Congressional Record, Volume 162 Issue 79 (Wednesday, May 18, 2016)

[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 79 (Wednesday, May 18, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H2734-H2787]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017

The Committee resumed its sitting.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Fleming

The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia). It is now in order to
consider amendment No. 2 printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle B of title III, add the following
new section:

SEC. 3__. PROHIBITION ON CARRYING OUT CERTAIN AUTHORITIES
RELATING TO CLIMATE CHANGE.

(a) In General.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2017 for the Department of Defense may be
obligated or expended to carry out the provisions described
in subsection (b).
(b) Provisions.--The provisions described in this
subsection are the following:
(1) Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6(b)(iii), and 6(c) of Executive
Order 13653 (78 Fed. Reg. 66817, relating to preparing the
United States for the impacts of climate change).
(2) Sections 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15(b)
of Executive Order 13693 (80 Fed. Reg. 15869, relating to
planning for Federal sustainability in the next decade).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, my amendment prevents scarce dollars from
being wasted to fund two of President Obama's executive orders
regarding climate change and green energy. These are dollars that
should go to the readiness of our Armed Forces.
A similar amendment has already been adopted by voice vote for the
past 2 years during House floor consideration of the Defense
appropriations bills.
My amendment is supported by 28 outside organizations, including the
Competitive Enterprise Institute, Americans for Prosperity, Council for
Citizens Against Government Waste, and many others.
These executive orders require the Department of Defense to
squander--squander--precious defense dollars by incorporating climate
change bureaucracies into its acquisition and military operations and
to waste money on green energy projects. EPA bureaucrats and other
political appointees are directing our military commanders on how to
run their installations and procure green weapons, which undermines
ongoing acquisition reforms in the NDAA. These activities are simply
not the mission of the U.S. military.
Regarding DOD's energy policy, decisions by installation commanders
and DOD personnel need to be driven by requirements for actual cost-
effectiveness, readiness, not arbitrary and inflexible green energy
quotas and CO2 benchmarks. My amendment does not prevent the
DOD from considering renewable energy projects where it makes sense.
But these decisions should not be driven by these mandates.
Take, for example, the Naval Station Norfolk, where the solar array
cost the Navy $21 million but only provided 2 percent of the base's
electricity. According to the Inspector General's Office, it will take
447 years for the savings to pay the cost of the project. However,
solar panels usually only last about 25 years.
These mandates are diverting limited military resources to Solyndra-
style boondoggles while sacrificing our military's readiness,
modernization, and end strength. In a time of declining defense
budgets, we need to ensure that every dollar spent goes directly to
support the lethality of our Armed Forces.
Again, my amendment is similar to repeated efforts by the House to
prevent national security dollars from being wasted to advance the
President's onerous green energy and climate change requirements. So I
ask that the House continue that opposition to this nondefense agenda
by supporting my amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment.
In January of this year, the Pentagon issued a directive saying:
``The Department of Defense must be able to adapt current and future
operations to address the impacts of climate change in order to
maintain an effective and efficient U.S. military.''
This followed a DOD report to Congress released last July that said:
``Climate change is an urgent and growing threat to our national
security, contributing to increased natural disasters, refugee flows,
and conflicts over basic resources such as food and water . . . and the
scope, scale, and intensity of these impacts are projected to
increase.''
From 2006 to 2010, Syria experienced overwhelming refugee flows that
DOD characterized as a climate-related security risk creating negative
effects on human security and requiring DOD involvement and resources.
In 2014, the Pentagon reported that the impacts of climate change may
increase the frequency, scale, and complexity of future missions, while
at the same time undermining the capacity of our domestic installation
to support training activities.
The readiness of our military depends on being able to train and
equip the most advanced force in the world, but the threat of rising
sea levels from escalating temperatures and melting icecaps could put
dozens of military installations at risk.
San Diego is home to the largest concentration of military forces in
the world. With seven military installations in my district alone,
rising sea levels, drought, and finding reliable energy sources all
pose challenges. San Diego military installations are investing in
energy security and increasing

[[Page H2735]]

water and energy efficiency. We should not undermine those efforts.
This amendment is an attempt by top politicians to prevent the
Department of Defense, which is tasked with maintaining a strong
military, keeping all Americans safe, and protecting our global
interests from addressing what they call an urgent and growing threat
to our own national security. But national defense is not about
politics or ideology. It is about security, readiness, and continuing
to field the most dynamic and effective military in the world. We
cannot have that if we ignore science and the concerns of the brightest
military minds in the United States of America.
I oppose this reckless amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the
same.
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana has 2 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Washington has 2\3/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, I would respond, first of all, by saying I
think we all see the reports. If you are on Armed Services, you hear
our generals talk about how our readiness is in dire straits, that we
can't respond to the challenges around the world.
At a time like this, why would we want to pay 5 or 10 times the
nominal amount for fuel? It makes no sense.
To my colleague who wants to argue climate change: fine, we can argue
that. But this is not the place to debate that.
You see, my amendment allows for the Department of Defense to do
whatever is best for our Armed Forces. Whether you agree with climate
change or not, it doesn't matter. All we say is let's free up the DOD,
our Armed Forces, and our generals to do the right thing.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes).
Mr. SARBANES. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the Obama administration issued two critical executive
orders directing Federal agencies to take responsibility for
anticipating and responding to the effects of climate change.
This amendment that is being proposed would block the Department of
Defense from undertaking that effort. The amendment is ill-advised. It
doesn't protect and prepare the American people for the impacts of
climate change, and it won't help our military operate in a new
security environment created by climate change.
Climate change poses a significant security threat to the United
States and the world at large. But don't take it from me. Our Nation's
military leaders are saying we need to prepare for this new threat. The
proponents of this amendment should listen to the military experts, not
the special interest polluters that benefit from climate denial and the
status quo.

As a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, I have been
frustrated that the Republican majority has refused to hold serious
hearings on the urgent problem of climate change, so Democrats on that
committee went to Annapolis in my State to hold a climate change field
forum.
We heard testimony from Vice Admiral Ted Carter, the Superintendent
of the Naval Academy. He told us that our future military leaders are
learning about the science of climate change and the national security
consequences that stem from it. He testified that because the Naval
Academy sits on the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, they have several
projects in motion to address sea level rise and the increased
regularity of flooding. They are retrofitting older buildings and
building new facilities that double as seawalls to protect the campus.
Vice Admiral Carter also told harrowing stories of sailing aircraft
carriers in between two massive hurricanes and equipment that short-
circuited in waters with surface temperatures in excess of 100 degrees.
Certainly my colleagues on the Republican side would not deny that
these are consequential problems. Leaders like Admiral Carter cannot
afford the luxury of ideological climate denial. He is taking the right
steps to address climate change. We should support him and our other
military leaders. Unfortunately, this amendment would do the opposite.
For that reason, I urge its defeat.
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, again, my amendment is not a debate about
climate change, regardless of where you fall on that issue. All this
does is free up DOD to make the vital important decisions on that,
instead of handcuffing it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, actually, it precisely does
handcuff them by telling them how to make their decisions, saying they
can't make a decision based on their belief that needs for alternatives
to fossil fuels are important. If we don't wish to handcuff them, don't
offer an amendment telling them that they have to spend their money in
a certain way. That is exactly what this amendment does.
Again, there are multiple reasons for making these investments in
alternative energy. I will return to one that was raised by Mr. Gibson.
Out in the field, you need multiple different sources of energy. If
you can get a situation where you have properly developed solar power
or thermal power and you can use that on the spot where you are at,
instead of relying on trucks to bring in diesel or gasoline, you are
saving lives.
This is an investment in making our military more prepared. What this
amendment does is it restricts the ability of the Department of Defense
to make that investment. If you don't want to restrict them, don't
restrict them.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana has 1 minute
remaining.
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to the ranking
member, all my amendment does is holds the status quo before these two
executive orders; and that is, the commanders in the field and the
generals at the Pentagon can do whatever is best for the military,
whether or not it has to do with saving money or spending more money on
alternative forms of energy.
My amendment frees them up. It does not restrict them in any way.
I urge adoption of this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana
will be postponed.

{time} 1545

Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Pearce

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3
printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

After section 7004, insert the following:

SEC. 7005. RETURN OF CERTAIN LANDS AT FORT WINGATE TO THE
ORIGINAL INHABITANTS ACT.

(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Return
of Certain Lands At Fort Wingate to The Original Inhabitants
Act''.
(b) Division and Treatment of Lands of Former Fort Wingate
Depot Activity, New Mexico, to Benefit the Zuni Tribe and
Navajo Nation.--
(1) Immediate trust on behalf of zuni tribe; exception.--
Subject to valid existing rights and to easements reserved
pursuant to subsection (c), all right, title, and interest of
the United States in and to the lands of Former Fort Wingate
Depot Activity depicted in dark blue on the map titled ``The
Fort Wingate Depot Activity Negotiated Property Division
April 2016'' (in this section referred to as the ``Map'') and
transferred to the Secretary of the Interior are to be held
in trust by the Secretary of the Interior for the Zuni Tribe
as part of the Zuni Reservation, unless the Zuni Tribe
otherwise elects under clause (ii) of paragraph (3)(C) to
have the parcel conveyed to it in Restricted Fee Status.
(2) Immediate trust on behalf of the navajo nation;
exception.--Subject to valid existing rights and to easements
reserved pursuant to subsection (c), all right, title,

[[Page H2736]]

and interest of the United States in and to the lands of
Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity depicted in dark green on
the Map and transferred to the Secretary of the Interior are
to be held in trust by the Secretary of the Interior for the
Navajo Nation as part of the Navajo Reservation, unless the
Navajo Nation otherwise elects under clause (ii) of paragraph
(3)(C) to have the parcel conveyed to it in Restricted Fee
Status.
(3) Subsequent transfer and trust; restricted fee status
alternative.--
(A) Transfer upon completion of remediation.--Not later
than 60 days after the date on which the Secretary of the
Army, with the concurrence of the New Mexico Environment
Department, notifies the Secretary of the Interior that
remediation of a parcel of land of Former Fort Wingate Depot
Activity has been completed consistent with subsection (d),
the Secretary of the Army shall transfer administrative
jurisdiction over the parcel to the Secretary of the
Interior.
(B) Notification of transfer.--Not later than 30 days after
the date on which the Secretary of the Army transfers
administrative jurisdiction over a parcel of land of Former
Fort Wingate Depot Activity under subparagraph (A), the
Secretary of the Interior shall notify the Zuni Tribe and
Navajo Nation of the transfer of administrative jurisdiction
over the parcel.
(C) Trust or restricted fee status.--
(i) Trust.--Except as provided in clause (ii), the
Secretary of the Interior shall hold each parcel of land of
Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity transferred under
subparagraph (A) in trust--

(I) for the Zuni Tribe, in the case of land depicted in
blue on the Map; or
(II) for the Navajo Nation, in the case of land depicted in
green on the Map.

(ii) Restricted fee status.--In lieu of having a parcel of
land held in trust under clause (i), the Zuni Tribe, with
respect to land depicted in blue on the Map, and the Navajo
Nation, with respect to land depicted in green on the Map,
may elect to have the Secretary of the Interior convey the
parcel or any portion of the parcel to it in restricted fee
status.
(iii) Notification of election.--Not later than 45 days
after the date on which the Zuni Tribe or the Navajo Nation
receives notice under subparagraph (B) of the transfer of
administrative jurisdiction over a parcel of land of Former
Fort Wingate Depot Activity, the Zuni Tribe or the Navajo
Nation shall notify the Secretary of the Interior of an
election under clause (ii) for conveyance of the parcel or
any portion of the parcel in restricted fee status.
(iv) Conveyance.--As soon as practicable after receipt of a
notice from the Zuni Tribe or the Navajo Nation under clause
(iii), but in no case later than 6 months after receipt of
the notice, the Secretary of the Interior shall convey, in
restricted fee status, the parcel of land of Former Fort
Wingate Depot Activity covered by the notice to the Zuni
Tribe or the Navajo Nation, as the case may be.
(v) Restricted fee status defined.--For purposes of this
section only, the term ``restricted fee status'', with
respect to land conveyed under clause (iv), means that the
land so conveyed--

(I) shall be owned in fee by the Indian tribe to whom the
land is conveyed;
(II) shall be part of the Indian tribe's Reservation and
expressly made subject to the jurisdiction of the Indian
Tribe;
(III) shall not be sold by the Indian tribe without the
consent of Congress;
(IV) shall not be subject to taxation by a State or local
government other than the government of the Indian tribe; and
(V) shall not be subject to any provision of law providing
for the review or approval by the Secretary of the Interior
before an Indian tribe may use the land for any purpose,
directly or through agreement with another party.

(4) Survey and boundary requirements.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall--
(i) provide for the survey of lands of Former Fort Wingate
Depot Activity taken into trust for the Zuni Tribe or the
Navajo Nation or conveyed in restricted fee status for the
Zuni Tribe or the Navajo Nation under paragraph (1), (2), or
(3); and
(ii) establish legal boundaries based on the Map as parcels
are taken into trust or conveyed in restricted fee status.
(B) Consultation.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this section, the Secretary of the Interior
shall consult with the Zuni Tribe and the Navajo Nation to
determine their priorities regarding the order in which
parcels should be surveyed and, to the greatest extent
feasible, the Secretary shall follow these priorities.
(5) Relation to certain regulations.--Part 151 of title 25,
Code of Federal Regulations, shall not apply to taking lands
of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity into trust under
paragraph (1), (2), or (3).
(6) Fort wingate launch complex land status.--Upon
certification by the Secretary of Defense that the area
generally depicted as ``Fort Wingate Launch Complex'' on the
Map is no longer required for military purposes and can be
transferred to the Secretary of the Interior--
(A) the areas generally depicted as ``FWLC A'' and ``FWLC
B'' on the Map shall be held in trust by the Secretary of the
Interior for the Zuni Tribe in accordance with this
subsection; and
(B) the areas generally depicted as ``FWLC C'' and ``FWLC
D'' on the Map shall be held in trust by the Secretary of the
Interior for the Navajo Nation in accordance with this
subsection.
(c) Retention of Necessary Easements and Access.--
(1) Treatment of existing easements, permit rights, and
rights-of-way.--
(A) In general.--The lands of Former Fort Wingate Depot
Activity held in trust or conveyed in restricted fee status
pursuant to subsection (b) shall be held in trust with
easements, permit rights, and rights-of-way, and access
associated with such easements, permit rights, and rights-of-
way, of any applicable utility service provider in existence
or for which an application is pending for existing
facilities at the time of the conveyance or change to trust
status, including the right to upgrade applicable utility
services recognized and preserved, in perpetuity and without
the right of revocation (except as provided in subparagraph
(B)).
(B) Termination.--An easement, permit right, or right-of-
way recognized and preserved under subparagraph (A) shall
terminate only--
(i) on the relocation of an applicable utility service
referred to in subparagraph (A), but only with respect to
that portion of the utility facilities that are relocated; or
(ii) with the consent of the holder of the easement, permit
right, or right-of-way.
(C) Additional easements.--The Secretary of the Interior
shall grant to a utility service provider, without
consideration, such additional easements across lands held in
trust or conveyed in restricted fee status pursuant to
subsection (b) as the Secretary considers necessary to
accommodate the relocation or reconnection of a utility
service existing on the date of enactment of this section.
(2) Access for environmental response actions.--The lands
of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity held in trust or
conveyed in restricted fee status pursuant to subsection (b)
shall be subject to reserved access by the United States as
the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Interior
determine are reasonably required to permit access to lands
of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity for administrative and
environmental response purposes. The Secretary of the Army
shall provide to the governments of the Zuni Tribe and the
Navajo Nation written copies of all access reservations under
this subsection.
(3) Shared access.--
(A) Parcel 1 shared cultural and religious access.--In the
case of the lands of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity
depicted as Parcel 1 on the Map, the lands shall be held in
trust subject to a shared easement for cultural and religious
purposes only. Both the Zuni Tribe and the Navajo Nation
shall have unhindered access to their respective cultural and
religious sites within Parcel 1. Within 1 year after the date
of the enactment of this section, the Zuni Tribe and the
Navajo Nation shall exchange detailed information to document
the existence of cultural and religious sites within Parcel 1
for the purpose of carrying out this subparagraph. The
information shall also be provided to the Secretary of the
Interior.
(B) Other shared access.--Subject to the written consent of
both the Zuni Tribe and the Navajo Nation, the Secretary of
the Interior may facilitate shared access to other lands held
in trust or restricted fee status pursuant to subsection (b),
including, but not limited to, religious and cultural sites.
(4) I-40 frontage road entrance.--The access road for the
Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity, which originates at the
frontage road for Interstate 40 and leads to the parcel of
the Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity depicted as
``administration area'' on the Map, shall be held in common
by the Zuni Tribe and Navajo Nation to provide for equal
access to Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity.
(5) Compatibility with defense activities.--The lands of
Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity held in trust or conveyed
in restricted fee status pursuant to subsection (b) shall be
subject to reservations by the United States as the Secretary
of Defense determines are reasonably required to permit
access to lands of the Fort Wingate launch complex for
administrative, test operations, and launch operations
purposes. The Secretary of Defense shall provide the
governments of the Zuni Tribe and the Navajo Nation written
copies of all reservations under this paragraph.
(d) Environmental Remediation.--Nothing in this section
shall be construed as alleviating, altering, or affecting the
responsibility of the United States for cleanup and
remediation of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity in
accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980.
(e) Prohibition on Gaming.--Any real property of the Former
Fort Wingate Depot Activity and all other real property
subject to this section shall not be eligible, or used, for
any gaming activity carried out under the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, in January of 1993, the BRAC Commission closed

[[Page H2737]]

Fort Wingate in New Mexico. Fort Wingate was destined and designated to
go to two tribes, equitably divided between the two--the Navajo Nation
and the Zunis.
During the past 12 years, I have been involved in negotiations back
and forth between the tribes. The lands were occupied ancestrally by
both tribes. There have been many long, ongoing discussions between all
of the parties. We have gotten signatures in the past from different
members of the Navajo government. We currently have a letter dated May
16, 2016, in which it states that it is the opinion of the Navajo
Nation that the land division and the terms developed between the two
tribes would provide a solution to the land division.
All we are asking is that the agreed-upon maps be distributed in
accordance with the terms, signed by the speaker of the Navajo Nation
and the Zunis. That is the purpose of this amendment today. It is a
fairly simple distribution according to the provisions that are listed
in the BRAC ruling of January 1993.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment in
its current form and at this particular time.
This amendment, as it has been pointed out, directly impacts two
federally recognized tribal nations: the Navajo Nation and the Zuni
Pueblo Nation in New Mexico.
They have been working with the Department of Defense to resolve the
disposition of this excess Federal land. The Navajo is one of the
tribes that would receive the land in transfer, and it is opposed to
some of the language that is still occurring in this amendment. The
Pearce amendment, unfortunately, claims a provision that would require
a right-of-way in perpetuity to the Navajo, and the Navajo agrees, it
is my understanding, to work toward some of the land transfer.
I ask the gentleman: Are they aware that the Navajo doesn't agree in
having this land transfer go in perpetuity and that it would like to
work something else out?
I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, that is a provision that I, personally, did
not put into the bill. It came from the committee of jurisdiction, the
Natural Resources Committee. They insisted on it because it is
prevailing language under the law.
The objection in the letter from the Navajo, which I was just showing
the gentlewoman previously, describes that, and the language reads that
they have so far failed to acquire a new right-of-way with the U.S.
Army and now have come to Congress to address their error.
What has happened is that the right-of-way has yielded, and the
language here was language that has previously been set up by the
committee in order to address this.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chair, there is some disagreement as to how this language should
be structured. I don't think we should be pushing through something
that the Navajo Nation now finds controversial but that wasn't
controversial when working with the Department of Defense and making
sure that they had the right-of-way and access to the land.
It is a sovereign nation. There are only 10 minutes of debate. There
seems to be a little bit of uncertainty as to where the Navajo Nation
is coming down on the particular language that the gentleman has. I do
not fault the gentleman for bringing the language forward, as Chairman
Bishop has changed from what the original conversation had been between
the sovereign nation and the Department of Defense by putting the
perpetuity in it.
I believe we should respect the right of sovereignty of the tribe,
and I believe at this time we should defeat the amendment. I would like
to work with the gentleman to come up with language that is acceptable
both for the Department of Defense and the two tribal nations. They
were so very close. I would like to make that happen.
Mr. PEARCE. Again, addressing the gentlewoman, those are the subjects
that Mr. Lujan and I have agreed that we would work on in conference. I
think that we are more than willing to accommodate, but to stall this
out now--this is the last vehicle this year. Literally, we are out of
time. I would gladly accept the gentlewoman's help in the conference
committee, and I want to resolve this. Again, I have been working on it
for 12 years. We go and we get the signatures. It has been very arduous
on the parts of all, and I understand the difficulty when you have
aboriginal lands.
Again, when I look at the language, it is language that was
previously established in the Ho-Chunk Nation distribution. The
language literally is set in precedent, and the committee explains to
us there is not much option there; but I am more than willing to work
on the issue with the gentlewoman.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PEARCE. I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I look forward to working with the
gentleman. I am sure we can come up with an accomodation that will make
everyone satisfied.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, reclaiming my time, what we are trying to do
is put into the hands of two Indian nations land that has been
designated for them since 1993. I think that all parties just want it
to be done in the right fashion. We are so close at this point that I
would really appreciate the fact that we put it in this bill, that we
include it, and move it into the conference. I am certain that with the
Senator's input, they will be listening to the same concerns as the
gentlewoman is listening to.
Again, I appreciate the help of Mr. Young, Mr. Lujan--all of those
parties--and both Chairman Thornberry and Chairman Bishop.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, in closing, again, I just appreciate the
consideration by the gentlewoman.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 4, 13, 15, 16,
17, 19, 21, 22, 24, 26, 29, 30, and 31 printed in House Report No. 114-
571, offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 4 offered by mr. schweikert of arizona

Page 372, after line 8, insert the following:

SEC. 1014. UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS TRAINING MISSIONS.

The Secretary of Defense shall coordinate unmanned aerial
systems training missions along the southern border of the
United States in order to support the Department of Homeland
Security's counter-narcotic trafficking efforts.

amendment no. 13 offered by mrs. davis of california

In section 522, page 120, strike lines 9 through 19, and
insert the following:
Section 701(i) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following new
paragraph:
``(3) In the event that two members of the armed forces who
are married to each other adopt a child in a qualifying child
adoption, the two members shall be allowed a total of at
least 36 days of leave under this subsection, to be shared
between the two members. The Secretary concerned shall permit
the transfer of such leave between the two members to
accommodate individual family circumstances.''.
In section 529, page 130, strike lines 9 through 20.

amendment no. 15 offered by mr. costello of pennsylvania

At the end of subtitle H of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. REPORT ON EXTENDING PROTECTIONS FOR STUDENT LOANS
FOR ACTIVE DUTY BORROWERS.

(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of Education, shall submit to
the appropriate congressional committees a report detailing
the information, assistance, and efforts to support and
inform

[[Page H2738]]

active duty members of the Armed Forces with respect to the
rights and resources available under the Servicemembers Civil
Relief Act (50 U.S.C. 3901 et seq.) regarding student loans.
The report shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) A description of the coordination and information
sharing between the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
Education regarding the eligibility of members, and requests
by members, to apply the interest rate limitation under the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act with respect to existing
Federal and private student loans.
(2) The number of such members with student loans who elect
to have the maximum interest rates set in accordance with
such Act.
(3) The number of such members whose student loans have an
interest rate that exceeds such maximum rate.
(4) Methods by which the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of Education can automate the process by which
members with student loans elect to have the maximum interest
rates set in accordance with such Act.
(5) A discussion of the effectiveness of such Act in
providing protection to members of the Armed Forces with
respect to student loans.
(b) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means the follow:
(1) The congressional defense committees.
(2) The Committee on Education and the Workforce of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate.

amendment no. 16 offered by mr. hastings of florida

Page 173, after line 2, insert the following:

SEC. 599A. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN REIMBURSEMENTS OF MEDICAL
EXPENSES AND OTHER PAYMENTS FROM DETERMINATION
OF ANNUAL INCOME WITH RESPECT TO PENSIONS FOR
VETERANS AND SURVIVING SPOUSES AND CHILDREN OF
VETERANS.

(a) In General.--Section 1503(a) of title 38, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (12) as
paragraphs (7) through (13), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new
paragraph (6):
``(6) payments regarding reimbursements of any kind
(including insurance settlement payments) for medical
expenses resulting from any accident, theft, loss, or
casualty loss (as defined by the Secretary), but the amount
excluded under this clause shall not exceed the costs of
medical care provided to the victim of the accident, theft,
loss, or casualty loss.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act.

amendment no. 17 offered by mr. larson of connecticut

At the end of subtitle C of title VII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 7__. APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS.

(a) Rates of Reimbursement.--
(1) In general.--In furnishing applied behavior analysis
under the TRICARE program to individuals described in
paragraph (2) during the period beginning on the date of the
enactment of this Act, and ending on December 31, 2018, the
Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the reimbursement
rates for providers of applied behavior analysis are not less
than the rates that were in effect on March 31, 2016.
(2) Individuals described.--Individuals described in this
paragraph are individuals who are covered beneficiaries (as
defined in section 1072 of title 10, United States Code) by
reason of being a member or former member of the Army, Navy,
Air Force, or Marine Corps, including the reserve components
thereof, or a dependent of such a member or former member.
(b) Analysis.--
(1) In general.--Upon the completion of the Department of
Defense Comprehensive Autism Care Demonstration, the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs shall
conduct an analysis to--
(A) use data gathered during the demonstration to set
future reimbursement rates for providers of applied behavior
analysis under the TRICARE program; and
(B) review comparative commercial insurance claims for
purposes of setting such future rates, including by--
(i) conducting an analysis of the comparative total of
commercial insurance claims billed for applied behavior
analysis; and
(ii) reviewing any covered beneficiary limitations on
access to applied behavior analysis services at various
military installations throughout the United States.
(2) Submission.--The Assistant Secretary shall submit to
the congressional defense committees the analysis conducted
under paragraph (1).
(c) Funding.--
(1) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 1405 for the Defense Health Program,
as specified in the corresponding funding table in section
4501, for Private Sector Care is hereby increased by
$32,000,000.
(2) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 4301 for operation and maintenance,
as specified in the corresponding funding table in section
4301, for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (Line 300)
is hereby reduced by $32,000,000.
(d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
amounts should be appropriated for behavioral health
treatment of TRICARE beneficiaries, including pursuant to
this section, in a manner to ensure the appropriate and
equitable access to such treatment by all such beneficiaries.

amendment no. 19 offered by mr. kelly of pennsylvania

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS TO IMPLEMENT
THE ARMS TRADE TREATY.

(a) In General.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2017 for the Department of Defense may be
obligated or expended to fund a Secretariat or any other
international organization established to support the
implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty, to sustain domestic
prosecutions based on any charge related to the Treaty, or to
implement the Treaty until the Senate approves a resolution
of ratification for the Treaty and implementing legislation
for the Treaty has been enacted into law.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to preclude the Department of Defense from
assisting foreign countries in bringing their laws,
regulations, and practices related to export control up to
United States standards.

amendment no. 21 offered by mr. mulvaney of south carolina

Page 603, after line 6, insert the following:

SEC. 1523. CODIFICATION OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
CRITERIA.

The Secretary of Defense shall implement the following
criteria in requests for overseas contingency operations:
(1) Geographic Area Covered - For theater of operations for
non-classified war overseas contingency operations funding,
the geographic areas in which combat or direct combat support
operations occur are: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrhyzstan, the Horn of Africa,
Persian Gulf and Gulf nations, Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean,
the Philippines, and other countries on a case-by-case basis.
(2) Permitted Inclusions in the Overseas Contingency
Operation Budget
(A) Major Equipment
(i) Replacement of loses that have occurred but only for
items not already programmed for replacement in the Future
Years Defense Plan (FYDP), but not including accelerations,
which must be made in the base budget.
(ii) Replacement or repair to original capability (to
upgraded capability if that is currently available) of
equipment returning from theater. The replacement may be a
similar end item if the original item is no longer in
production. Incremental cost of non-war related upgrades, if
made, should be included in the base.
(iii) Purchase of specialized, theater-specific equipment.
(iv) Funding for major equipment must be obligated within
12 months.
(B) Ground Equipment Replacement
(i) For combat losses and returning equipment that is not
economical to repair, the replacement of equipment may be
given to coalition partners, if consistent with approved
policy.
(ii) In-theater stocks above customary equipping levels on
a case-by-case basis.
(C) Equipment Modifications
(i) Operationally-required modifications to equipment used
in theater or in direct support of combat operations and that
is not already programmed in FYDP.
(ii) Funding for equipment modifications must be able be
obligated in 12 months.
(D) Munitions
(i) Replenishment of munitions expended in combat
operations in theater.
(ii) Training ammunition for theater-unique training
events.
(iii) While forecasted expenditures are not permitted, a
case-by-case assessment for munitions where existing stocks
are insufficient to sustain theater combat operations.
(E) Aircraft Replacement
(i) Combat losses by accident that occur in the theater of
operations.
(ii) Combat losses by enemy action that occur in the
theater of operations.
(F) Military Construction
(i) Facilities and infrastructure in the theater of
operations in direct support of combat operations. The level
of construction should be the minimum to meet operational
requirements.
(ii) At non-enduring locations, facilities and
infrastructure for temporary use.
(iii) At enduring locations, facilities and infrastructure
for temporary use.
(iv) At enduring locations, construction requirements must
be tied to surge operations or major changes in operational
requirements and will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
(G) Research and development projects for combat operations
in these specific theaters that can be delivered in 12
months.
(H) Operations
(i) Direct War costs:

(I) Transport of personnel, equipment, and supplies to,
from and within the theater of operations.

[[Page H2739]]

(II) Deployment-specific training and preparation for
unites and personnel (military and civilian) to assume their
directed missions as defined in the orders for deployment
into the theater of operations.

(ii) Within the theater, the incremental costs above the
funding programmed in the base budget to:

(I) Support commanders in the conduct of their directed
missions (to include Emergency Response Programs).
(II) Build and maintain temporary facilities.
(III) Provide food, fuel, supplies, contracted services and
other support.
(IV) Cover the operational costs of coalition partners
supporting US military missions, as mutually agreed.

(iii) Indirect war costs incurred outside the theater of
operations will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

(I) Health

(i) Short-term care directly related to combat.
(ii) Infrastructure that is only to be used during the
current conflict.
(J) Personnel
(i) Incremental special pays and allowances for Service
members and civilians deployed to a combat zone.
(ii) Incremental pay, special pays and allowances for
Reserve Component personnel mobilized to support war
missions.
(K) Special Operations Command
(i) Operations that meet the criteria in this guidance.
(ii) Equipment that meets the criteria in this guidance.

(L) Prepositioned Supplies and equipment for resetting in-
theater stocks of supplies and equipment to pre-war levels.

(M) Security force funding to train, equip, and sustain
Iraqi and Afghan military and police forces.
(N) Fuel
(i) War fuel costs and funding to ensure that logistical
support to combat operations is not degraded due to cash
losses in the Department of Defense's baseline fuel program.
(ii) Enough of any base fuel shortfall attributable to fuel
price increases to maintain sufficient on-hand cash for the
Defense Working Capital Funds to cover seven days
disbursements.
(3) Excluded items from Overseas Contingency Funding that
must be funded from the base budget
(A) Training vehicles, aircraft, ammunition, and
simulators, but not training base stocks of specialized,
theater-specific equipment that is required to support combat
operations in the theater of operations, and support to
deployment-specific training described above.
(B) Acceleration of equipment service life extension
programs already in the Future Years Defense Plan.
(C) Base Realignment and Closure projects.
(D) Family support initiatives
(i) Construction of childcare facilities.
(ii) Funding for private-public partisanships to expand
military families' access to childcare.
(iii) Support for service members' spouses professional
development.
(E) Programs to maintain industrial base capacity including
``war-stoppers.''
(F) Personnel
(i) Recruiting and retention bonuses to maintain end-
strength.
(ii) Basic Pay and the Basic allowances for Housing and
Subsistence for permanently authorized end strength.
(iii) Individual augmentees on a case-by-case basis.
(G) Support for the personnel, operations, or the
construction or maintenance of facilities, at U.S. Offices of
Security Cooperation in theater.
(H) Costs for reconfiguring prepositioned supplies and
equipment or for maintaining them.
(4) Special Situations - Items proposed for increases in
reprogrammings or as payback for prior reprogrammings must
meet the criteria above.

amendment no. 22 offered by mr. himes of connecticut

At the end of subtitle C of title XVI, add the following:

SEC. 16_. REPORT ON POLICIES FOR RESPONDING TO MALICIOUS
CYBER ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT AGAINST THE UNITED
STATES OR UNITED STATES PERSONS BY FOREIGN
STATES OR NON-STATE ACTORS.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report
on policies, doctrine, procedures, and authorities governing
Department of Defense activities in response to malicious
cyber activities carried out against the United States or
United States persons by foreign states or non-state actors.
(b) Elements.--The report required under subsection (a)
shall include the following:
(1) Specific citations to appropriate associated Executive
branch and agency directives, guidance, instructions, and
other authoritative policy documents.
(2) Descriptions of relevant authorities, rules of
engagement, command and control structures, and response
plans.

amendment no. 24 offered by ms. tsongas of massachusetts

At the end of subtitle C of title I, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1__. REPORT ON P-8 POSEIDON AIRCRAFT.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than October 1, 2017, the
Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report regarding future capabilities for
the P-8 Poseidon aircraft.
(b) Elements.--The report under subsection (a) shall
include, with respect to the P-8 Poseidon aircraft, the
following:
(1) A review of possible upgrades by the Navy to the
sensors onboard the aircraft, including intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance sensors currently being
fielded on Air Force platforms.
(2) An assessment of the ability of the Navy to use long-
range multispectral imaging systems onboard the aircraft.

amendment no. 26 offered by mr. blumenauer of oregon

At the end of subtitle D of title I, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1__. REPORT ON COST OF B-21 AIRCRAFT.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the cost of the
B-21 aircraft. The report shall include an estimate of the
total cost of research, production, and maintenance for the
aircraft expressed in constant base-year dollars and in
current dollars.

amendment no. 29 offered by mr. kildee of michigan

At the end of subtitle B of title III, insert the
following:

SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

It is the Sense of Congress that the Department of Defense
should work with State and local health officials to prevent
human exposure to perfluorinated chemicals.

amendment no. 30 offered by mr. poliquin of maine

At the end of subtitle D of title III, add the following
new section:

SEC. 3__. REPORT ON AVERAGE TRAVEL COSTS OF MEMBERS OF THE
RESERVE COMPONENTS.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a
report on the travel expenses of members of reserve
components associated with performing active duty service,
active service, full-time National Guard duty, active Guard
and Reserve duty, and inactive-duty training, as such terms
are defined in section 101(d) of title 10, United States
Code. Such report shall include the average annual cost for
all travel expenses for a member of a reserve component.

amendment no. 31 offered by mr. farenthold of texas

At the end of title III, add the following new section:

SEC. 3__. ACCESS TO WIRELESS HIGH-SPEED INTERNET AND NETWORK
CONNECTIONS FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES DEPLOYED OVERSEAS.

