Ryan Zinke

Mr. ZINKE

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, 2 weeks ago, when I held events across Montana to finally welcome our Vietnam veterans home and present them with the 50th Anniversary Vietnam Veteran Lapel Pin, many of these veterans were surprised to find out that the same UH-1 Novembers that they flew in in Vietnam are still in service today. Even more astonishing is that these 50-year helicopters are still used to protect our national nuclear missile sites. Mr. Chair, I commend our men and women in uniform who are still able to maintain these aircraft in a constant state of readiness, but, in reality, the Huey is incapable of meeting the mission requirements they face today. In fact, they have failed multiple exercises, not from personnel issues but from equipment issues. This amendment will provide the funding that is necessary for the Air Force to expedite a full and open competition to replace these aging aircraft. It is critical we provide our men and women who protect our Nation's nuclear missiles and arsenals with the equipment that is capable of meeting the requirements of this important mission.

Mr. ZINKE. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman and his staff for the hard work they have done in helping me to bring this to the floor. It was a learning experience for all of us. I thank the gentleman for his efforts and work. I also thank the Vietnam veterans. They don't have to look at the UH- 1s flying to protect our missiles again. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ZINKE

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my colleague from Florida's amendment to create a Judge Advocate General career litigation track in the Army and the U.S. Air Force. The legislation provides the Army and Air Force JAG officers with trial and prosecutorial experience that is absolutely critical. Currently, Army and Air Force JAGs lack experience, as multiple reports have said. As a matter of fact, a shocking 89 percent of military prosecutors only have 10 or fewer contested cases. This inexperience is a disservice to those who seek justice under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Anyone who has suffered a transgression and sexual assault or other crime while serving in the military, quite frankly, deserves the best. The Navy has implemented this litigation path and is already reaping great results. It is time for the Air Force and the Army to follow suit.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, I offer amendment No. 10 as the designee of Mrs. Lummis from the great State of Wyoming.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of this amendment to highlight the importance of maintaining our nuclear deterrence. This amendment will ensure that our land-based nuclear ICBMs are ready at a moment's notice and are not placed on a reduced-alert status. President Reagan had it right. He championed the notion of peace through strength. Those wise words still apply today, even greater. The harsh reality is that we live in an increasingly unstable international environment. Nuclear deterrence provided by the triad has been the backbone of our national security posture for over half a century. Just last fall, the Secretary of Defense stated: ``The nuclear deterrent is a must-have . . . It is the foundation. It's the bedrock and it needs to remain healthy . . . '' Montana is a proud defender of our triad, and our troops are always ready. Our ICBMs should be, too. As more nation-states, including Iran, begin to defy international laws and pursue nuclear and ballistic missiles, it is critical that we do not scale back our nuclear deterrence. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the great State of North Dakota (Mr. Cramer).

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the great State of Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, this amendment is about ensuring that our nuclear deterrence that has protected this country for over 70 years remains strong and viable. Yesterday, this body passed a measure to keep our nukes safe. It is now time to ensure they are ready at a moment's notice. There is no reason to have a nuclear force unless they are ready. To lower the alert posture of our land-based ICBMs would result in a 2-week delay before our ICBMs would be ready to use. This would cripple our ability to respond quickly, which is the entire point of having a nuclear triad. In the military, we always hope for the best but plan for the worse. While I hope we never have to use our nuclear weapons--and, indeed, I believe everyone in this body does--to lower their posture status of land-based ICBMs would unnecessarily put us at risk. I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ZINKE

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert).

