have done historically, moved this bill through committee without one single hearing or considering one single amendment. The result? A bill that makes no structural reforms to prevent or shore up future pension plan insolvencies. In fact, it incentivizes pension plan managers to offer generous underfunded benefits while taking risky bets at the cost of the American worker and retiree, knowing full well they have a forgivable taxpayer-funded loan to fall back on. Mr. Speaker, I implore my colleagues to abandon this bill and instead work with us so we can achieve forward-looking solutions to protect workers and prevent future insolvencies.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 582, the Raise the Wage Act, or, as it should be called, the Raising Unemployment for American Workers Act. I was disappointed to hear that Democratic members on the Rules Committee failed to make my amendment in order. The amendment prohibited H.R. 582 from going into effect if the Government Accountability Office found that over 500,000 jobs would be lost to automation as a direct result of this legislation, a very reasonable amendment. This amendment was intended to make sure that, in seeking to improve economic outcomes for workers, especially lower-wage and lesser-skilled workers, we don't adopt policies that have the opposite effect. This radical legislation would more than double the Federal minimum wage, the largest-ever increase since its creation. The recent Congressional Budget Office report on this bill paints a bleak picture of the consequences if it ever becomes law. When fully implemented, this legislation would result in as many as 3.7 million, almost 270,000 from the State of Texas, jobs lost. Across the country, total real family income would drop by $9 billion. At a time when the economy is expanding, wages are rising above inflation, and unemployment is the lowest it has been in decades, we should not be considering job-killing, income-reducing legislation. The negative impacts of such a disastrous bill would be felt in high- income urban areas, but they would be even more severe in lower income rural areas. The economic conditions of Navarro County, Texas, in my district, where the median income is $45,000 a year, are not the same as San Francisco, where the median income is more than double that. A federally mandated doubling of the minimum wage would burden these people and businesses, forcing them to cut hours, let employees go, and close business doors.

Mr. WRIGHT. My colleagues across the aisle like to point to the number of people who will be lifted out of poverty but consistently fail to acknowledge that the same number of Americans are expected to lose their jobs. It seems to me that this bill is a sweet deal, but only if you get to keep your job.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 962, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I urge the Speaker to immediately schedule this important bill.

Mr. WRIGHT

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I stand in opposition to the amendment offered by Mr. Sherman that conditions defense transfers to Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan actively contributes to international security efforts. We see their forces working alongside coalition forces in countering terrorism in Afghanistan, in addition to contributing a logistics supply route vital to U.S. and coalition forces. Azerbaijan lies in a compromising position between two hostile forces: Russia and Iran. Our bilateral relationship and the incredible amount of support the Azeris have provided to U.S. missions in Afghanistan were strong indicators of how our partnership has grown since Azerbaijan first gained its independence in 1991. We must not limit our ability to provide reciprocal support to our friend and partner in a tumultuous region. Putin's history of utilizing military force against its neighbors, such as Ukraine and Georgia, forebodes his willingness to use the same methods against others that counter him. The United States Department of State is responsible for the review of sales and transfers of defense articles and services. They exercise this responsibility through an interagency process that assesses each possible arms transfer on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Sherman's amendment unnecessarily singles out Azerbaijan by placing an additional certification requirement on the State Department's armed sales review process. The length of time this amendment would add to the defense exports review process is detrimental in the event of an attack by militarily superior Russia against our security partner, Azerbaijan, while providing no added benefit to our bilateral relationship. This would include a lengthening of time in reviewing arms sales intended for Azeri forces operating in counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan. Nagorno-Karabakh is an Armenian-occupied territory inside the borders of Azerbaijan, which has undergone bitter conflict for two decades. The OSCE Minsk Group, co-chaired by the United States, has sought a peaceful solution to the conflict since 1992. By conditioning sales to Azerbaijan, the United States Congress would tilt the United States neutral position as a member of the Minsk Group and hinder resolution efforts in Nagorno-Karabakh. By taking sides, the trust that has been built up by the U.S. and Azerbaijan through the group's efforts would be gravely diminished, and the conflict would degenerate further. The NDAA is not the appropriate vehicle for taking sides on a political issue, nor should it be used to influence a process that clearly lies within the jurisdiction of the Foreign Affairs Committee. This amendment is not required. The Department of Defense already adheres to the provisions of the Department of State's March 2019 extension of section 907, which specifies that assistance to Azerbaijan will not be used for offensive purposes against Armenia. I oppose this amendment, which halts the positive momentum of our bilateral relationship, particularly with the arrival of U.S. Ambassador Lee Litzenberger in January of this year. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.