Consistent with section 2492a of title 10, United States
Code, the Secretary of Defense is encouraged to enter into
contracts with third-party vendors in order to provide
members of the Armed Forces who are deployed overseas at any
United States military facility, at which wireless high-speed
Internet and network connections are otherwise available,
with access to such Internet and network connections without
charge.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Farenthold).
Mr. FARENTHOLD. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment, which
is included in here, that encourages the Department of Defense to
provide free Wi-Fi access of the Internet to military personnel who are
deployed overseas.
Right now our military personnel, in some instances, are required to
pay twice as much as a typical American family would pay for access to
the Internet. Access to the Internet is a way for our troops to keep
their morale high by staying in touch with their families back home by
using technology like FaceTime and Skype.
This amendment does not require any expenditure by the military. It
merely instructs the military to work towards this goal: to make it
available where possible and to indicate that it should be a priority.
It doesn't cost anything, but it is a great morale booster, and it
should be great for our troops.
I urge my colleagues to support this.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 3 minutes.
I speak about the broader bill. Unfortunately, something happened in
the Rules Committee yesterday that has been happening far too often in
recent years. This was much debated during the debate over the rule,
but I didn't have a chance to come and talk about it.
There was an amendment added in committee that overturns an executive

[[Page H2740]]

order by the President. The executive order basically says: if you
discriminate against the LGBT community, you will not be allowed to get
government contracts.
That executive order also had an exception for religious
organizations. The amendment that was added in committee--and it is
much debated as to what it did or didn't do, but my reading of it is
that it dramatically expands that exception and basically increases the
ability of defense firms and subcontractors to discriminate against the
LGBT community.
The larger problem here is: Why couldn't we vote on it?
It puts our Members in the position of voting for a defense bill that
has what we believe to be discriminatory language in it without our
even having had the opportunity to have voted to remove that language.
This is something that has happened for the last 3 or 4 years on an
increasing basis. It used to be that this was an open rule. With the
defense bill, you basically offered an amendment; you had a debate; and
you had a chance. Then we started to shrink them down a little bit.
Now, in the last couple of years, anything that is inconvenient for the
majority to vote on or, even more distressingly, anything that they
think will make it inconvenient for us to vote on the bill gets struck.
That is not the way the Rules Committee is supposed to work. They are
supposed to give us the opportunity to vote on these amendments. They,
again, have narrowly crafted it down to just the amendments that they
like. Having this discriminatory provision within the defense bill, in
addition to all of the other problems, has forced me to the point at
which I am actually going to oppose the bill, which I do not want to do
and did not want to do; but I hope, in the future, the Rules Committee
will at least give us a chance to vote.
We had a robust debate about the substance of this particular
amendment earlier. Again, it is not so much about the substance of the
particular amendment. It is about the opportunity for our Members to
have a vote. If we could go on record and vote against that amendment
on the floor--do our best to strip it out--then at least we are on
record. Here, we are simply forced to vote for a defense bill that
contains discriminatory language that we do not support.
I hope, in the future, the Rules Committee will stop doing this, will
let the democratic process work, will give us the opportunity to vote,
accept the outcome of that vote, and move forward.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 30 seconds.
My understanding is that the provision that the gentleman refers to
is a restatement of religious liberties from the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
What that tells me, if he opposes the bill based on that, is that there
are Members who are looking for some excuse to vote against this bill.
You can always find one. I can find one myself. I don't think that is
the right thing to do, however, for the men and women who serve our
Nation.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maine (Mr.
Poliquin).
Mr. POLIQUIN. Mr. Chair, each month across our great country, our
brave men and women in the National Guard and the Armed Forces Reserves
leave their homes and report for duty. Each month they train on the
ground and in the air and on the sea so that they are ready at a
moment's notice to fight for our freedom. Our guardsmen and reservists
often travel long distances to their training sites, and their travel
costs often exceed their monthly training pay, which forces them to buy
gas, meals, and sometimes hotel rooms out of pocket.
Right now, today, under existing law, if you work for the IRS or the
EPA or some other Federal Government agency, you are granted a tax
deduction for out-of-pocket travel expenses if you travel beyond 50
miles of your home; but if you are a guardsman or a woman or if you are
in the Reserves, you need to travel more than 100 miles to receive the
same benefits.
Mr. Chair, this is not fair, and this is not right. I urge everybody
to endorse and support my amendment No. 300.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
O'Rourke) will control the time of the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Smith).
There was no objection.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
Mr. KILDEE. I thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. Chair, for many years, the Air Force used perfluorinated
chemicals in its compound for firefighting foam, but in the past few
years, very high levels of these PFCs have been discovered in the fish
near the former Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda, Michigan, which is
in my district. Tests have revealed the presence of PFCs as well in the
groundwater that people who live near the former Air Force base depend
upon.
The CDC and the EPA have both said that PFCs can be potentially
harmful to people's health, though there is still not clear guidance as
to what is a safe level of exposure, especially in the long term;
although, there is great concern on this question.
I have asked the Air Force as well as the State of Michigan to
provide bottled water to those identified individuals who are living
near Wurtsmith whose water may be contaminated by PFCs at least until
more research is done on the safety of their water. My amendment would
require the Department of Defense to do whatever it can to prevent
further exposure to PFCs.

{time} 1600

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the
amendment to renew the 1-year ban on the Obama administration or any
other administration from using any Department of Defense funds to
implement the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, a treaty which, by the
way, has never been ratified by our Senate.
Specifically, the amendment bans the use of Department of Defense
funds for the ATT Secretariat, a body that was created for effectively
implementing the ATT according to the treaty's supporters.
Last August, ATT member nations organized the Conference of States
Parties to the ATT, a conference in which we did not have a vote and
which decided that American taxpayers are now on the hook to pay 22
percent of the expenses of this annual meeting. This taxpayer money
would go directly to the ATT Secretariat and become part of its core
budget. My amendment prevents these hardworking American taxpayer
dollars from flowing into the coffers of those who are working to
implement the ATT.
I thank the chairman and the ranking member for including this in the
en bloc amendment, and I urge all my colleagues to stand in support of
our Second Amendment and of our Nation's sovereignty and vote in
support of this amendment to renew the annual ban on the funding of the
United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Hastings).
Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chair, my amendment would exempt reimbursement for
medical expenses from the Department of Veterans Affairs calculation of
annual income when determining pension eligibility for veterans. This
amendment is a version of H.R. 4994, the Veterans Pensions Protection
Act, bipartisan legislation endorsed by the Vietnam Veterans of
America, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and others.
A few years ago, a disabled veteran and a constituent of mine was
struck by a vehicle while crossing the street. After receiving
insurance compensation for his injuries, he lost his pension. This is
because, under current law, compensation for medical expenses,
including insurance settlement payments or reimbursements, are
considered income by the VA.
We effectively punish our veterans when they receive these types of
compensation after suffering medical emergencies like the one I just
outlined. This is, quite simply, wrong. My amendment will rectify this.
I ask the House to support this amendment.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Farenthold) to discuss an additional
amendment he has.

[[Page H2741]]

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of an amendment
that directs our service academies to notify the Members of Congress of
acceptees at least 48 hours before publishing the acceptance or letting
the acceptee know.
As most Members of this body know, we are actually the interviewing
source for the service academies. Young men and women seeking to serve
this country attending a service academy apply for a nomination from
their Member of Congress, most often go through a very lengthy vetting
process, and we develop a relationship with these young men and women.
Historically, the service academies have allowed us to call them and
tell them they are accepted and congratulate them. This year, in some
instances, the service academies have quit doing that, which was a
longstanding practice.
I believe that it is appropriate that those who interview and work so
hard to get those young men and women into our service academies should
be the ones delivering the news to them rather than them reading it on
a Web site or in a piece of mail.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment when it comes before
the House.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Himes).
Mr. HIMES. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank both the chairman of
the committee and the ranking member for the opportunity to offer this
amendment, which would be a very straightforward amendment, which
simply requires the Department of Defense to report to the Congress on
the policies, doctrine, procedures, and authorities, as well as the
definitions associated with a cyber attack on the United States.
This is a small step in a larger very, very important effort that
Chairman Westmoreland and I have been working on for some period of
time now to try to bring some clarity to what is, today, kind of the
Wild West in the cyber realm. In the kinetic realm, we understand very
clearly what an act of war is. We understand our doctrine for
responding as such.
In the cyber realm, we don't know exactly when a crime becomes an act
of war, how to deal with an asymmetric actor versus a nation-state. It
is terribly important that we begin the process, with other nations
around the world, of establishing some clarity on these points. That
won't help our adversaries, but it will remove uncertainty from the
system in this new and very, very important realm.
Again, I thank the leadership of the House Armed Services Committee
and hope this amendment will be supported.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time on
this en bloc amendment.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Polis).
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the committee for
including, en bloc, my amendment No. 59, which is a step to look at
commonsense, cost-saving proposals that the United States Navy itself
has offered earlier this year that could save as much as $900 million
by consolidating carrier Air Force wings from 10 to 9.
In the fiscal year 2017 budget request, the Navy asked Congress to
reallocate their 10th carrier wing into their 9 existing wings, which
they feel would boost readiness and save money.
I understand there is reluctance to make what I believe is a
strategic, cost-effective move, and that is why I offer my amendment
today, directing the Secretary of Defense to offer Congress a study on
this issue. As Vice Admiral Michael Shoemaker said: ``Restructuring to
nine carrier air wings is the most efficient use of those operational
forces to meet global requirements.''
The study will serve as an important step in realizing a more
efficient, capable, cost-effective Navy. I am very encouraged that the
committee was willing to include this en bloc today, and I see this as
an important first step toward recognizing increased readiness as well
as cost savings.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in
permitting me to speak on the en bloc amendment, and I appreciate the
committee having accepted the amendment dealing with cost
accountability for the B-21 bomber. This is a new weapon that has both
conventional and nuclear weapons capability.
We are in a situation now where there is tremendous stress on our
Defense Department budget with a whole range of weaponry. I think it is
more important now than ever that we are able to understand exactly
what we are getting into, how much this is going to cost. There is
about $1.4 billion already into this. We ought to be able to know what
the total commitment is being made, to be able to have appropriate
decisions made by Congress.
I am deeply concerned that the Defense Department, to this point, has
resisted giving an appraisal of what the total cost is going to be,
somehow fearing that, if the total budget were available, that would
give too much information to our adversaries about the weight, size,
and range of the plane. I think not. I think the real danger here is
that the American public and Congress would know what the costs are.
This is not an acceptable approach as we deal with these critical
questions.
It is important, Mr. Chairman, that we have full transparency about
what the costs are going to be for these massive, expensive, and, in
some cases, questionable weapons systems. This is not an argument for
or against it. It is an argument for transparency and being able to
know what we are getting into.
The worst of all possible worlds is making commitments and then
finding, 5 and 10 years down the line, that we can't follow through on
them or they result in cannibalizing other important priorities. I
would think that this is one area that we could all agree we need to
have this transparency and have this information available.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, this seems to me to be a priority going
forward, given the experience we have had with cost overruns and given
how many elements that this committee is trying to juggle. The demands
on the committee, I think, are remarkable. It is not a job that I envy.
These are hard decisions that are being made.
The Department of Defense can do a favor for themselves and for us by
being fully transparent so we know what we should be budgeting for in
the future and that they can be held accountable for performance.
Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I want to speak about one of the amendments that is in
this en bloc package offered by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Mulvaney). My understanding of that amendment is that it tries to have
a clearer process by which we fund the military, and that is a goal for
which I have enormous sympathy.
We clearly need to have more predictable funding for the military.
That is true on behalf of our military commanders and all the troops.
It is true on behalf of industry. It is true on behalf of budgeting in
the government.
I personally also agree we need to do away with the artificial caps
that have caused such difficulty for the military in recent years. I
also believe that it would be beneficial if administrations did not
play political budgetary games.
For example, in this year's budget, the President requests a very low
number for Israeli missile defense, knowing full well that the
Congress, on a bipartisan basis, is not going to let that go through.
We are going to be more responsible. So they are counting on us to have
to cut other programs so that we can do what they should have done to
begin with. There are all sorts of tactics that are used in developing
budgets. There has got to be a better way.
Apparently, some administration political appointees have been urging
Members of the House to call the approach in this bill a gimmick.
Actually, I have heard that term used a few times on the floor over the
last couple of days.

[[Page H2742]]

Well, one question I have is: Was it a gimmick in 2008 when, under
Democratic majority, this House used exactly the same approach in fully
funding the base requirements for the year and then had a bridge fund
that allowed the new President to evaluate deployments and the funding
and to make adjustments, which President Obama took advantage of? That
is what it was intended for. Now, why was it okay then, but it is a
gimmick now? It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, someone would consider that
a double standard.
Would Members rather that we continue to cannibalize aircraft and
deny pilots the minimum amount of training they are supposed to get?
Are Members content to have class A mishaps continue to go up in
service after service, or is the desire to score political points so
strong that Members would rather let those trends continue rather than
deal with them here in this bill before us?
Mr. Chairman, my point is that I agree there has got to be a better
way. But I also believe that we have a choice before us today, and that
is whether we fund the training, the maintenance, the end strength, the
modernization that starts to fix the problems that I have talked about
or we stick with name-calling, we look for excuses to vote ``no'' and
allow those problems to get worse. Lives are at stake.
So while I don't know that I agree with all the particulars of the
gentleman from South Carolina's amendment, I think he raises important
issues. Therefore, I urge Members to support that amendment as part of
this en bloc package and resolve to try to put partisanship and excuses
aside and think about the men and women who serve and what is in their
best interest.
I urge adoption of the en bloc amendments.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

{time} 1615

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Ms. Lee

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5
printed in House Report 114-571.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. REPEAL OF AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General.--The Authorization for Use of Military
Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby
repealed.
(b) Effective Date.--The repeal contained in subsection
(a)--
(1) takes effect on the date that is 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act; and
(2) applies with respect to each operation or other action
that is being carried out pursuant to the Authorization for
Use of Military Force initiated before such effective date.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, first let me just thank the Committee on Rules
Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter and all of the members
of the committee for making this amendment in order.
My amendment is very straightforward. It would, after 90 days of
enactment of this act, repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of
Military Force which Congress passed into law September 14, 2001. When
we repeal this 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, Congress
would finally be forced to debate and vote on a specific AUMF to
address the ISIL threat.
Now, I voted against the 2001 authorization because I believed it
opened the door for any President to wage endless war without a
congressional debate or a vote, and I believe, quite frankly, that
history has borne that out.
I include in the Record a new report from the Congressional Research
Service.

Congressional Research Service,

May 11, 2016.

Memorandum

Subject: Presidential References to the 2001 Authorization
for Use of Military Force in Publicly Available Executive
Actions and Reports to Congress.
From: Matthew Weed, Specialist in Foreign Policy Legislation.
This memorandum was prepared to enable distribution to more
than one congressional office.
This memorandum sets out information and analysis
concerning presidential references in official notifications
and records to the Authorization for Use of Military Force
(2001 AUMF; Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. Sec. 1541 note),
enacted in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks on the United States, to justify and undertake
military and other action. It contains very brief discussions
of the relevant provisions of the 2001 AUMF, and the uses of
U.S. armed forces connected with 2001 AUMF authority, as well
as excerpted language and other information from the
notifications.

Use of Military Force Authorization Language in the 2001 AUMF

Section 2(a) of the 2001 AUMF authorizes the use of force
in response to the September 11 attacks:
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
* * *

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) In General.--That the President is authorized to use
all necessary and appropriate force against those nations,
organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized,
committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on
September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or
persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international
terrorism against the United States by such nations,
organizations or persons.
The 2001 AUMF does not include a specified congressional
reporting requirement, but states that the authorization is
not intended to supersede any requirement of the War Powers
Resolution, which does require congressional reporting for
initial and continuing deployments of U.S. armed forces into
imminent or ongoing hostilities.

Executive Branch Policy Concerning Utilization of 2001 AUMF
Authorization

Prior to the U.S. military campaign against the Islamic
State that began in summer 2014, executive branch officials
made statements that included certain interpretations
concerning the 2001 AUMF, including the following
interpretations:
The 2001 AUMF is primarily an authorization to enter into
and prosecute an armed conflict against Al Qaeda and the
Taliban in Afghanistan.
The 2001 AUMF authorizes the President to use military
force against Al Qaeda and the Taliban outside Afghanistan,
but such uses of force must meet a higher standard of threat
to the United States and must use limited, precise methods
against specific individual targets rather than general
military action against enemy forces.
Because the 2001 AUMF authorizes U.S. involvement in an
international armed conflict, the international law of armed
conflict informs the authority within the 2001 AUMF. This law
permits the use of military force against forces associated
with Al Qaeda and the Taliban as co-belligerents; such forces
must be operating in some sort of coordination and
cooperation with Al Qaeda and/or the Taliban, not just share
similar goals, objectives, or ideologies.
According to the Obama Administration, this interpretation
of the scope of 2001 AUMF authority fits within the overall
framework of presidential power to use military force against
those posing a threat to U.S. national security and U.S.
interests. In situations where the 2001 AUMF or other
relevant legislation does not seem to authorize a given use
of military force or related activity, the executive branch
will determine whether the President's Article II powers as
Commander in Chief and Chief Executive, as interpreted by the
executive branch itself, might authorize such actions. In
this way, similar U.S. military action to meet U.S.
counterterrorism objectives might be interpreted to fall
under different authorities, of which the 2001 AUMF is just
one, albeit important, example.

Records of Executive Actions and Presidential Reporting to Congress
Referencing the 2001 AUMF

CRS has located 37 relevant occurrences of an official
record, disclosed publicly, of presidential reference to the
2001 AUMF in connection with initiating or continuing
wilitary or related action (including nonlethal military
activities such as detentions and military trials). Of the 37
occurrences, 18 were made during the Bush Administration, and
19 have been made during the Obama Administration. The
notifications reference both statutory and constitutional
authority for the President to take such action, as well as
statutory provisions requiring congressional notification,
including reference to provisions in the 2001 AUMF. As will
be discussed in detail below, the manner in which Presidents
have presented information on military deployments and
actions in these notifications, the constitutional and
statutory authority for such actions, and the reporting
requirements for such actions, have changed over time.

[[Page H2743]]

Notifications of Deploying U.S. Armed Forces and/or Using Military
Force Involving Reference to the 2001 AUMF

Both President Bush and President Obama have provided
formal notifications of military deployments and/or action to
Congress at various times since enactment of the 2001 AUMF,
referring to that authorization to various degrees and ends.
While presidential reports to Congress concerning the use of
military force and other activities undertaken by the U.S.
armed forces initially provided a fairly simple and
straightforward discussion of actions and related
authorities, over time these reports became increasingly
detailed, complicated, and difficult to decipher with regard
to determining applicable presidential authority. At all
times, both Presidents have relied primarily on their
constitutional Article II powers as Commander in Chief and
Chief Executive. In many instances, reference to 2001 AUMF
authority has been supplementary and indirect; in only a few
cases has a President relied directly on 2001 AUMF authority
as justification for a military operation, deployment, or
other action. This is not to say that 2001 AUMF authority
does not serve as a sole or primary legal basis for military
action in any given situation reported in a notification,
only that the notification language is susceptible to more
than one interpretation when it concerns presidential
authority to use to military force or undertake other
military action.
Below are provided several tables of information concerning
presidential notifications and records of other executive
action referencing the 2001 AUMF. Each table provides:
a date of each notification or record;
the relevant military activity, location, and/or purpose of
such activities, as available;
the constitutional and statutory authority provided in the
notification or record as provided; and
the reference to applicable reporting requirements
precipitating each respective notification or record.
For Tables 1-8, each set out in its own section with
accompanying analysis, each table includes a group of
notifications that are similar in composition and content.
Each subsequent table and section, therefore, denotes a
change in composition of the notifications referencing the
2001 AUMF in some way.
Initial Reporting in the Aftermath of the September 11, 2001
Attacks
President Bush's reports to Congress concerning military
deployments in the weeks following the September 11, 2001
terror attacks were relatively concise, focusing on the need
to address the terrorist threat in the immediate aftermath of
the attacks, and the deployments and actions taken in
response to such threat. The first notification on September
24, 2001 references deployments to ``a number of foreign
nations'' in the ``Central and Pacific Command areas of
operations.'' Major military operations in Afghanistan had
not yet commenced. The second notification on October 9, 2001
includes similar information but also notifies Congress of
the commencement of combat against Al Qaeda and the Taliban
in Afghanistan. In these two notifications, President Bush
stated that he had taken the actions described pursuant to
his constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and Chief
Executive. In both notifications, he referred to the 2001
AUMF as evidencing the continuing support of Congress, but
did not specifically state he had taken such action pursuant
to 2001 AUMF authority. The President stated in these
notifications that he was reporting on these actions to
Congress consistent with both the War Powers Resolution and
the 2001 AUMF. It is possible to conclude that reporting
action consistent with the 2001 AUMF would mean that the
action was considered taken pursuant to 2001 AUMF authority.

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to encourage all my colleagues to read
this report. It shows that this authorization has, in fact, become that
blank check for war. In the more than 14 years since its passage, it
has been used 37 times in 14 countries to wage war with little or no
congressional oversight. It has been used 18 times by President Bush
and 19 times by President Obama.
This report only looks at unclassified incidents. How many other
times has it been used without the knowledge of Congress or the
American people? Not only has this authorization been used to justify
military action thousands of miles away, it has also been used much
closer to home to allow warrantless surveillance and wiretaps,
indefinite detention practices at GTMO, and targeted killing by drones,
including of American citizens. It has also been cited as the authority
for the nearly 2-year-long war against ISIL, a war that Congress has
never debated, voted on, or specifically authorized.
Mr. Chairman, our brave servicemen and -women continue to be deployed
around the world. Whether they are combat troops or not, they are in
combat zones. They are risking their lives. Don't we at least owe them
our representation in terms of our job to debate and vote on the cost
and consequences of the war? I think we owe them that.
If we all agree that ISIL must be degraded and dismantled, then why
is Congress missing in action? Every day more bombs fall. We have
already lost three brave servicemen. We have already spent more than
$9.6 billion, and we spend an additional $615,000 per hour.
I know that while we may not share a common position on what the
shape of any new AUMF to address ISIL might look like, I know that many
of us do agree that the overly broad and almost 15-year-old AUMF
represents a major and very concerning deterioration of congressional
oversight. That means a lack of involvement and input and voice of the
American people.
Let's repeal this blank check and finally, 90 days later, debate and
vote on an AUMF to address the ISIL threat.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the distinguished chairman of
the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment which would
unilaterally end the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda.
Mr. Chair, ISIS grew out of al Qaeda in Iraq. The President has
determined that the 2001 AUMF allows the United States to target ISIS.
Both the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs agree
that they have full legal authority to combat ISIS, and Congress has
supported that view by appropriating funds.
Many Members want to enact a new AUMF to renew the authority to fight
ISIS and support our troops, but this amendment fails to do so. We must
understand that a new AUMF cannot give President Obama any more
authority to fight ISIS than he currently claims. It could give him
less. The President asked for less in his proposal. It is clear many
want an AUMF that limits the authority of this President and the next
President.
The administration still does not have the broad, overarching
strategy needed to defeat these radical Islamist terrorists. Once the
President provides that strategy, this House can have an informed
debate over a new AUMF, but this amendment would leave us with no
strategy and no authority. That is irresponsible.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, let me just make one comment before yielding to
my colleague from Minnesota.
First, the President has sent over an AUMF. He sent this over 15
months ago. The Speaker yet has to take this Authorization for Use of
Military Force up. The President has asked for it. Why don't we do our
job? We could at least either bring the one that he sent over, or we
need to put our own on the floor.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr.
Ellison).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California has 1\1/4\ minutes
remaining.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the gentlewoman's
amendment.
I want to just say that the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) is
absolutely wrong when he says there would be a unilateral ending to the
struggle against Daesh, or ISIL. The only way that would happen is if
we do not take up a new AUMF that would authorize us to take on that
battle.
What we need to do is take on our constitutional responsibility. We
cannot abdicate it with this out-of-date AUMF that is only tenuously
connected to many of the conflicts we see arising today. We have a
responsibility under the Constitution, Article I, section 8, to debate
and vote, up or down, use of force. We should do that. We should do it
now. There is nothing to prevent us from passing a new one or crafting
our own or passing the President's unless we abdicate that
responsibility.
This allows us to criticize anything the President does and yet, at
the same time, never take responsibility for

[[Page H2744]]

passing our own AUMF adapted for the moment that we are in. That is not
right.
I support the gentlewoman's amendment.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I will just close by saying my amendment is
enacted 90 days after the signing of this law. That means we have 90
days to debate and vote upon an ISIL-specific Authorization for Use of
Military Force. We need to do our job. We have a constitutional
responsibility to do our job. Unfortunately, Congress is missing in
action. We need to do exactly what the American people sent us to do.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, no one can contest the gentlewoman from California's
sincerity on this issue. On September 14, 2001, when this House passed
the Authorization for the Use of Military Force that she is talking
about, 3 days after 3,000 Americans had been murdered on 9/11, the vote
in this House was 420-1, and the one person who voted against this AUMF
was the gentlewoman from California who offered this amendment. So her
sincerity cannot be questioned.
I also, by the way, happen to agree with her that we need to update
this AUMF. As a matter of fact, this House passed, twice, provisions
that I had authored to update the 2001 AUMF. We passed it in 2011; we
passed it in 2012. Unfortunately, the administration says: No, we are
opposed to that; the one we have got is just fine. And the Senate took
that position, and so it did not get passed into law.
But to say, now, to unilaterally repeal the 2001 AUMF on which the
administration is relying for all its counterterrorism activities not
only against al Qaeda, but against ISIS and others, to repeal it now, I
believe, would be a mistake. There are still real dangers in the world
from terrorists. I don't think I need to remind Members of Paris, of
Brussels, of San Bernardino, and just today, of Baghdad.

The other point I want to make, Mr. Chairman, is I think we all
underestimate the catastrophes that have been avoided--in other words,
the terrorist plots, what they wanted to do, what they tried to do--
that were thwarted. Sometimes they were thwarted just because we were
lucky, but a lot of times they were thwarted because of the work of the
men and women in the military, the men and women in the intelligence
community, the men and women in law enforcement doing a lot of hard
work, sacrificing, some of them losing their lives to make sure that we
did not have a repeat of the 3,000 people murdered on 9/11.
We owe them, Mr. Chairman, more than just a thank-you. We owe them
whatever preparation, whatever equipment, whatever support they need to
continue to battle terrorists today. That is what this bill tries to
do: to make sure that we don't send people out in the Middle East to
bomb terrorists on airplanes that cannot fly, that cannot be
maintained, that we don't wear our pilots and our mechanics out. That
is readiness. That is what we are talking about in this bill. That is
what we have an obligation in this House to do for them who do so much
for us.
I oppose the gentlewoman's amendment. As I say, I have tremendous
respect for her views and the sincerity with which she holds them. I
think it results in a more dangerous world.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Polis

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6
printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1098. REDUCTION OF AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Reduction.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Act, but subject to subsection (b), the President, in
consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
Energy, and the Administrator for Nuclear Security, shall
make such reductions in the amounts authorized to be
appropriated under this Act in such manner as the President
considers appropriate to achieve an aggregate reduction of 1
percent of the total amount of funds authorized to be
appropriated under this Act. Such reduction shall be in
addition to any other reduction of funds required by law.
(b) Exclusions.--In carrying out subsection (a), the
President shall not reduce the amount of funds for the
following accounts:
(1) Military personnel, reserve personnel, and National
Guard personnel accounts of the Department of Defense.
(2) The Defense Health Program account.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, this is a very simple amendment. When we look
at our country's national security, it is important to make sure that
we don't mortgage our national security because fiscal security is an
important part of protecting our country.
My amendment would give authority to the President of the United
States and the Secretary of Defense to reduce the overall amount of
money authorized by this bill by 1 percent. It simply cuts defense
spending by 1 percent.
As you know, we spend as much as the rest of the world, combined, on
defense. We want to have a strong defense, but of course, as you know,
this current authorization exceeds the levels of the Budget Control
Act, even with this 1 percent reduction, which is really a compromise.
It only reduces it by $5.5 billion and, in fact, continues to authorize
at a level of $10 billion more than the bipartisan Budget Control Act.
In a bill in which we overfunded multiple accounts and weapons
systems above the request level of the military, I think 1 percent is a
very reasonable request. It is about $5.5 billion. It is certainly
possible to find these cuts. In fact, they are very likely to occur
because, again, if we conform to the Budget Control Act, there would
actually be a larger cut than even this humble one that we are offering
before you today.
As an example, the bill authorizes $9.5 billion in nuclear weapons
activities alone. We could pass my amendment. Even if we allocated the
entire cuts to nuclear weapons, we would still be spending $4 billion
on nuclear weapons. I think the estimate is we would then have enough
to destroy the entire world and wipe out life as we know it three times
instead of six times. How much is enough?
There are plenty of other programs that we could look at. Of course,
it should not be Congress making those decisions in a political manner;
it should be the military and the executive. I imagine they would start
with accounts that Congress has chosen to overfund.
At some point, we have to stand up for fiscal security and realize
that mortgaging our future and our children's future to Saudi Arabia
and China does not enhance our national security; it detracts from it.
My amendment is a small first step toward taking a stand against a
military budget that we simply cannot afford. We need to reduce our
budget deficit. This is a very small and simple way to start. We can
make these strategic cuts and, of course, still fully protect our
national security and even enhance it.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on my amendment and take this
modest step toward fiscal responsibility as a compromise between the
Budget Control Act levels and the committee authorization levels.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1630

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.

[[Page H2745]]

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
This amendment cuts defense below the President's request, below last
year's funding, and below what the last Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff said was the lower, ragged edge of what it takes to defend this
country.
Let's just put in a little bit of context here. This bill, counting
OCO and everything, is a whopping one-half of 1 percent over what we
spent last year. One-half of 1 percent. Inflation is supposed to be 2.1
percent. So what it really means is this bill, even in real dollars, is
a cut, even as it is.
This bill is 23 percent less than we were spending on defense in real
terms in 2010. Mr. Chairman, the world is not 23 percent safer now than
it was 6 years ago. And yet the gentleman from Colorado's amendment
would cut that even further.
This bill stays within the amount requested by the President. It
meets the need for base requirements and provides a bridge fund for
deployments, just like Democratic majorities did for the last change of
administration. And I think that is the most reasonable response.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from the great State of California (Ms. Lee), a cosponsor of this
amendment.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to first thank Congressman Polis for
yielding time and for his work to ensure that our Nation's fiscal
security is secure through this amendment. It is an honor to cosponsor
this amendment with him. I want to thank the ranking member also for
guiding us through this very difficult bill to make sure that we all
know what is included in the bill.
I just have to say, our amendment, I think, would take a modest step
in making this bill a lot better to help us rein in the over-the-top,
quite frankly, Pentagon spending, while protecting the pay or health
benefit accounts of our brave servicemen and -women and their families.
Over the last 15 years, Pentagon spending has ballooned by 50 percent
in real terms. Pentagon spending now consumes more than half of the
Federal discretionary budget. That is just outrageous.
Recently, The New York Times made this case in their editorial called
``A Better, Not Fatter, Defense Budget,'' which I include for the
Record.

[From the New York Times, May 9, 2016]

A Better, Not Fatter, Defense Budget

(By the Editorial Board)

To hear some military commanders and members of Congress
talk, the American military is worn out and in desperate need
of more money. After more than a decade in Iraq and
Afghanistan, they say, troops are lagging in training and new
weaponry, which is jeopardizing their ability to defeat the
Islamic State and deal with potential conflicts with Russia
and China.
While increased funding for some programs may be needed,
total military spending, at nearly $600 billion annually, is
not too low. The trouble is, the investment has often yielded
poor results, with the Pentagon, Congress and the White House
all making bad judgments, playing budget games and falling
under the sway of defense industry lobbyists. Current
military spending is 50 percent higher in real terms than it
was before 9/11, yet the number of active duty and reserve
troops is 6 percent smaller.
For nearly a decade after 9/11, the Pentagon had a virtual
blank check; the base defense budget rose, in adjusted
dollars, from $378 billion in 1998 to $600 billion in 2010.
As the military fought Al Qaeda and the Taliban, billions of
dollars were squandered on unnecessary items, including new
weapons that ran late and over budget like the troubled F-35
jet fighter.
The waste and the budget games continue with the House
Armed Services Committee approving a $583 billion total
defense authorization bill for 2017 last month that skirts
the across-the-board caps imposed by Congress in 2011 on
discretionary federal spending.
The caps are supposed to restrain domestic and military
spending equally, but defense hawks have insisted on throwing
more money at the Pentagon. That doesn't encourage efficiency
or wise choices. The panel took $18 billion from a $59
billion off-budget account, which has become a slush fund
renewed annually to finance the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and
other trouble spots, and is not subject to the budget caps,
and repurposed that money for use in the $524 billion base
military budget.
The move will underwrite the purchase of more ships, jet
fighters, helicopters and other big-ticket weapons that the
Pentagon didn't request and will keep the Army from falling
below 480,000 active-duty troops. It also means the war
account will run out of money next April. Representative Mac
Thornberry, the Republican chairman of the committee,
apparently assumes the next president will be forced to ask
for, and Congress will be forced to approve, more money for
the war account. This sleight of hand runs the risk that
troops overseas, at some point, could be deprived of some
resources, at least temporarily. The full House should reject
this maneuver.
Many defense experts, liberals and centrists as well as
hawks, agree that more investment is needed in maintenance,
training and modernizing aging weapons and equipment. These
needs were identified years ago, yet the Pentagon and
Congress have chosen to invest in excessively costly high-
tech weaponry while deferring maintenance and other
operational expenses.
The Pentagon can do with far fewer than the 1,700 F-35s it
plans on buying. It should pare back on President Obama's $1
trillion plan to replace nearly every missile, submarine,
aircraft and warhead in the nuclear arsenal. Defense
officials recently reported that 22 percent of all military
bases will not be needed by 2019. Civilian positions will
have to be reduced, while reforms in health care and the
military procurement system need to be carried out. All of
these changes make good sense, given the savings they would
bring. But they are politically unpalatable; base closings,
for instance, have been stubbornly resisted in recent years
by lawmakers fearful of angering voters by eliminating jobs
in communities that are economically dependent on those
bases.
Todd Harrison, a defense budget expert with the Center for
Strategic and International Studies, says that sustaining the
current military force of roughly two million and paying for
all the new weapons systems will cost billions more than
Congress has allowed under the budget caps. To maintain
sensible troop levels, Congress and the administration need
to begin honestly addressing the hard fiscal choices that
they have largely been loath to make.

Ms. LEE. The article lists program after program, many of which our
generals did not ask for, that have cost taxpayers billions without
making us any safer.
Clearly, we also need to audit the Pentagon. That is why I am pleased
the House adopted the Burgess-Lee amendment yesterday to require a
report on auditability and help keep moving toward auditing the
Pentagon. While we were working on that, we should take every
opportunity to address Pentagon spending.
The article in The New York Times sets forth: ``The waste and the
budget games continue with the House Armed Services Committee approving
a $583 billion total defense authorization.''
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee
on Readiness.
Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Chairman, I want to reiterate the importance of
making sure that we are funding defense at the President's request. The
FY 2017 request, I think, is minimally adequate, but it is not just me.
The administration's own Secretary of the Army Murphy stated that this
budget request is minimally adequate and that we are taking a high risk
as an Army and as a Nation when the Army is funded at this level. So
there is still risk there with this level of funding.
As the chairman pointed out, we live in a more dangerous world today,
but we see our Marine Corps and Air Force having to go to aircraft that
are museum exhibits to cannibalize parts to bring them in to have a
minimally operational cadre of aircraft.
We see this, too, when we talk about only 9 of the 20 B-1 bombers are
available today because they are lacking parts and when we have 30
percent or less of our Marine Corps helicopters available because they
are lacking parts. We see that, in a squadron of 14 jets, only 3 in the
Marine Corps are available because they are lacking parts.
It is irresponsible not to provide to the brave men and women that
serve this Nation the things that they need. We are asking them to go
into harm's way. We are asking them to do tremendously difficult jobs.
We are asking them to maintain safety. Yet we are not providing them
the resources necessary.
This amendment would do even more to take away what is already a
challenging situation for those brave men and women that are doing a
tremendous job and that, as their leaders have said, are being stressed
to the breaking point because they do not have the basic resources to
keep those aircraft flying, to keep those ships on the

[[Page H2746]]

water, to keep those systems necessary to be able to perform the job
that we have asked them to do.
We have an obligation as a Nation that, when we ask those brave men
and women to go into harm's way, to support them. It is unconscionable
when we don't do that, when we have situations like 84 percent of our
Marine Corps aircraft are in a nonready status, based on a 10-year
average.
So when we talk about taking dollars away, what signal does that send
to the brave men and women serving in the military? I think this
amendment cuts to the heart of what we must do as a Nation, and that is
to rebuild readiness, not degrade readiness.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, there are a number of programs which
Congress has forced spending on the military that even the military has
not requested.
As an example, we blocked the Navy from making a sound fiscal
decision saving $900 million to shutter a carrier air wing. There are a
dozen more Black Hawk and Apache helicopters than requested by the
military to meet our national defense needs. There are two extra V-22
Ospreys that were not requested, 500 extra Javelin missiles above the
request, 500 more extra Hydra guided rockets, and 75 extra Sidewinder
missiles.
These are just some of the examples of some the low-hanging fruit
that we can use to restore military funding to a more fiscally
responsible manner.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Colorado raising the
issue that he just raised because it gives me the opportunity to affirm
that many of the programs he was just mentioning like the Black Hawks,
for example, have been requested by many of the Members on his side of
the aisle. And they were included in the unfunded requirements list
from the Army.
So the way it works is we get all sorts of requests from Members on
both sides of the aisle. Each of the services gives us a list of what
they would like to have had in the budget request but the
administration took out, and then where the two match up as Member
priorities and service priorities, that is what these funds are.
It is not that they weren't asked for from the military. It is the
military wanted them but OMB took them out. And when you have many
Members, particularly on the Black Hawks, the V-22s, the LCS, and a
number of the items he just mentioned on his side of the aisle, asking
for them as well as the service, then that becomes part of the
modernization priority.
Let me just make one other point. In the Black Hawk case
specifically, these new Black Hawks will replace helicopters that were
built in 1979, for which we cannot get parts, which have very
restricted flight envelopes because of all the restrictions. They can't
be repaired. They can't do everything the Army wants them to do.
So the administration did not ask for any. Many Members on the
Democratic side asked for some. We put them in here. And that is the
way to fix readiness: by replacing a 1979 helicopter with a 2016
helicopter.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
will be postponed.