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support my colleague from Indiana's amendment. The amendment is simply about restoring public accountability and transparency to the National Security Council. As a former Deputy Commander of Special Operations in Iraq, I have personally seen what happens. Oftentimes, our rules of engagement that dictate how we fight are politicized and it diminishes our ability to fight. I have seen it. It is time to change. If they move out of an advisory role to a role where they are commanding and interpreting commands, then we need FOIA. America deserves accountability. America deserves our ability to look at who is calling the shots and why. This is not a hit on the administration. This is an American issue. When a role is advisory and comes from advisory to command, then that command needs to be held accountable. That is what we do.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, well, how soon we forget why they are there. How soon we forget. Why are they there? Go to New York and look at the names engraved of the ladder men, the commercial pilots, the innocent. I did a lot to put them there. I don't remember reading Miranda rights or warrants. Yet some people want to bring them back to the United States under U.S. law where rules of evidence and Miranda rights would apply. Yet that is ignored. Now we are asking for tighter controls overseas because one-third go back to the battlefield. Is it a risk we should incur? The answer is no. Why? Because what is left is the bottom. These are the guys that are not hanging around evil. These are the guys that are evil. They are absolutely evil, and we have seen it. So putting more controls, more restrictions to protect American lives is what we must do in Congress. This is not a Democratic or Republican issue. This is an American issue.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 60 be modified by the form that I have placed at the desk.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment that will ensure that our servicemembers in the nuclear security forces have the ability to do their job. Each and every day, these men and women are tasked with the protection of our nuclear weapons. This is not a mission that we can fail, and, thankfully, they have performed their mission successfully for over half a decade. Unfortunately, despite the gravity and importance of this mission, these men and women must use Huey helicopters, UH-1s, that are in the Vietnam-era. They must be able to respond anywhere in a 32,000-square- mile area, larger than the State of Maine, while using these helicopters that are over 50 years old. Air Force demonstrations performed at Minot Air Force Base have shown time and time again that critical security shortages exist using these Hueys, and they are problematic in mission success. The Air Force and the Department of Defense have known this for over a decade but, unfortunately, have consistently kicked the can down the road. My amendment ensures the replacement of the Huey aircraft is done now. The mission of protecting our forces is too important to delay yet again, and the Air Force and DOD, by their own tests, have proven its vulnerability. This amendment ensures a full and open competition, but does not allow the Air Force to further delay replacement. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say thank you to everyone for working on this bill and doing slight amendments to ensure that we have a fair and open competition but yet not delay the problem. I think we can all understand that we need to replace the Hueys. The Hueys are inaccurate. They have been inaccurate for a long time. The acquisition process yet again, as we have identified, is broke. So I thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to place this in importance. Our nuclear weapon and our arsenal needs to be protected. We face an asymmetrical enemy, and ensuring that they are safe at all times is part of what this Congress should be doing. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ZINKE

Mr. ZINKE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of Rear Admiral Brian Losey, the current commander of Naval Special Warfare Command, our Nation's top U.S. SEAL. He is entrusted with the honor of commanding all SEALs, all special boat units, and all support staff across this great country and across many theatres. I have had the privilege of serving with Brian Losey, SEAL Team 6, Red Team, and I can tell you that Brian is an outstanding officer. It is an obligation of every officer to take action when he sees wrong, and Brian Losey did just that. He saw a problem and took action. He took decisive action because he knew the actions of others around him were wrong. Yet, once again, an entrusted, entrenched bureaucracy was allowed to hide behind threats, hide behind whistleblowers, hide behind rules that were intended to protect command and not to erode it. And yet, those accusations discredited a great officer and the head of the United States Navy SEALs. I understand these protections are important, and they are necessary, but we cannot allow such protections to go against accountability and against the sanctity of command. In this case, the Navy reviewed the investigation on Admiral Brian Losey. They found him to be innocent and wrongfully accused. I have seen the evidence and went through it line by line. I fully support the Navy's conclusion and believe that they properly reviewed this case. The DOD had different conclusions, and I believe those DOD conclusions from the IG are flawed and are cherry-picked. Admiral Losey is highly regarded by his subordinates, all of the Naval Special Warfare community, and all SEALs who have served with him and under his command. This includes the Navy SEAL standing before you. I have known this man and his family for 30 years. Let me just give you a snapshot of Admiral Losey's leadership under his command of Naval Special Warfare. The SEALs, and those under his command, have executed 654 total missions, have killed 461 high-value targets--every one of those targets, if given a chance, would do grievous harm to our Nation--have captured 60, wounded 32, rescued an American hostage, deployed an average of 250 days of the year. In 2015 alone, in Iraq, Naval Special Warfare Command and its components were responsible for the killing or capture of over 3,000 enemy combatants. Admiral Losey personally deployed to Operation Inherent Resolve, Operation Enduring Freedom in the Trans-Sahara. He has deployed to 30 countries. Naval Special Warfare forces under his command are deployed to 70 countries across this great globe. They advanced partner forces' security capabilities, training over 6,000 of our allies. Madam Speaker, America, our men, women, and children, both at home and abroad, are able to sleep at night due to the leadership of Admiral Losey and those forces that he commands. Admiral Brian Losey, I thank you for your dedicated service to this country. As a former teammate and United States Navy SEAL, I am proud of all that you have done for our community, for the United States Navy, and our grateful Nation. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Rear Admiral Brian Losey, the current Commander of Naval Special Warfare Command, our Nation's top U.S. Navy SEAL, entrusted with the honor of Commanding all Navy SEALs. I had the privilege of serving with Brian in the SEALs and am proud to call him a team mate. It is the obligation of every officer to take action when they see wrong, Admiral Losey did just that. He saw a problem and took action. Yet once again, our entrenched bureaucracy has allowed senior civilian individuals to hide behind anonymous accusations and whistle blower protections, in an attempt to discredit a great man and cover-up their transgressions. While these protections are important and necessary, they cannot be allowed to be abused or shield them from being held accountable. In this case, after the Navy reviewed the investigation of Admiral Losey, they found him to be innocent and wrongfully accused. I have seen the evidence. I fully support the U.S. Navy's conclusion and believe they properly reviewed the case and fairly adjudicated this matter. Admiral Losey is highly regarded by his subordinates and all of the special warfare community as a true selfless and humble leader. This includes the Navy SEAL standing before you that has had the honor to serve with him and know him for the last 30 years. He has sacrificially served our nation with distinction and honor. Let me just give you a snap shot of Admiral Losey's leadership under his command Naval Special Warfare Forces have: Executed 654 total missions. Killed 461 High Value Individuals. Captured 60, Wounded 32. Rescued an American Hostage. Deployed an average number of 250 days. NSW strives to maintain a 1:3 deploy-to-dwell ratio. In 2015 Iraq alone, NSW was responsible for the coordinated capture/ kill of over 3,000 enemy combatants. Participated in Operation Inherent Resolve, Operation Enduring Freedom (AFG/PI/H0A/TransSahara). Deployed to 30 countries as Crisis Response Forces. Deployed to 70 countries to support 550 training events for allied and partner nations, advancing partner forces' security capabilities, ultimately training approximately 6,000 foreign partner and allied military personnel per year. American men, women, and children, both at home and abroad, are able to sleep soundly in their beds due to the leadership of Admiral Losey and the actions of the men and women he leads. Admiral Brian Losey thank you for your