Amendments En Bloc No. 2 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I
offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 2 consisting of amendment Nos. 8, 14, 25, 27,
28, 32, 33, 34, 35, 38, 40, 41, 42, and 45 printed in House Report 114-
571, offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 8 offered by mr. desantis of florida

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. LIMITATION ON MILITARY CONTACT AND COOPERATION
BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND CUBA.

(a) Limitation.--Except as provided in subsection (b), none
of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made
available for fiscal year 2017 for the Department of Defense
may be used for any bilateral military-to-military contact or
cooperation between the Governments of the United States and
Cuba until the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
State, in consultation with the Director of National
Intelligence, certify to the appropriate congressional
committees that--
(1) the Government of Cuba has--
(A) met the requirements and satisfied the factors
specified in sections 205 and 206 of the Cuban Liberty and
Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 6065
and 6066); and
(B) resolved, to the full satisfaction of United States
law, all outstanding claims and judgments belonging to United
States nationals against the Government of Cuba, including
but not limited to claims regarding property confiscated by
the Government of Cuba;
(2) the Cuban military and other security forces in Cuba
have ceased committing human right abuses, including
arbitrary arrests, beatings, and other acts of repudiation,
against those who express opposition to the Castro regime,
civil rights activists and other citizens of Cuba, as well as
all persecution, intimidation, arrest, imprisonment, and
assassination of dissidents and members of faith-based
organizations;
(3) the Cuban military has ceased providing military
intelligence, weapons training, strategic planning, and
security logistics to the military and security forces of
Venezuela;
(4) the Government of Cuba no longer demands that the
United States relinquish control of Guantanamo Bay, in
violation of an international treaty;
(5) the Government of Cuba returns to the United States
fugitives wanted by the Department of Justice for crimes
committed in the United States; and
(6) the officials of the Cuban military that were indicted
in the murder of United States citizens during the shoot down
of planes operated by the Brothers to the Rescue humanitarian
organization in 1996 are brought to justice.
(b) Exceptions.--The limitation on the use of funds under
subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to--
(1) payments in furtherance of the lease agreement, or
other financial transactions necessary for maintenance and
improvements of the military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba,
including any adjacent areas under the control or possession
of the United States;
(2) assistance or support in furtherance of democracy-
building efforts for Cuba described in section 109 of the
Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of
1996 (22 U.S.C. 6039); or
(3) customary and routine financial transactions necessary
for the maintenance, improvements, or regular duties of the
United States mission in Havana, including outreach to the
pro-democracy opposition.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.
(2) Bilateral military-to-military contact or
cooperation.--The term ``bilateral military-to-military
contact or cooperation''--
(A) means--
(i) reciprocal visits and meetings by high-ranking
delegations;
(ii) information sharing, policy consultations, security
dialogues or other forms of consultative discussions;
(iii) exchange of military instructors, training personnel,
and students;
(iv) defense planning; and
(v) military training or exercises; but
(B) does not include any contact or cooperation that is in
support of the United States stability operations.
(3) Cuban military.--The term ``Cuban military'' means--
(A) the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Cuba,
the Ministry of the Interior of Cuba, or any subdivision of
either such Ministry;
(B) any agency, instrumentality, or other entity that is
owned, operated, or controlled by an entity specified in
subparagraph (A); or
(C) an individual who is a senior member of the Ministry of
the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Cuba or the Ministry of the
Interior of Cuba.
(d) Effective Date.--This section takes effect on the date
of the enactment of this Act and applies with respect to
funds described in subsection (a) that are unobligated as of
such date of enactment.

amendment no. 14 offered by mr. desantis of florida

Page 139, after line 22, insert the following:

[[Page H2747]]

SEC. 547. CAREER MILITARY JUSTICE LITIGATION TRACK FOR JUDGE
ADVOCATES.

(a) Career Litigation Track Required.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of each military department
shall establish a career military justice litigation track
for judge advocates in the Armed Forces under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary.
(2) Consultation.--The Secretary of the Army and the
Secretary of the Air Force shall establish the litigation
track required by this section in consultation with the Judge
Advocate General of the Army and the Judge Advocate General
of the Air Force, respectively. The Secretary of the Navy
shall establish the litigation track in consultation with the
Judge Advocate General of the Navy and the Staff Judge
Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps.
(b) Elements.--Each career litigation track under this
section shall provide for the following:
(1) Assignment and advancement of qualified judge advocates
in and through assignments and billets relating to the
practice of military justice under chapter 47 of title 10,
United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice).
(2) Establishing for each Armed Force the assignments and
billets covered by paragraph (1), which shall include trial
counsel, defense counsel, military trial judge, military
appellate judge, academic instructor, all positions within
criminal law offices or divisions of such Armed Force,
Special Victims Prosecutor, Victims' Legal Counsel, Special
Victims' Counsel, and such other positions as the Secretary
of the military department concerned shall specify.
(3) For judge advocates participating in such litigation
track, mechanisms as follows:
(A) To prohibit a judge advocate from more than a total of
four years of duty or assignments outside such litigation
track
(B) To prohibit any adverse assessment of a judge advocate
so participating by reason of such participation in the
promotion of officers through grade O-6 (or such higher grade
as the Secretary of the military department concerned shall
specify for purposes of such litigation track).
(4) Such additional requirements and qualifications for the
litigation track as the Secretary of the military department
concerned considers appropriate, including requirements and
qualifications that take into account the unique personnel
needs and requirement of an Armed Force.
(c) Implementation Deadline.--Each Secretary of a military
department shall implement the career litigation track
required by this section for the Armed Forces under the
jurisdiction of such Secretary by not later than 18 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(d) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, each Secretary of a military
department shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on
the progress of such Secretary in implementing the career
litigation track required under this section for the Armed
Forces under the jurisdiction of such Secretary.

amendment no. 25 offered by mr. lamalfa of california

At the end of subtitle D of title I, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1__. PROHIBITION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR RETIREMENT
OF U-2 AIRCRAFT.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
or otherwise made available for the Air Force may be
obligated or expended to retire, prepare to retire, or place
in storage or on backup aircraft inventory status any U-2
aircraft.

amendment no. 27 offered by mr. hudson of north carolina

At the end of title I, add the following new section:

SEC. 1__. BRIEFING ON ACQUISITION STRATEGY FOR GROUND
MOBILITY VEHICLE.

(a) Briefing Required.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Army, shall present to
the congressional defense committees a briefing on the
acquisition strategy for the Ground Mobility Vehicle for use
with the Global Response Force.
(b) Elements.--The briefing under subsection (a) shall
include an assessment of--
(1) whether the Ground Mobility Vehicle is a suitable
candidate for solutions that would utilize militarized
commercial off-the-shelf platforms leveraging existing global
automotive supply chains to satisfy requirements and reduce
the life-cycle cost of the program;
(2) whether the acquisition strategy meets the focus areas
specified in the Better Buying Power initiative of the
Secretary of Defense; and
(3) whether including an active safety system like
electronic stability control in the Ground Mobility Vehicle,
as such system is used on the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle,
is expected to reduce the risk of vehicle rollover.

amendment no. 28 offered by mr. sanford of south carolina

At the end of title I, add the following new section:

SEC. 1__. STANDARDIZATION OF 5.56MM RIFLE AMMUNITION.

(a) Report.--If, on the date that is 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Army and the Marine
Corps are each using different variants of 5.56mm rifle
ammunition, the Secretary of Defense shall, on such date,
submit to the congressional defense committees a report
explaining the reasons that the Army and the Marine Corps are
using different variants of such ammunition.
(b) Standardization Requirement.--Not later than one year
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall ensure that the Army and the Marine Corps are
using the same variant of 5.56mm rifle ammunition.
(c) Exception.--Subsection (b) shall not apply in a case in
which the Secretary of Defense--
(1) determines that a state of emergency requires the Army
and the Marine Corps to use different variants of 5.56mm
rifle ammunition; and
(2) certifies to the congressional defense committees that
such a determination has been made.

amendment no. 32 offered by mr. cartwright of pennsylvania

At the end of title III, add the following new section:

SEC. 3__. SYSTEM FOR COMMUNICATING AVAILABILITY OF SURPLUS
AMMUNITION.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall implement a formal
process to provide Government agencies outside the Department
of Defense with information on the availability of surplus,
serviceable ammunition for the purpose of reducing the
overall storage and disposal costs related to such
ammunition.

amendment no. 33 offered by mr. forbes of virginia

Page 107, line 20, strike ``322,900'' and insert
``324,615''.

amendment no. 34 offered by mr. jones of north carolina

At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following new
section:

SEC. 6__. ACCEPTANCE OF MILITARY STAR CARD AT COMMISSARIES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure
that--
(1) commissary stores accept as payment the Military Star
Card; and
(2) any financial liability of the United States relating
to such acceptance as payment be assumed by the Army and Air
Force Exchange Service.
(b) Military Star Card Defined.--In this section, the term
``Military Star Card'' means a credit card administered under
the Exchange Credit Program by the Army and Air Force
Exchange Service.

amendment no. 35 offered by mr. allen of georgia

Page 141, line 17, after ``senior military college'' insert
the following: ``and each of the Reserve Officer Training
Corps institutions selected for partnership by the cyber
institutes at the individual service academies''.

amendment no. 38 offered by mr. desaulnier of california

At the end of subtitle E of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 568. INCLUSION OF INFORMATION IN TRANSITION ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM.

Section 1144(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(10) Provide information regarding the deduction of
disability compensation paid by the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs pursuant to section 1175a(h) of this title by reason
of voluntary separation pay received by the member.''.

amendment no. 40 offered by mr. keating of massachusetts

At the end of title V, add the following new section:

SEC. 5__. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON DESIRABILITY OF SERVICE-WIDE
ADOPTION OF GOLD STAR INSTALLATION ACCESS CARD.

It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of each
military department and the Secretary of the Department in
which the Coast Guard is operating should--
(1) provide for the issuance of a Gold Star Installation
Access Card to Gold Star family members who are the survivors
of deceased members of the Armed Forces in order to expedite
the ability of a Gold Star family member to gain unescorted
access to military installations for the purpose of obtaining
the on-base services and benefits for which the Gold Star
family member is entitled or eligible;
(2) work jointly to ensure that a Gold Star Installation
Access Card issued to a Gold Star family member by one Armed
Force is accepted for access to military installations of
another Armed Force; and
(3) in developing, issuing, and accepting the Gold Star
Installation Access Card--
(A) prevent fraud in the procurement or use of the Gold
Star Installation Access Card;
(B) limit installation access to those areas that provide
the services and benefits for which the Gold Star family
member is entitled or eligible; and
(C) ensure that the availability and use of the Gold Star
Installation Access Card does

[[Page H2748]]

not adversely affect military installation security.

amendment no. 41 offered by ms. kaptur of ohio

Page 186, after line 25, insert the following new
subsection:
(c) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report on the
dependency and indemnity compensation offset under sections
1450(c) of title 10, United States Code. The report shall
include the following:
(1) The total number of individuals affected by such
offset.
(2) Of the number of individuals covered under paragraph
(1), the number who are covered by section 1448(d) of title
10, United States Code, listed by the rank of the deceased
member and the current age of the individual.
(3) Of the number of individuals under paragraph (1), the
number who are not covered by section 1448(d) of title 10,
United States Code, listed by the rank of the deceased member
and the current age of the individual.
(4) The average amount of money that is affected by such
offset, including the average amounts with respect to--
(A) individuals described in paragraph (2); and
(B) individuals described in paragraph (3).
(5) The number of recipients for the special survivor
indemnity allowance under section 1450(m) of title 10, United
States Code.

amendment no. 42 offered by mr. kildee of michigan

Page 264, line 7, insert ``and units'' after ``members''.
Page 265, after line 8, insert the following:
(3) High risk veterans.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs
shall use the results under subsection (c) to provide
outreach regarding the available preventative and treatment
resources for mental health for enrolled veterans who were
deployed with the units identified under this subsection.
Page 265, line 16, insert ``and the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs'' after ``Defense''.
Page 265, line 17, insert ``and the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs'' after ``Services''.
Page 265, line 18, insert ``and the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs'' after ``Services''.
Page 266, strike lines 3 through 6 and insert the
following:
(f) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Military services.--The term ``military services''
means the Army, Navy, Air Force, and the Marine Corps,
including the reserve components thereof.
(2) Enrolled veteran.--The term ``enrolled veteran'' means
a veteran enrolled in the health care system of the
Department of Veterans Affairs.

amendment no. 45 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

At the end of title VII (page 273, after line 12), insert
the following new section:

SEC. 749. INCREASED COLLABORATION WITH NIH TO COMBAT TRIPLE
NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER.

The Office of Health of the Department of Defense shall
work in collaboration with the National Institutes of Health
to--
(1) identify specific genetic and molecular targets and
biomarkers for triple negative breast cancer; and
(2) provide information useful in biomarker selection, drug
discovery, and clinical trials design that will enable both--
(A) triple negative breast cancer patients to be identified
earlier in the progression of their disease; and
(B) the development of multiple targeted therapies for the
disease.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).
Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chair, I am very grateful to Chairman Thornberry for
allowing me to present this amendment.
Today, I rise in support of my amendment to the NDAA in support of
the U-2, known as the Dragon Lady, one of the must successful spy
planes ever built. Its unique capabilities have served our Nation's
high-altitude intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance mission
for decades.
What many don't know is that the U-2 is not a cold war relic. It is
still current. The most recent ones were made in the 1980s. U-2s are
currently flying more hours today than at any point since the end of
the cold war and have been deployed in our ongoing efforts to defeat
ISIS.
Flying at an altitude of 70,000 feet, the U-2 is able to reach
heights other spy planes cannot. Because the U-2 can reach such
extraordinary heights, it is able to use high-tech sensors to increase
its ability to collect intelligence.
Other unique features of the U-2 include cloud-piercing radar and
interchangeable nose cones. The U-2 can also take incredible high-
resolution photographs on a 10,500-foot reel wet film.
My amendment to the NDAA will prevent the Air Force from retiring the
U-2. It is absolutely essential to our ability to meet our high-
altitude intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance needs.
In addition to aiding in the fight against ISIS, General Philip
Breedlove, NATO's supreme allied commander and the head of U.S. forces
in Europe, called for the use of U-2s in countering the strategic
threat posed by Vladimir Putin.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. LaMALFA. General Breedlove said:
``EUCOM needs additional intelligence collection platforms, such as
the U-2 or the RC-135, to assist the increased collection requirements
in the theatre.''
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of this amendment.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I listened to the frustration of the
chairman describing the process, and I sympathize with that. I have sat
and admitted that this committee has one of the most difficult tasks,
because as long as we are sort of unhinged here from the reality and
the accountability of how they all work out, we will have people make
requests for this or the administration will leave something out there,
and it is difficult for the committee to try to make sense of reality
out of these conflicting requests.
Out of this, I think there is an elephant in the room of an
unrealistic, unsustainable, and unnecessary trillion-dollar path we are
on for the nuclear triad of bombers, land-based missiles, and the
submarines.
These are weapons that we have never used in 71 years. These are
weapons that do not help us with the major challenges that vex this
committee right now in terms of military readiness, the challenges
dealing with ISIS, dealing with encroachment by the Chinese, problems
with Russia.
These are weapons that didn't stop Russian aggression in the Crimea
or Ukraine or Chinese encroachment. These are weapons that don't deter
the greatest nuclear threat we face, which is nuclear materials falling
into the hands of extremist elements from rogue nations like North
Korea or some of our purported friends in Pakistan.
These are the threats that we face. And this muscle-bound nuclear
triad that we are going to spend a trillion dollars on does not help
us.
There is enough blame, I think, to go around. The administration made
an agreement to upgrade and modernize all these nuclear weapons in
their effort to get the nonproliferation treaty advanced. I think it
was a foolish bargain, an expensive bargain. They are not going to be
around to have to deliver on the trillion dollars. They are nibbling
around the edges and moving these things forward and leaving the big
decisions for the future.
They have actually made it worse by not fighting aggressively for
nonproliferation resources to help us keep these materials out of the
hands of the extremists and retire nuclear weapons that are floating
around the world now.
We have more nuclear weapons than we need, more nuclear weapons than
we can use, more nuclear weapons than we can afford. We can debate
whether we have enough to destroy the world 3 times, 5 times, or 10
times. What is ironic is that we never have that debate on the floor of
the House on how the tradeoffs occur, what the threats to conventional
military capacity are, and how they fit into an overall scheme of
affairs.

{time} 1645

The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I suggest this is the least-effective part of our
overall

[[Page H2749]]

defense inventory. I would hope that, in the future, when maybe we have
a new administration willing to turn a page, when we have a Congress
that is willing to entertain a broad and robust debate about this
critical issue, that we can deal with an effort to rein in this
trillion-dollar spending folly that is going to have disastrous effects
for our military readiness in the years ahead.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Chairman, the reason these weapons have not been used since 1945
is that we have had a credible nuclear deterrent. The fastest way to
have a more dangerous, destabilized world is for the credibility of
that deterrent to erode, and I worry about that.
Secondly, if you look at what is planned with upgrading the weapons
and the delivery systems, at no point does it become more than 11
percent of the U.S. defense budget. That is a pretty good investment to
make sure that they are not used, and I suggest that it is well worth
the investment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the amendment I offer today, in cooperation with the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) requires a report simply from
the Secretary of Defense, detailing the quantity, composition, and lost
income of survivors currently affected by the Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation offset to the Survivor Benefit Program.
It continues this body's crucial, bipartisan effort to find a
feasible solution for the disgraceful way we shortchange and penalize
our military widows and widowers.
This mandatory offset hurts those who have already given more to
freedom than most of us ever will, the life of a spouse.
It hurts women like the Army Sergeant First Class who recently
contacted me. She is an Afghan veteran herself, mother of three.
Tragically, she also is a Gold Star Wife due to the death of her
husband in Iraq in 2004. As a young widow of a servicemember who died
as a result of his service, she is not eligible to receive the full
amount of her benefits, making the burden of living without her spouse
that much more difficult at a time of enormous adjustment for their
family. What's more, if she were a Federal civil service survivor, she
could receive both benefits.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentlewoman an
additional 30 seconds.
Ms. KAPTUR. If she were a civil service survivor, she could receive
both benefits; and if she were over the age of 37, she could receive
both benefits. Her husband gave his life for liberty. She is a veteran,
too. We must honor their sacrifice as we honor the sacrifice of any
other American who dies in service to our Nation, and find a way to fix
this awkward offset.
This report will help us better define the situation so we can find
just solutions. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from Montana (Mr. Zinke), a member of the
committee.
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. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
I want to make clear that my opposition to the bill at this point is
not just based on the exclusion of the amendment that would have lifted
the discrimination against the LGBT community. That was sort of the
last straw.
I was on the fence about this bill from the very beginning because,
understand that this bill continues the pattern of the last few years,
of putting our defense on a fiscal path to nowhere, a fiscal path
towards a cliff of not having the money to fund what needs to be funded
because the Budget Control Act remains in place.
Now, the chairman repeatedly says that in 2008, we did this when a
new administration was coming in. We only funded half of the overseas
contingency operation fund, knowing the supplemental was coming.
There was no Budget Control Act in 2008. The Budget Control Act is in
place. Even if we get a supplemental in April--and in this Congress,
getting additional money is no guarantee--the Budget Control Act
remains in place, and this Congress has shown a complete unwillingness
to get rid of it.
So what we are doing by funding all of these programs that some of my
colleagues have started, we are funding a defense that we cannot
sustain.
I think the best example of this is the military wanted to cut the
size of the Marine Corps and the Army. Now, the levels that they wanted
to cut them to were levels that no one in the defense community wanted
to cut them to, but that was the amount of money that they have
available under the Budget Control Act.
As soon as we repeal the Budget Control Act, we will have a lot
easier conversation about how to fund defense; but what we are doing to
national security right now is we are creating a bow wave that they
will not be able to absorb.
When the Budget Control Act kicks in again next year, all of a sudden
the Army and the Marine Corps will have to, like that, cut--my numbers
may be off a little bit here--30,000 in the Army, 10,000 in the Marine
Corps. You can't really do that in any sort of reasonable way. It will
be incredibly disruptive to the military, incredibly disruptive to
readiness.
Now, I will agree with the chairman that a passionate case can be
made for spending more on defense. Heck, if we spent a trillion dollars
on defense, a passionate case could be made for spending even more than
that when you look at the threat environment. But we have the money we
have.
He also cited that, in 2010 numbers, we are now 23 percent below
where we are at, and that is true. But we are 23 percent below where we
are at because of the 2011 Budget Control Act which, again, this House
refuses to repeal.
So instead of dealing with the amount of money that Congress has
forced the Department of Defense to deal with, we fantasize that more
money will appear, and in that fantasy, we put the military in an
impossible situation.
We start all of these programs. There is not the money to finish
those programs. And maybe someone can tell me where this money is going
to come from, how it is going to magically appear, when we are $19
trillion in debt--I forget off the top of my head what the deficit is
this year, but it is somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 or $600
billion--deficits for as far as the eye can see; the Freedom Caucus on
the Republican side refusing to spend any more money.
This money is not going to appear. And so what we are going to have
is we are going to have a military that has to cut drastically and
irresponsibly in the blink of an eye because we refused to let them do
it responsibly.
I would urge Members to read Secretary Carter's testimony before the
Senate earlier this week or last week where he outlined what a
devastating impact this defense bill will have on our national security
when the bills that it is charging actually come due.
Now, that is the primary reason to oppose this bill; contemplating
swallowing that and hoping that, like last year, we could fix that in
conference.
But in addition to that, to have discriminatory provisions in it
brings me

[[Page H2750]]

back to 2009, when the Republicans opposed the defense bill because it
had an antihate crime piece of legislation attached to it.
There are reasons to oppose the defense bill other than you just
don't really like people who serve in the military, and that is a
condescending and irresponsible argument to make against those who
would oppose the bill.
If we continue down this funding path, we are not serving the
military. All of these readiness disasters that we keep hearing about
have, in part, happened because of the way this committee and the
Appropriations Committee has funded defense for the last 3 or 4 years,
by taking from readiness to fund a wide variety of programs, including
the beginning of the $1 trillion Mr. Blumenauer talked about for our
nuclear deterrent.
We are not making choices. We refuse to get rid of the A-10. We
refuse to lay off 11 cruisers. We refuse to allow the military to
shrink its size and, instead, we keep putting it on a credit card and
hoping that the money will appear.

Well, when that money doesn't appear--and it is not going to. I
haven't seen money just sort of burst out of nowhere in my lifetime.
Maybe we will be lucky and maybe it will be the first time--but it puts
the Department of Defense in a tenuous position.
We need to start making choices based on the money that we actually
have. This bill doesn't do that.
Six months from now, our troops serving in Afghanistan and Iraq will
have no money, and we hope that problem fixes itself. That is a
national security reason for opposing this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 7 minutes remaining.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I think I made clear a few moments ago that I believe
we need to have a better way to fund defense, a more predictable way.
But, Mr. Chairman, I am not willing to wait to support the military
until that is done. I am not willing to wait until we have tax reform
and entitlement reform and all sorts of other things before I am
willing to stand up and support the military. There are lives at stake
today, and we have enormous challenges in the future, there is no
question, budgetary and otherwise.
But I think it would be a mistake if I were to say we have all these
challenges coming down the road, therefore, I am not going to fix this
problem that is affecting pilots, mechanics, others today. We can do
something about it today.
As a matter of fact, the gentleman talks about the Budget Control
Act. We have made some alterations to the Budget Control Act for each
of the last 4 years because of this problem.
I think most people, at least on both sides of the aisle, realize
that when you cut defense 23 percent since 2010, and the world is not
23 percent safer, we are not asking our military folks for 23 percent
fewer deployments, that something has got to give.
So there has been--it has been painful, it has been messy, it has not
been ideal, but there has been some alterations to the Budget Control
Act.
I said a while ago that I am for doing away with these artificial
caps. The Budget Control Act did not work as anyone, I think, intended.
There was never the mandatory spending reform that was the goal.
And what bore the brunt of the cuts?
Defense.
Fifteen percent of the budget has absorbed 50 percent of the cuts
under the Budget Control Act. That is wrong.
Now, I think if Members on both sides of the aisle committed to
working together to fix that, we could. Now, that would involve not
having a President use the military as a hostage to try to force more
domestic spending, which is what this President has done. That would
mean that we focus on trying to fix defense, and understand that all of
us have other priorities that we need to also work on at the same time.
But we are always going to have different budget laws and different
circumstances. I still do not understand how a Democratic majority, in
2008, could use this approach, to give the new President the benefit of
the doubt, the benefit of a fresh look; and when we try to do the same
for the next President, who none of us know who it is going to be, but
when we try to use the same approach, all of a sudden then you just
can't do it. It is irresponsible, it is a gimmick, and all sorts of
names.
The gentleman mentioned that we are not making choices and mentioned
specifically the A-10.
Mr. Chairman, there are a lot more things that I would like to have
done in this bill, lots of additional programs I would like to have
authorized. We had to make difficult choices.
But just to take the A-10 for an example, the administration has
proposed eliminating the A-10 for the past several years. This Congress
reached a different judgment on that. That is what the Constitution, by
the way, says we are supposed to do. It is our job to raise and
support, build and maintain the Armed Forces of the United States.
On the A-10 program, we reached a different conclusion. We decided
that, until you have something to take its place, we shouldn't get rid
of it.
And you know what?
The Secretary of Defense has testified that it has been devastating
in its use against ISIS today. If we had eliminated it, it wouldn't be
there.
So sometimes our judgment--and we have a long list of instances where
Congress, under majorities of both parties, have exercised a different
judgment from the administration and where we were proved right. So we
make tough choices. Sometimes our choices actually turn out to look
pretty good in hindsight.
But the bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is we could all wait to support a
defense bill until some far-off condition were met. It is easy to vote
``no'' unless something happens or unless some condition is met; but
for this, if only that. That is easy.
But that does not fix the immediate problems that face the men and
women who volunteer to defend our country, the problems that they are
facing today. That is what we are trying to do with this bill. We don't
actually fix them. We just start to turn it around.
I don't think there is an excuse that justifies opposing doing what
is right for them, and that is the reason I believe that this bill
should be supported. I hope Members will support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

{time} 1700

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Ellison

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7
printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

In section 1215(b)--
(1) strike paragraphs (2), (3), and (4);
(2) in paragraph (6), insert ``and'' after ``2018;'';
(3) in paragraph (7), strike ``; and'' and insert a period;
and
(4) strike paragraph (8).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, my amendment strikes language telling the
President to expand our mission in Afghanistan, language that tells the
President to put more of our troops in harm's way, to go backwards
towards a combat mission in Afghanistan.
Now, Republicans may not say it, but the effect is exactly what they
are pushing for--moving the United States military and the United
States back toward a combat mission in Afghanistan, not forward away
from one. Worse yet, they are pushing for an expanded mission before
the new commander on the ground, General John Nicholson, finishes his
review. That is right. Congress is giving instructions to the President
before the current commander has weighed in. This is a mistake.

[[Page H2751]]

So the opening line of the sense of Congress tells the President to
leave 9,800 troops in Afghanistan next year. The current plan calls for
5,500. This sets the tone for what is next. Unfortunately, the
amendment that strikes this language was not ruled in order.
My amendment starts by striking the next provision. The Republicans
want our military to unilaterally strike the Taliban. Now, of course,
these people are absolutely bad news, but the State Department does not
recognize them as a terrorist organization at this time. This is a
decision that should be based on military considerations.
Thus, our counterterrorism mission is allowed to strike and go after
Daesh and al Qaeda, but the mission regarding the Taliban is defensive
in nature; and if that is going to be changed, it should be based on
military considerations, not just through a piece of legislation.
In fact, the Afghans are leading all missions against the Taliban,
and this has been happening well before we transitioned to a noncombat
mission. So let's not call for going back to combat mission tactics,
especially when the commander has not asked for it.
Finally, I would like to talk about a particular provision that is
close to me. I would like to address what I regard as actually a
troubling piece in the provision, which says, and I will quote from the
proposed legislation:

The United States military personnel who are tasked with
the mission of providing combat search and rescue support,
casualty evacuation, and medical support should not be
counted as part of any force management level limitation on
the number of United States ground forces in Afghanistan.

This is a mistake. I believe that our medical personnel and others
should be considered boots on the ground, contrary to the language in
the provision. Combat medics carry weapons, they take casualties, and
they are killed. Why shouldn't we count them? It doesn't seem to make
sense to me. One of the closest people in the whole wide world to me is
an Active Duty military combat medic, and if they are in a war zone, I
want them counted.
So with that, I ask for my amendment to be approved and included, and
I ask that we listen to military people on the ground before we start
trying to tell them what to do, and that we absolutely count combat
medics and people who do rescue.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner), the chairman of the Subcommittee on
Tactical Air and Land Forces.
Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, I am going to try to make some sense of
this.
We just had an amendment where we were debating providing the
Authorization of Use of Military Force to the President, and we wanted
to make certain that the President had the authority, and this is the
portion of our bill where we actually provide authority. The word
``authority'' is throughout these sections that are, by this amendment,
being asked to be deleted. But as Mr. Ellison stated, we should look to
the commanders on the ground. So let's look at what they have said.
General Campbell, testifying about the Haqqani network, said that it
remains the most capable threat to U.S. and coalition forces.
Now, what does threat mean? It means that they are trying to kill us
and our coalition forces. It is a State Department-designated terrorist
organization which harbors al Qaeda and is the most lethal actor on the
battlefield. These provisions that will be deleted relate to our
ability to fight them.
Approximately 30 percent of district centers are under Taliban
control and influence or are at such risk, says General Campbell.
Now, General Nicholson, who is currently the commander, is doing his
review. That is correct. But what we are doing in these provisions is
providing the status quo. We are not presuming that he is going to come
back and say: Let's cut; we can go do this with less troops. We are
allowing that he would have the same resources that General Campbell
had so that he would have an ability to defend our troops.
Basically, if you go down to these paragraphs that are being deleted,
this comes down to some fairly easy decisions:
If you believe that ISIL is not a threat to our troops, vote for this
amendment.
If you believe that ISIL is not a threat to our allies in the Middle
East, vote for this amendment.
If you believe that the killings that were directed and inspired by
ISIL in Brussels and Paris are not a threat to our Nation or our NATO
allies, vote for this amendment.
If you believe that it is okay for the Taliban to control portions of
Afghan territory, even though al Qaeda planned and directed 9/11 under
Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, vote for this amendment.
If you believe that the U.S. and NATO troops should be responsible
for Afghan security, and not Afghan security forces, vote for this
amendment.
If you believe, however, that we have a responsibility for our
national security and to our troops, vote against this amendment.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Minnesota has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Texas has 3 minutes remaining.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, first, let me thank Congressman Ellison for
yielding and for his tremendous leadership. This amendment is extremely
important.
Today I rise to urge my colleagues to support this amendment and,
really, allow our ground commanders to do their job. Now, of course,
time and time again, Congress has refused to do its job. From Zika
funding to confirming a new Supreme Court Justice, we failed to do our
job.
Instead of letting Congress do its job, the majority only seems
interested in Congress doing other peoples' jobs, and that is including
our military commanders. There is no way we should be allowing this to
happen.

Make no mistake, Republicans are trying to expand the U.S. mission in
Afghanistan and further expand America's longest war. For nearly 15
years, we have been fighting a war in Afghanistan. Our brave servicemen
and -women have gone way beyond the call of duty. They have done
everything we have asked them to do. It is past time to bring them home
to their families and to their children. But minimally, we should not
be telling our military leaders what to do in a war zone, especially
before they have completed their on-the-ground assessment.
So I hope that we vote ``yes'' on this commonsense amendment. While
our young men and women are in Afghanistan, until we bring them home,
let's use the best type of intelligence, the best information, and the
best direction that the ground commanders have determined based on
their ground assessment in this war.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 3 minutes remaining.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, just to be clear, the underlying provisions which the
gentleman's amendment would strike are sense of Congress provisions.
Basically, it is the sense of Congress that the ground commanders ought
to make these decisions.
Unfortunately, artificial troop caps and overly restrictive
requirements on our military increase the danger that our military
faces in Afghanistan. So if you draw down too low the number of people
you have, for example, then you don't have enough to protect yourself.
That is part of what we are seeing in Afghanistan.
If you tie the military's hands and say, ``Okay. You cannot go after
this enemy, even though they may pose the most deadly threat to you,''
then you increase the danger to our military. That is exactly what
these provisions try to deal with.
Mr. Chairman, the Afghans are doing the fighting in Afghanistan. They
are advancing and getting more capable all the time, but they still
need us to be there and to advise and assist them.
Just to look briefly at some of the provisions that the gentleman
would strike, one says that the commander in

[[Page H2752]]

Afghanistan has the authority to strike the Haqqani network. They are
the ones that pose, in many people's eyes, the biggest threat for big
bombings and so forth in that region. Why would we not allow our
military commander, if he wants to, if he thinks it is right, to strike
them?
Another provision the gentleman strikes is the one that says that we
ought to have resources to go after ISIS. Remember, Mr. Chairman, that
it is not just al Qaeda and the Taliban that are growing in
Afghanistan. ISIS is growing there, too. This just says we ought to do
something about that. The gentleman's amendment would strike it.
On troop caps, part of what is happening in Afghanistan is that we
are artificially limiting the number of people there. As I mentioned,
that increases the danger to the troops we do have there. Otherwise, we
are bringing some people in on a temporary basis or hiring contractors
to do the job.
So these artificial troop caps mean that commanders and the
administration have got to find all these ways around it, but they
still increase the danger that the people we do have there face. That
doesn't make sense. There are still dangers in Afghanistan to our
national security.
These provisions the gentleman would strike just try to untie the
hands of our military so they can deal with it on a military basis, not
a political basis.
Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I urge Members to do
likewise.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Minnesota
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Ellison

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Strike section 1502 and insert the following new section:

SEC. 1502. PROCUREMENT.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2017 for
procurement accounts for the Army, the Navy and the Marine
Corps, the Air Force, and Defense-wide activities, as
specified in--
(1) the funding table in section 4102; or
(2) the funding table in section 4103.
(b) Funding Reduction.--Notwithstanding the amounts set
forth in the funding tables in division D, the amount
authorized to be appropriated for procurement for overseas
contingency operations for base requirements, as specified in
the funding table in section 4103, is hereby reduced by
$9,440,300,000.
Strike section 1504 and insert the following new section:

SEC. 1504. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2017 for the
use of the Armed Forces and other activities and agencies of
the Department of Defense for expenses, not otherwise
provided for, for operation and maintenance, as specified
in--
(1) the funding table in section 4302, or
(2) the funding table in section 4303.
(b) Period of Availability.--Amounts specified in the
funding table in section 4302 shall remain available for
obligation only until April 30, 2017, at a rate for
operations as provided in the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 2016 (division C of Public Law 114-113).
(c) Funding Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set
forth in the funding tables in division D, the amount
authorized to be appropriated in this section for operation
and maintenance, as specified in the funding table in section
4302, is hereby increased by $9,440,300,000, of which
$26,000,000 is designated for suicide prevention.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge support for my amendment to
H.R. 4909, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017.
The overseas contingency operations account is supposed to provide
emergency funding for wars and unexpected operations overseas,
operations that cannot be planned for in the base budget.
Republicans are raiding this account. They are taking money from
missions designed to protect our Nation from imminent threats to feed
the military industrial complex. They argue that this makes our
military stronger and that it improves our national security; but what
it really does is, the Republicans have taken money from operations
overseas and put it towards money for procurement, for nonwar needs, so
much so that the operators would only be funded through 2017, April of
next year. My amendment puts the money back.
Mr. Chairman, Secretary Carter stated that this gimmick is gambling
``with warfighter money at a time of war.'' He said: ``It would spend
money taken from the war account on things that are not DOD's highest
priorities across the joint force.''
My amendment takes the $9.4 billion taken for procurement on items
like extra F-35s and the littoral combat ship, which the Pentagon did
not prioritize, and puts the funds back in the OCO operations and
maintenance account.