dedicated and faithful service to the United States of America. As a former teammate and U.S. Navy SEAL, I am proud of all that you have done for the NSW community, the United States Navy, and our great nation. The following in a more in depth background of the situation: There has been significant public media interest in the Whistleblower Reprisal Investigations against Rear Admiral Brian Losey, currently serving as Commander, Naval Special Warfare Command while serving as Commander, Special Operations Command Africa. My professional interest in these issues as a member of House Armed Services Committee, and as a former member of the Naval Special Warfare Community, was drawn by the apparent divergence in reporting put forth by the DoD Inspector General, and the adjudication conclusions of the Navy--and further highlighted by a divergent Senate address by Senator Chuck Grassley and a pointed op-ed by the former Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command Admiral (ret) Bill McRaven, which raised concerns about the unjust and destructive politicization of the matter. I looked into these cases and identified the following significant, and not all- inclusive, items of concern from the evidence submitted to the DoD Inspector General: Rear Admiral Losey relieved an Air Force Lieutenant Colonel of his duties as Director of Personnel and Administration (J1 Director). This officer was responsible for the processing of awards and evaluations for service members assigned or conducting duties in support of Special Operations Command Africa (SOCAFRICA), and was delinquent in the processing of over 300 awards and evaluations spanning a timeframe greater than two years. Rear Admiral Losey and the Deputy Commander of SOCAFRICA counseled this officer well before any IG complaints were raised. By word and deed, this officer signaled that he was unwilling to step up his efforts to take care of service members, citing his family life as his primary concern, and arguing against establishing the normal administrative trackers for awards, evaluations, and pending transfers and gains in personnel as requested by Losey. After discovering that this officer allowed the use of Admiral Losey's legal signature via auto pen 36 times without the necessary authorization, and then not being truthful about it, Rear Admiral Losey relieved him and properly referred the placement of this officer to the Air Force chain of command. In the same timeframe, an Army Captain assigned to the J1 filed an 8 page complaint against the J1 Director, citing a hostile work environment, lack of compliance with various administrative policies, and many of the same issues that SOCAFRICA leadership had already addressed in counseling with the J1 Director. An investigation was conducted by SOCAFRICA's higher headquarters, U.S. Africa Command, which determined that the J1 Director was culpably negligent and derelict in the execution of his duties on multiple counts. The investigation noted that the Senior NCO in the J1 among others, had reflected this officer ``was seldom in the workplace for 40 hours a week.'' The AFRICOM Judge Advocate Office endorsed the investigation and an Air Force Major General at AFRICOM issued a Letter of Counseling to the SOCAFRICA J1 Director citing ``a lack of; professionalism, selfless service, self-discipline and duty'' and further recommending that this officer ``approach future situations with the integrity and professionalism expected of an Air Force officer''. The AFRICOM investigation further recommended that this officer be issued an adverse fitness report. Admiral Losey did not issue an adverse fitness report and instead, recommended this officer for all for promotion requirements and promotion. It is apparent that Admiral Losey exercised considerable restraint and care in handling this officer. The written and verbal testimony as well as the substantial supporting documentation submitted to DoD IG by Rear Admiral Losey, the Deputy Commander, and the Chief of Staff reflects good faith and effective efforts to resolve both performance and misconduct issues related to the former Chief of Staff and the most senior civilian assigned to SOCAFRICA--publicly identified as Mr. Fred Jones through multiple media statements he has made related to these cases. Mr. Jones was provided a written counseling document for necessary performance improvement owing to a lack of staff processes, which he was responsible for developing and implementing over the four years he was the Chief of Staff, as well as deficiencies in staff organization and execution of his assigned duties. In addressing the increasing workload and levels of risk brought to SOCAFRICA service members deploying to Africa in the shadow of the Arab Spring and exacerbated by longer term and growing Al Qaeda, Al Shabaab, and Boko Haram terrorism concerns, Mr. Jones agreed amicably in writing to the creation of a Director of Staff position to help level the workload not being addressed in his role as Chief of Staff. This parallels the common Deputy Commanding General for Operations and Deputy Commanding General for Support structure in Army Divisions. Rear Admiral Losey, with the diligent work of the staff was able to create a GS-15 position for Mr. Jones with no decrement to pays, benefits or stature. The new Chief of Staff, an Army Colonel, offered Mr. Jones workspace in the Chief of Staff office. Mr. Jones had a couple of other choices and selected an office co-located with a longtime friend, remote from the command group. Shortly after the new Chief of Staff assumed his duties, he gained access to the SOCAFRICA pay report. He noted and confirmed significant irregularities in pay benefits drawn by several SOCAFRICA civilian members with AFRICOM, who issued the report. A formal, command-wide, and broad scoped investigation was initiated and spanned a timeframe of one and a half years prior to Rear Admiral Losey's arrival to approximately one and a half years after his arrival. The investigation of over 1,000 pay record entries revealed that Mr. Jones, along with 3 other civilians identified in allegations against Losey, comprised 92% of the major pay violations in SOCAFRICA in that three year period. This was particularly egregious as Mr. Jones, a retired Army Reserve Special Forces Colonel, was accountable for maintaining the integrity and compliance of the pay system, and was the single largest violator of DoD Financial Management Regulations and policies in SOCAFRICA by routinely seeking pay and leave benefit approvals from his subordinates. This investigation and a subsequent AFRICOM IG inspection further revealed that several civilians in SOCAFRICA held unauthorized super user/system administrator privileges in the pay system and were circumventing the normal benefit approval and verification processes. Rear Admiral Losey directed Mr. Jones to personally comply with proper procedures--but Mr. Jones disregarded this direction and continued to seek approvals of pay benefits through his subordinates. The whistleblower complaints against Rear Admiral Losey were raised AFTER the pay investigations were initiated and Mr. Jones implicated in misconduct. To not investigate this misconduct given the data presented would have been a dereliction of duty by Rear Admiral Losey. This misconduct was further amplified when the new Chief of Staff went to work with staff experts to include Mr. Jones, in creating an apparently absent pay policy within SOCAFRICA. Weeks into this work, the new Chief of Staff discovered that a policy had already been created years earlier under the hand of Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones did not disclose that there was already a policy in effect that was not being complied with. After designation as Director of Staff, Mr. Jones was properly detailed in accordance with his job description and duties to complete the body of instructions and policies that should have been in place for a command that was 4 years old. With persistent management oversight, he satisfactorily completed his tasks months after the agreed to suspense date, and was rated as ``successful'' in his performance evaluation. This evaluation was fully supported by civilian personnel policy, was not a ``lowering'' of his ratings, as this was Rear Admiral Losey's first report on Mr. Jones. This rating did not require any Performance Improvement Plan as incorrectly asserted by DoD IG, and is required only for evaluations reflecting ``failure''. It appears that Losey did not reprise in addressing these issues. It appears that the responsible management officials (RMOS) as a whole, took considerable care in ensuring Mr. Jones' pay and stature in the creation of a GS-15 Director of Staff position were not decremented or compromised. In another disturbing demonstration of a lack of process, internal management, and compliance, SOCAFRICA's executive oversight agency for communications security (COMSEC) and specifically, the handling of sensitive cryptographic keying material noted a pervasive lack of compliance in SOCAFRICA's COMSEC program during a staff assist visit. Discrepancies in COMSEC are a national security concern, and reportable at all times. Their discovery during the assist visit threatened to shut down SOCAFRICA's communications, and the numerous operations they supported. Rear Admiral Losey learned that his COMSEC vault and COMSEC managers were not certified, and that there were a significant number of cryptographic keys in Africa that had not been documented as properly destroyed. The was perplexing as Rear Admiral Losey recalled the receipt of commendatory correspondence from USSOCOM for an excellent internal management control program only a couple of months before his arrival at SOCAFRICA. This program is designed to apply additional oversight on sensitive or high impact functions of a command, to include COMSEC. Given that the program was commendable on one hand, and failing on another, an investigation was initiated. The investigation revealed that the COMSEC oversight portion of the internal management program was falsified with backdated compliance checklists, and an unsupported statement of compliance. Staff processes, staff function and compliance, fell squarely in Mr. Jones job responsibilities. Again, Rear Admiral Losey handled the correction of this issue administratively at the lowest level possible. By all evidence reviewed, it appears that Rear Admiral Losey did his best to ensure that SOCAFRICA was able to provide critical support to service members deploying into complex security situations and at risk, while preserving Mr. Jones equities as a civil servant. These areas included Somalia and boundary states, South Sudan, Libya, Uganda and countries impacted by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) and Joseph Kony, as well as a dozen more countries in the Trans-Sahara and Islamic Maghreb regions--areas where Al Qaeda and Boko Haram were spreading. Civilian A, a named party in the allegations against Rear Admiral Losey, served as