{time} 1715

Mr. Chair, $26 million of that money will go to preventing suicides
amongst our military, as the President's request for this was $26
million lower than the amount we appropriated in 2016. This problem is
not going down, and it should not receive less support from us.
In summary, we are putting money back where it belongs. We are
supporting our troops on the ground. We are supporting those services
overseas. We are supporting military readiness. We are supporting the
priorities of the Pentagon and the President, not those of the defense
industry.
And I will say, Mr. Chairman, that if I were to ask you who I got a
call from and ask you to guess, did I get a call from the President's
office or the Pentagon or Boeing, the answer would be number three,
Boeing. That is who called me and doesn't like this particular
amendment. In fact, we didn't hear from the others. We heard from the
industry, the special interests.
Let's just say the Republicans do push through extra funds for OCO
next year. This would still be shortchanging domestic programs that
will have to be cut to pay for the defense industry.
We all know that Republicans won't let us raise taxes to cover
additional costs. We won't be able to take on more debt. Americans are
going to suffer under the Republicans' scheme to give the Pentagon
equipment and the industry just more.
I oppose it, and I urge support for my amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Turner).
Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, when we read our newspapers, we certainly
know that the world is becoming a much less safe place. The conflicts
around the world and the ability of our military to respond are
incredibly important. But also, if you read the newspaper, you
understand that our military is at a critical juncture. The effects of
sequestration have significantly undermined the readiness of our
military.
The argument that Mr. Ellison is making about what pot of money funds
come out of is kind of irrelevant in that his amendment isn't pure and
that he doesn't take all of the money out of one pot and move it into
another. He only takes a portion. The President does the same thing in
this shell game of where dollars come from. It is not an issue of where
do dollars come from. It is an issue of, where do they go?
If you read this bill, the issue of where these go, which is what Mr.
Ellison wants to stop, is moneys that go to readiness. It goes to the
ability of our military to be prepared.
The Admiral Vice Chief of Staff, General Daniel Allyn, recently
explained that to build readiness ``the Army has been forced to cancel
or delay military construction, sustainment, restoration,

[[Page H2753]]

and modernization across our posts, camps, and stations. Additionally,
the Army reduced key installation services, individual training
programs, and modernization.'' In essence, readiness.
This amendment strips away funding from critical programs that have
been identified by our military services that were not fully funded by
the President's budget request that go to readiness. We are currently
in a readiness crisis.
Marine pilots are having to cannibalize museum parts to get their F-
18s ready to deploy. Of the Marine Corps 271 strike aircraft, only 46
can fly. Of the most severe type of aviation accidents, Marines are 84
percent above their 10-year average. The Air Force maintainers are also
cannibalizing museum parts to get aircraft in the air. Of the 20 B-1
bombers, which are workhorses in Iraq and Syria, only 9 can fly due to
parts and maintenance shortfalls. Pilots are getting less than half of
their training required during a time when our adversaries are becoming
increasingly capable and technologically advanced.
The Air Force's Vice Chief of Staff, David Goldfein, recently stated
during congressional testimony that lower than planned funding levels
have resulted in one of the smallest, oldest, and least ready forces
across the full-spectrum of operations in our history.
Voting for this amendment supports cutting our troops' strength,
cutting training and maintenance, forcing our armed services to
maintain crumbling facilities, and forcing our servicemembers to
continue to rely on faulty and worn out equipment.
It is not an issue of what pot this money comes out of. It is a
matter of where it goes. It needs to go for our servicemembers, so vote
against this amendment.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Rice of South Carolina). The gentleman from
Minnesota has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman for yielding, and
for introducing this amendment, and for his leadership to end waste,
fraud, and abuse at the Pentagon.
This amendment, which I am proud to cosponsor, would stop Republicans
from using the overseas contingency operation fund as a piggy bank for
more wasteful Pentagon spending. Yes, it really does appear that
Christmas is coming in May for the military-industrial complex.
Right now, Republicans have robbed critical programs, like military
suicide prevention, and redirected that money to the OCO fund where
there is no accountability, no transparency, or oversight. By funneling
this money to the OCO account, Republicans are shortchanging lifesaving
programs to fund wasteful programs, like the F-35 and tanks that rust
in the Nevada desert.
Even the Pentagon say they don't want these programs funded. Yet,
Republicans are jeopardizing our real national security priorities to
further enrich the military-industrial complex.

Our troops deserve better, Mr. Chairman. This is a dangerous
budgeting gimmick. This amendment would end the OCO fraud and return
the funds to the important programs that they were intended for.
Let's end this scheme and put the money back into where it belongs,
and that is protecting our troops and the American people.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, let me just conclude by saying that it is
time to put resources where they are needed, among suicide prevention
and directly to our troops, not into simply more military-industrial
complex procurement stuff, not just to help private business feed its
bottom line profit, but to help our soldiers and to help our military
on the ground, when needed.
I urge support for my amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, just to be clear, the President in his budget request
takes some of the OCO dollars and uses it to meet base requirements. He
does that in his budget. It is not a question of whether it is done or
not. The question is, how much?
And even though the President uses OCO dollars to help meet base
shortfalls, his own Comptroller in the defense budget review writes,
even though they do that in the President's budget request: ``The
Department will continue to experience gaps in training and maintenance
over the near term and have a reduced margin of error in dealing with
risks of uncertainty in a dynamic and shifting security environment.''
In other words, even the President's own budget documents say that it
is not enough what he has done. So what we try to do is we try to do
more. We are not going to do it all, but we try to do more to make sure
that the training and maintenance that our troops are entitled to are
provided. What that means is we should not send anyone out on a mission
for which they are not fully prepared and fully supported.
The problem is, as I mentioned awhile ago with the Black Hawk
example, some of these folks have to fly helicopters that were made in
1979. I, myself, saw a fighter plane that President Reagan sent to bomb
Muammar Qadhafi in 1986, and they couldn't find the parts for it. The
pilot tried. He figured out a way to take a part off of a museum
aircraft and tried to make it fit, but the holes were drilled in the
wrong place, so it didn't work.
The only thing you can do to replace a helicopter made in 1979 or an
airplane that was flown on a mission in 1986 is to get a new one. So
that is what the procurement is.
As I mentioned a few moments ago, we have had a number of people from
the Democratic side of the aisle who have asked for C-40s, MQ-4s, Black
Hawks, B-22s, F-18s, F-35s, C-130s. Now, they didn't just invent that.
The reason that Democratic Members have asked for those things above
and beyond what the President submitted is because there is a real need
and because the only way we are going to fix some of these readiness
problems, in addition to more money for training and maintenance, more
money for facilities, and preventing further cuts in end strength, is
to replace some of this old equipment with new equipment. That is what
we do. The gentleman would undo that. I think his amendment should be
defeated.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Minnesota
will be postponed.

Amendments En Bloc No. 3 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I
offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 3 consisting of amendment Nos. 20, 36, 37, 39,
48, 49, 52, 53, 59, and 63 printed in House Report 114-571, offered by
Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 20 offered by mr. thornberry of texas

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT CENTER.

(a) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State, in
coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of
other relevant Federal departments and agencies, shall
establish a Global Engagement Center (in this section
referred to as the ``Center''). The purposes of the Center
are--
(1) to lead and coordinate the compilation and examination
of information on foreign government information warfare
efforts monitored and integrated by the appropriate
interagency entities with responsibility for such
information, including information provided by recipients of
information access fund grants awarded under subsection (f)
and other sources;
(2) to establish a framework for the integration of
critical data and analysis provided by the appropriate
interagency entities with responsibility for such information
on foreign propaganda and disinformation efforts into the
development of national strategy;
(3) to develop, plan, and synchronize, in coordination with
the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of other relevant
Federal departments and agencies, whole-of-government
initiatives to expose and counter foreign propaganda and
disinformation directed

[[Page H2754]]

against United States national security interests and
proactively advance fact-based narratives that support United
States allies and interests;
(4) to demonstrate new technologies, methodologies and
concepts relevant to the missions of the Center that can be
transitioned to other departments or agencies of the United
States Government, foreign partners or allies, or other
nongovernmental entities;
(5) to establish cooperative or liaison relationships with
foreign partners and allies in consultation with interagency
entities with responsibility for such activities, and other
entities, such as academia, nongovernmental organizations,
and the private sector; and
(6) to identify shortfalls in United States capabilities in
any areas relevant to the United States Government's mission,
and recommend necessary enhancements or changes.
(b) Functions.--The Center shall carry out the following
functions:
(1) Integrating interagency and international efforts to
track and evaluate counterfactual narratives abroad that
threaten the national security interests of the United States
and United States allies.
(2) Integrating, and analyzing relevant information, data,
analysis, and analytics from United States Government
agencies, allied nations, think tanks, academic institutions,
civil society groups, and other nongovernmental
organizations.
(3) Developing and disseminating fact-based narratives and
analysis to counter propaganda and disinformation directed at
United States allies and partners.
(4) Identifying current and emerging trends in foreign
propaganda and disinformation based on the information
provided by the appropriate interagency entities with
responsibility for such information, including information
obtained from print, broadcast, online and social media,
support for third-party outlets such as think tanks,
political parties, and nongovernmental organizations, and the
use of covert or clandestine special operators and agents to
influence targeted populations and governments in order to
coordinate and shape the development of tactics, techniques,
and procedures to expose and refute foreign misinformation
and disinformation and proactively promote fact-based
narratives and policies to audiences outside the United
States.
(5) Facilitating the use of a wide range of technologies
and techniques by sharing expertise among agencies, seeking
expertise from external sources, and implementing best
practices.
(6) Identifying gaps in United States capabilities in areas
relevant to the Center's mission and recommending necessary
enhancements or changes.
(7) Identifying the countries and populations most
susceptible to foreign government propaganda and
disinformation based on information provided by appropriate
interagency entities.
(8) Administering the information access fund established
pursuant to subsection (f).
(9) Coordinating with allied and partner nations,
particularly those frequently targeted by foreign
disinformation operations, and international organizations
and entities such as the NATO Center of Excellence on
Strategic Communications, the European Endowment for
Democracy, and the European External Action Service Task
Force on Strategic Communications, in order to amplify the
Center's efforts and avoid duplication.
(c) Coordinator.--The Secretary of State shall appoint a
full-time Coordinator to lead the Center.
(d) Employees of the Center.--
(1) Detailees.--Any Federal Government employee may be
detailed to the Center without reimbursement, and such detail
shall be without interruption or loss of civil service status
or privilege for a period of not more than three years.
(2) Personal service contractors.--The Secretary of State
may exercise the authority provided under section 3161 of
title 5, United States Code, to establish a program (referred
to in this subsection as the ``Program'') for hiring United
States citizens or aliens as personal services contractors
for purposes of personnel resources of the Center, if--
(A) the Secretary determines that existing personnel
resources are insufficient;
(B) the period in which services are provided by a personal
services contractor under the Program, including options,
does not exceed three years, unless the Secretary determines
that exceptional circumstances justify an extension of up to
one additional year;
(C) not more than 20 United States citizens or aliens are
employed as personal services contractors under the Program
at any time; and
(D) the Program is only used to obtain specialized skills
or experience or to respond to urgent needs.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--Under ``Diplomatic
and Consular Programs'', for each of fiscal years 2017 and
2018, $10,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of State and may remain available until expended
to carry out the functions, duties, and responsibilities of
the Center.
(f) Information Access Fund.--
(1) Authority for grants.--The Center is authorized to
provide grants or contracts of financial support to civil
society groups, journalists, nongovernmental organizations,
federally-funded research and development centers, private
companies, or academic institutions for the following
purposes:
(A) To support local independent media who are best placed
to refute foreign disinformation and manipulation in their
own communities.
(B) To collect and store examples in print, online, and
social media, disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda
directed at the United States and its allies and partners.
(C) To analyze and report on tactics, techniques, and
procedures of foreign government information warfare with
respect to disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda.
(D) To support efforts by the Center to counter efforts by
foreign governments to use disinformation, misinformation,
and propaganda to influence the policies and social and
political stability of the United States and United States
allies and partners.
(2) Funding availability and limitations.--The Secretary of
State shall provide that each organization that applies to
receive funds under this subsection undergoes a vetting
process in accordance with the relevant existing regulations
to ensure its bona fides, capability, and experience, and its
compatibility with United States interests and objectives.
(g) Limitation.--None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by the Act to carry out this section shall be
used for purposes other than countering foreign propaganda
and misinformation that threatens United States national
security.
(h) Termination of Center.--The Center shall terminate on
the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of
this Act.

SEC. 12YY. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BROADCASTING BOARD OF
GOVERNORS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER POSITION.

The United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994
(22 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.; Public Law 103-236) is amended--
(1) by amending section 304 (22 U.S.C. 6203) to read as
follows:

``SEC. 304. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
THE BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS.

``(a) Continued Existence Within Executive Branch.--The
Broadcasting Board of Governors shall continue to exist
within the Executive branch of Government as an entity
described in section 104 of title 5, United States Code.
``(b) Chief Executive Officer.--
``(1) In general.--The head of the Broadcasting Board of
Governors shall be a Chief Executive Officer, who shall be
appointed by the President, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate. The President shall nominate the Chief
Executive Officer not later than 60 days after the date of
the enactment of this section. Until such time as a Chief
Executive Officer is appointed and has qualified, the current
or acting Chief Executive Officer appointed by the Board may
continue to serve and exercise the authorities and powers
under this Act.
``(2) Term.--The first Chief Executive Officer appointed
pursuant to paragraph (1) shall serve for an initial term of
three years.
``(3) Compensation.--A Chief Executive Officer appointed
pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be compensated at the annual
rate of basic pay for level III of the Executive Schedule
under section 5314 of title 5, United States Code.
``(c) Termination of Director of International Broadcasting
Bureau.--Immediately upon appointment of the Chief Executive
Officer under subsection (b), the Director of the
International Broadcasting Bureau shall be terminated, and
all of the responsibilities, authorities, and immunities of
the Director or the Board under this or any other Act or
authority before the date of the enactment of this section
shall be transferred to and assumed or overseen by the Chief
Executive Officer, as head of the agency.
``(d) Members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors.--
Members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors in office as
of the date of the enactment of this section may serve the
remainder of their terms of office in an advisory capacity,
but such terms may not be extended beyond the date on which
such terms are set to expire.
``(e) Immunity From Civil Liability.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, all limitations on liability that
apply to the Chief Executive Officer shall also apply to
members of the board of directors of RFE/RL, Inc., Radio Free
Asia, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks, or any
organization that consolidates such entities when such
members are acting in their official capacities.''; and
(2) in section 305 (22 U.S.C. 6204)--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) by striking ``Board'' each place it appears and
inserting ``Chief Executive Officer'';
(ii) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``direct and'' before
``supervise'';
(iii) in paragraph (5)--

(I) by inserting ``and cooperative agreements'' after
``grants''; and
(II) by striking ``sections 308 and 309'' and inserting
``this Act, and on behalf of other agencies, accordingly'';

(iv) in paragraph (6), by striking ``subject to the
limitations in sections 308 and 309 and'';

[[Page H2755]]

(v) in paragraph (11), by inserting ``not'' before
``subject'';
(vi) in paragraph (15)(A), by striking--

(I) ``temporary and intermittent''; and
(II) ``to the same extent as is authorized by section 3109
of title 5, United States Code,''; and

(vii) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(20) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
including section 308(a), to condition, if appropriate, any
grant or cooperative agreement to RFE/RL, Inc., Radio Free
Asia, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks on authority
to determine membership of their respective boards, and the
consolidation of such entities into a single grantee
organization.
``(21) To redirect funds within the scope of any grant or
cooperative agreement, or between grantees, as necessary, and
to condition grants or cooperative agreements, if
appropriate, on similar amendments as authorized under
section 308(a) to meet the purposes of this Act.
``(22) To change the name of the Board pursuant to
congressional notification 60 days prior to any such
change.'';
(B) by striking subsections (b) and (c); and
(C) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (b).

SEC. 12ZZ. UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL BROADCASTING ACT OF
1994.

The United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994
(22 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.; Public Law 103-236) is amended--
(1) in section 306 (22 U.S.C. 6205)--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) by striking the heading; and
(ii) by striking ``Board'' each place it appears and
inserting ``Agency''; and
(B) by striking subsection (b);
(2) by striking section 307 (22 U.S.C. 6206); and
(3) by inserting after section 309 the following new
sections:

``SEC. 310. BROADCAST ENTITIES REPORTING TO CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER.

``(a) Grantee Organizations.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the following provisions shall apply:
``(1) Consolidation.--The Chief Executive Officer, subject
to the regular notification procedures of the Committee on
Appropriations and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Appropriations
and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, who is
authorized to incorporate a grantee, may condition annual
grants to RFE/RL, Inc., Radio Free Asia, and the Middle East
Broadcasting Networks on the consolidation of such grantees
into a single, consolidated private, non-profit corporation
(in accordance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code),
which may broadcast and provide news and information to
audiences wherever the Agency may broadcast, for activities
that the Chief Executive Officer determines are consistent
with the purposes of this Act, including the terms and
conditions of subsections (g)(5), (h), (i), and (j) of
section 308, except that the Agency may select any name for
such a consolidated grantee.
``(2) Federal status.--Nothing in this or any other Act, or
any action taken pursuant to this or any other Act, may be
construed to make such a consolidated grantee described in
paragraph (1) or RFE/RL, Inc., Radio Free Asia, or the Middle
East Broadcasting Networks or any other grantee or entity
provided funding by the Agency a Federal agency or
instrumentality. Employees or staff of such grantees or
entities shall not be considered Federal employees. For
purposes of this subsection and this Act, the term `grant'
includes agreements under section 6305 of title 31, United
States Code, and the term `grantee' includes recipients of
such agreements.
``(3) Leadership of grantee organizations.--Officers of
RFE/RL Inc., Radio Free Asia, and the Middle East
Broadcasting Networks or any organization that is established
through the consolidation of such entities, or authorized
under this Act, shall serve at the pleasure of the Chief
Executive Officer of the Agency.
``(b) Voice of America.--
``(1) Status as a federal entity.--The Chief Executive
Officer is authorized to establish an independent grantee
organization, as a private nonprofit organization, to carry
out all broadcasting and related programs currently performed
by the Voice of America. The Chief Executive Officer may make
and supervise grants or cooperative agreements to such
grantee, including under terms and conditions and in any
manner authorized under section 305(a). Such grantee shall
not be considered a Federal agency or instrumentality and
shall adhere to the same standards of professionalism and
accountability required of all Board broadcasters and
grantees. The Board is authorized to transfer any facilities
or equipment to such grantee, and to utilize the provisions
of subchapter VI of chapter 33 of title 5, United States
Code.
``(2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the Voice of America, operating as a nonprofit
organization, should have the mission to--
``(A) serve as a consistently reliable and authoritative
source of news on the United States, its policies, its
people, and the international developments that affect the
United States;
``(B) provide accurate, objective, and comprehensive
information, with the understanding that these three values
provide credibility among global news audiences;
``(C) present the official policies of the United States,
and related discussions and opinions about those policies,
clearly and effectively; and
``(D) represent the whole of the United States, and shall
accordingly work to produce programming and content that
presents a balanced and comprehensive projection of the
diversity of thought and institutions of the United States.

``SEC. 311. INSPECTOR GENERAL AUTHORITIES.

``(a) In General.--The Inspector General of the Department
of State and the Foreign Service shall exercise the same
authorities with respect to the Broadcasting Board of
Governors and the International Broadcasting Bureau as the
Inspector General exercises under the Inspector General Act
of 1978 and section 209 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980
with respect to the Department of State.
``(b) Respect for Journalistic Integrity of Broadcasters.--
The Inspector General shall respect the journalistic
integrity of all the broadcasters covered by this title and
may not evaluate the philosophical or political perspectives
reflected in the content of broadcasts.''.

amendment no. 36 offered by mrs. comstock of virginia

At the end of subtitle E of title V (page 153, after line
9), add the following new section:

SEC. 568. REPORT AND GUIDANCE REGARDING JOB TRAINING,
EMPLOYMENT SKILLS TRAINING, APPRENTICESHIPS,
AND INTERNSHIPS AND SKILLBRIDGE INITIATIVES FOR
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO ARE BEING
SEPARATED.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness shall submit to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, and make available to the public, a report
evaluating the success of the Job Training, Employment Skills
Training, Apprenticeships, and Internships (known as JTEST-
AI) and SkillBridge initiatives, under which civilian
businesses and companies make available to members of the
Armed Forces who are being separated from the Armed Forces
training or internship opportunities that offer a high
probability of employment for the members after their
separation.
(b) Elements of Report.--In preparing the report required
by subsection (a), the Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness shall use the effectiveness metrics
described in Enclosure 5 of Department of Defense Instruction
No. 1322.29. The report shall include, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) An assessment of the successes of the JTEST-AI and
SkillBridge initiatives.
(2) Recommendations by the Under Secretary regarding ways
in which the administration of the JTEST-AI and SkillBridge
initiatives could be improved.
(3) Recommendations by civilian companies participating in
the initiatives regarding ways in which the administration of
the JTEST-AI and SkillBridge initiatives could be improved.
(4) Testimony from a sample of members of the Armed Forces
who are participating in a JTEST-AI or SkillBridge initiative
regarding the effectiveness of the initiatives and the
members' support for the initiatives.
(5) Testimony from a sample of recently separated members
of the Armed Forces who participated in a JTEST-AI or
SkillBridge initiative regarding the effectiveness of the
initiatives and the members' support for the initiatives.
(c) Issuance of Guidance.--Not later than 180 days after
the submission of the report required by subsection (a), the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness shall
issue guidance to commanders of units of the Armed Forces for
the purpose of encouraging commanders, consistent with unit
readiness, to allow members of the Armed Forces under their
command who are being separated from the Armed Forces to
participate in a JTEST-AI or SkillBridge initiative.

amendment no. 37 offered by mr. farenthold of texas

At the end of subtitle E of title V, add the following new
section:

SEC. 5__. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION IN ADVANCE OF
APPOINTMENTS TO SERVICE ACADEMIES.

(a) United States Military Academy.--Section 4342(a) of
title 10, United States Code, is amended in the matter after
paragraph (10) by adding at the end the following new
sentence: ``When a nominee of a Senator, Representative, or
Delegate is selected for appointment as a cadet, the Senator,
Representative, or Delegate shall be notified at least 48
hours before the official notification or announcement of the
appointment is made.''.
(b) United States Naval Academy.--Section 6954(a) of title
10, United States Code, is amended in the matter after
paragraph (10) by adding at the end the following new
sentence: ``When a nominee of a Senator, Representative, or
Delegate is selected for appointment as a midshipman, the
Senator, Representative, or Delegate shall be notified at
least 48 hours before the official notification or
announcement of the appointment is made.''.
(c) United States Air Force Academy.--Section 9342(a) of
title 10, United States

[[Page H2756]]

Code, is amended in the matter after paragraph (10) by adding
at the end the following new sentence: ``When a nominee of a
Senator, Representative, or Delegate is selected for
appointment as a cadet, the Senator, Representative, or
Delegate shall be notified at least 48 hours before the
official notification or announcement of the appointment is
made.''.
(d) United States Merchant Marine Academy.--Section 51302
of title 46, United States Code, is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(e) Congressional Notification in Advance of
Appointments.--When a nominee of a Senator, Representative,
or Delegate is selected for appointment as a cadet, the
Senator, Representative, or Delegate shall be notified at
least 48 hours before the official notification or
announcement of the appointment is made''.
(e) Application of Amendments.--The amendments made by this
section shall apply with respect to the appointment of cadets
and midshipmen to the United States Military Academy, the
United States Naval Academy, the United States Air Force
Academy, and United States Merchant Marine Academy for
classes entering these service academies after January 1,
2018.

amendment no. 39 offered by mr. hunter of california

Page 173, after line 2, insert the following:

SEC. 599A. SERVICEMEMBERS' GROUP LIFE INSURANCE.

Section 1967(f)(4) of title 38, United States Code, is
amended by striking the second sentence.

amendment no. 48 offered by ms. meng of new york

Page 173, after line 2, insert the following:

SEC. 599A. EXTENSION OF SUICIDE PREVENTION AND RESILIENCE
PROGRAM.

Section 10219(g) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``October 1, 2017'' and inserting
``October 1, 2018''.

amendment no. 49 offered by ms. maxine waters of california

At the end of subtitle D of title VIII (page 326, after
line 4), insert the following new section:

SEC. 843. STUDY AND REPORT ON CONTRACTS AWARDED TO MINORITY-
OWNED AND WOMEN-OWNED BUSINESSES.

(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall carry out a study on the number and types of contracts
for the procurement of goods or services for the Department
of Defense awarded to minority-owned and women-owned
businesses during fiscal years 2010 through 2015. In
conducting the study, the Comptroller General shall identify
minority-owned businesses according to the categories
identified in the Federal procurement data system (described
in section 1122(a)(4)(A) of title 41, United States Code).
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the congressional defense committees a report on the
results of the study under subsection (a).

amendment no. 52 offered by mr. sanford of south carolina

In section 1047(c)(1), strike ``and approvals'' and insert
``, approvals, and the total costs of all flyover missions,
including the costs of fuel, maintenance, and manpower,''.

amendment no. 53 offered by mr. walz of minnesota

Page 394, after line 5, insert the following new
subsection:
(e) State Defined.--In this section, the term ``State''
includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands,
and any territory or possession of the United States.

amendment no. 59 offered by mr. polis of colorado

Page 423, after line 3, insert the following:

SEC. 1070. REPORT ON CARRIER AIR WING FORCE STRUCTURE.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a
report on the impact of changes to existing carrier air wing
force structure and the impact a potential reduction to 9
carrier air wings would have on overall fleet readiness if
aircraft and personnel were to be distributed throughout the
remaining 9 air wings.

amendment no. 63 offered by mr. courtney of connecticut

Page 462, after line 13, insert the following new section
(and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 1098. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Maritime Occupational Safety
and Health Advisory Committee Act''.

SEC. 2. MARITIME OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADVISORY
COMMITTEE.

Section 7 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
(29 U.S.C. 656) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(d) There is established a Maritime Occupational Safety
and Health Advisory Committee, which shall be a continuing
body and shall provide advice to the Secretary in formulating
maritime industry standards and regarding matters pertaining
to the administration of this Act related to the maritime
industry. The composition of this advisory committee shall be
consistent with the advisory committees established under
subsection (b), provided that a member of this committee who
is otherwise qualified may continue to serve until a
successor is appointed. The Secretary may promulgate or amend
regulations as necessary to implement this subsection.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Moulton) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak first about an amendment to be
considered in a later en bloc regarding Special Immigrant Visas. I want
to call attention to the urgent need to continue the Special Immigrant
Visa program for Afghans who worked for U.S. forces.
This bipartisan amendment, backed by several veterans on the
committee, would remove the unfortunate narrowing of eligibility
requirements included in the mark, which would prevent hundreds of
Afghans whose lives are at risk because of their work for our country
from even being considered for resettlement in the United States.
The narrowing of eligibility intentionally excludes hundreds of
Afghans who worked for the State Department, USAID, and U.S. security
contractors in a number of capacities, many of whom face well-
documented death threats due to their work with our government,
regardless of whether that was with frontline troops or on an American
base.
By narrowing eligibility, the program would erode the expectations of
hundreds of Afghan staff whose lives remain in danger because of their
work for the U.S. mission and also make it more difficult to hire and
retain qualified Afghan staff in the future who are essential to
achieving our diplomatic and assistance goals.
For that risk and sacrifice, the very least we can do is offer them a
chance to stay live, to keep living, rather than abandoning them to the
same enemies they united with us to destroy.
One of the things I was most proud of as a Marine infantry officer
was that we never let our enemies make us compromise our values. One of
those values is a solemn commitment to our allies and to our brothers
in arms.
I urge your support on the floor in following through on our
commitment to our Afghan partners.
I also want to comment on the fact that the chairman of the committee
and I worked to resolve some differences that we had on understanding
the concerns of our diplomatic mission in Afghanistan. I appreciate
very much his work with me on that to support our troops and mission
overseas.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from
Massachusetts, and he is exactly right. He and other Members are very
concerned about this issue. He has talked to me about it a number of
times.
I have been concerned that there was abuse of this system. That was
gathered from visits I have made to Afghanistan, including last year.
But I very much appreciate the points that the gentleman from
Massachusetts has made. I think he and others who have worked on this
issue have come up with a good amendment. I support it.
All of us agree that if someone has risked their lives or would be in
danger for supporting the United States and our folks in Afghanistan,
then that person needs protection. None of us want to see the program
abused.
But I am convinced that the changes that the gentleman has been
instrumental in working out are helpful. I support it. And I thank him
for his efforts on doing this.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Iowa (Mr. Young).

{time} 1730

Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Chair, I will be brief.
According to the Federal Trade Commission, our men and women who are
defending our Nation and their families are twice as likely to fall
victim to

[[Page H2757]]

identity theft and fraud. Because they protect us, we need to do more
to protect them and their families from scammers who take advantage of
their service. My amendment No. 177 simply requires the Department of
Defense to report to Congress on its efforts to protect their
information.
I thank the chairman for working with me on this amendment, and I
look forward to working the committee to better protect those who
sacrifice so much to defend our Nation. I also thank my co-chair of the
Bipartisan Congressional Task Force to Combat Identity Theft and Fraud,
the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Sinema), for her great work. She has
been a great partner in helping to protect taxpayers and now our
servicemembers from having their identities stolen.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Arizona (Ms. Sinema).
Ms. SINEMA. I thank Chairman Thornberry and Mr. Moulton for
supporting the Young-Sinema amendment. I thank Congressman Young for
working with me and others in offering this bipartisan amendment to
protect members of the Armed Forces and their families from identity
theft.
My home State of Arizona is one of the top 10 States that is affected
by identity theft. Military families are among those most targeted and
most at risk for these crimes. Our amendment improves the Department of
Defense's efforts to protect military families' financial information
from identity theft. I am committed to working with my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle to combat identity theft and financial fraud.
Again, I thank my friend, Congressman Young, for working with me on
this important, commonsense amendment.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Among the amendments in this en bloc package is one that I have
authored to establish a global engagement center. I thank my cosponsors
of this amendment, Mr. Wilson and Mr. Langevin, the chair and ranking
member of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats & Capabilities. I also
thank Chairman Royce, who has worked with us. Included in this
amendment are reforms of the Broadcasting Board of Governors that he
and his ranking member have worked on for some time.
Mr. Chair, it has been a source of great frustration for me that our
government has seemed to be so inept in the battle of ideas against the
terrorists.
I first introduced a bill on this topic in 2005. Today there is a lot
of talk not only of the so-called physical caliphate that ISIS claims,
but of the virtual caliphate. Unless and until we can be more effective
at engaging in the battle of ideas, we will not succeed in defeating
terrorism.
It is not just the terrorists we have to worry about. We have seen
the Russians lie and use deception for military gain. We have seen
similar sorts of tactics by the Chinese in their building these islands
out in the South China Sea and elsewhere around the world.
This amendment requires the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
Defense, and others--the executive branch--to get their act together,
coordinate, and more effectively engage in the battle of ideas. I hope
it helps. As I say, this is a crucial battlefield, and our country
needs to do better in this field.
Mr. Chair, as I have no further speakers at this point, I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Maxine Waters).
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. I am appreciative to the gentleman
from Massachusetts for allowing me to speak on my amendment.
Mr. Chair and Members, a lack of opportunity for Federal contracting
is one of the main factors of the widening racial wealth gap. As the
Nation's largest employer, the Federal Government has a critical
responsibility to focus on increasing minority and female inclusion in
the job market; yet, only a fraction of Federal contracts goes to
minority- or female-owned businesses. This is partly why the wealth gap
and extreme disparities in racial incomes continue.
Amendment No. 49 ensures that we meet important contracting goals by
analyzing a 5-year study by the GAO on how the DOD contracts with
minority- and female-owned businesses. While there are many ways the
government can address the issue of more equitable contracting, one
important and more immediate impact, I believe, the Federal Government
can have is by providing more opportunities for minority-owned
businesses.
The DOD spends roughly $285 billion a year on contracting, more than
all Federal agencies combined. With such large purchasing power, it is
imperative that these funds are used not only to provide the best
services for the Department of Defense, but also to distribute fairly
and wisely in all communities.
The study proposed is the first step toward identifying where those
opportunities lie for great inclusion. This amendment further
emphasizes and underscores the importance of minorities in both our
local and national communities.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for
yielding and also for his service to the Nation. I thank the ranking
member of the full committee, Mr. Smith; the chairman of the full
committee, Mr. Thornberry; and the Rules Committee for accepting this
amendment. Let me thank the gentlemen doubly and triply for being kind
enough to accept this amendment on a regular basis, and I am going to
persist because I believe it is important.
Mr. Chair, let me make a big pronouncement or announcement or
breaking news: there are women in the United States military. I want to
say that again. There are women in the United States military.
My amendment deals with triple negative breast cancer. It calls for
the increased collaboration between the DOD and the National Institutes
of Health to combat triple negative breast cancer. This amendment
directs the Department of Defense to identify specific genetic and
molecular targets and biomarkers for TNBC. ``Triple negative breast
cancer'' is a term used to describe breast cancer. Its cells do not
have estrogen receptors and progesterone receptors and does not have an
excess of HER2 protein on its cell membrane of tumor cells.
I am not in the military. I have had many family members in the
military, but I would venture to say this is a case in which you have
battalions, and you are on the field, and you have a difficult enemy
who keeps moving away from your sight and your target. Though you have
used overlapping forces, you can't seem to pinpoint the enemy.
Ultimately you are victorious, but that is because you collaborate and
you work together. This makes commonly used tests and methods to detect
breast cancer not as effective, meaning the ordinary style of fighting
does not work for triple negative breast cancer.
Seventy percent of women with metastatic triple negative breast
cancer do not live more than 5 years after being diagnosed. It is
important to note that TNBC affects women under 50 years of age, and it
makes up more than 30 percent of all breast cancer diagnoses,
specifically in African American women.

The collaboration between the Department of Defense and the NIH to
combat triple negative breast cancer can support the development of
multiple targeted therapies for this devastating disease and can help
women in the United States military, those who are serving our country.
Triple negative breast cancer is a specific strain of breast cancer for
which no targeted treatment is available.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. MOULTON. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentleman so very much.
Mr. Chair, it is a disease, however, that can be conquered. Triple
negative breast cancer, TNBC, accounts for between 13 percent and 25
percent of all breast cancers in the United States. It is of a higher
grade, and it onsets at a

[[Page H2758]]

young age. That means these women are in the United States military.
Finally, because it continues, there is a need for research funding
for biomarker selection, drug discovery, and clinical trials that will
lead to the early detection of TNBC and to the development of multiple
targeted therapies to treat this awful disease. My amendment would
provide for that.
In coming from Houston, Texas, with MD Anderson Cancer Center, I can
tell you that they are looking at major research that can be very
helpful between the NIH and the Department of Defense. I hope my
amendment will stay in this particular bill, and I hope it will go to
the Senate and will be signed by the President.
Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Thornberry, Ranking Member Adam Smith and
the Rules Committee for making in order and including Jackson Lee
Amendment and including it in En Bloc Amendment Number 2 to the
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017.''
This is the first of 3 Jackson Lee amendments made in order by the
House Rules Committee.
Jackson Lee Amendment Number 45, calls for increased collaboration
between the DoD and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to combat
Triple Negative Breast Cancer.
Jackson Lee Amendment Number 45 directs the DoD and NIH to
collaborate to combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer.
This amendment directs the Department of Defense to identify specific
genetic and molecular targets and biomarkers for TNBC.
``Triple Negative Breast Cancer'' is a term used to describe breast
cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone
receptors, and do not have an excess of the ``HER2'' protein on their
cell membrane of tumor cells.
This makes commonly used tests and methods to detect breast cancer
not as effective.
This is a serious illness that affects between 10-17% of female
breast cancer patients and this condition is more likely to cause death
than the most common form of breast cancer.
Seventy percent of women with metastatic triple negative breast
cancer do not live more than five years after being diagnosed.
Jackson Lee Amendment Number 45 will help to save lives.
TNBC disproportionately impacts younger women, African American
women, Hispanic/Latina women, and women with a ``BRCA1 genetic
mutation, which is prevalent in Jewish women.
TNBC usually affects women under 50 years of age and makes up more
than 30% of all breast cancer diagnoses in African Americans. Black
women are far more susceptible to this dangerous subtype than white or
Hispanic women.
The collaboration between the Department of Defense and NIH to combat
Triple Negative Breast Cancer can support the development of multiple
targeted therapies for this devastating disease.
Triple negative breast cancer is a specific strain of breast cancer
for which no targeted treatment is available.
The American Cancer Society calls this particular strain of breast
cancer ``an aggressive subtype associated with lower survival rates.''
Triple negative breast cancer is a term used to describe breast
cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone
receptors, and do not have an excess of the HER2 protein on their cell
membrane of tumor cells
In 2011, the Centers for Disease Control predicted that that year
26,840 black women would be diagnosed with TNBC.
The overall incidence rate of breast cancer is 10% lower in African
American women than white women.
African American women have a five year survival rate of 78% after
diagnosis as compared to 90% for white women.
The incidence rate of breast cancer among women under 45 is higher
for African American women compared to white women.
Triple Negative Breast Cancer cells: TNBC accounts for between 13%
and 25% of all breast cancer in the United States; usually of a higher
grade and size; onset at a younger age; are more aggressive; are more
likely to metastasize.
Currently, 70% of women with metastatic triple negative breast cancer
do not live more than five years after being diagnosed.
African American women are 3 times more likely to develop triple-
negative breast cancer than White women.
African-American women have prevalence TNBC of 26% versus 16% in non-
African-American women.
African-American women are more likely to be diagnosed with larger
tumors and more advanced stages of breast cancer.
Currently there is no targeted treatment for TNBC.
Breast cancers with specific, targeted treatment methods, such as
hormone and gene based strains, have higher survival rates than the
triple negative subtype, highlighting the need for a targeted
treatment.
Because there continues to be a need for research funding for
biomarker selection, drug discovery, and clinical trial designs that
will lead to the early detection of TNBC and to the development of
multiple targeted therapies to treat this awful disease Jackson Lee
Amendment Number 45 included in En Bloc 2 is essential to paving a way
for advancements in these areas.
I thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith for including
these amendments in the En Bloc Amendment Number 2, and I urge all
Members to join me in voting for its adoption.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
Mr. LIPINSKI. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise in support of an amendment I offered along with Mrs. Comstock.
It seeks to expand the SkillBridge job training program by directing
unit commanders to encourage participation by departing servicemembers.
It also directs the DOD to form a comprehensive study so that they can
evaluate and improve the program as needed. The SkillBridge initiative
helps returning veterans by providing them with job training and
apprenticeship programs in areas that span every sector of the
workforce.
This program has already trained around 4,500 servicemembers, and the
18 SkillBridge programs claim to have an employment success rate of 100
percent. Encouraging participation will help more of our veterans find
employment when they reenter civilian life, which is something we need
to do all we can to promote.
I thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith for supporting
this amendment in this bloc. I urge my colleagues to support the bloc.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 2 minutes.
I would like to discuss an amendment to come up in a future en bloc
package.
I joined a vast array of foreign policy experts and retired
generals--and even Israel's own nuclear commission--in supporting the
nuclear deal with Iran because, although it was an imperfect deal,
nobody could articulate a better pathway to a better deal to prevent
Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The nuclear deal, however, is
only that--a nuclear deal. As when President Reagan was negotiating
nuclear deals with the Soviets, we make these agreements with our
enemies, not with our friends, and we must not forget that Iran remains
opposed to us in a vast array of other ways. As with the Soviets,
enforcement of the deal requires continued vigilance.
My amendment would require the President to notify Congress whenever
Iran conducts a ballistic missile launch and inform Congress as to the
actions the President will take in response, including diplomatic
efforts to pursue additional sanctions and the passage of a United
Nations Security Council resolution.
While we have been successful in deterring Iran from building a
nuclear weapon with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, we must
continue to apply pressure to deter further actions that destabilize
this fragile region and threaten our allies.
I urge a ``yes'' vote.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I urge the adoption of the en bloc
package.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Carter of Georgia). The question is on the
amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Zinke

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, I offer amendment No. 10 as the designee of
Mrs. Lummis from the great State of Wyoming.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle D of title XVI, add the following
new section:

[[Page H2759]]

SEC. 16__. MATTERS RELATED TO INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC
MISSILES.