the SOCAFRICA Executive Officer (XO), and was a retired Army Major. He was subordinate to and rated by, Mr. Jones. He was the primary unauthorized approval authority for Mr. Jones' pay benefits as revealed in the broadly scoped, command wide investigation into the matter. As XO, Civilian A was properly detailed in accordance with his job description and duties to assist Mr. Jones in completing the body of instructions and policies necessary to define and formalize SOCAFRICA's staff processes and functions. Along with Mr. Jones, Civilian A satisfactorily completed this task with persistent management oversight months after the agreed suspense date. In accordance with personnel policy, he was given ``successful'' evaluation marks in a report rendered by Losey. This was Losey's first report on the member, and was not a ``lowering''. As with Mr. Jones, a performance improvement plan was not required, and is triggered when a member is assessed to be ``failing''. As reflected in evidence submitted to DoD IG by RMOS, Civilian A had repeated clashes with senior management officials, and was constant in his efforts to assert alternative realities of discussions and agreements. He was particularly resistant to direction to removing his liquor displays from the government workplace. At the request of Civilian A, and as agreed to at the outset of the detail period, Civilian A was moved to the SOCAFRICA Directorate for Plans (J5) upon completion of his work detail with Mr. Jones. As there was no civil servant position available for him in the J5, Rear Admiral Losey and management officials ensured his placement by creating a GS- 13 non-compete billet in the J5 to support and ensure Civilian A's professional placement and development desires. DoD IG instructions require that investigators assess the motives and character of witnesses. In the case of Civilian A and Mr. Jones, it is apparent that the whistleblower complaint against Rear Admiral Losey was likely not triggered by the distant allegation of a travel infraction, but more proximately triggered as a shield to the long standing misconduct associated with padding their compensatory time and overtime pay benefits, and circumventing the very processes they were accountable for instituting and enforcing in SOCAFRICA. DoD IG questioned Losey on a ``locker room'' discussion from which nearly every quote that is attributed to Losey and his alleged reprisal motives emanate. After misrepresenting Rear Admiral Losey's transcribed testimony in preliminary reports, and after separate questionings a year apart, DoD IG concluded that they could not substantiate that any ``locker room'' discussion occurred--this was revealed finally as an allegation made by Civilian A as a ``one on one'' conversation. It is a significant concern, but likely an simple administrative oversight to see the elements of a conversation that could not be substantiated cascaded through every DoD IG investigative report as though they actually occurred. It is equally concerning that DoD IG enables these complainants seeking the title of ``whistleblower'' to exercise a seemingly unlimited dominion over truth and forthright character. Civilian A, as an Army Officer and Battalion XO, ordered a cover up in advance of a CID investigation into a drowning death of an Iraqi citizen. He later testified on the matter in exchange for immunity from prosecution, while soldiers from the Battalion that followed his orders were tried in court. Civilian A's character is well chronicled in the book ``Drowning in the Desert'' by V.H. Gambera. He was ultimately censured by the Chief Staff of the Army for obstruction of justice. These motive and character assessments are clearly relevant. I reviewed the separate investigation into Rear Admiral Losey's leadership, as referenced by Admiral (ret) McCraven. Rear Admiral Losey's effectiveness as well the respect he generates in mission execution is well documented. Additionally I note that he has exceeded DoD and Navy averages for every command climate assessment area based on DEOMI Survey records. I commend the Navy for its careful and forthright review of relevant evidence in this matter. Mission execution and ensuring proper support of service members in harm's way while bringing SOCAFRICA's processes and compliance to acceptable levels were evident drivers in RMO and Rear Admiral Losey's actions, and clearly supports the Navy's adjudication conclusions. I am deeply concerned that three and a half years of investigating, over 100 witness interviews, and 300,000 e-mails were digested to produce biased reports at the near complete exclusion or distortion of the testimony, evidence, and documentation that provided credible support and justification for the actions of RMO's and for a commander's duty obligations and responsibilities. I am equally concerned at the disregard for timeliness in the execution of these investigations, and note there is still a ``phantom investigation'' open for over a thousand days? There are also legitimate concerns with DoD IG's handling of sensitive case material and its' release to the media. There is something seriously amiss at DoD IG. Finally, I wholeheartedly agree with my colleague Senator Grassley-- there needs to be an independent, in depth investigation into the Deputy IC for Administrative Investigations, Marguerite Garrison. I have substantial misgivings in the integrity, investigative practices, timeliness, and compliance under her leadership in this matter based on my review. [From the Tampa Tribune, Apr. 24, 2016] (By William H. McRaven) When I was a young boy my father, a veteran of World War II and Korea, schooled me on the downfall of Gen. Douglas MacArthur. MacArthur, he explained, had overstepped his authority and shown blatant disrespect for the civilian leadership of the country. President Harry Truman relieved him of his command, and MacArthur retired soon thereafter. Civilian rule of the military was one of the most fundamental principles of the armed forces. To believe differently was dangerous, my father told me. Dad strongly supported Truman's action, and he made me understand the value of the civil-military relationship--a lesson I never forgot. But over the past decade I have seen a disturbing trend in how politicians abuse and denigrate military leadership, particularly the officer corps, to advance their political agendas. Although this is certainly not a new phenomenon, it seems to be growing in intensity. My concern is that if this trend of disrespect to the military continues it will undermine the strength of the officer corps to the point where good men and women will forgo service--or worse the ones serving will be reluctant to make hard decision for fear their actions, however justified, will be used against them in the political arena. Take the recent case of Rear Adm. Brian Losey. Adm. Losey is the commander of all Naval Special Warfare forces--the SEALs and Special Boat sailors. I have known Losey for more than 30 years. He is without a doubt one of the finest officers with whom I have ever served. Over the past 15 years no officer I know in the SEAL Teams has given more to this country than Brian. None. As a young officer he was constantly deployed away from his family. After 9/11, he was sent to Afghanistan in the early days to help fight the Taliban. From there, Losey participated in the final march to Baghdad and then stayed in country as a SEAL Task Unit Commander. Afterward he served as the deputy and then the commanding officer of SEAL Team Six during more tough fighting in Afghanistan. Later he was posted to the White House in the Office of Combating Terrorism. He made rear admiral in 2009 while at the White House. He was subsequently sent back overseas to Djibouti, Africa, to do a 15-month isolated tour as the commander of all U.S. forces in the Horn of Africa. As a result of that successful tour, he was given command of Special Operations Command, Africa (SOCAFRICA). SOCAFRICA was a relatively new command, which had been established to address the growing threat in North Africa. Located in the beautiful Swabian city of Stuttgart, Germany, it was initially staffed with military and civilian personnel from another nearby special operations unit. Although most of the men and women were incredibly capable, hard-working staffers, there was a small core who had been living in Europe for years enjoying the comfortable lifestyle in Stuttgart. Upon Losey's arrival in Germany, the situation in North Africa changed dramatically, and the fledgling SOCAFRICA had to quickly get on wartime footing. Brian Losey did just that. Losey is a no-nonsense officer who knows what it takes to get results. Combat is hard. Lives are at stake. Being genteel and considerate of everyone's feelings are not the qualities that will engender success. But although Losey can be a tough taskmaster, he is a ``by-the-book'' officer. Unfortunately for Losey, along the way to strengthening the command there were those who fought the change and through a series of whistleblower complaints sought to seek his removal. At the time, I was the commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa. I worked with Gen. Carter Ham, who commanded U.S. Africa Command and had operational control of Adm. Losey, to investigate the complaints. The investigation we initiated determined that Losey's leadership style, while brusque and demanding, did not warrant his removal. The Navy subsequently recommended Losey for two stars, and he was confirmed by the Senate in December 2011. Although the Navy inspector general absolved Losey of any wrongdoing, his promotion was put on hold pending DOD inspector general resolution of the complaints. Nevertheless, the secretary of the Navy agreed to reassign Adm. Losey to the premier job in Naval Special Warfare--command of all the SEALs. During the past three years as commander of Naval Special Warfare Command (WARCOM), his staff has consistently ranked WARCOM to be one of the best places to work in the Navy. He has passed all Navy IG inspections with flying colors, and the retention statics for his young officers and enlisted is exceptional. However, in the course of those three years, the whistleblowers from Stuttgart continued to pursue Losey's removal and resignation, routinely submitting new complaints to prolong the process and hold up his promotion. A series of DOD inspector general investigations were reviewed by the Navy leadership and, once again, Adm. Losey was found not to have violated any law, rule or policy. In fact, it was clear to the Navy that the personnel action taken by Losey against the complainants was not reprisal. He was recommended again for promotion to two stars. Despite the Navy's multiple endorsements, certain members of Congress chose to use Losey's case to pursue their own political agenda. They held hostage other Navy nominations until Losey's promotion recommendation was rescinded. The ransom for their congressional support was Brian Losey's career and, more importantly, his stellar reputation.