(a) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States to
maintain and modernize a responsive and alert
intercontinental ballistic missile force to ensure robust
nuclear deterrence by preventing any adversary from believing
it can carry out a small, surprise, first-strike attack on
the United States that disarms the strategic forces of the
United States.
(b) Prohibition.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided by paragraph (2), none
of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or
otherwise made available for fiscal year 2017 shall be
obligated or expended for--
(A) reducing, or preparing to reduce, the responsiveness or
alert level of the intercontinental ballistic missiles of the
United States; or
(B) reducing, or preparing to reduce, the quantity of
deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles of the United
States to a number less than 400.
(2) Exception.--The prohibition in paragraph (1) shall not
apply to any of the following activities:
(A) The maintenance or sustainment of intercontinental
ballistic missiles.
(B) Ensuring the safety, security, or reliability of
intercontinental ballistic missiles.
(C) Reduction in the number of deployed intercontinental
ballistic missiles that are carried out in compliance with--
(i) the limitations of the New START Treaty (as defined in
section 494(a)(2)(D) of title 10, United States Code); and
(ii) section 1644 of the Carl Levin an Howard P. ``Buck''
McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2015 (Public Law 113-291; 128 Stat. 3651; 10 U.S.C. 494
note).
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force and
the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council shall submit to
the congressional defense committees a report regarding
efforts to carry out section 1057 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 10
U.S.C. 495 note).
(2) Elements.--The report under paragraph (1) shall include
the following with respect to the period of the expected
lifespan of the Minuteman III system:
(A) The number of nuclear warheads required to support the
capability to redeploy multiple independently retargetable
reentry vehicles across the full intercontinental ballistic
missile fleet.
(B) The current and planned (until 2030) readiness state of
nuclear warheads intended to support the capability to
redeploy multiple independently retargetable reentry vehicles
across the full intercontinental ballistic missile fleet,
including which portion of the active or inactive stockpile
such warheads are classified within.
(C) The current and planned (until 2030) reserve of
components or subsystems required to redeploy multiple
independently retargetable reentry vehicles across the full
intercontinental ballistic missile fleet, including the plans
or industrial capability and capacity to produce more such
components or subsystems, if needed.
(D) The current and planned (until 2030) time required to
commence redeployment of multiple independently retargetable
reentry vehicles across the intercontinental ballistic
missile fleet, including the time required to finish
deployment across the full fleet.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Montana (Mr. Zinke) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Montana.
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.

{time} 1745

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Rhode Island is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Having previously served as the chairman of the Strategic Forces
Subcommittee for several years, I am intimately familiar with our
intercontinental ballistic missile forces and the important role ICBM
deterrence plays when it comes to our national defense. While I
understand the intent of this amendment, it is fundamentally
unnecessary, dramatically overreaching, and lacks meaningful policy
reform.
The budget request for FY 2017 contains no funding for reducing the
alert level or reducing the number of deployed ICBMs below 400, and
there are no plans to do so in the future. Furthermore, the statement
of policy with regard to ICBMs, which is legally binding, significantly
overreaches. It states that modernization of the ICBMs and retaining an
alert ICBM force is necessary to ensure robust nuclear deterrence by
preventing any adversary from believing it can carry out a small,
surprise, first-strike attack which disarms the strategic forces of the
United States.
However, this disregards the crucial and fundamental role of
submarines that provide assured, survivable second-strike capability,
which would dissuade an adversary from even thinking they could launch
a disarming attack against the United States.
If we include any legislation on ICBMs, Mr. Chairman, it should be
that we increase accountability and ensure that we are improving the
morale and culture inside the Air Force with regard to nuclear weapons.
Some of the serious and embarrassing problems that have plagued the
ICBM missileers and security forces in recent years unfortunately
continues, such as the Air Force base in Wyoming where 14 enlisted
airmen in the security forces were being investigated for drug use just
several weeks ago. I see nothing in this amendment that addresses that
problem, nor do I see anything in the bill that addresses that issue.
If we are going to talk about keeping ICBMs, it should be in a
meaningful way, instead of yet another annual amendment driven by what
seems like parochial interests in highlighting their role, particularly
at the exclusion of other legs of the nuclear triad.
While the committee tried to work with Ms. Lummis, Mr. Chairman, to
avail the amendment of some of these concerns, bipartisan negotiations
was seemingly rejected.
So, Mr. Chairman, I hope that we are able to make some of these
adjustments as we conference with the Senate, but I urge my colleagues
to oppose this amendment as offered.
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. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, reducing our ICBM alertness is reducing our
readiness, and the whole point of the Defense Authorization Act is to
ensure our military readiness.
The ICBMs have been a very effective deterrent to enemy aggression
for decades. This amendment is simply a deterrent to those who would
try to reduce our readiness by reducing our alertness and reducing the
number of ICBMs. This would be a dangerous step, contrary to the
longstanding policies of our defense and certainly a bad posture.
Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the
great State of Alabama (Mr. Rogers).
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the Strategic
Forces Subcommittee, I understand that the responsiveness and
distributed nature of our ICBMs are their most critical feature and
their unique contribution to our nuclear triad.
Without ICBMs, an adversary would only need to strike less than 10
targets to disarm our nuclear forces. With ICBMs, an adversary needs to
strike hundreds of hardened targets deep in the American homeland. That
is a much more difficult proposition and is at the very heart of
deterrence.
This is not a parochial issue or a political issue. This is a
profound national security issue. De-alerting our

[[Page H2760]]

ICBMs or unilaterally cutting their numbers is a terrible idea.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, as I previously stated--and with all due
respect to my colleague--this bill contains no funding for reducing the
alert level or reducing the number of deployed ICBMs below 400, and
there are no plans to do so in the future.
Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Rhode Island has 2 minutes
remaining.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy and
his leadership on this, and I think he laid it out very clearly.
This is an imaginary problem, but it is an area that actually needs
to have some attention to it. He referenced recent problems in terms of
potential drug abuse. You know they found the cheating earlier because
they were investigating drug abuse when they found out that there was
cheating on the readiness test.
I would advise my colleagues to read Eric Schlosser's ``Command and
Control,'' a fascinating study about the history of American nuclear
weapons and problems that we have had, mistakes that were made, and
near misses.
There are serious issues that we need to be thinking in terms of the
readiness and how it goes forward. We need to think clearly about what
we do in the future, what is the right level of deterrence, and how are
we going to adequately analyze it.
454 land-based missiles are not necessarily a magic number that we
should be freezing on a permanent basis. Looking at what happens going
forward with the trillion-dollar commitment with missiles that are
submarine based--we have our bombers; we have land based--and being
able to have a critical appraisal of how much deterrence is enough and
look at problems, such as security lapses, training problems, drug
problems, this is not a situation that we should just sort of happily
freeze for the next go-around and maintain that any adjustment to this
or even evaluating an adjustment is somehow a threat to national
security.
The real problems that we face dealing with international terrorism
and the potential of nuclear weapons falling into rogue hands, those
are very real problems that we need to be doing more. This vast nuclear
triad that we will spend a trillion dollars on does not help us with
those challenges. Rather than hollow out the military, we ought to be
looking at potential changes going forward.
This amendment is ill-advised, unnecessary, and is the wrong
direction we should be going.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
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.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Montana (Mr. Zinke).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Lamborn

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Strike subsections (b) and (c) of section 2856 and insert
the following:
(b) Recognition.--Congress recognizes the National Museum
of World War II Aviation in Colorado Springs, Colorado, as
America's National World War II Aviation Museum.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas and
committee staff for their willingness to work with me on this
amendment. I fought long and hard to get this museum the recognition it
deserves, and I am very pleased that we have a path forward where we
can finally achieve that.
My amendment simply recognizes this museum in Colorado Springs as the
National Museum of World War II Aviation. This amendment does not
authorize any funds. The museum is not seeking Federal funds and does
not have plans to do so in the future.
The National Museum of World War II Aviation has taken great care to
focus its story line on an aspect of military history that has not been
fully explored by other national military museums. The intent is to
augment the tremendous work that is being done by those museums, not to
duplicate or replace it.
It is the only museum in the United States that exists to exclusively
preserve and promote an understanding of the role of aviation in
winning World War II. It is dedicated to celebrating the American
spirit and to recognizing the teamwork, patriotism, and courage of the
men and women who fought, as well as those on the home front who
mobilized and supported the national aviation effort.
I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) for the purpose
of engaging in a colloquy.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn)
has been a strong advocate for this museum, and I certainly appreciate
him bringing it to the committee's attention and to the attention of
the House.
Many Members share the gentleman's commitment to the preservation of
historic aircraft, and I will certainly work with him on this and
related issues.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, based on that reassurance and on that
pledge to work together, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Colorado?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.

Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Sanford

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12
printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of title XXXV add the following:

SEC. __. GAO REPORT ON MARITIME SECURITY FLEET PROGRAM.

Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act the Comptroller General of the United States shall
study and report to the relevant congressional committees on
the following:
(1) The justification for the size of the Maritime Security
Fleet established under chapter 531 of title 46, United
States Code, given present national defense operational
requirements for such fleet, and how the annual per-vessel
payment under that chapter corresponds to the costs of
operating vessels in such Fleet.
(2) The difference in costs between the Maritime Security
Fleet program and other options for achieving the same
objectives as that program, such as--
(A) procurement by the United States of a national defense
sealift fleet;
(B) contracting for United States-flag vessels and foreign-
flag vessels on a temporary basis; and
(C) other potential options.
(3) Instances, examined in detail, in which use of foreign-
flag, foreign-crewed vessels for national defense sealift
purposes has hindered national security or impeded United
States military operations.
(4) Comparison, in detail, of volumes and types of--
(A) Federal cargo that has been carried on foreign-flagged
vessels; and
(B) Federal cargo that has been carried on vessels in the
Maritime Security Fleet.

=========================== NOTE ===========================

On May 18, 2016, in the middle column and at the bottom right of
page H2760 and continuing on to page H2761, amendments by Mr.
Lamborn and Mr. Sanford were inadvertently transposed.

The online version has been corrected to reflect the amendments
in the correct order.

========================= END NOTE =========================

[[Page H2761]]

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I rise with a very simple amendment. It
would do nothing more than call for a GAO report of the maritime
security fleet. I do so because I think that we would all acknowledge
that knowledge is power, and the ability to look very closely at what
is happening within that fleet, I think, is important. I would also say
that, as a believer that defense is a core function of the Federal
Government, we would want to have transparency in the way that we
expend those funds in pursuit of our Nation's defense.
I think that this is important in light of the fact that overall
funding has risen by about $89 million here over the last, I guess,
funding cycle. You have seen the per-ship stipend go from $3.5 million
to $5 million.
There has not been a study of what is happening within that fleet of
ships for more than 12 years, and so, again, this is not in any way
prescriptive in nature as to what should or shouldn't happen or the
merits or demerits of the program. It is simply saying might we not
learn a little bit more of what is happening within that fleet, and
that is it.
I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1800

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
The gentleman from South Carolina is correctly concerned about the
expenditure of money. I would suggest to him that this study is a waste
of the expenditure of money by the GAO and, hence, the taxpayers of the
United States.
Studies about the MSP have been available over many, many years; and
in fact, there is now, in the Office of Management and Budget, a
comprehensive study that was commissioned by the Assistant Secretary of
the Navy. The gentleman can certainly contact OMB and get that study
and, quite probably, get all the information he is going to request in
this particular analysis and, furthermore, not have to waste taxpayer
money in the process.
I would point out to the gentleman a statement that was made on
January 17 of this year concerning the MSP program by General Darren
McDew, commander of US TRANSCOM. This is the guy who is responsible for
moving men, women, materiel, and equipment around the world.
He said: ``Our overwhelming success was due in large part to the
10,000 U.S. mariners who sped 220 shiploads of decisive U.S. combat
power throughout the buildup known as Operation Desert Shield. Without
those mariners and vessels, our ability to project decisive force and
demonstrate our national resolve would have been a mere fraction of
what was required to ensure the swift victory the world witnessed.
Simply put, moving an army of decisive size and power can only be
accomplished by sea,'' and the MSP is the central part of that.
We don't need this study. What we need is strong support for the MSP.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chair, I would say to my colleague that, again, what
we would all recognize is that OMB is different than the Government
Accountability Office. The OMB is fundamentally executive branch in
nature. I think there is a real value to having a third party
independent look at what is happening with the study. Again, it is not
prescriptive in nature, but having that third party look, I think, is
that much more important in all of our justifications of this program
or other programs like it.
I would also say this, in terms of ``waste of money,'' as we know,
GAO is funded through the legislative branch. This would not involve an
additional expenditure of money. It would be incorporated into the
expenditures that currently take place within the legislative branch
and, again, GAO, by extension. In that regard, I think it would be a
good use of taxpayer money to take a look that has not been taken in
more than 12 years.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, that is the first time I have ever heard
that expenditure by the House of Representatives is not taxpayer money,
but I guess some people can claim that.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes).
Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I
thank the gentleman for offering this amendment. I know how committed
he is to national defense and to fiscal responsibility in the country.
However, one of the things that we haven't talked about in this
amendment is it asks us to look at outsourcing this to foreign
countries to be able to do, and I think today I rise not just as
chairman of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, but
also on behalf of my good friend Mr. Courtney, who is the ranking
member on that subcommittee and who has given us authority to say that
he is opposed to this as well for these reasons.
The sealift, if we lose that sealift, we have lost the lifeblood to
our warfighters because that is the vessel, that is the lifeline that
keeps them and sustains them. The very question for us is this: If that
balloon goes up and the bell rings, are we going to trust a foreign
power to hold in their hand that very lifeblood for our men and women
and our warfighters?
I want to remind everyone in the House that in World War II, 1 in 26
merchant mariners were actually killed. It was a higher rate of loss
than any other service. The rate was so high, in fact, that the
merchant marine concealed it because they were afraid they couldn't
find enough mariners if the true danger of the services were known.
So our big question here is, even if we came back with a study that
said it might be cheaper to outsource it, would anyone in this room
dare place that trust in a foreign country? I think very clearly we
would not.
Mr. Chairman, also these decisions are probably best made by military
transportation command, sealift command, and maritime command, and they
have said there is no guarantee whatsoever that a foreign-flagged fleet
will sail into harm's way if we need them. They have said a 60-ship
capability is extremely important, and they have said that foreign-
flagged ships which might be cheaper cannot be relied on for critical
national security missions.
Mr. Chairman, I hope we will oppose this amendment, we will reject
it.
Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time I have
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from South Carolina has 3 minutes
remaining.
Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I would say this: in essence, we already
have outsourced this. I think the question about the maritime security
fleet is that it is currently run by a foreign-flagged fleet of
vessels. If I am not mistaken, it is almost exclusively run by Maersk,
which is a foreign-flagged vessel.
The question of this amendment is to say: Might not there be other
ways of doing it? Maybe this is the best way to do it. Maybe there are
other ways to do it. But this notion of not being willing to look, not
being willing to have a third party validate or, if you will, take a
look and say this makes sense or, no, there is a better way of skinning
this cat both for the military and for the taxpayer, I think again
warrants, in this case, the study by the GAO.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1 minute
remaining.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
In Desert Storm I, back in the 1990s, a ship that was manned by
Pakistanis was loaded at the docks, began to sail, and turned around
because the crew refused to go into that zone. We cannot

[[Page H2762]]

allow that to happen ever again. The MSP was started specifically to
provide that kind of sealift power that we need to move our men,
materiel, and equipment, wherever they may be needed in the world. It
does us little good to spend $680 billion on a Defense appropriation
bill and not be able to get where the trouble is. Do away with the MSP,
and that is where you are headed with this, moving toward foreign flags
and, indeed, Maersk is operated by a foreign country, but it is
licensed to operate in the United States with American sailors on
American ships for the MSP program.
We don't need to waste money on this. The studies are available
dating back to 2006, 2009, and, more recently, with the OMB study. We
don't need to waste our money. We need to get on with supporting the
MSP program. I ask for a ``no'' vote.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I would again go back to the basics. This
stipend goes to Maersk presently. It has been raised from $3.5 million
to $5 million. Maybe that is the best thing in the world to do; maybe
it is not. But I think it is worthy of study, particularly given the
fact that we have raised the stipend by $89 million over the last year,
particularly given the fact that we have not looked at this issue from
the standpoint of an outside third-party validation from the GAO for
more than 12 years.
It is for that reason I simply say, again, in no way prescriptively,
it is worth a look. And again, given the fact that the Government
Accountability Office does regular studies on a whole host of different
issues on a very regular basis, I think this is worthy, given the
additional $89 million that was spent last year.
I would ask for a ``yes'' vote.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South
Carolina will be postponed.

Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Thornberry

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18
printed in House Report 114-571.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Strike section 1045 and insert the following:

SEC. 1045. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN FEDERAL SPECTRUM OPERATIONS.

Section 1004 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (Public
Law 114-74; 47 U.S.C. 921 note) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(d) Protection of Certain Federal Spectrum Operations.--
If the report required by subsection (a) determines that
reallocation and auction of the spectrum described in the
report would harm national security by impacting existing
terrestrial Federal spectrum operations at the Nevada Test
and Training Range, the Commission, in coordination with the
Secretary shall, prior to the auction described in subsection
(c)(1)(B), establish rules for licensees in such spectrum
sufficient to mitigate harmful interference to such
operations.
``(e) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed to affect any requirement under section 1062(b)
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2000 (47 U.S.C. 921 note; Public Law 106-65).''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, the Spectrum Pipeline Act was included in the
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 that we passed in December. Now,
apparently, there has developed some disagreement among lawyers about
whether that had some effect on section 1062(b) of the fiscal year 2000
National Defense Authorization Act related to spectrum.
My amendment simply clarifies what everyone that I know of agrees on,
and that is it was never intended to have any effect. We have assurance
from the Office of Management and Budget that was their intention. I
appreciate Chairman Fred Upton, who has worked with us on this
amendment, saying that was not his intention. Basically, Mr. Chairman,
I see this as a technical amendment to resolve some disagreement among
lawyers.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, the Nation's spectrum is one of our most
valuable natural resources. Under the bipartisan oversight of the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, one spectrum auction alone last year
raised more than $40 billion. It is imperative that we continue our
bipartisan management of this valuable national asset, but to do that
we must follow regular order through the proper committee of
jurisdiction. That is the only way that we can make sure that we
continue proper congressional oversight.
This amendment that we are considering today was made public 1 day
ago. This process runs counter to our successful bipartisan efforts to
manage spectrum well. It does not allow the relevant agencies adequate
time to weigh in, and it does not allow interested stakeholders to
provide meaningful input.
I appreciate my colleague's efforts to improve this amendment, but
these are extremely complicated issues of national importance. They
cannot be put together overnight.
Earlier today when the rule for consideration of this bill was
debated here on the floor, my Republican colleagues said that they
chose to exclude some Democratic amendments because those amendments
did not go through the committee process. Well, the same can be said of
this amendment as well, Mr. Chairman.
If there are issues of national security underlying this amendment,
the Democrats on the Committee on Energy and Commerce stand ready to
work on them expeditiously, but we must stand by our commitment to
regular order. The consequences of getting this wrong are simply too
high.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Smith), the ranking member of the Committee on Armed
Services.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, this is clearly a problem that
we need to work on. The chairman and I have worked together in talking
about it and making sure that our military assets are protected as we
deal with spectrum auctions.
I look forward to having the conversation in conference committee
about how to deal with this, but my concern is this is something that
many on the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and I as well, have
worked on for a number of years. We worked with the Department of
Defense for years to try and make sure that their equities were
protected. We talked with everyone we could conceivably talk with. This
auction was originally set up to make sure that we protected those.
Now we are hearing a slightly new argument. I certainly want to make
sure that the Department of Defense's interests are protected, but I
also want to make sure that they don't have absolute veto power on
auctioning spectrum. That was sort of the law before all of the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and others worked on, and it really
tied up a very valuable national asset, as Mr. Pallone points out.
I hope that as we get into conference committee we will figure out
how to both protect the interests of national security and the Defense,
but also make sure that, if spectrum can be safely made available, it
is safely made available.
As I said, this was something that was worked on for a very long
time,

[[Page H2763]]

and we thought we had it worked out. So right at the eleventh hour
here, to have the Department of Defense say ``No, we want to change
it'' is something I think we still need to examine more closely.
I thank Mr. Pallone for the time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time
simply to say this amendment, a version of this amendment, was filed
last week. Working with the Committee on Energy and Commerce, it has
been revised. Again, the purpose of this amendment is--and what I think
it clearly does is simply restate what everybody thought was the case--
to resolve a disagreement among lawyers. That is the reason I call it,
really, a technical amendment. I hope that the House will adopt it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
The amendment was agreed to.

{time} 1815

Amendments En Bloc No. 4 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I
offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 4 consisting of amendment Nos. 23, 43, 44, 46,
47, 50, 51, 54, 64, 65, 66, 67, and 69 printed in House Report 114-571,
offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 23 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

At the end of subtitle F of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 16__. HARMFUL INTERFERENCE TO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM.

(a) Federal Communications Commission Conditions on
Commercial Terrestrial Operations.--Part I of title III of
the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is
amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 343. CONDITIONS ON COMMERCIAL TERRESTRIAL OPERATIONS.

``(a) In General.--The Commission shall not permit
commercial terrestrial operations in the 1525-1559 megahertz
band or the 1626.5-1660.5 megahertz band until the date that
is 90 days after the Commission resolves concerns of
widespread harmful interference by such operations in such
band to covered GPS devices.
``(b) Notice to Congress.--
``(1) In general.--At the conclusion of the proceeding on
such operations in such band, the Commission shall submit to
the congressional committees described in paragraph (2)
official copies of the documents containing the final
decision of the Commission regarding whether to permit such
operations in such band. If the decision is to permit such
operations in such band, such documents shall contain or be
accompanied by an explanation of how the concerns described
in subsection (a) have been resolved.
``(2) Congressional committees described.--The
congressional committees described in this paragraph are the
following:
``(A) The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.
``(B) The Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation and the Committee on Armed Services of the
Senate.
``(c) Covered GPS Device Defined.--In this section, the
term `covered GPS device' means a Global Position System
device of the Department of Defense.''.
(b) Secretary of Defense Review of Harmful Interference.--
(1) Review.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter until the
date referred to in paragraph (3), the Secretary of Defense
shall conduct a review to--
(A) assess the ability of covered GPS devices to receive
signals from Global Positioning System satellites without
widespread harmful interference; and
(B) determine if commercial communications services are
causing or will cause widespread harmful interference with
covered GPS devices.
(2) Notice to congress.--
(A) Notice.--If the Secretary of Defense determines during
a review under paragraph (1) that commercial communications
services are causing or will cause widespread harmful
interference with covered GPS devices, the Secretary shall
promptly submit to the congressional defense committees
notice of such interference.
(B) Contents.--The notice required under subparagraph (A)
shall include--
(i) a list and description of the covered GPS devices that
are being or expected to be interfered with by commercial
communications services;
(ii) a description of the source of, and the entity causing
or expect to cause, the interference with such receivers;
(iii) a description of the manner in which such source or
such entity is causing or expected to cause such
interference;
(iv) a description of the magnitude of harm caused or
expected to be caused by such interference;
(v) a description of the duration of and the conditions and
circumstances under which such interference is occurring or
expected to occur;
(vi) a description of the impact of such interference on
the national security interests of the United States; and
(vii) a description of the plans of the Secretary to
address, alleviate, or mitigate such interference, including
the cost of such plans.
(C) Form.--The notice required under subparagraph (A) shall
be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a
classified annex.
(3) Termination date.--The date referred to in this
paragraph is the earlier of--
(A) the date that is two years after the date of the
enactment of this Act; or
(B) the date on which the Secretary--
(i) determines that commercial communications services are
not causing any widespread harmful interference with covered
GPS devices; and
(ii) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense
committees notice of the determination made under clause (i).
(c) Covered GPS Device Defined.--In this section, the term
``covered GPS device'' means a Global Position System device
of the Department of Defense.
(d) Conforming Repeal.--Section 911 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81;
125 Stat. 1534) is repealed.

amendment no. 43 offered by mr. carter of georgia

Page 269, line 7, insert ``including small business
pharmacies,'' after ``retail pharmacy,''.

amendment no. 44 offered by mrs. comstock of virginia

At the end of subtitle D of title VII add the following:

SEC. __. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE STUDIES ON PREVENTING THE
DIVERSION OF OPIOID MEDICATIONS.

(a) Studies.--With respect to programs of the Department of
Defense that dispense drugs to patients, the Secretary of
Defense (referred to in this section as the ``Secretary'')
shall study the feasibility, the effectiveness in preventing
the diversion of opioid medications, and the cost-
effectiveness of--
(1) requiring that such programs, in appropriate cases,
dispense opioid medications in vials using affordable
technologies designed to prevent access to the medications by
anyone other than the intended patient, such as a vial with a
locking-cap closure mechanism; and
(2) the Secretary providing education on the risks of
opioid medications to individuals for whom such medications
are prescribed, and to their families, with special
consideration given to raising awareness among adolescents on
such risks.
(b) Feedback.--In conducting the studies under subsection
(a), the Secretary shall seek feedback (on a confidential
basis when appropriate) from the individuals and entities
involved in the studies.
(c) Report to Congress.--Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit
to the Congress a report on the results of the studies
conducted under subsection (a).

amendment no. 46 offered by mr. lamborn of colorado

At the end of subtitle A of title VIII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 810A. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ENHANCED TRANSFER OF
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPED AT DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
LABORATORIES.

Section 801(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 127 Stat. 804; 10
U.S.C. 2514 note) is amended by striking ``2017'' and
inserting ``2021''.

amendment no. 47 offered by mr. jenkins of west virginia

At the end of title III, add the following new section:

SEC. 3__. INCREASE IN FUNDING FOR NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG
PROGRAMS.

(a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated in section 1404 for drug interdiction and
counter-drug activities, as specified in the corresponding
funding table in section 4501, for drug interdiction and
counter-drug activities, Defense-wide is hereby increased by
$30,000,000 (to be used in support of the National Guard
counter-drug programs).
(b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D--
(1) the amount authorized to be appropriated for in section
101 for procurement, as specified in the corresponding
funding table in section 4101, for Aircraft Procurement,
Navy, for Common Ground Equipment (Line 064), is hereby
reduced by $20,000,000; and
(2) the amount authorized to be appropriated in section 201
for research, development, test, and evaluation, as specified
in the corresponding funding table in section 4201, for
advanced component development and prototypes, Advanced
Innovative Technologies (Line 095) is hereby reduced by
$10,000,000.

amendment no. 50 offered by mr. guinta of new hampshire

Page 372, after line 8, insert the following:

[[Page H2764]]

SEC. 1014. FUNDING FOR COUNTER NARCOTICS OPERATIONS.

(a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated for drug interdiction and counterdrug
activities, Defense-wide, as specified in the corresponding
funding table in section 4501 is hereby increased by
$3,000,000.
(b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the
funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be
appropriated for operation and maintenance, as specified in
the corresponding funding table in section 4301, for
administration and servicewide activities, Defense Logistics
Agency (Line 160) is hereby reduced by $3,000,000.

amendment no. 51 offered by mr. walberg of michigan

Page 372, after line 8, insert the following:

SEC. 1014. REPORT ON EFFORTS OF UNITED STATES SOUTHERN
COMMAND OPERATION TO DETECT AND MONITOR DRUG
TRAFFICKING.

The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report
on the effectiveness of the United States Southern Command
Operation to limit threats to the national security of the
United States by detecting and monitoring drug trafficking,
specifically heroin and fentanyl.

amendment no. 54 offered by mrs. ellmers of north carolina

At the end of subtitle F of title X (page 423, before line
4), add the following new section:

SEC. 1070. QUARTERLY REPORTS ON PARACHUTE JUMPS CONDUCTED AT
FORT BRAGG AND POPE ARMY AIRFIELD AND AIR FORCE
SUPPORT FOR SUCH JUMPS.

(a) Report Required.--Until January 31, 2020, the Secretary
of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Army shall submit
to the Committees on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives and the Senate quarterly reports--
(1) specifying the number of parachute jumps conducted at
Fort Bragg and Pope Army Airfield, North Carolina, during the
three-month period covered by the report; and
(2) describing and evaluating the level of air support
provided by the Air Force for those jumps.
(b) Joint Airborne Air Transportability Training
Contracts.--As part of each report submitted under subsection
(a), the Secretaries shall specifically provide the
following:
(1) The number of Joint Airborne Air Transportability
Training contracts requested during the three-month period
covered by the report by all units located at Fort Bragg and
Pope Army Airfield.
(2) The number of Joint Airborne Air Transportability
Training contracts validated during the three-month period
covered by the report for units located at Fort Bragg and
Pope Army Airfield.
(3) The number of Joint Airborne Air Transportability
Training contracts not validated during the three-month
period covered by the report for units located at Fort Bragg
and Pope Army Airfield.
(4) In the case of each Joint Airborne Air Transportability
Training contract identified pursuant to paragraph (3), the
reason the contract was not validated.

amendment no. 64 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

Page 462, after line 13, insert the following new section:

SEC. 1098. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES NORTHERN
COMMAND PREPAREDNESS.

It is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) the United States Northern Command plays a crucial role
in providing additional response capability to State and
local governments in domestic disaster relief and consequence
management operations;
(2) the United States Northern Command must continue to
build upon its current efforts to develop command strategies,
leadership training, and response plans to effectively work
with civil authorities when acting as the lead agency or a
supporting agency; and
(3) the United States Northern Command should leverage
whenever possible training and management expertise that
resides within the Department of Defense, other Federal
agencies, State and local governments, and private sector
businesses and academic institutions to enhance--
(A) its defense support to civil authorities and incidence
management missions;
(B) relationships with other entities involved in disaster
response; and
(C) its ability to respond to unforeseen events.

amendment no. 65 offered by mr. lewis of georgia

At the end of title X, add the following new section:

SEC. 1098. COST OF WARS.

The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service and the Director
of the Bureau of Economic Analysis, shall post on the public
Web site of the Department of Defense the costs, including
the relevant legacy costs, to each American taxpayer of each
of the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.

amendment no. 66 offered by ms. bordallo of guam

Page 462, after line 13, insert the following:

SEC. 1098. WORKFORCE ISSUES FOR RELOCATION OF MARINES TO
GUAM.

(a) In General.--Section 6(b) of the Joint Resolution
entitled ``A Joint Resolution to approve the `Covenant To
Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in
Political Union With the United States of America', and for
other purposes'', approved March 24, 1976 (48 U.S.C. 1806(b))
is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Numerical Limitations for Nonimmigrant Workers.--An
alien, if otherwise qualified, may seek admission to Guam or
to the Commonwealth during the transition program as a
nonimmigrant worker under section 101(a)(15)(H) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H))
without counting against the numerical limitations set forth
in section 214(g) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)). An alien,
if otherwise qualified, may, before October 1, 2028, be
admitted under section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of such Act for a
period of up to 3 years (which may be extended by the
Secretary of Homeland Security before October 1, 2028, for an
additional period or periods not to exceed 3 years each) to
perform services or labor on Guam pursuant to any agreement
entered into by a prime contractor or subcontractor calling
for services or labor required for performance of the
contract or subcontract in direct support of all military-
funded construction, repairs, renovation, and facilities
services, or to perform services or labor on Guam as a
health-care worker, notwithstanding the requirement of such
section that the service or labor be temporary. This
subsection does not apply to any employment to be performed
outside of Guam or the Commonwealth.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date that is 120 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act.

amendment no. 67 offered by mr. sean patrick maloney of new york

Page 462, after line 13, insert the following:

SEC. 1098. REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEBT COLLECTION
REGULATIONS.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall review and update
Department of Defense regulations to ensure such regulations
comply with Federal consumer protection law with respect to
the collection of debt.

amendment no. 69 offered by mr. langevin of rhode island

Page 480, before line 13, insert the following:

SEC. 1112. PUBLIC-PRIVATE TALENT EXCHANGE.

(a) Authority.--Chapter 81 of title 10, United States Code,
as amended by section 1105 of this Act, is further amended by
adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 1599g. Public-private talent exchange

``(a) Assignment Authority.--Under regulations prescribed
by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary may, with the
agreement of a private-sector organization and the consent of
the employee, arrange for the temporary assignment of an
employee to such private-sector organization, or from such
private-sector organization to a Department of Defense
organization under this section.
``(b) Agreements.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall
provide for a written agreement among the Department of
Defense, the private-sector organization, and the employee
concerned regarding the terms and conditions of the
employee's assignment under this section. The agreement--
``(A) shall require that the employee of the Department of
Defense, upon completion of the assignment, will serve in the
Department of Defense, or elsewhere in the civil service if
approved by the Secretary, for a period equal to the length
of the assignment; and
``(B) shall provide that if the employee of the Department
of Defense or of the private-sector organization (as the case
may be) fails to carry out the agreement, such employee shall
be liable to the United States for payment of all expenses of
the assignment, unless that failure was for good and
sufficient reason, as determined by the Secretary of Defense.
``(2) An amount for which an employee is liable under
paragraph (1) shall be treated as a debt due the United
States.
``(3) The Secretary may waive, in whole or in part,
collection of a debt described in paragraph (2) based on a
determination that the collection would be against equity and
good conscience and not in the best interests of the United
States, after taking into account any indication of fraud,
misrepresentation, fault, or lack of good faith on the part
of the employee.
``(c) Termination.--An assignment under this section may,
at any time and for any reason, be terminated by the
Department of Defense or the private-sector organization
concerned.
``(d) Duration.--An assignment under this section shall be
for a period of not less than 3 months and not more than one
year, renewable up to a total of 4 years. No employee of the
Department of Defense may be assigned under this section for
more than a total of 4 years inclusive of all such
assignments.
``(e) Status of Federal Employees Assigned to Private-
Sector Organizations.--An employee of the Department of
Defense who is assigned to a private-sector organization
under this section shall be considered, during the period of
assignment, to be on detail to a regular work assignment in
the Department for all purposes. The written agreement
established under subsection (b)(1) shall address the
specific terms and conditions related to the employee's
continued status as a Federal employee.

[[Page H2765]]

``(f) Terms and Conditions for Private-sector Employees.--
An employee of a private-sector organization who is assigned
to a Department of Defense organization under this section--
``(1) shall continue to receive pay and benefits from the
private-sector organization from which such employee is
assigned and shall not receive pay or benefits from the
Department of Defense, except as provided in paragraph (2);
``(2) is deemed to be an employee of the Department of
Defense for the purposes of--
``(A) chapters 73 and 81 of title 5;
``(B) sections 201, 203, 205, 207, 208, 209, 603, 606, 607,
643, 654, 1905, and 1913 of title 18;
``(C) sections 1343, 1344, and 1349(b) of title 31;
``(D) the Federal Tort Claims Act and any other Federal
tort liability statute;
``(E) the Ethics in Government Act of 1978; and
``(F) chapter 21 of title 41;
``(3) shall not have access to any trade secrets or to any
other nonpublic information which is of commercial value to
the private-sector organization from which such employee is
assigned.
``(g) Prohibition Against Charging Certain Costs to the
Federal Government.--A private-sector organization may not
charge the Department of any other agency of the Federal
Government, as direct or indirect costs under a Federal
contract, the costs of pay or benefits paid by the
organization to an employee assigned to a Department
organization under this section for the period of the
assignment.
``(h) Considerations.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary of Defense--
``(1) shall ensure that, of the assignments made under this
section each year, at least 20 percent are from small
business concerns (as defined by section 3703(e)(2)(A) of
title 5);
``(2) shall take into consideration the question of how
assignments under this section might best be used to help
meet the needs of the Department of Defense with respect to
the training of employees; and
``(3) shall take into consideration, where applicable,
areas of particular private sector expertise, such as
cybersecurity.''.
(b) Table of Sections Amendment.--The table of sections at
the beginning of such chapter, as amended by section 1105 of
this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the
following new item:

``1599g. Public-private talent exchange.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Moulton) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman
from North Carolina (Mrs. Ellmers).
Mrs. ELLMERS of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, this amendment does one
thing: it maintains oversight and accountability of the Air Force. This
will ensure that the Air Force follows through on their promise of
providing adequate air support to ensure there is no negative impact on
the readiness of Fort Bragg paratroopers.
I have said this is a terrible decision, and today's amendment is
about holding the Air Force accountable. It will require the Secretary
of the Army and the Air Force to evaluate and to report the levels of
air support provided to Fort Bragg by the Air Force. As the
Representative of Fort Bragg, this will allow me to monitor jump
numbers and ensure military readiness is not jeopardized in any way,
shape, or form.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I want to, first of all, thank my HASC
colleague across the aisle, ETC Chairman Wilson from the great State of
South Carolina, for working with me on this bipartisan amendment to
expand talent exchange authorities within the DOD.
This amendment addresses a key challenge facing the Department, which
is competition with the private sector to recruit and retain highly
skilled talent.
As we understand right now, it is exceptionally competitive in, for
example, the IT and cybersecurity fields. We need to be able to retain,
attract, and recruit the best and the brightest in this field,
particularly because salaries are very high and it is very difficult in
many ways for the DOD to compete in this space.
While we are very grateful, of course, for those who devote their
lives to a military career, not everyone will give 20 or 30 years of
their lives to the U.S. military. But there is certainly no shortage of
patriotism across the private sector, and dedicating several months or
years of their lives to our national security is certainly a worthy
endeavor.
This also gives DOD employees exposure to cutting-edge operational
techniques and best practices across a wide array of disciplines, while
giving private sector employees insight into how the Department
operates.
Mr. Chairman, we must ensure that we are recruiting the best and the
brightest in order to uphold our national defenses.
This amendment has been sought after by the DOD. Again, there is
bipartisan support on this amendment. It gives great flexibility to the
Department to be able to work to bring in people of great talent from
the private sector for a period of time. Again, it also allows the DOD
to have our men and women in uniform go to the private sector for a
time and learn best practices and what cutting-edge techniques and
capabilities are happening in the private sector.
So this is a good, commonsense amendment, and I urge my colleagues to
support it.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).
Mr. CARTER of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his
leadership in this very important endeavor.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment package,
which includes my amendment that clarifies that the pilot program for
prescription drug acquisition costs regarding TRICARE pharmacy benefits
will also include small business pharmacies.
Currently, the pilot program helps extend discounts to TRICARE
beneficiaries for prescription drugs filled at retail pharmacies. My
amendment simply clarifies that small business pharmacies are retail
pharmacies and will be included in this pilot program.
In many cases around the country, people are unlimited when it comes
to which pharmacy they can have their preparations filled at. With this
amendment, we can ensure all pharmacies, both large and small
retailers, will be included in this pilot program.
I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment package.
Mr MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to refer back to an amendment
that was in the previous en bloc that dealt with the special immigrant
visas.
I want to express my appreciation to the committee, the chairman, the
ranking member, and to the staff. This is a complicated issue. It is in
your bill, but it is not entirely within your jurisdiction. And there
has been an ebb and flow. It has been something that I have, as you
know, been working on for a decade, and that is for the United States
to keep faith with the people in Afghanistan who made the mission
possible--the people who literally risked their lives as guides,
construction workers, interpreters, and truck drivers--the men and
women who made it possible for us to succeed.
It isn't just the Department of Defense. There are men and women who
worked with the State Department and USAID, which are an important part
of our activities in those countries. Those foreign nationals are every
bit at risk as somebody who is guiding our troops in the field.
I appreciate your willingness to put in the en bloc amendment a
little bit of flexibility. I hope it is not the last word, because we
need to think seriously about what we do for the people who work on
base, people who work for the State Department, and the people who work
for USAID so that we are able to make sure that we have an adequate
number of visas and that we don't have an arbitrarily short period of
time because the pipeline has been hopelessly complex and flawed.
We have been working with the bureaucracy in trying to make it work
better, but that is an ongoing struggle. And the fact is, there are
different people with different committees who have different
orientations.
I hope that this en bloc amendment is just the start and that we can
continue working with the chairman, with the minority party, with the
staff, and with the advocates and various people who are committed to
making sure that we do right by the people who are at risk now of being
killed, murdered, tortured, and having family members killed.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished

[[Page H2766]]

gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hudson).
Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Speaker, North Carolina is a proud, strong military
State. We are proud of the men and women who answer the call and risk
their lives to protect us. I never, ever want them to be in a fair
fight. I want them to always have the tools, the equipment, and the
training needed to dominate and destroy the enemy. That is why I filed
an amendment with my colleague, Renee Ellmers, to protect training of
paratroopers at Fort Bragg, the epicenter of the universe.
As you may know, the Air Force has moved forward with plans to
deactivate the 440th Airlift Wing. This deactivation puts these young
paratroopers, and indeed our very national security, at risk, as
evidenced by the failure of the Air Force to meet current training
requirements.
For the sake of our national security, this amendment is absolutely
critical to hold the Air Force accountable and to ensure our rapid
reaction forces are prepared for deployment at a moment's notice.
I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the bipartisan
amendment I have co-written with my colleague, Judge Ted Poe of Texas.
The amendment, which is part of the en bloc amendments, endorses an
ongoing effort at the Defense Security Cooperation Agency to develop a
comprehensive framework for the assessment, monitoring, and evaluation
of security cooperation activities of the Department of Defense. It
follows a related monitoring evaluation amendment Judge Poe and I
offered to the NDAA for FY 2016 and the committee retained, gratefully,
in the 2017 bill.
Security cooperation with foreign security forces builds valuable
international partnerships and enhances the ability of our partners to
carry out joint military operations and enhances American security
while it is at it. However, few requirements are placed on these
programs to measure the impact of funding provided to our foreign
security partners. Looking at efficacy, does it work?
Judge Poe and I have led the effort to apply assessment, monitoring,
and evaluation leading principles to U.S. foreign assistance
administered by the State Department, USAID, and other Federal
agencies.
Last year, the House of Representatives passed our bill, the Foreign
Aid Transparency and Accountability, H.R. 3766. We should have a
similar expectation of accountability for our security cooperation
programs as well.
I welcome the committee's bipartisan efforts to begin to reform,
consolidate, and modify the more than 120 security cooperation
authorities Congress has provided DOD over the years.
Notably, the underlying bill strengthens country-by-country reporting
requirements for security cooperation and begins to reorganize security
cooperation authorities into one coherent separate section of title X
of the U.S. Code.
Furthermore, the Senate is advancing an NDAA bill that requires DOD
to produce an annual budget justification for security cooperation
funding.
There is obviously significant demand, Mr. Chairman, for more
transparency and accountability in terms of U.S. security cooperation.
Our amendment is consistent with that demand, and it builds on the
great work done by the committee in this area to define clear
objectives and metrics for security cooperation.
I want to thank the chairman, the ranking member, and both committee
staffs, minority and majority, for their excellent work and for their
bipartisan approach to this and so many other issues in the bill.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Guinta).
Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to the
National Defense Authorization Act, and I want to thank the chairman
for including it in the en bloc package.
My amendment increases funding for U.S. NORTHCOM's Joint Task Force
North by $3 million to assist with its counternarcotics operations.
As part of my work as the chair of the Task Force to Combat the
Heroin Epidemic, I traveled to the Mexican border earlier this spring
to investigate sources of illegal fentanyl and heroin coming into the
country. There I learned and had the opportunity to meet with the
commanding officers at the Joint Task Force North, the joint service
command that supports Federal law enforcement agencies with resources
to identify and interdict criminal activities conducted within the
United States and its borders.
My goal is to ensure that Joint Task Force North receives the funding
necessary to continue their counternarcotics efforts.
Again, I want to thank the chairman and the Armed Services Committee
for their work on the underlying bill, and I urge my colleagues to
support the amendment.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, again, I thank the distinguished
gentleman, and I also thank the chairman of the full committee, the
ranking member of the full committee, and the subcommittee chairs as
well.
I serve on the Homeland Security Committee, and I am constantly aware
of the overlapping duties and responsibilities, Mr. Chairman, of the
United States military, which has its confinement in certain areas, but
also working to secure the homeland.
The Jackson Lee amendment No. 64 in en bloc amendment No. 4 makes an
important contribution to the bill by improving the effectiveness of
U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, in fulfilling its critical mission
of protecting the U.S. homeland in the event of war and to provide
support to local, State, and Federal authorities in times of national
emergency.
Specifically, here is what my amendment does. It develops and has in
place a leadership strategy that will strengthen and foster necessary
institutional and interpersonal relationships with State and local
governments. The backbone of securing the homeland is engaging State
and local governments. Also, to develop an instructional program to
train key personnel how to lead effectively in the event of a disaster
when they do not have command authority to dictate actions.

{time} 1830

In addition, NORTHCOM, which was established in 2002 in the aftermath
of the 9/11 attacks, is to bring the capabilities and the resources of
the U.S. military to the assistance the American people during a
catastrophic disaster like war or a pandemic outbreak of diseases, such
as Ebola, Zika, SARS, or influenza; major earthquakes, floods, and
natural disasters; or terrorist attacks.
I live in the Gulf Coast, and I am well familiar with hurricanes,
enormous rains that we have just experienced, needing to bring to bear
moving large numbers of people, housing large numbers of people.
And then this morning I spent time after time of dealing with the
Zika virus, which, again, our southern Gulf Coast region may be the
epicenter.
Let me quote, for example, a quote from a renowned professor, Leonard
Marcus, out of Harvard. What we are trying to do is: ``Effective
emergency preparedness and response requires leadership that can
accomplish perceptive coordination and communication amongst diverse
agencies . . . ''
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Holding). The time of the gentlewoman has
expired.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. The challenge is, as we learned from 9/11,
``operating within their specified scope of authority, preparedness
leaders in characteristic bureaucratic fashion often serve to bolster
the profile and import of their own organization, thereby creating a
silo effect . . . ''
So let me speak as that Homeland Security member and the person who
has been engaged in the crises or disasters in my own community. When
we collaborate we work better together. When we develop relationships,
we work better together.
Let me just offer a moment of personal privilege as someone speaking
about relationships. This bill has many good elements in it, and I am
propelled

[[Page H2767]]

and committed to diversity and respecting all people.
I am saddened by the language that the Russell amendment has dealing
with the LGBT, and I am saddened that the Dent amendment was not
allowed in. We need to build on collaborating with all people to secure
America and to make a better military.
I thank the gentleman for the support of my amendment in the en bloc.
Mr. Chair, I rise in support of En Bloc Amendment Number 4 to H.R.
4909, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017,
offered by Chairman Thornberry.
I want to express my thanks and appreciation to Chairman Thornberry
and Ranking Member Smith, and their colleagues on the Armed Services
Committee for their work thank on this bill and their devotion to the
men and women of the Armed Forces.
I also thank Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter of the
Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64,
which is included in En Bloc Amendment Number 4.
Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64 makes an important contribution to
the bill by improving the effectiveness of the Northern Command
(``NORTHCOM'') in fulfilling its critical mission of protecting the
U.S. homeland in event of war and to provide support to local, state,
and federal authorities in times of national emergency.
Specifically, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64 encourages NORTHCOM to:
1. Develop and has in place a leadership strategy that will
strengthen and foster necessary institutional and interpersonal
relationships with state and local governments; and
2. Develop an instructional program to train key personnel how to
lead effectively in the event of a disaster when they do not have
command authority to dictate actions.
A mission critical function of NORTHCOM, which was established in
2002 in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks is to bring the capabilities
and the resources of the U.S. military to the assistance of the
American people during a catastrophic disaster like war, a pandemic
outbreak of diseases such Ebola, Zika, Sars, or influenza; major
earthquakes, floods, and natural disasters; or terrorist attacks like
those occurring on September 11, 2001 and at the Boston Marathon on
April 15, 2013.
NORTHCOM leaders will be much more effective in saving lives,
protecting assets, and enhancing resilience after the disaster has
occurred if they are trained in the techniques of effective engagement
with civilian leadership.
Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64 will help ensure that such training
will be available.
Mr. Chair, let me explain why this type of training--commonly
referred to as ``Resilience'' training is very important.
As stated in a highly influential journal article by Professor
Leonard Marcus and his colleagues at Harvard's National Public
Leadership Initiative, ``effective emergency preparedness and response
requires leadership that can accomplish perceptive coordination and
communication amongst diverse agencies and sectors.'' (Leonard J.
Marcus, Barry C. Dorn, and Joseph M. Henderson, Meta-Leadership and
National Emergency Preparedness: A Model to Build Government
Connectivity, in Biosecurity And Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy,
Practice, And Science Volume 4, Number 2, 2006).
The challenge is, as we learned from the 9/11 Commission, operating
within their specified scope of authority, preparedness leaders in
characteristic bureaucratic fashion often serve to bolster the profile
and import of their own organization, thereby creating a silo effect
that interferes with effective system wide planning and response.
Resilience training seeks to equip preparedness leaders overcome this
obstacle of ``traditional silo thinking by teaching ``meta-
leadership,'' a new type of overarching leadership that intentionally
connects the purposes and work of different organizations or
organizational units.
Meta-leadership training enables leaders to provide guidance,
direction, and momentum across organizational lines that develop into a
shared course of action and a commonality of purpose among people and
agencies that are doing what may appear to be very different work.
Meta-leaders have the skill and training to imaginatively and
effectively leverage system assets, information, and capacities, which
a particularly critical function for organizations with emergency
preparedness responsibilities like responding to terrorist attacks,
natural disasters, or pandemic outbreaks of infectious diseases like
the Ebola and the Zika Virus, which may disproportionately affect
persons in the Gulf Coast region, including my congressional district
in Houston, Texas.
As a senior and charter member of the Homeland Security Committee,
and the Ranking Member of Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
Homeland Security, and Investigations, I have spent the better part of
the last decade and a half working to craft policies and provide the
resources, personnel, equipment, and funding needed to protect the
security of our homeland and the American people.
Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64 will help ensure that those
responsible for providing leadership in times of national emergency
have the skills and training to prevent, mitigate, or recover from any
major catastrophe, disaster, or tragedy that could befall our nation.
I urge my colleagues to support En Bloc Amendment Number 64 and thank
the Chairman and Ranking Member for including Jackson Lee Amendment
Number 64 in this important measure.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of two amendments I
offered to this year's National Defense Authorization Act.
The amendment we are currently considering requires the DOD to report
on the effectiveness of efforts to detect and monitor drug trafficking,
specifically heroin and fentanyl, which is devastating my home State of
Michigan and the entire country.
The United States Southern Command is already doing important work to
interdict drug runners and provide needed training to counternarcotic
teams in Central America.
My amendment would help quantify those efforts and see what more can
be done to combat the heroin and fentanyl coming from this region.
The second bipartisan amendment, which we will consider later today,
requires DOD to verify it has sufficient access to Afghan accounts to
guarantee effective audits.
It is important that our military has access to financial information
to protect U.S. funds from waste, fraud, and abuse, and ensure taxpayer
resources are being spent effectively.
I appreciate these amendments being included en bloc. I urge the
support of my colleagues.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, and I
thank the chairman for including it in the next en bloc amendment, one
that brings accountability to countries granting consent to Russian
naval vessels calling into port.
The aggressive posture and actions of the Russian Federation over the
last few years has profoundly changed the global landscape. Russia has
invaded Crimea, and currently still occupies that region. And Russia
directly intervened militarily to shore up the Assad regime in Syria.
The common thread that runs through these two interventions is that
of warm water ports for the Russian navy. Crimea's port in Sevastopol
and Syria's port of Tartus provide Russia with access to the warm
waters of the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, waters that are
essential to Russia's reach of aggression.
Despite these aggressive actions, some countries are accommodating
the Russian navy by allowing warships and submarines to call into their
ports.
Spain, although a cherished NATO ally, grants Russia access to the
ports in its enclaves across the strategically important Strait of
Gibraltar, where the United Kingdom has a Permanent Joint Operating
Base that hosts U.S. ships.
Furthermore, Greece and Malta have hosted Russian warships last year.
The recent high-profile visits to Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua by
Russia's navy in recent years are also cause for concern.
Mr. Chairman, governments across the globe should be isolating the
Russian navy, not accommodating it.
The Russian navy must constantly compete with geographic and
strategic disadvantages of lacking access to warm blue waters of the
world, but these disadvantages are forfeited when we lack a cohesive,
unified effort to deny Russian vessels the ability to call into foreign
ports.
With the inclusion of this amendment, the Secretary of Defense will
have to report to Congress and, thus, the American people on these
instances. And I hope governments will think twice before offering up
their ports to Putin's navy.

[[Page H2768]]

I urge support of the underlying bill as well.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from Illinois, (Mr. Kinzinger).
Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of
amendment No. 74 in the en bloc, the Blumenauer Special Immigrant Visa
amendment. I just want to speak to the program broadly and quickly.
In Afghanistan, countless people put their lives on the line to serve
as translators, basically being the middle person between American
troops and the population we are trying to secure.
Now, we promised them opportunity to come into the United States, but
this process has been bogged down by bureaucracy. In fact, many have
been in this process for years, and still in the first steps because of
the bureaucracy on this.
Unfortunately, today, actually, many Afghans are being killed every
day by the Taliban, by ISIS, by al Qaeda, as a result of having worked
with us.
I want to thank Representative Moulton and Representative Blumenauer
for their work on this. This is a bipartisan issue, and one that I
think we ought to take very seriously, keeping our commitment to those
that help us, because there will be a war again some day, and we ought
to be able to maintain the trust of the population we are there to
secure.
So I thank Mr. Blumenauer for putting this amendment in, and I thank
the chairman for accepting it.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I just think it is important to pause for a second and
just think about what has just happened here. We have had a package of
amendments that have been discussed, about an equal number of
Republicans and Democrats. They have talked about very important issues
and contributions that they have made, but if a Member then votes
against final passage of the bill, the contributions are nullified.
And I think it is just important to step back and just reiterate that
all of us have provisions in this bill we agree with and disagree with.
We place different values on different parts of the bill. But what has
happened before is that Members have put aside some personal
differences and still paid attention to the larger purpose of the bill,
which is to support the men and women who serve our country. I hope
that can happen again.
However proud Members may be of the various provisions--and there are
a lot of good provisions from both sides of the aisle--however proud
they may be of those, if you don't support the final bill, you are not
accomplishing very much.
I hope Members not only will support this en bloc package, but the
final measure.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 5 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I
offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 5 consisting of amendment Nos. 55, 56, 57, 58,
60, 61, 62, 68, 70, 74, 77, and 82 printed in House Report 114-571,
offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 55 offered by mr. gosar of arizona

At the end of subtitle F of title X, add the following new
section:

SEC. 1070. BRIEFING ON REAL PROPERTY INVENTORY.

(a) Briefing Required.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall brief the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives on the status of the Installation Geospatial
Information and Services of the Department of Defense as it
relates to the real property inventory of the Department, and
the extent to which the Department has made use of the
cadastral geographic information systems-based real property
inventory.
(b) Matters Covered.--The briefing required by subsection
(a) shall, at a minimum, cover the following:
(1) The status of current policies of the Department
governing real property inventories and the use of geospatial
information systems, the status of real property inventory in
relation to the financial improvement and audit readiness
efforts of the Department, and the status of implementation
of Department of Defense Instruction 8130.01, Installation
Geospatial Information and Services (IGI&S).
(2) The extent to which the Department is coordinating with
the Federal Geographic Data Committee, other Federal
agencies, and State and local governments, and how existing
Department standards and common protocols ensure that the
interoperability of geospatial information complies with
section 216 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-
347; 44 U.S.C. 3501 note) and Executive Orders 12906 and
13327.
(3) The existing real property inventories systems or any
components of any cadastre currently authorized by law or
conducted by the Department of Defense, the statutory
authorization for such inventories or components, and the
amount expended by the Federal Government for each such
activity in fiscal year 2015.
(4) A discussion of the Department's ability to make this
information publicly available on the Internet in a
graphically geo-enabled and searchable format, and how the
Department plans to prevent the disclosure of any parcel or
parcels of land, any buildings or facilities on any such
parcel, or any information related to any such parcel,
building, or facility, if such disclosure would impair or
jeopardize the national security or homeland defense of the
United States.
(5) Any additional topics identified by the Secretary.

amendment no. 56 offered by mr. russell of oklahoma

Page 423, after line 3, insert the following:

SEC. 1071. REPORT ON ADJUSTMENT AND DIVERSIFICATION
ASSISTANCE.

Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a
briefing on the adjustment and diversification assistance
authorized by subsections (b) and (c) of section 2391 of
title 10, United States Code. Such briefing shall include
each of the following:
(1) A description of the activities and programs currently
being conducted under subsections (b)(1) and (c) of such
section, including a list of the recipients of grants, and
amount received by each recipient, of such activities and
programs in each of the five most recent fiscal years.
(2) For each of the five fiscal years preceding the fiscal
year during which the briefing is conducted, separate
estimates of the funding the Department of Defense has
directed to activities under each of clauses (A) through (E)
of paragraph (1) of subsection (b) and under subsection (c)
of such section and the recipients of such funding.

amendment no. 57 offered by mr. pitts of pennsylvania

Page 542, after line 6, insert before ``Such'' the
following: ``The number and type of transient Russian naval
vessels that have utilized ports of the country.''.
Page 542, line 8, insert before ``and'' the following: ``,
including the use of ports of such country by transient
Russian naval vessels,''.

amendment no. 58 offered by mr. young of iowa

Insert at the end of subtitle F of title X the following:

SEC. 1070. BRIEFING ON THE PROTECTION OF PERSONALLY
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES.

Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the
congressional defense committees a briefing on the efforts of
the Department of Defense to protect the personally
identifiable information of members of the Armed Forces and
their families, and of employees of the Department of
Defense, which shall include--
(1) current and planned initiatives to protect the
personally identifying information of members of the Armed
Forces and their families, and employees of the Department of
Defense;
(2) the challenges encountered in carrying out the
activities described in paragraph (1); and
(3) any trends related to fraudulent activity that targets
the personally identifying information of members of the
Armed Forces or their families, or employees of the
Department of Defense.

amendment no. 60 offered by mr. fitzpatrick of pennsylvania

Page 462, after line 13, insert the following new section:

SEC. 1098. IMPORTANCE OF ROLE PLAYED BY WOMEN IN WORLD WAR
II.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) National Rosie the Riveter Day is a collective national
effort to raise awareness of the 16 million women working
during World War II.
(2) Americans have chosen to honor female workers who
contributed on the home front during World War II.
(3) These women left their homes to work or volunteer full-
time in factories, farms, shipyards, airplane factories,
banks, and other institutions in support of the military
overseas.

[[Page H2769]]

(4) These women worked with the USO and Red Cross, drove
trucks, riveted airplane parts, collected critical materials,
rolled bandages, and served on rationing boards.
(5) It is fitting and proper to recognize and preserve the
history and legacy of working women, including volunteer
women, during World War II to promote cooperation and
fellowship among such women and their descendants.
(6) These women and their descendants wish to further the
advancement of patriotic ideas, excellence in the workplace,
and loyalty to the United States of America.
(b) Sense of Congress.--Congress acknowledges the important
role played by women in World War II.

amendment no. 61 offered by mr. forbes of virginia

At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following:

SEC. 1098. RECOVERY OF EXCESS RIFLES, AMMUNITION, AND PARTS
GRANTED TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND TRANSFER TO
CERTAIN PERSONS.

(a) Recovery.--Subchapter II of chapter 407 of title 36,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after section
40728A the following new section:

``Sec. 40728B. Recovery of excess rifles, ammunition, and
parts granted to foreign countries and transfer to certain
persons

``(a) Authority to Recover.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2)
and subsection (b), the Secretary of the Army may acquire
from any person any rifle, ammunition, repair parts, or other
supplies described in section 40731(a) of this title which
were--
``(A) provided to any country on a grant basis under the
conditions imposed by section 505 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2314) that became excess to the needs
of such country; and
``(B) lawfully acquired by such person.
``(2) The Secretary of the Army may not acquire anything
under paragraph (1) except for transfer to a person in the
United States under subsection (c).
``(3) The Secretary of the Army may accept rifles,
ammunition, repair parts, or other supplies under paragraph
(1) notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31.
``(b) Cost of Recovery.--The Secretary of the Army may not
acquire anything under subsection (a) if the United States
would incur any cost for such acquisition.
``(c) Availability for Transfer.--Any rifles, ammunition,
repair parts, or supplies acquired under subsection (a) shall
be available for transfer in the United States to the person
from whom acquired if such person--
``(1) is licensed as a manufacturer, importer, or dealer
pursuant to section 923(a) of title 18; and
``(2) uses an ammunition depot of the Army that is an
eligible facility for receipt of any rifles, ammunition,
repair parts, or supplies under this paragraph.
``(d) Contracts.--Notwithstanding subsection (k) of section
2304 of title 10, the Secretary may enter into such contracts
or cooperative agreements on a sole source basis pursuant to
paragraphs (4) and (5) of subsection (c) of such section to
carry out this section.
``(e) AECA.--Transfers authorized under this section may
only be made in accordance with applicable provisions of the
Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).
``(f) Rifle Defined.--In this section, the term `rifle' has
the meaning given such term in section 921 of title 18.''.
(b) Sale.--Section 40732 of such title is amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Sales by Other Persons.--A person who receives a
rifle or any ammunition, repair parts, or supplies under
section 40728B(c) of this title may sell, at fair market
value, such rifle, ammunition, repair parts, or supplies.
With respect to rifles other than caliber .22 rimfire and
caliber .30 rifles, the seller shall obtain a license as a
dealer in rifles and abide by all requirements imposed on
persons licensed under chapter 44 of title 18, including
maintaining acquisition and disposition records, and
conducting background checks.''; and
(2) in subsection (c), in the heading, by inserting ``by
the Corporation'' after ``Limitation on Sales''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 407 of such title is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 40728A the
following new item:

``40728B. Recovery of excess rifles, ammunition, and parts granted to
foreign countries and transfer to certain persons.''.

amendment no. 62 offered by mr. young of indiana

At the end of title X, add the following new section:

SEC. 1098. PROJECT MANAGEMENT.

(a) Deputy Director for Management.--
(1) Additional functions.--Section 503 of title 31, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Program and Project Management.--
``(1) Requirement.--Subject to the direction and approval
of the Director, the Deputy Director for Management or a
designee shall--
``(A) adopt governmentwide standards, policies, and
guidelines for program and project management for executive
agencies;
``(B) oversee implementation of program and project
management for the standards, policies, and guidelines
established under subparagraph (A);
``(C) chair the Program Management Policy Council
established under section 1126(b);
``(D) establish standards and policies for executive
agencies, consistent with widely accepted standards for
program and project management planning and delivery;
``(E) engage with the private sector to identify best
practices in program and project management that would
improve Federal program and project management;
``(F) conduct portfolio reviews to address programs
identified as high risk by the Government Accountability
Office;
``(G) not less than annually, conduct portfolio reviews of
agency programs in coordination with Project Management
Improvement Officers designated under section 1126(a)(1) to
assess the quality and effectiveness of program management;
and
``(H) establish a 5-year strategic plan for program and
project management.
``(2) Application to department of defense.--Paragraph (1)
shall not apply to the Department of Defense to the extent
that the provisions of that paragraph are substantially
similar to or duplicative of--
``(A) the provisions of chapter 87 of title 10; or
``(B) policy, guidance, or instruction of the Department
related to program management.''.
(2) Deadline for standards, policies, and guidelines.--Not
later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of
Management and Budget shall issue the standards, policies,
and guidelines required under section 503(c) of title 31,
United States Code, as added by paragraph (1).
(3) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date on
which the standards, policies, and guidelines are issued
under paragraph (2), the Deputy Director for Management of
the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the
Program Management Policy Council established under section
1126(b) of title 31, United States Code, as added by
subsection (b)(1), and the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget, shall issue any regulations as are
necessary to implement the requirements of section 503(c) of
title 31, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1).
(b) Program Management Improvement Officers and Program
Management Policy Council.--
(1) Amendment.--Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 1126. Program Management Improvement Officers and
Program Management Policy Council

``(a) Program Management Improvement Officers.--
``(1) Designation.--The head of each agency described in
section 901(b) shall designate a senior executive of the
agency as the Program Management Improvement Officer of the
agency.
``(2) Functions.--The Program Management Improvement
Officer of an agency designated under paragraph (1) shall--
``(A) implement program management policies established by
the agency under section 503(c); and
``(B) develop a strategy for enhancing the role of program
managers within the agency that includes the following:
``(i) Enhanced training and educational opportunities for
program managers that shall include--

``(I) training in the relevant competencies encompassed
with program and project manager within the private sector
for program managers; and
``(II) training that emphasizes cost containment for large
projects and programs.

``(ii) Mentoring of current and future program managers by
experienced senior executives and program managers within the
agency.
``(iii) Improved career paths and career opportunities for
program managers.
``(iv) A plan to encourage the recruitment and retention of
highly qualified individuals to serve as program managers.
``(v) Improved means of collecting and disseminating best
practices and lessons learned to enhance program management
across the agency.
``(vi) Common templates and tools to support improved data
gathering and analysis for program management and oversight
purposes.
``(3) Application to department of defense.--This
subsection shall not apply to the Department of Defense to
the extent that the provisions of this subsection are
substantially similar to or duplicative of the provisions of
chapter 87 of title 10. For purposes of paragraph (1), the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics (or a designee of the Under Secretary) shall be
considered the Program Management Improvement Officer.
``(b) Program Management Policy Council.--
``(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Office of
Management and Budget a council to be known as the `Program
Management Policy Council' (in this subsection referred to as
the `Council').
``(2) Purpose and functions.--The Council shall act as the
principal interagency forum for improving agency practices
related to program and project management. The Council
shall--
``(A) advise and assist the Deputy Director for Management
of the Office of Management and Budget;

[[Page H2770]]

``(B) review programs identified as high risk by the
General Accountability Office and make recommendations for
actions to be taken by the Deputy Director for Management of
the Office of Management and Budget or a designee;
``(C) discuss topics of importance to the workforce,
including--
``(i) career development and workforce development needs;
``(ii) policy to support continuous improvement in program
and project management; and
``(iii) major challenges across agencies in managing
programs;
``(D) advise on the development and applicability of
standards governmentwide for program management transparency;
and
``(E) review the information published on the website of
the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to section 1122.
``(3) Membership.--
``(A) Composition.--The Council shall be composed of the
following members:
``(i) Five members from the Office of Management and Budget
as follows:

``(I) The Deputy Director for Management.
``(II) The Administrator of the Office of Electronic
Government.
``(III) The Administrator of Federal Procurement Policy.
``(IV) The Controller of the Office of Federal Financial
Management.
``(V) The Director of the Office of Performance and
Personnel Management.

``(ii) The Program Management Improvement Officer from each
agency described in section 901(b).
``(iii) Other individuals as determined appropriate by the
Chairperson.
``(B) Chairperson and vice chairperson.--
``(i) In general.--The Deputy Director for Management of
the Office of Management and Budget shall be the Chairperson
of the Council. A Vice Chairperson shall be elected by the
members and shall serve a term of not more than 1 year.
``(ii) Duties.--The Chairperson shall preside at the
meetings of the Council, determine the agenda of the Council,
direct the work of the Council, and establish and direct
subgroups of the Council as appropriate.
``(4) Meetings.--The Council shall meet not less than twice
per fiscal year and may meet at the call of the Chairperson
or a majority of the members of the Council.
``(5) Support.--The head of each agency with a Project
Management Improvement Officer serving on the Council shall
provide administrative support to the Council, as
appropriate, at the request of the Chairperson.
``(6) Committee duration.--Section 14(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the
Council.''.
(2) Report required.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget, in consultation with each Program
Management Improvement Officer designated under section
1126(a)(1) of title 31, United States Code, shall submit to
Congress a report containing the strategy developed under
section 1126(a)(2)(B) of such title, as added by paragraph
(1).
(c) Program and Project Management Personnel Standards.--
(1) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``agency''
means each agency described in section 901(b) of title 31,
United States Code, other than the Department of Defense.
(2) Regulations required.--Not later than 180 days after
the date on which the standards, policies, and guidelines are
issued under section 503(c) of title 31, United States Code,
as added by subsection (a)(1), the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management, in consultation with the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget, shall issue regulations
that--
(A) identify key skills and competencies needed for a
program and project manager in an agency;
(B) establish a new job series, or update and improve an
existing job series, for program and project management
within an agency; and
(C) establish a new career path for program and project
managers within an agency.
(d) GAO Report on Effectiveness of Policies on Program and
Project Management.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Government Accountability Office
shall issue, in conjunction with the High Risk list of the
Government Accountability Office, a report examining the
effectiveness of the following on improving Federal program
and project management:
(1) The standards, policies, and guidelines for program and
project management issued under section 503(c) of title 31,
United States Code, as added by subsection (a)(1).
(2) The 5-year strategic plan established under section
503(c)(1)(H) of title 31, United States Code, as added by
subsection (a)(1).
(3) Program Management Improvement Officers designated
under section 1126(a)(1) of title 31, United States Code, as
added by subsection (b)(1).
(4) The Program Management Policy Council established under
section 1126(b)(1) of title 31, United States Code, as added
by subsection (b)(1).

amendment no. 68 offered by mr. young of alaska

In section 1101--
(1) in subsection (a), insert ``or as a military technician
(dual status)'' after ``Base''; and
(2) amend subsection (c) to read as follows:
(c) Definitions.--In this section--
(1) the term ``defense industrial base facility'' means any
Department of Defense depot, arsenal, or shipyard located
within the United States; and
(2) the term ``military technician (dual status)'' has the
meaning given such term in section 10216 of title 10, United
States Code.

amendment no. 70 offered by mr. connolly of virginia

At the end of subtitle A of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING AN ASSESSMENT,
MONITORING, AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK FOR
SECURITY COOPERATION.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the Secretary of Defense should develop and maintain an
assessment, monitoring, and evaluation framework for security
cooperation with foreign countries to ensure accountability
and foster implementation of best practices; and
(2) such framework--
(A) should be consistent with interagency approaches and
existing best practices;
(B) should be sufficiently resourced and appropriately
placed within the Department of Defense to enable the
rigorous examination and measurement of security cooperation
efforts towards meeting stated objectives and outcomes; and
(C) should be used to inform security cooperation planning,
policies, and resource decisions as well as ensure the
effectiveness and efficiency of security cooperation efforts.

amendment no. 74 offered by mr. blumenauer of oregon

Beginning on page 503, strike line 16 through page 504,
line 11, and insert the following:
(a) Aliens Described.--Section 602(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the
Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note) is
amended to read as follows:

``(I)(aa) by, or on behalf of, the United States
Government, in the case of an alien submitting an application
for Chief of Mission approval pursuant to subparagraph (D)
before the date of the enactment of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017; or
``(bb) in the case of an alien submitting an application
for Chief of Mission approval pursuant to subparagraph (D) on
or after the date of the enactment of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, in a capacity that
required the alien--

``(AA) to serve as an interpreter or translator for
personnel of the Department of State or the United States
Agency for International Development in Afghanistan while
traveling away from United States embassies or consulates
with such personnel;
``(BB) to serve as an interpreter or translator for United
States military personnel in Afghanistan while traveling off-
base with such personnel; or
``(CC) to perform sensitive and trusted activities for
United States military personnel stationed in Afghanistan;
or''.

amendment no. 77 offered by mr. welch of vermont

At the end of subtitle B of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. MODIFICATION TO SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON ENHANCING
SECURITY AND STABILITY IN AFGHANISTAN.