Mr. ZINKE

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition to contributions of Jocelyn Galt, my agricultural expert. Agriculture is the number one industry in Montana. As Jocelyn goes to Montana, I recognize the contributions of her and her family to Montana. You may know that the Galts are pioneers in Montana and their family includes Jeannette Rankin, the first female Member of this body. She was a Member of this body before females were allowed to vote. I wish Jocelyn, as she returns to Montana and to farming and ranching, the very best, fair winds and following seas. Jocelyn Galt, Bravo Zulu.

Mr. ZINKE

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 719) to rename the Armed Forces Reserve Center in Great Falls, Montana, the Captain John E. Moran and Captain William Wylie Galt Armed Forces Reserve Center.

Mr. ZINKE. 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 bill under consideration.

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. ZINKE. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 719 and my companion bill, H.R. 1521, to honor Montana Medal of Honor recipients Captain John E. Moran and Captain William Wylie Galt and rename the Armed Forces Reserve Center in Great Falls, Montana, in their honor. Captain John E. Moran served in the Philippine-American war and was awarded the Medal of Honor in 1910 for fearlessly leading a small body of troops under severe fire and through waist-deep water in the attack against the enemy. Captain William Wylie Galt served in World War II and was awarded the Medal of Honor in 1945 for gallantry above and beyond the call of duty. Galt manned a machinegun on a tank destroyer at the front of the assault force, staying at his post in the vehicle's turret and continuing to lead his men despite intense hostile fire. He was killed while manning his machinegun and, on February 1, 1945, was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor. He was just 24 years old. I am proud to have a member of the Galt family on my staff. Captain Galt and Captain Moran are an inspiration to every Montanan who was ever and will ever put on the uniform, myself included. Montana has a strong heritage of military service, with more veterans per capita than almost any other state in the Nation, to include our Indian nations. Both Captain Moran and Captain Galt received the Medal of Honor, this Nation's most distinguished honor, for displaying such personal bravery that went well beyond the call of duty. As leaders, they deserve our respect and honor. Memorializing these two heroes by renaming the Armed Forces Reserve Center will provide a daily reminder to us all of the service and sacrifice these Montanans made to our country. I thank my friends, Senator Steve Daines and Senator Jon Tester, for seeing this important bill through the Senate. I am proud to see this issue to completion. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ZINKE

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my deepest concern over the recent surge in hostilities along the Line of Contact between Armenia and Azerbaijan which needlessly claimed dozens of lives on both sides. These skirmishes come just days after a successful visit by Azerbaijani President Aliyev with Vice President Biden and Secretary Kerry. Azerbaijan has been a staunch ally to the United States. It is critical to regional stability and global security that the recent hostilities are deescalated. It is no secret that Russia does not support the Southern Gas Corridor Project. This pipeline has been championed by Azerbaijan and would provide critical energy security for America's friends and allies in Europe. Accordingly this latest upsurge in fighting is another sign of Moscow's meddling in the affairs of states along its borders. As we have seen in Eastern Ukraine and Georgia, Russia continues to exploit separatist movements along its periphery to pressure our friends and allies in the region. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that Armenia, Russia's key regional ally, has been used as a proxy to intimidate our partners, including Azerbaijan and Georgia. These latest hostilities between Azerbaijan and Armenia remind us of the urgency to find a peaceful solution to the protracted conflict. I urge the Administration to step up its efforts towards a peaceful solution and work with both sides to stabilize the region. Meanwhile, in the face of increasing Russian interference and aggression against its neighbors, the United States must remain steadfast in its support of friends like Azerbaijan.

Mr. ZINKE

Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of the women of Montana to advocate for renaming the Women and Minorities in STEM Fields Grant Program to honor former Montana Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin. Yes, I do hold her seat and, yes, she held the first seat in Montana before women could vote. I would like to also say that she was a true Montanan. She embodied the pioneer spirit that we know and love. She led the way in so many different areas to include: She was one of the first to graduate from the University of Montana with a degree in biology. She voted against both wars because she could not fight. Her spirit blazoned the trails and gave us leadership. She was also a gifted scientific mind and an early pioneer. The grant program is an important tool for young women today to continue their education in STEM and possibly break new ground, like Jeannette Rankin, and blaze new trails for young women of tomorrow, today, and our future. I would like to add that my own staffer, Ms. Jocelyn Galt, is a relative of Jeannette Rankin. She, too, demonstrates the tenacity and determination that made Jeannette Rankin successful and feared among her peers. Renaming this program in Representative Rankin's honor is the right thing to do because it a reminder of those who had courage to break down the barriers, had the tenacity to not let go of their dreams, and the courage to be a mentor and an inspiration to us all. I am happy to partner with Representative Grace Meng on this important endeavor. I thank her for her leadership.