Subsection (b) of section 1225 of the Carl Levin and Howard
P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291; 128 Stat. 3550), as
amended by section 1213 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92; 129 Stat. 1045),
is further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(8) Afghan personnel and pay system.--A description of
the status of the implementation of the Afghan Personnel and
Pay System (APPS) at the Afghan Ministry of Interior and the
Afghan Ministry of Defense for personnel funds provided
through the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund, including a
description of the following:
``(A) The expected completion date of installation and full
implementation and utilization of the APPS.
``(B) If installation of the APPS is complete at one, or
both, ministries, the extent to which the APPS is being
utilized to distribute personnel funds to the Afghan National
Army and Afghan National Police.
``(C) If installation of the APPS is not complete at one,
or both, ministries, or full implementation and utilization
of the APPS has not been achieved at one, or both,
ministries, an explanation of any delays, any expected
obstacles, and any additional support that may be needed for
installation or full implementation and utilization.
``(D) Any examples of intentional delay or obstruction by
members of the Government of Afghanistan, to include one, or
both, ministries, or any sub-unit thereof, to installing or
fully implementing or utilizing the APPS.
``(E) If the APPS is fully implemented at one, or both,
ministries, the identified cost savings to date, due to the
elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse at the ministry
compared to the previous payroll system. If the APPS is not
fully implemented at one, or both, ministries, the expected
cost savings due to the elimination of waste, fraud, and
abuse at the ministry once the APPS is fully implemented.
``(F) If the APPS is not fully implemented, what steps the
United States and Afghanistan are taking to mitigate waste,
fraud, and abuse in the disbursement of personnel funds

[[Page H2771]]

provided through the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.''.

amendment no. 82 offered by mr. kilmer of washington

Page 545, after line 22, insert the following:
``(22) A description of the People's Republic of China's
military and nonmilitary activities in the South China
Sea.''.
At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. REDESIGNATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF SOUTH CHINA SEA
INITIATIVE.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the United States should continue supporting the efforts
to the Southeast Asian nations to strengthen their maritime
security capacity, domain awareness, and integration of their
capabilities.
(b) Redesignation as Southeast Asia Maritime Security
Initiative.--Subsection (a)(2) of section 1263 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016
(Public Law 114-92; 129 Stat. 1073; 10 U.S.C. 2282 note) is
amended by striking ``the `South China Sea Initiative' '' and
inserting ``the `Southeast Asia Maritime Security Initiative'
''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--The heading of such section is
amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 1263. SOUTHEAST ASIA MARITIME SECURITY INITIATIVE.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Moulton) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), the distinguished chair of
our Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. I thank Chairman Thornberry for his
leadership of peace through strength.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of amendment No. 69, a
bipartisan amendment submitted with Ranking Member Jim Langevin.
As we reach to secure cyberspace and protect American families from
new and emerging threats while encouraging innovation, we turn to the
mutual benefit that public-private partnerships provide industry
employees and Department of Defense personnel.
We have seen the success of public-private partnerships already in
the IT field. This amendment will provide an opportunity to expand the
benefits of the talent exchange to all components of the Department of
Defense.
The benefits to the military are clear. These partnerships provide
the ability for fresh talent and concepts from outside the government
sector.
The private sector benefits as well by having the flexibility to gain
a unique insight into how the government operates and engage in public
service creating jobs.
This bipartisan amendment promotes choice and opportunity that will
benefit America's workers and the defense community. Actually, the
collaboration will benefit all American families. Therefore, I urge my
colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Peters).
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support two amendments that we
have in the en bloc, the first on veteran hiring, a sense of Congress
amendment.
I rise to support a simple, but important effort that everyone in
this Chamber can agree on. My amendment adds to this bill a sense of
Congress that the Department of Defense should seek ways to maximize
the number of veterans employed to build military construction
projects.
We are talking about good jobs here that can help our veterans make
the transition to civilian life. In places like San Diego, we have
already had a number of contractors employing highly skilled veterans
to do this work.
Many Members of this Chamber, on both sides of the aisle, champion
the cause of hiring veterans. It is a policy we have incentivized the
private sector to implement.
I hope Members will support this amendment and join in showing that
our military readiness can be built by those who know personally how
important that readiness is when fighting for our freedom.
I also want to speak on integrated missile defense. Mr. Chairman,
Iran is a chief sponsor of international terrorism, and regularly
threatens to obliterate Israel, our most important ally in the region.
Those who supported agreement last year to keep Iran from obtaining a
nuclear weapon understood that the JCPOA does not eliminate all of
Iran's threats to the United States and our partners in the Middle
East.
My amendment would take further steps to support our allies in the
region and crack down on Iranian aggression.
By vocalizing our support for working with Israel, the Gulf
Cooperation Council, Jordan, and Egypt, to build an integrated missile
defense system, we can build off of the successes of Israel's existing
missile defense network.
I support the funding authorizations included in this year's defense
budget that will continue to support Israel's missile defense program.
Through a smart, targeted approach with our partners, we can continue
to counter Iranian aggression and promote security.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).
Mr. CARTER of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment package,
which includes my amendment that ensures the safety of Naval Submarine
Base Kings Bay.
Home to the Atlantic ballistic missile submarine fleet, Kings Bay's
contributions to national security and to the nuclear deterrence
capabilities of the U.S. fleet cannot be overstated.
Just south of the installation is a low-use general aviation airport
called St. Mary's Airport. The flight lines for their airport take
civilian aircraft right over the base, raising a number of security
concerns for the installation and for the weapons packages stored
there.
The dangers this poses to our nuclear stockpile is glaring, and this
amendment is the first step in remedying that situation. This amendment
would allow for the relocation of the St. Mary's Airport service due to
national security concerns posed to Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay.
This amendment has been a major priority for the Navy, and provides
much-needed changes to security concerns that have been persistent for
a number of years.
With this amendment, we can protect our nuclear submarines while
providing new economic opportunities.
I encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
MR. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Ruiz).
Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, the
Counter Iran Maritime Initiative.

{time} 1845

Iran is a serious risk to our national security. We must remain
vigilant. We must protect our troops and our allies in the Middle East.
This amendment will help stop illegal arms shipments from Iran to
terrorists and protect our national security. My amendment will help
keep American troops and our allies in the region, including Israel,
safe.
It authorizes our military to provide training, equipment, supplies,
and military construction to nations along the Persian Gulf, the
Arabian Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea.
I am glad that there is broad, bipartisan consensus on the need for
this amendment so that we can keep our troops safe and shore up the
safety of our allies in the region.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam).
Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I want to tell you briefly about the Roskam amendment,
which requires the President to provide Congress with a comprehensive
report on Iran's usage of commercial aircraft for military and
terrorist activity. You say to yourself, Mr. Chairman: Why do we need
this? Why is this important?
Here is why. There is an important American company that is actively
talking to the Iranians about the possibility of selling aircraft to
them.
Here is the problem with that. Everybody--everybody--agrees that the
Iranians are the world's largest state sponsor of terror; and
therefore, it goes that if you give them something that is useful for
military purposes--that is, aircraft--it is fungible, and it can be
used for any purpose. The notion that the Iranians are going to use
Boeing

[[Page H2772]]

aircraft, for example, simply to transport people on vacation back and
forth within Iran is profoundly naive.
So what this amendment does is it puts the aircraft industry on
notice and it puts the Iranians on notice that we are very interested
in what they are doing with commercial aircraft, for what purpose.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, thanks again to the Armed Services
Committee for making in order with the Rules Committee my three
amendments that I have discussed today, two that I have already
discussed, and this one that I will now bring to my colleagues'
attention.
Today, walking out of the bush of Nigeria, it was determined that
another Chibok girl has been found, discovered, or fled. The debate is
whether or not the military forces of Nigeria helped her out. What we
do know is that she was missing for 2 years, along with the 200-plus
girls that were taken. Fifty-seven of them escaped in the immediacy of
the hours, and six of them died, and this young woman has now come out
2 years later.
Families are suffering, and Boko Haram has become one of the most
vile and most vicious terrorist groups in the world. They are
affiliated with ISIS, ISIL, but they have, if you will, no conformity
to any protocol but killing. They have burned and killed Muslims and
Christians alike, schools, homes, mosques, and churches. They have
decapitated people. They have sent 8-year-olds with bombs strapped to
their bodies to kill.
So my amendment is very straightforward.
As I do this, let me say that a number of you have joined
Congresswoman Frederica Wilson week after week wearing red to bring the
girls home. She joined me, and we traveled together within weeks of the
girls being taken in 2014. We confronted families, saw the pain, saw
women with slashed throats that had healed, and we saw the leaders of
government who then were somewhat, if you will, challenged about this
task.
So my amendment is one that deals with collaboration. It is a sense
of Congress that provides for condemning the ongoing violence,
expresses its support for the Nigerian people, and calls on the
President to support Nigeria, Lake Chad Basin, and the international
community to ensure accountability for crimes against humanity.
It also asks for the initiative that we can engage the Department of
Defense to assist the Government of Nigeria and countries in the Lake
Chad Basin to develop capacities to deploy and destroy Boko Haram,
obviously with the use of possible security forces, recognizing the
Leahy amendment, but also with technology.
Lives are still in the midst. Lives are still not being provided for.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Womack). The time of the gentlewoman has
expired.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 1
minute.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I am asking that we collaborate with
the forces in Nigeria and the forces that have been part of the
multinational task force to be able to have a strategy that deals with
Boko Haram.
This report can be critical in our efforts to empower and complement
the efforts of the Multinational Joint Task Force as well as the
commitment espoused at the recent Lake Chad Basin Regional Security
Summit.
So I would say that we have to recognize that we now have an
individual. This young woman can give us the intelligence. I am
concerned that these girls cannot be rescued now. This is partly asking
President Buhari of Nigeria to join in with this information--this new
information, the collaboration that, hopefully, as we move through this
legislation, ongoing, right now--to rescue those girls and also support
the idea of a special envoy to focus on the dangers in the Lake Chad
Basin region.
Let me compliment the African command. I met many of them when I was
in Nigeria. I think it is an excellent command among all the other
commands. They can be dynamic in their work.
My resolution, my amendment, my sense of Congress, is to give us
focus to bring back the girls and save these girls. We have the
information. Bring back these girls.
Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Thornberry, Ranking Member Adam Smith and
the Rules Committee for making in order and including Jackson Lee
Amendment Number 99 and including it in En Bloc Amendment Number 8 to
the ``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017.''
This is the third of 3 Jackson Lee amendments made in order by the
House Rules Committee.
Jackson Lee Amendment Number 99, calls for a report on efforts to
combat Boko Haram in Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin.
In the wake of the Rules Committee making this Amendment in order, I
hold in my hand an article entitled ``#BringBackOurGirls: Chibok Victim
Found in Nigeria After 2 Years, Activist Says.''
Two years after her captivity, we learn that a 19 year Chibok school
girl named Ameina Nkeki was found Tuesday by the Civilian JTF vigilante
group, which fights alongside the Nigerian military, in a village near
the Sambisa Forest.
Nkeki had a baby with her and told the militia members she had
escaped from Boko Haram captivity.
Indeed, just last night right before presenting before the Rules
Committee on this Amendment, I met with a remarkable couple whose name
I do not want to mention in order not to place their lives in danger.
This couple, through their NGO, helped in the rescue, recovery and
reintegration of over 10 Chibok girls.
Because of their remarkable work, the girls are now able to continue
to pursue their education. Unfortunately, the lives of these good
Samaritans are now in jeopardy.
I plan to do everything in my power to make sure that they and the
persons they seek to empower are not harmed.
This is why I have introduced the bipartisan measure H. Res. 528--
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the
Victims of the Terror Protection Fund.
And this is why I am working on a measure related to a Special Envoy
on Boko Haram to the Lake Chad Basin.
Support for this Amendment is timely as it is:
1. Strongly condemns the ongoing violence and the systematic gross
human rights violations against the people of Nigeria and the Lake Chad
Basin carried out by Boko Haram;
2. Expresses support for the people of Nigeria and the Lake Chad
Basin who wish to live in a peaceful, economically prosperous, and
democratic region;
3. Calls on the President to support Nigerian, Lake Chad Basin, and
International Community efforts to ensure accountability for crimes
against humanity committed by Boko Haram against the people of Nigeria
and the Lake Chad Basin, particularly young girls kidnapped from Chibok
and other internally displaced persons affected by the actions of Boko
Haram;
Additionally, the Report calls that no later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of State, and the Attorney General shall jointly submit to
Congress a report on efforts to combat Boko Haram in Nigeria and the
Lake Chad Basin;
Among others, the report shall also include the following elements:
1. A description of initiatives undertaken by the Department of
Defense to assist the Government of Nigeria and countries in the Lake
Chad Basin to develop capacities to deploy special forces to combat
Boko Haram;
2. A description of United States' activities to enhance the capacity
of Nigeria and the countries in the Lake Chad Basin to investigate and
prosecute human rights violations perpetrated against the people of
Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin by Boko Haram, al-Qaeda affiliates, and
other terrorist organizations to promote respect for rule of law in
Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin;
3. This report can be critical in our efforts to empower and
complement the efforts of the Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) as
well as the commitments espoused at the recent Lake Chad Basin Regional
Security Summit.
Mr. Chair, the U.S. war on terror has been waged for over a decade
and the lesson is clear that our adversaries adapt very quickly because
they are not constrained by geographic limitations.
In the beginning it was only Al Qaeda--now the list includes Al
Shabaab, Boko Haram which last year affiliated itself with ISIS/ISIL.
Indeed, the data on persons affected by violent extremism is
staggering.
There are now more than 2.2 million Nigerians, and over 450,000
internally-displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees in neighboring
Cameroon, Chad and Niger.
An estimated 4.2 million people in the Lake Chad Basin region face
water and food security crises, including 800,000 in Nigeria's

[[Page H2773]]

northern Borno and Yobe states, Nigeria, where an estimated 184
children a day risk starvation without the immediate provision of
emergency food assistance.
Boko Haram continues to claim responsibility for atrocious and
targeted violence ranging from burnings, kidnappings and killings of
civilians and school children, such as the Chibok girls and a suicide
bombing of the United Nations building in Abuja on August 26, 2011,
that killed 21 people and injured dozens more, many of them aid workers
supporting development projects across Nigeria.
Half of persons displaced are children.
I continue to commend the tireless efforts of the United Nations,
United States officials, Regional Leaders, Civil Society Organizations,
Community Groups and good Samaritans who have helped to support efforts
of combatting Boko Haram and securing peace and security in Nigeria and
the Lake Chad Basin.
Through this Amendment, we will establish our strong support and
commitment for the protection and empowerment of the peoples of Nigeria
and the Lake Chad Basin who continue to face the threat of terrorism
and violent extremism from Syria to Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin
which covers Cameroon, Niger, Nigeria, Chad and everywhere in between.
As terrorist craft new strategies to threaten our homeland and harm
our allies, it is in the U.S. security interest to double our
counterterrorism efforts that identify, engage and empower people who
are victimized by terrorist groups like Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, Al
Qaeda and ISIS in Africa and Pakistan.
For this reason, our military must adapt as quickly and as seamlessly
as our adversaries in empowering our allies.
Our message must be clear: the United States must expand its capacity
to meet the terrorist threat where it emerges whether here in the
homeland or abroad.
The Nuremberg trials were essential in bringing to justice war
criminals who committed acts of barbarism against civilians and
military personnel during World War II, but a critical component of
bringing war criminals to justice is the gathering and preservation of
evidence.
No person whether they travel to a battle field and later return to
their native country or live in the region where they commit acts of
terrors should rest well because they believe that no one will come to
seek justice on behalf of the millions of lives destroyed.
Our message must be clear: terrorism will not thrive on our watch.
I ask for your support of this Amendment.

[May 18, 2016]

#BringBackOurGirls: Chibok Victim Found in Nigeria After 2 Years,
Activist Says

(By Alexander Smith)

The mass kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls by Boko Haram from
the Nigerian town of Chibok in April 2014 ignited an
international outcry. The ensuing#BringBackOurGirls campaign
was backed by the likes of Michelle Obama, while the U.S. and
other countries sent military assistance.
A handful of the kidnapped girls managed to escape early on
but most were never found.
Both Nigeria's military and the #BringBackOurGirls campaign
said Wednesday that one of the girls was now in safe hands--
but gave conflicting information on the circumstances and her
identity.
Bukky Shonibare, one of the strategic team members of the
#BringBackOurGirls campaign, told NBC News that a 19-year-old
named Ameina Nkeki was found Tuesday by the Civilian JTF
vigilante group, which fights alongside the Nigerian
military, in a village near the Sambisa Forest.
Nkeki had a baby with her and told the militia members she
had escaped from Boko Haram captivity, Shonibare said, noting
that the details of the girl's escape were not immediately
clear.
This is a major, major breakthrough--this is the
breakthrough we've been waiting for,'' she said.
Nkeki was taken to a military base in Damboa before being
brought to her mother and her former high-school head
teacher--both of whom positively confirmed her identify,
according to Shonibare.
The activists are ``100 percent sure that this was one of
the Chibok girls,'' Shonibare added.
Col. Sani Usman, a spokesman for the Nigerian Army,
confirmed via WhatsApp message that one of the kidnapped
Chibok girls had been recovered.
He added in a statement that the girl was ``rescued'' by
``our troops'' near Damboa. It was not immediately clear if
he was referring to his soldiers or the JTF.
Usman's statement also identified the girl as Falmata
Mbalala--which did not correspond to the name given by
Shonibare and the Bring Back Our Girls movement.
Both Usman and Shonibare insisted they had the correct name
for the young woman. NBC News was not immediately able to
reconcile the differing accounts.
While the Chibok Girls drew the most international
attention, an estimated 2,000-plus women and girls have been
abducted during Boko Haram's violent campaign in Nigeria.
Chibok may not even be the largest group to be kidnapped,
with Human Rights Watch reporting that some 400 people were
taken from the town of Damasak last year.
The army gave details of a large-scale operation against
Boko Haram on Tuesday--the day the young woman was reportedly
found--in Sambisa forest.
The military said troops killed 15 Boko Haram fighters
after coming under heavy fire in the area of Alafa.
Troops also rescued 41 hostages--mainly women and children
the military added in a statement.
While Nigeria's government has publicly touted an
aggressive campaign to beat back Boko Haram, its failure to
find the girls has drawn criticism.
The news comes one day after the president's wife, Aisha
Buhari, presented ``symbolic'' checks to the mothers of the
missing girls.

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate Chairman
Thornberry's acceptance of my amendments No. 100 and No. 125. The first
recognizes the heroic efforts of the Pakistani doctor, Dr. Afridi, who
helped us bring to justice Osama bin Laden, the prime mover in the
massacre of 3,000 Americans on 9/11.
Dr. Afridi is a courageous hero who enabled us to destroy this
terrorist monster. He continues to languish in a Pakistani dungeon.
This amendment was adopted by the House during consideration of past
defense authorization acts but was stripped out during conference
negotiations with the Senate. This is a shameful slap in the face to
Dr. Afridi and other heroic friends around the world who put themselves
at risk to stand up with us.
Who will trust us? Who will stand with us if we betray our friends
like this? It is time to end this irrational support that we give to
Pakistan. It is only prudent that we increase--which is another one of
the amendments I talk about today--certification required to release
American military or economic aid to Pakistan.
It behooves us not to finance Pakistan's brutal suppression of ethnic
groups and religious minorities like the Baloch and the Sindhis who are
under attack today simply for seeking their political and religious
freedom.
I would ask my colleagues to join with me and to stand also with the
people around the world. Send a message: If you stand with the United
States, we will not forget you; we will stand with you. The people of
the United States and the United States Congress stand tall with you
and appreciate that you have risked your lives in a way that saved
American lives.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers, and so I urge
adoption of the en bloc amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support
of the bipartisan amendment with Congressman Seth Moulton, No. 95, that
would increase transparency and accountability--in addition to
promoting peace through strength.
In the past few months, the Tehran regime has repeatedly pushed the
boundaries of the dangerous Iran deal and on United Nations Security
Council resolutions. Since January, the Iranian regime has tested at
least two intercontinental ballistic missiles, including one that had
the writing ``Israel should be wiped off the Earth,'' written in
Hebrew. These ICBMs have the ability to reach Israel and other allies
in the Middle East from southeastern Europe to India.
Sadly, the American people have not received satisfactory answers
about why the actions by Iran are without repercussions. This amendment
will require a quick and clear response: Why or why not did the ICBM
tests violate international agreements, and what response the
administration will take.
This bipartisan amendment will hold the administration accountable
and require a timely and thorough report on our response to hostile
actions.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote in support.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Holding).
Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by thanking both Chairman
Thornberry and Chairman Royce for

[[Page H2774]]

their assistance in helping to craft this amendment, and also let me
thank Ranking Member Engel and Dr. Bera, who joined Chairman Royce as
original cosponsors.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment truly is a testament to the broad,
bipartisan support for the U.S.-India relationship here in Congress.
Our agreement is straightforward. It seeks to promote greater defense
trade and encourage additional military cooperation between the United
States and India.
I believe that by requiring our government to take actions such as
strengthening the Defense Technology and Trade Initiative and
encouraging combined military planning with India, we can make certain
that the U.S.-India defense relationship endures.
Mr. Chairman, given the dynamic nature of the Indo-Pacific region and
its importance to our own national security and future economic growth,
now is the time to build on recent successes and propel the U.S.-India
strategic partnership forward.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of Amendment Number
70.
I want to thank Representative Connolly for his good work on this
amendment.
DOD is one of the last agencies that implement most of our foreign
aid to come up with an evaluation policy. USAID has one. The State
Department has one. The Millennium Challenge Corporation has one. But
not DOD.
Evaluations do not just trace how money is spent. Evaluations help us
figure out if the money is achieving its intended outcome. Is it
working? Is it making a lasting difference?
The good news is that the DOD is working on an evaluation policy now.
But just because they are working on it doesn't mean it will get done.
We all know what bureaucrats can do if given the time.
Amendment Number 70 makes it clear that Congress supports a strong
evaluation policy.
We should be doing rigorous evaluation on all our foreign aid because
Americans deserve to know how their money is being spent. And that's
just the way it is.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia). The question is on the
amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 6 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I
offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc consisting of amendment Nos. 71, 72, 73, 75, 76,
78, 79, 88, 89, 90, 91, and 92 printed in House Report 114-571, offered
by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 71 offered by mr. rooney of florida

At the end of subtitle A of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON THE PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR
ASSISTANCE TO UNITS OF FOREIGN SECURITY FORCES
THAT HAVE COMMITTED A GROSS VIOLATION OF HUMAN
RIGHTS.

(a) Report Required.--Not later than 60 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on
its implementation of section 294 of title 10, United States
Code (relating to prohibition on use of funds for assistance
to units of foreign security forces that have committed a
gross violation of human rights).
(b) Matters to Be Included.--The report required under
subsection (a) shall contain the following:
(1) A detailed description of the policies and procedures
governing the manner in which Department of Defense personnel
identify and report information on gross violations of human
rights and how such information is shared with personnel
responsible for implementing the prohibition in subsection
(a)(1) of section 294 of title 10, United States Code.
(2) The funding expended in fiscal years 2015 and 2016 for
purposes of implementing section 294 of title 10, United
States Code, including any relevant training of personnel,
and a description of the titles, roles, and responsibilities
of the personnel responsible for reviewing credible
information relating to human rights violations and the
personnel responsible for making decisions regarding the
implementation of the prohibition in subsection (a)(1) of
such section 294.
(3) An addendum that includes any findings or
recommendations included in any report issued by a Federal
Inspector General related to the implementation of section
294 of title 10, United States Code, and, as appropriate, the
Department of Defense's response to such findings or
recommendations.
(4) Any other matters the Secretary determines is
appropriate.
(c) Form.--The report required under subsection (a) shall
be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a
classified annex.

amendment no. 72 offered by mr. poe of texas

Page 497, line 11, strike ``and'' at the end.
Page 497, line 16, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
Page 497, after line 16, insert the following:
(4) Pakistan has shown progress in arresting and
prosecuting Haqqani network senior leaders and mid-level
operatives.

amendment no. 73 offered by mr. rohrabacher of california

Page 497, line 11, strike ``and''.
Page 497, line 16, strike the period at the end and insert
``; and''.
Page 497, after line 16, insert the following:
(4) Pakistan is not using its military or any funds or
equipment provided by the United States to persecute minority
groups seeking political or religious freedom, including the
Balochi, Sindhi, and Hazara ethnic groups and minority
religious groups, including Christian, Hindu, and Ahmadiyya
Muslim.

amendment no. 75 offered by mr. rohrabacher of california

At the end of subtitle B of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO DR. SHAKIL AFRIDI.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The attacks of September 11, 2001, killed approximately
3,000 people, most of whom were Americans, but also included
hundreds of individuals with foreign citizenships, nearly 350
New York Fire Department personnel, and about 50 law
enforcement officers.
(2) Downed United Airlines flight 93 was reportedly
intended, under the control of the al-Qaeda high-jackers, to
crash into the White House or the Capitol in an attempt to
kill the President of the United States or Members of the
United States Congress.
(3) The September 11, 2001, attacks were largely planned
and carried out by the al-Qaeda terrorist network led by
Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al Zawahiri, after which
Osama bin Laden enjoyed safe haven in Pakistan from where he
continued to plot deadly attacks against the United States
and the world.
(4) The United States has obligated nearly $30 billion
between 2002 and 2014 in United States taxpayer money for
security and economic aid to Pakistan.
(5) The United States very generously and swiftly responded
to the 2005 Kashmir Earthquake in Pakistan with more than
$200 million in emergency aid and the support of several
United States military aircraft, approximately 1,000 United
States military personnel, including medical specialists,
thousands of tents, blankets, water containers and a variety
of other emergency equipment.
(6) The United States again generously and swiftly
contributed approximately $150 million in emergency aid to
Pakistan following the 2010 Pakistan flood, in addition to
the service of nearly twenty United States military
helicopters, their flight crews, and other resources to
assist the Pakistan Army's relief efforts.
(7) The United States continues to work tirelessly to
support Pakistan's economic development, including millions
of dollars allocated towards the development of Pakistan's
energy infrastructure, health services and education system.
(8) The United States and Pakistan continue to have many
critical shared interests, both economic and security
related, which could be the foundation for a positive and
mutually beneficial partnership.
(9) Dr. Shakil Afridi, a Pakistani physician, is a hero to
whom the people of the United States, Pakistan and the world
owe a debt of gratitude for his help in finally locating
Osama bin Laden before more innocent American, Pakistani and
other lives were lost to this terrorist leader.
(10) Pakistan, the United States and the international
community had failed for nearly 10 years following attacks of
September 11, 2001, to locate and bring Osama bin Laden, who
continued to kill innocent civilians in the Middle East,
Asia, Europe, Africa and the United States, to justice
without the help of Dr. Afridi.
(11) The Government of Pakistan's imprisonment of Dr.
Afridi presents a serious and growing impediment to the
United States' bilateral relations with Pakistan.
(12) The Government of Pakistan has leveled and allowed
baseless charges against Dr. Afridi in a politically
motivated, spurious legal process.
(13) Dr. Afridi is currently imprisoned by the Government
of Pakistan, a deplorable and unconscionable situation which
calls into question Pakistan's actual commitment to
countering terrorism and undermines the notion that Pakistan
is a true ally in the struggle against terrorism.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
Dr. Shakil Afridi is an international hero and that the
Government of Pakistan should release him immediately from
prison.

amendment no. 76 offered by mr. walberg of michigan

At the end of subtitle B of title XII (page 504, after line
25), add the following:

[[Page H2775]]

SEC. 1217. REPORT ON ACCESS TO FINANCIAL RECORDS OF THE
GOVERNMENT OF AFGHANISTAN TO AUDIT THE USE OF
FUNDS FOR ASSISTANCE FOR AFGHANISTAN.

Not later than December 31, 2017, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to Congress a report on the extent to which the
Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan has adequate
access to financial records of the Government of Afghanistan
to audit the use of funds authorized to be appropriated by
this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2017 for
assistance for Afghanistan.

amendment no. 78 offered by mr. fortenberry of nebraska

Page 507, line 7, strike ``and''.
Page 507, line 11, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
Page 507, after line 11, insert the following:
(4) securing safe areas, including the Nineveh Plain, for
purposes of resettling and reintegrating ethnic and religious
minorities, including victims of genocide, into their
homelands, is a critical component of a safe, secure, and
sovereign Iraq.

amendment no. 79 offered by mr. fortenberry of nebraska

Page 510, line 24, insert ``including ethnic and religious
minority groups,'' after ``local security forces,''.

amendment no. 88 offered by mr. cicilline of rhode island

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. OPPORTUNITIES TO EQUIP CERTAIN FOREIGN MILITARY
ENTITIES.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Secretaries of the military departments and the Secretary of
State, shall submit to Congress a report that describes--
(1) efforts to make United States manufacturers aware of
opportunities to equip foreign military entities that have
been approved to receive assistance from the United States;
and
(2) any new plans or strategies to raise United States
manufacturers' awareness with respect to such opportunities.

amendment no. 89 offered by mr. cooper of tennessee

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following
new section:

SEC. 12__. REPORTS ON INF TREATY AND OPEN SKIES TREATY.

(a) Reports.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff shall submit to the appropriate congressional
committees the following reports:
(1) A report on the Open Skies Treaty containing--
(A) an assessment, conducted by the Chairman jointly with
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State, of
whether and why, the Treaty remains in the national security
interest of the United States, including if there are
compliance concerns related to implementation by the Russian
Federation of the Treaty;
(B) a specific plan by the Chairman jointly with the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State on remedying
any such compliance concerns; and
(C) a military assessment conducted by the Chairman of such
compliance concerns.
(2) A report on the INF Treaty containing--
(A) an assessment, conducted by the Chairman jointly with
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State, of
whether and why, the Treaty remains in the national security
interest of the United States, including how any ongoing
violation bear on the assessment if such a violation is not
resolved in the near-term;
(B) a specific plan by the Chairman jointly with the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State to remedy
violation by the Russian Federation of the Treaty, and a
judgment of whether Russia intends to take the steps required
to establish verifiable evidence that Russia has resumed its
compliance with the Treaty if such non-compliance and
inconsistencies are not resolved by the date of the enactment
of this Act; and
(C) a military assessment conducted by the Chairman of the
risks posed by Russia's violation of the Treaty.
(b) Update.--Not later than February 15, 2018, the
Chairman, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of
State shall jointly submit to the appropriate congressional
committees an update to each report under subsection (a).
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; and
(B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the Senate.
(2) The term ``INF Treaty'' means the Treaty Between the
United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate- Range and
Shorter-Range Missiles, commonly referred to as the
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed at
Washington December 8, 1987, and entered into force June 1,
1988.
(3) The term ``Open Skies Treaty'' means the Treaty on Open
Skies, done at Helsinki March 24, 1992, and entered into
force January 1, 2002.

amendment no. 90 offered by ms. frankel of florida

At the end of subtitle E of title XII add the following:

SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE ROLE OF THE UNITED
STATES IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY
ORGANIZATION.

It is the sense of Congress that continued United States
leadership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is
critical to the national security of the United States.

amendment no. 91 offered by mr. higgins of new york

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. AUTHORIZATION OF UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE TO
ISRAEL.

(a) In General.--The President is authorized to provide
assistance to Israel to improve maritime security and
maritime domain awareness.
(b) Activities Supported.--Activities that may be supported
by assistance under subsection (a) include the following:
(1) Procurement, maintenance, and sustainment of the
David's Sling Weapon System for purposes of intercepting
short-range missiles.
(2) Payment of incremental expenses of Israel that are
incurred by Israel as the direct result of participation in a
bilateral or multilateral exercise of the United States Navy
or Coast Guard.
(3) Visits of United States naval vessels at ports of
Israel.
(4) Conduct of joint research and development for advanced
maritime domain awareness capabilities.
(c) Sunset.--This section shall terminate on the date that
is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

amendment no. 92 offered by mr. ted lieu of california

At the end of subtitle E of title XII add the following:

SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS IN SUPPORT OF A DENUCLEARIZED
KOREAN PENINSULA.

It is the sense of Congress that United States foreign
policy should support a denuclearized Korean peninsula.

{time} 1900

The amendment simply ensures that American businesses have the
opportunity to compete for these contracts so that as we are building
up and securing our national security interests around the world, we
are also strengthening American jobs, American manufacturing, and
growing our economy.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.

[[Page H2776]]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak about a bipartisan amendment that
passed the full Committee on Armed Services, and also had to go through
the Foreign Affairs Committee to be approved. It calls on the
administration to report to Congress on a comprehensive political and
military strategy for our fight against ISIS in the Middle East.
Mr. Chairman, we are sending troops back into Iraq today, just 7 or 8
years after we pulled the last troops out. Many of the battles they are
fighting have familiar names--Fallujah, Ramadi, and Haditha--battles
that we fought and won a long time ago. But we did not have a strategy
to ensure the peace.
Mr. Clausewitz taught us about 200 years ago that war is an extension
of politics.
We have to have a political endgame for our fight in Iraq, or we will
find ourselves continually going back there again and again. When Iraqi
politics fail, a new terrorist group sweeps in; and American troops are
left to pick up the mess.
If you think about what happened when ISIS swept in from Syria and
entered western, then northern Iraq, the Iraqi army wasn't just
defeated by ISIS. The Iraqi Army put their weapons down and went home
because they had lost faith in the Iraqi Government.
We must have a long-term, comprehensive political and military
strategy. We owe it to the troops to ensure that their efforts will not
be in vain.
I am proud of the bipartisan support for this amendment, both on the
Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Affairs Committee, and I am
especially proud that the chairman worked with me to get it adopted. I
am glad that it is included in the bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the amendments en bloc.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chair, on Sept. 22, 2011, Adm. Mike Mullen,
then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the Senate
Armed Services Committee that the Haqqani Network was behind the 2011
attack on our embassy and a truck bombing that wounded more than 70
U.S. and NATO troops. Adm. Mullen went on to say, ``The Haqqani Network
acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence
agency.''
Last year, the Haqqani Network and the Taliban killed more Afghan
civilians and troops than in any other year since the Taliban was
toppled in 2001.
My amendment adds a fourth condition on the aid to Pakistan. This new
condition requires the Administration to certify that Pakistan has
shown progress in arresting and prosecuting Haqqani Network senior
leaders and mid-level operatives.
This forces Pakistan to make a choice: either go after the Haqqani
Network in a public way that it has never done before or lose hundreds
of millions of dollars of US aid.
And that's just the way it is.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 7 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I
offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 7 consisting of amendment Nos. 80, 81, 83, 84,
85, 86, 87, 93, 94, 95, 96, and 97 printed in House Report 114-571,
offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 80 offered by mr. pearce of new mexico

At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON BUSINESS PRACTICES OF THE
ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA (ISIS).

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) For nearly two years, the Islamic State of Iraq and
Syria (ISIS) has capitalized on established oil production
facilities throughout Iraq and Syria in order to fund its
jihadist operations globally.
(2) Oil production and sale represent the largest and most
vulnerable income factors for ISIS.
(3) In 2015, ISIS oil sales brought in over $400,000,000 to
prop up the terror group's operations world-wide.
(4) ISIS has executed a robust recruitment scheme to staff
and operate the oil facilities within the group's control and
maintained smuggling routes for the sale of that oil.
(5) Further disrupting ISIS oil production and sale
structures would be minimally invasive but would effectively
curtail the terror group's ability to self-finance.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the United States should focus all necessary efforts in the
Middle East to disrupt the financing of the Islamic State of
Iraq and Syria (ISIS) through oil production and sale.

amendment no. 81 offered by mr. yoho of florida

At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OF MAN-PORTABLE AIR
DEFENSE SYSTEMS TO ANY ENTITY IN SYRIA.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2017 may be obligated or expended to transfer or
facilitate the transfer of man-portable air defense systems
(MANPADS) to any entity in Syria.

amendment no. 83 offered by mr. poe of texas

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12_. MEASURES AGAINST PERSONS INVOLVED IN ACTIVITIES
THAT VIOLATE ARMS CONTROL TREATIES OR
AGREEMENTS WITH THE UNITED STATES.

(a) Imposition of Measures.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (c), on
and after the date that is 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the President shall impose the
measures described in subsection (b) with respect to--
(A) a person the President determines--
(i)(I) is an individual who is a citizen, national, or
permanent resident of a country described in paragraph (2);
or
(II) is an entity organized under the laws of a country
described in paragraph (2); and
(ii) has engaged in any activity that contributed to or is
a significant factor in the President's or the Secretary of
State's determination that such country is not in full
compliance with its obligations as further described in
paragraph (2); and
(B) a person the President determines has provided material
support to a person described in subparagraph (A).
(2) Country described.--A country described in this
paragraph is a country that the President or the Secretary of
State has determined, in the most recent annual report
submitted to Congress pursuant to section 403 of the Arms
Control and Disarmament Act (22 U.S.C. 2593a), is not in full
compliance with its obligations undertaken in all arms
control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements or
commitments to which the United States is a participating
state.
(b) Measures Described.--
(1) In general.--The measures to be imposed with respect to
a person under subsection (a) are the head of any executive
agency (as defined in section 133 of title 41, United States
Code) may not enter into, renew, or extend a contract for the
procurement of goods or services with the person.
(2) Exception for major routes of supply.--The requirement
to impose measures under paragraph (1) shall not apply with
respect to any contract for the procurement of goods or
services along a major route of supply to a zone of active
combat or major contingency operation.
(3) Requirement to revise regulations.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Federal Acquisition
Regulation, the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation
Supplement, and the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards shall
be revised to implement paragraph (1)(B).
(B) Certifications.--The revisions to the Federal
Acquisition Regulation under subparagraph (A) shall include a
requirement for a certification from each person that is a
prospective contractor that the person, and any person owned
or controlled by the person, does not engage in any activity
described in subsection (a)(1)(A)(ii).
(C) Remedies.--If the head of an executive agency
determines that a person has submitted a false certification
under subparagraph (B) on or after the date on which the
applicable revision of the Federal Acquisition Regulation
required by this paragraph becomes effective--
(i) the head of that executive agency shall terminate a
contract with such person or debar or suspend such person
from eligibility for Federal contracts for a period of not
less than 2 years;
(ii) any such debarment or suspension shall be subject to
the procedures that apply to debarment and suspension under
the Federal Acquisition Regulation under subpart 9.4 of part
9 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations; and
(iii) the Administrator of General Services shall include
on the List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and
Nonprocurement Programs maintained by the Administrator under
part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation each person that
is debarred, suspended, or proposed for debarment or
suspension by the head of an executive agency on the basis of
a determination of a false certification under subparagraph
(B).
(4) United states person defined.--In this subsection, the
term ``United States person'' means--
(A) a natural person who is a citizen or resident of the
United States or a national of the United States (as defined
in section

[[Page H2777]]

101(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1101(a)); and
(B) an entity that is organized under the laws of the
United States or any State.
(c) Waiver.--
(1) In general.--The President may waive the application of
measures on a case-by-case basis under subsection (a) with
respect to a person if the President--
(A) determines that--
(i)(I) in the case of a person described in subsection
(a)(1)(A), the person did not knowingly engage in any
activity described in such subsection; or
(II) in the case of a person described in subsection
(a)(1)(B), the person conducted or facilitated a transaction
or transactions with, or provided financial services to, a
person described in subsection (a)(1)(A) that did not
knowingly engage in any activity described in such
subsection; and
(ii) the waiver is in the national security interest of the
United States; and
(B) submits to the appropriate congressional committees a
report on the determination and the reasons for the
determination.
(2) Form of report.--The report required by paragraph
(1)(B) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may
include a classified annex.
(3) Appropriate congressional committees defined.--In this
subsection, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, and the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence of the House of Representatives; and
(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Foreign Relations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence
of the Senate.
(d) Termination.--The measures imposed with respect to a
person under subsection (a) shall terminate on the date on
which the President submits to Congress a subsequent annual
report pursuant to section 403 of the Arms Control and
Disarmament Act (22 U.S.C. 2593a) that does not contain a
determination of the President that the country described in
subsection (a)(2) with respect to which the measures were
imposed with respect to the person is a country that is not
in full compliance with its obligations undertaken in all
arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements or
commitments to which the United States is a participating
state.

amendment no. 84 offered by mr. pompeo of kansas

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REPORT ON COOPERATION
BETWEEN IRAN AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

(a) Report Required.--The Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of State shall jointly submit to Congress a report
on cooperation between Iran and the Russian Federation and
how and to what extent such cooperation affects United States
national security and strategic interests.
(b) Matters to Be Included.--The report required by
subsection (a) shall include the following:
(1) How and to what extent Iran and the Russian Federation
cooperate on matters relating to Iran's space program,
including how and to what extent such cooperation strengthens
Iran's ballistic missile program.
(2) How and to what extent Iran's interests and actions and
the Russian Federation's interests and actions overlap with
respect to Latin America.
(3) A description and analysis of the intelligence-sharing
center established by Iran, the Russian Federation, and Syria
in Baghdad, Iraq and whether such center is being used for
purposes other than the purposes of the joint mission of such
countries in Syria.
(4) A description and analysis of--
(A) naval cooperation between Iran and the Russian
Federation, including joint naval exercises between the two
countries; and
(B) the implications of--
(i) an increased Russian Federation naval presence in the
Eastern Mediterranean; and
(ii) an Iranian naval presence in the Persian Gulf.
(5) A description of the increased cooperation between Iran
and the Russian Federation since the start of the current
conflict in Syria.
(6) The steps Iran has taken to adopt the Russian
Federation model of hybrid warfare against potential targets
such as Gulf Cooperation Council states with sizeable Shiite
populations.
(7) The extent of Russian Federation cooperation with
Hezbollah in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, including cooperation
with respect to training and equipping and joint operations.
(8) A description of the weapons that have been provided by
the Russian Federation to Iran that have violated relevant
United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing an arms
embargo on Iran.
(c) Submission Period.--The report required by subsection
(a) shall be submitted not later than 120 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, for
such period of time as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Act
remains in effect.
(d) Form.--The report required by subsection (a) shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified
annex.

amendment no. 85 offered by mr. roskam of illinois

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, insert the
following:

SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON MAINTENANCE BY ISRAEL OF A ROBUST
INDEPENDENT CAPABILITY TO REMOVE EXISTENTIAL
SECURITY THREATS.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation
Act of 2012 (22 U.S.C. 8601 et seq.) established the policy
of the United States to support the inherent right of Israel
to self-defense.
(2) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation
Act of 2012 expresses the sense of Congress that the
Government of the United States should transfer to the
Government of Israel defense articles and defense services.
(3) The inherent right of Israel to self-defense
necessarily includes the ability to defend against threats to
its security and defend its vital national interests.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
Israel should be able to defend its vital national interests
and protect its territory and population against existential
threats.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to the
specified congressional committees a report that--
(A) identifies defensive capabilities and platforms
requested by the Government of Israel that would contribute
to maintenance of Israel's defensive capability against
threats to its territory and population, including nuclear
and ballistic missile facilities in Iran, and defend its
vital national interests;
(B) assesses the availability for sale or transfer of items
requested by the Government of Israel to maintain the
capability described in subparagraph (A), including the legal
authorities available for making such transfers; and
(C) describes what steps the President is taking to
transfer the items described in subparagraph (B) for Israel
to maintain the capability described in subparagraph (A).
(2) Form.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified
annex if necessary.
(3) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``specified
congressional committees'' means--
(A) the congressional defense committees; and
(B) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and
the Committee of Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives.

amendment no. 86 offered by mr. roskam of illinois

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, insert the
following:

SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON USE BY THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAN OF
COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT AND RELATED SERVICES FOR
ILLICIT MILITARY OR OTHER ACTIVITIES.

(a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and every 180 days thereafter, the
President, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and
the Secretary of State, shall submit to the congressional
defense committees and the Committee on Foreign Relations of
the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House
of Representatives a report on use by the Government of Iran
of commercial aircraft and related services for illicit
military or other activities during the 5-year period ending
of such date of enactment.
(b) Elements of Report.--The report required under
subsection (a) shall include a description of the extent to
which--
(1) the Government of Iran has used commercial aircraft or
related services to transport illicit cargo to or from Iran,
including military goods, weapons, military personnel,
military-related electronic parts and mechanical equipment,
and rocket or missile components;
(2) the commercial aviation sector of Iran has provided
financial, material, and technological support to the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC); and
(3) foreign governments and persons have facilitated the
activities described in paragraph (1), including allowing the
use of airports, services, or other resources.

amendment no. 87 offered by mr. walker of north carolina

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. AUTHORITY TO GRANT OBSERVER STATUS TO THE MILITARY
FORCES OF TAIWAN AT RIMPAC EXERCISES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense is authorized to
grant observer status to the military forces of Taiwan in any
maritime exercise known as the Rim of the Pacific Exercise.
(b) Effective Date.--This section takes effect on the date
of the enactment of this Act and applies with respect to any
maritime exercise described in subsection (a) that begins on
or after such date of enactment.

amendment no. 93 offered by mr. meng of new york

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. AGREEMENTS WITH FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS TO DEVELOP
LAND-BASED WATER RESOURCES IN SUPPORT OF AND IN
PREPARATION FOR CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.

The Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State, is authorized

[[Page H2778]]

to enter into agreements with the governments of foreign
countries to develop land-based water resources in support of
and in preparation for contingency operations, including
water selection, pumping, purification, storage,
distribution, cooling, consumption, water reuse, water source
intelligence, research and development, training, acquisition
of water support equipment, and water support operations.

amendment no. 94 offered by mr. meng of new york

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. EXTENSION OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ON THE USE OF
CERTAIN IRANIAN SEAPORTS BY FOREIGN VESSELS AND
USE OF FOREIGN AIRPORTS BY SANCTIONED IRANIAN
AIR CARRIERS.

Section 1252(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2013 (22 U.S.C. 8808(a)) is amended in the
matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking ``2016'' and
inserting ``2019''.

amendment no. 95 offered by mr. moulton of massachusetts

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. NOTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF BALLISTIC MISSILE
LAUNCH BY IRAN.

(a) Notification.--The President shall notify Congress
within 48 hours of a suspected ballistic missile launch,
including a test, by Iran based on credible information
indicating that such a launch took place.
(b) Assessment.--
(1) In general.--The President shall initiate an assessment
within 48 hours of providing the notification described in
subsection (a) to determine whether a missile launch,
including a test, described in subsection (a) took place.
(2) Determination and notification.--Not later than 15 days
after the date on which an assessment is initiated under
paragraph (1), the President shall determine whether Iran
engaged in a launch described in subsection (a) and shall
notify Congress of the basis for any such determination.
(3) Affirmative determination.--If the President determines
under paragraph (2) that a launch described in subsection (a)
took place, the President shall further notify Congress of
the following:
(A) An identification of entities involved in the launch.
(B) A description of steps the President will take in
response to the launch, including--
(i) imposing unilateral sanctions pursuant to Executive
Order 13382 (2005) or other relevant authorities against such
entities; or
(ii) carrying out diplomatic efforts to impose multilateral
sanctions against such entities, including through adoption
of a United Nations Security Council resolution.

amendment no. 96 offered by mr. peters of california

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON INTEGRATED BALLISTIC MISSILE
DEFENSE SYSTEM FOR GCC PARTNER COUNTRIES,
JORDAN, EGYPT, AND ISRAEL.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) Iran has conducted numerous ballistic missile tests;
and
(2) such tests are in violation of United Nations Security
Council Resolution 2231 and unnecessarily provoke Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC) partner countries and threaten
Israel.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the United States should encourage and enable as appropriate
an integrated ballistic missile defense system that links GCC
partner countries, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel in order assist
in preventing an attack by Iran against such countries.

amendment no. 97 offered by mr. ruiz of california

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following

SEC. 12XX. AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING TO
INCREASE MARITIME SECURITY AND DOMAIN AWARENESS
OF FOREIGN COUNTRIES BORDERING THE PERSIAN
GULF, ARABIAN SEA, OR MEDITERRANEAN SEA.

(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to authorize
assistance and training to increase maritime security and
domain awareness of foreign countries bordering the Persian
Gulf, the Arabian Sea, or the Mediterranean Sea in order to
deter and counter illicit smuggling and related maritime
activity by Iran, including illicit Iranian weapons
shipments.
(b) Authority.--
(1) In general.--To carry out the purpose of this section
as described in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense,
with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, is
authorized--
(A) to provide training to the national military or other
security forces of Israel, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United
Arab Emirates, Oman, Kuwait, and Qatar that have among their
functional responsibilities maritime security missions; and
(B) to provide training to ministry, agency, and
headquarters level organizations for such forces.
(2) Designation.--The provision of assistance and training
under this section may be referred to as the ``Counter Iran
Maritime Initiative''.
(c) Types of Training.--
(1) Authorized elements of training.--Training provided
under subsection (b)(1)(A) may include the provision of de
minimis equipment, supplies, and small-scale military
construction.
(2) Required elements of training.--Training provided under
subsection (b) shall include elements that promote the
following:
(A) Observance of and respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms.
(B) Respect for legitimate civilian authority within the
country to which the assistance is provided.
(d) Availability of Funds.--Of the amount authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2017 by section 301 and
available for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide
activities as specified in the funding table in section 4301,
$50,000,000 shall be available only for the provision of
assistance and training under subsection (b).
(e) Cost Sharing.--
(1) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress that,
given income parity among recipient countries, the Secretary
of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State,
should seek, through appropriate bilateral and multilateral
arrangements, payments sufficient in amount to offset any
training costs associated with implementation of subsection
(b).
(2) Cost-sharing agreement.--The Secretary of Defense, with
the concurrence of the Secretary of State, shall negotiate a
cost-sharing agreement with a recipient country regarding the
cost of any training provided pursuant to section (b). The
agreement shall set forth the terms of cost sharing that the
Secretary of Defense determines are necessary and
appropriate, but such terms shall not be less than 50 percent
of the overall cost of the training.
(3) Credit to appropriations.--The portion of such cost-
sharing received by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to this
subsection may be credited towards appropriations available
for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities as
specified in the funding table in section 4301.
(f) Notice to Congress on Training.--Not later than 15 days
before exercising the authority under subsection (b) with
respect to a recipient country, the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a
notification containing the following:
(1) An identification of the recipient country.
(2) A detailed justification of the program for the
provision of the training concerned, and its relationship to
United States security interests.
(3) The budget for the program, including a timetable of
planned expenditures of funds to implement the program, an
implementation time-line for the program with milestones
(including anticipated delivery schedules for any assistance
and training under the program), the military department or
component responsible for management of the program, and the
anticipated completion date for the program.
(4) A description of the arrangements, if any, to support
recipient country sustainment of any capability developed
pursuant to the program, and the source of funds to support
sustainment efforts and performance outcomes to be achieved
under the program beyond its completion date, if applicable.
(5) A description of the program objectives and an
assessment framework to be used to develop capability and
performance metrics associated with operational outcomes for
the recipient force.
(6) Such other matters as the Secretary considers
appropriate.
(g) Definition.--In this section, the term ``appropriate
congressional committees'' means--
(1) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Appropriations of the
Senate; and
(2) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, and the Committee on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives.
(h) Termination.--Assistance and training may not be
provided under this section after September 30, 2020.

[[Page H2779]]

The amendment that was included allows those companies to use some of
the money that the Air Force is providing for the development of a new
engine, to use it also to develop a launch vehicle to go along with
that engine. We have got, like I said, great companies like Blue Origin
in my district, Aerojet Rocketdyne--a lot of folks working on new
vehicles--SpaceX as well. This amendment allows the money that the Air
Force is providing not just to go to the engine but for some of it to
go to a launch vehicle as well. I think this will greatly reduce the
cost of our launch costs for the Air Force, which has been a
significantly problem recently.
So I thank Chairman Rogers for allowing us to offer that amendment
and for working with me on it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chair, I want to thank my good friend Mr.
Rogers from Alabama for his work with me on this amendment.
The Intermediate Nuclear Forces or ``INF'' Treaty places limits on
ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500
and 5,500 kilometers.
In 2008, the Russians tested a missile within this prohibited range
and were caught red handed.
But it took 3 years for the Administration to report any concern
about Russian compliance to Congress. It took a full 6 years for the
State Department to officially find the Russians in violation. After
eight years, there have been no serious consequences for Russia's
violation of the treaty.
My amendment would prohibit government contracts with entities that
have contributed to Russia's violation of the INF Treaty.
Russia is not our ally, is not our friend, and we cannot take it at
its word. Czar Putin is determined to restore Russia to its glory days.
We must respond with strength.
And that's just the way it is.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 8 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I
offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 8 consisting of amendment Nos. 98, 99, 100,
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, and 110 printed in House
Report 114-571, offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 98 offered by ms. loretta sanchez of california

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON MILITARY RELATIONS BETWEEN
VIETNAM AND THE UNITED STATES.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The United States and Vietnam signed a Joint Vision
Statement on Defense Relations on June 1, 2015.
(2) In October 2014, the Administration partially relaxed
United States restrictions on the transfer of lethal weapons
to Vietnam.
(3) In 2014, the United States provided $18,000,000 in
maritime security assistance to Vietnam.
(4) According to Reporters Without Borders, Vietnam ranks
175 out of 180 countries in press freedom, as the Government
of Vietnam continues to persecute citizens for practicing the
freedom of speech and expression.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the United States Government should review its policy
on the transfer of lethal weapons to Vietnam; and
(2) the United States Government should evaluate certain
human rights benchmarks when providing military assistance to
Vietnam.

amendment no. 99 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON EFFORTS TO COMBAT BOKO HARAM IN NIGERIA
AND THE LAKE CHAD BASIN.

(a) Sense of Congress.--Congress--
(1) strongly condemns the ongoing violence and the
systematic gross human rights violations against the people
of Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin carried out by Boko Haram;
(2) expresses its support for the people of Nigeria and the
Lake Chad Basin who wish to live in a peaceful, economically
prosperous, and democratic region; and
(3) calls on the President to support Nigerian, Lake Chad
Basin, and International Community efforts to ensure
accountability for crimes against humanity committed by Boko
Haram against the people of Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin,
particularly young girls kidnapped from Chibok and other
internally displaced persons affected by the actions of Boko
Haram.
(b) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of State, and the Attorney General shall jointly
submit to Congress a report on efforts to combat Boko Haram
in Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin.
(2) Elements.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include the following elements:
(A) A description of initiatives undertaken by the
Department of Defense to assist the Government of Nigeria and
countries in the Lake Chad Basin to develop capacities to
deploy special forces to combat Boko Haram.
(B) A description of United States' activities to enhance
the capacity of Nigeria and countries in the Lake Chad Basin
to investigate and prosecute human rights violations
perpetrated against the people of Nigeria and the Lake Chad
Basin by Boko Haram, al-Qaeda affiliates, and other terrorist
organizations to promote respect for rule of law in Nigeria
and the Lake Chad Basin.

amendment no. 100 offered by mr. holding of north carolina

At the appropriate place in title XII of division A of the
bill, insert the following:

SEC. 12XX. ENHANCING DEFENSE AND SECURITY COOPERATION WITH
INDIA.

(a) Required Actions.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense and Secretary of
State shall jointly take such actions as may be necessary
to--
(A) recognize India's status as a major defense partner of
the United States;
(B) designate an individual within the Executive branch who
has experience in defense acquisition and technology--
(i) to reinforce and ensure, through interagency policy
coordination, the success of the Framework for the United
States-India Defense Relationship; and
(ii) to help resolve remaining issues impeding United
States-India defense trade, security cooperation, and co-
production and co-development opportunities;
(C) approve and facilitate the transfer of advanced
technology, consistent with United States conventional arms
transfer policy, to support combined military planning with
the Indian military for missions such as humanitarian
assistance and disaster relief, counter piracy, and maritime
domain awareness missions;
(D) strengthen the effectiveness of the DTTI and the
durability of the Department of Defense's ``India Rapid
Reaction Cell'';
(E) collaborate with the Government of India to develop
mutually agreeable mechanisms to verify the security of
defense articles and related technology, such as appropriate
cyber security and end use monitoring arrangements,
consistent with United States export control laws and policy;
(F) promote policies that will encourage the efficient
review and authorization of defense sales and exports to
India;
(G) encourage greater government-to-government and
commercial military transactions between the United States
and India;
(H) support the development and alignment of India's export
control and procurement regimes with those of the United
States and multilateral control regimes; and
(I) continue to enhance defense and security cooperation
with India in order to advance United States interests in the
South Asia and greater Indo-Pacific regions.
(2) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary
of Defense and Secretary of State shall jointly submit to the
congressional defense committees and the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs
of the House of Representatives a report on how the United
States is supporting its defense relationship with India in
relation to the actions described in paragraph (1).
(b) Military Planning.--The Secretary of Defense is
encouraged to coordinate with the Ministry of Defense for the
Government of India to develop combined military plans for
missions such as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief,
maritime domain awareness, and other missions in the national
security interests of both countries.
(c) Assessment Required.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense and Secretary of
State shall jointly, on an annual basis, conduct an
assessment of the extent to which India possesses strategic
operational capabilities to support military operations of
mutual interest between the United States and India.
(2) Use of assessment.--The President shall ensure that the
assessment described in paragraph (1) is used, consistent
with United States conventional arms transfer policy, to
inform the review by the United States of sales of defense
articles and services to the Government of India.
(3) Form.--The assessment described in paragraph (1) shall,
to the maximum extent practicable, be in classified form.

amendment no. 101 offered by mr. smith of washington

Page 609, line 20, strike ``or any fiscal year
thereafter''.
Page 610, strike lines 8 through 15 and insert the
following:
``(3) Other purposes.--The Secretary may obligate or expend
not more than a total of 31 percent of the funds that are
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for
fiscal year 2017 for the rocket propulsion

[[Page H2780]]

system and launch system investment for activities not
authorized by paragraph (1)(A), including for developing a
launch vehicle, an upper stage, a strap-on motor, or related
infrastructure. The Secretary may exceed such limit in fiscal
year 2017 for such purposes
if--''.
Page 612, strike lines 4 through 12 and insert the
following:
``(3) Plan to protect government investment and assured
access to space.--
``(A) In developing the rocket propulsion system under
paragraph (1), and in any development conducted pursuant to
subsection (d)(3), the Secretary shall develop a plan to
protect the investment of the United States and the assured
access to space, including, consistent with section 2320 of
title 10, United States Code, and in accordance with other
applicable provisions of law, acquiring the rights, as
appropriate, for the purpose of developing alternative
sources of supply and manufacture in the event such
alternative sources are necessary and in the best interest of
the United States, such as in the event that a company goes
out of business or the system is otherwise unavailable after
the Federal Government has invested significant resources to
use and rely on such system for launch services.
``(B) Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017, the Secretary shall submit to the
appropriate congressional committees the plan developed under
subparagraph (A).''.
Page 612, strike lines 13 through 25.

amendment no. 102 offered by mr. ted lieu of california

At the end of subtitle A of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 16__. REPORT ON USE OF SPACECRAFT ASSETS OF THE SPACE-
BASED INFRARED SYSTEM WIDE-FIELD-OF-VIEW
PROGRAM.

(a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Director of National Intelligence,
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a
report on the feasibility of using available spacecraft
assets of the space-based infrared system wide-field-of-view
program to satisfy other mission requirements of the
Department of Defense or the intelligence community.
(b) Matters Covered.--The report required by subsection (a)
shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(1) An evaluation of using the space-based infrared system
wide-field-of-view spacecraft bus for other urgent national
security space priorities.
(2) An evaluation of the cost and schedule impact, if any,
to the space-based infrared system wide-field-of-view program
if the spacecraft bus is used for another purpose.
(c) Form.--The report required by subsection (a) shall be
submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified
annex if necessary to protect the national security interests
of the United States.
(d) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(1) the congressional defense committees; and
(2) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the
House of Representatives and the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate.

amendment no. 103 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

At the end of subtitle C of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 16__. ASSESSMENT ON SECURITY OF INFORMATION HELD BY
CLEARED DEFENSE CONTRACTORS.

(a) Assessment.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct an
assessment of the sufficiency of the regulatory mechanisms of
the Department of Defense to secure defense information held
by cleared defense contractors to determine whether there are
any gaps that may undermine the protection of such
information.
(2) Submission.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the findings of
the assessment conducted under paragraph (1).
(b) Regulations.--Not later than 270 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prescribe
regulations that the Secretary determines appropriate to
improve the security of defense information held by cleared
defense contractors.
(c) Cleared Defense Contractor Defined.--In this section,
the term ``cleared defense contractor'' has the meaning given
that term in section 393(e) of title 10, United States Code.

amendment no. 104 offered by mr. meehan of pennsylvania

At the end of subtitle C of title XVI of division A, add
the following new section:

SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON CYBER RESILIENCY OF THE
NETWORKS AND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS OF THE
NATIONAL GUARD.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Army and Air National Guard personnel need to have
situational awareness and reliable communications during any
of the following events occurring in the United States:
(A) A terrorist attack.
(B) An intentional or unintentional release of chemical,
biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive
materials.
(C) A natural or man-made disaster.
(2) During such an event, it is vital that Army and Air
National Guard personnel are able to communicate and
coordinate response efforts with their own units and
appropriate civilian emergency response forces.
(3) Current networks and communications systems of the
National Guard, including commercial wireless solutions (such
as mobile wireless kinetic mesh), and other systems that are
interoperable with the systems of civilian first responders,
should provide the necessary robustness, interoperability,
reliability, and resilience to extend needed situational
awareness and communications to all users and under all
operating conditions, including degraded communications
environments where infrastructure is damaged or destroyed or
under cyber attack or disruption.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the National Guard should be constantly seeking ways to
improve and expand its communications and networking
capabilities to provide for enhanced performance and
resilience in the face of cyber attacks or disruptions, as
well as other instances of degradation.

amendment no. 105 offered by mr. hanna of new york

At the end of subtitle C of title XVI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 1635. REQUIREMENT FOR ARMY NATIONAL GUARD STRATEGY TO
INCORPORATE CYBER PROTECTION TEAMS INTO
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CYBER MISSION FORCE.

(a) Strategy Required.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army,
if the Secretary has not already done so, shall provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees outlining a
strategy for incorporating Army National Guard cyber
protection teams into the Department of Defense cyber mission
force.
(b) Elements of Strategy.--The strategy required by
subsection (a) shall include, at minimum, the following:
(1) A timeline for incorporating Army National Guard cyber
protection teams into the Department of Defense cyber mission
force, including a timeline for receiving appropriate
training.
(2) Identification of specific units to be incorporated.
(3) An assessment of how incorporation of Army National
Guard cyber protection teams into the Department of Defense
cyber mission force might be used to enhance readiness
through improved individual and collective training
capabilities.
(4) A status report on the Army's progress in issuing
additional guidance that clarifies how Army National Guard
cyber protection teams can support State and civil operations
in National Guard status under title 32, United States Code.
(5) Other matters as considered appropriate by the
Secretary of the Army.

amendment no. 106 offered by mr. peters of california

At the end of subtitle A of title XXVIII (page 872, after
line 12), add the following new section:

SEC. 2807. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON MAXIMIZING NUMBER OF VETERANS
EMPLOYED ON MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

It is the sense of Congress that, when practical and cost-
effective, the Department of Defense should seek ways to
maximize the number of veterans employed on military
construction projects (as defined in section 2801 of title
10, United States Code).

amendment no. 107 offered by mr. brat of virginia

At the end of subtitle B of title XXVIII (page 877, after
line 25), add the following

SEC. 2817. IMPROVED PROCESS FOR DISPOSAL OF DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY LOCATED OVERSEAS.

(a) Petition to Acquire Surplus Property.--2687a of title
10, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new
subsection:
``(g) Petition Process for Disposal of Overseas Surplus
Real Property.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall establish
a process by which a foreign government may request the
transfer of surplus real property or improvements under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Defense in the foreign
country.
``(2) Upon the receipt of a petition under this subsection,
the Secretary shall determine within 90 days whether the
property or improvement subject to the petition is surplus.
If surplus, the Secretary shall seek to enter into an
agreement with the foreign government within one year for the
disposal of the property.
``(3) If real property or an improvement is determined not
to be surplus, the Secretary shall not be obligated to
consider another petition involving the same property or
improvement for five years beginning on the date on which the
initial determination was made.''.
(b) Additional Use of Department of Defense Overseas
Military Facility Investment Recovery Account.--Section
2687a(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--

[[Page H2781]]

(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``property disposal
agreement,'' after ``forces agreement,''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B)
and inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) military readiness programs.''.
(c) Reporting Requirement.--Section 2687a(a) of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(3) A report under paragraph (1) also shall specify the
following:
``(A) The number of petitions received under subsection (g)
from foreign governments requesting the transfer of surplus
real property or improvements under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Defense overseas.
``(B) The status of each petition, including whether
reviewed, denied, or granted.
``(C) The implementation status of each granted
petition.''.

amendment no. 108 offered by mr. carter of georgia

At the end of subtitle D of title XXVIII, add the following
new section:

SEC. __. CLOSURE OF ST. MARYS AIRPORT.

(a) Release of Restrictions.--Subject to subsection (b),
the United States, acting through the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration, shall release the city of
St. Marys, Georgia, from all restrictions, conditions, and
limitations on the use, encumbrance, conveyance, and closure
of the St. Marys Airport, to the extent such restrictions,
conditions, and limitations are enforceable by the
Administrator.
(b) Requirements for Release of Restrictions.--The
Administrator shall execute the release under subsection (a)
once all of the following occurs:
(1) The Secretary of the Navy transfers to the Georgia
Department of Transportation the amounts described in
subsection (c) and requires as an enforceable condition on
such transfer that all funds transferred shall be used only
for airport development (as defined in section 47102 of title
49, United States Code) of a general aviation airport in
Georgia, consistent with planning efforts conducted by the
Administrator and the Georgia Department of Transportation.
(2) The city of St. Marys, for consideration as provided
for in this section, grants to the United States, under the
administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary, a restrictive
use easement in the real property used for the St. Marys
Airport, as determined acceptable by the Secretary, under
such terms and conditions as the Secretary considers
necessary to protect the interests of the United States and
prohibiting the future use of such property for all aviation-
related purposes and any other purposes deemed by the
Secretary to be incompatible with the operations, functions,
and missions of Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay, Georgia.
(3) The Secretary obtains an appraisal to determine the
fair market value of the real property used for the St. Marys
Airport in the manner described in subsection (c)(1).
(4) The Administrator fulfills the obligations under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) in connection with the release under subsection (a). In
carrying out such obligations--
(A) the Administrator shall not assume or consider any
potential or proposed future redevelopment of the current St.
Marys airport property;
(B) any potential new general aviation airport in Georgia
shall be deemed to be not connected with the release noted in
subsection (a) nor the closure of St. Marys Airport; and
(C) any environmental review under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) for
a potential general aviation airport in Georgia shall be
considered through an environmental review process separate
and apart from the environmental review made a condition of
release by this section.
(c) Transfer of Amounts Described.--The amounts described
in this subsection are the following:
(1) An amount equal to the fair market value of the real
property of the St. Marys Airport, as determined by the
Secretary and concurred in by the Administrator, based on an
appraisal report and title documentation that--
(A) is prepared or adopted by the Secretary, and concurred
in by the Administrator, not more than 180 days prior to the
transfer described in subsection (b)(1); and
(B) meets all requirements of Federal law and the appraisal
and documentation standards applicable to the acquisition and
disposal of real property interests of the United States.
(2) An amount equal to the unamortized portion of any
Federal development grants (including grants available under
a State block grant program established pursuant to section
47128 of title 49, United States Code), other than used for
the acquisition of land, paid to the city of St. Marys for
use as the St. Marys Airport.
(3) An amount equal to the airport revenues remaining in
the airport account for the St. Marys Airport as of the date
of the enactment of this Act and as otherwise due to or
received by the city of St. Marys after such date of
enactment pursuant to sections 47107(b) and 47133 of title
49, United States Code.
(d) Authorization for Transfer of Funds.--Using funds
available to the Department of the Navy for operation and
maintenance, the Secretary may pay the amounts described in
subsection (c) to the Georgia Department of Transportation,
conditioned as described in subsection (b)(1).
(e) Additional Requirements.--
(1) Survey.--The exact acreage and legal description of St.
Marys Airport shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to
the Secretary and concurred in by the Administrator.
(2) Planning of general aviation airport.--Any planning
effort for the development of a new general aviation airport
in southeast Georgia using the amounts described in
subsection (c) shall be conducted in coordination with the
Secretary, and shall ensure that any such airport does not
encroach on the operations, functions, and missions of Naval
Submarine Base, Kings Bay, Georgia.
(f) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be
construed to limit the applicability of--
(1) the requirements and processes under section 46319 of
title 49, United States Code;
(2) the requirements and processes under part 157 of title
14, Code of Federal Regulations; or
(3) the public notice requirements under section
47107(h)(2) of title 49, United States Code.

amendment no. 109 offered by mr. pearce of new mexico

At the end of subtitle D of title XXVIII (page 904, after
line 22), add the following new section:

SEC. 2839. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE
JURISDICTION, PORTION OF ORGAN MOUNTAINS AREA,
FILLMORE CANYON, NEW MEXICO.

The Secretary of Defense may not transfer administrative
jurisdiction over the parcel of Federal land depicted as
``Parcel D'' on the map entitled ``Organ Mountains Area -
Fillmore Canyon'' and dated April 19, 2016 from the
Department of Defense to the Secretary of the Interior.

amendment no. 110 offered by mr. culberson of texas

Page 936, after line 3, insert the following:

SEC. 2857. BATTLESHIP PRESERVATION GRANT PROGRAM.

(a) Establishment.--There is hereby established within the
Department of the Interior a grant program for the
preservation of our nation's most historic battleships.
(b) Use of Grants.--Amounts received through grants under
this section shall be used for the preservation of our
nation's most historic battleships in a manner that is self-
sustaining and has an educational component.
(c) Criteria for Eligibility.--To be eligible for a grant
under this section, an entity shall--
(1) submit an application under procedures prescribed by
the Secretary;
(2) match the amount of the grant, on a 1-to-1 basis, with
non-Federal assets from non-Federal sources, which may
include cash or durable goods and materials fairly valued as
determined by the Secretary;
(3) maintain records as may be reasonably necessary to
fully disclose--
(A) the amount and the disposition of the proceeds of the
grant;
(B) the total cost of the project for which the grant is
made; and
(C) other records as may be required by the Secretary,
including such records as will facilitate an effective
accounting for project funds; and
(4) provide access to the Secretary for the purposes of any
required audit and examination of any books, documents,
papers, and records of the entity.
(d) Most Historic Battleship Defined.--In this section, the
term ``most historic battleship'' means a battleship that
is--
(1) between 75 and 115 years old;
(2) listed on the National Historic Register; and
(3) located within the State for which it was named.
(e) Savings Provision.--The authorities contained in this
section shall be in addition to, and shall not be construed
to supercede or modify those contained in the National
Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470-470x-6).
(f) Private Property Protection.--
(1) In general.--No Federal funds made available to carry
out this section may be used to acquire any real property, or
any interest in any real property, without the written
consent of the owner (or owners) of that property or interest
in property.
(2) No designation.--The authority granted by this section
shall not constitute a Federal designation or have any effect
on private property ownership.
(g) Sunset.--The authority to make grants under this
section expires on September 30, 2023.

[[Page H2782]]

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the en bloc
amendments.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the en bloc
amendments.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendments En Bloc No. 9 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I
offer amendments en bloc.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc No. 9 consisting of amendment Nos. 111, 112, 113,
114, 115, 116, 117, 118, and 120 printed in House Report 114-571,
offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

amendment no. 111 offered by mr. newhouse of washington

Add at the end of subtitle G of title XXVIII the following
new section:

SEC. 2867. REPORT ON DOCUMENTATION FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN
PROPERTIES ALONG COLUMBIA RIVER, WASHINGTON, BY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS.

(a) Report on Documentation.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the
Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, shall submit a
report to Congress on the process by which the Corps of
Engineers acquired the properties described in subsection
(b), and shall include in the report the specific legal
documentation pursuant to which the properties were acquired.
(b) Properties Described.--The properties described in this
subsection are each of the properties described in paragraph
(2) of section 501(i) of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1996 (Public Law 104-303; 110 Stat. 3752).

amendment no. 112 offered by mr. ben ray lujan of new mexico

At the end of subtitle B of title XXXI of division C,
insert the following:

SEC. 3126. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ACCOUNTING PRACTICES
BY LABORATORY OPERATING CONTRACTORS AND PLANT
OR SITE MANAGERS OF NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION FACILITIES.

It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Energy
should ensure that each laboratory operating contractor or
plant or site manager of a National Nuclear Security
Administration facility adopt generally accepted and
consistent accounting practices for laboratory, plant, or
site directed research and development.

amendment no. 113 offered by mr. foster of illinois

At the end of subtitle C of title XXXI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 31__. BRIEFING ON THE INFORMATION-INTERCHANGE OF LOW-
ENRICHED URANIUM.

(a) Briefing.--Not later than 120 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of Energy, and the Secretary of State shall provide
a briefing to the appropriate congressional committees on the
feasibility and potential benefits of a dialogue between the
United States and France on the use of low-enriched uranium
in naval reactors.
(b) Appropriate Congressional Committees.--In this section,
the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means--
(1) the congressional defense committees;
(2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate;
(3) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the
House of Representatives and the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate; and
(4) the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate.

amendment no. 114 offered by mr. peters of california

Page 1009, lines 1 through 8, amend paragraph (1) to read
as follows:
``(1) Advanced nuclear reactor.--The term `advanced nuclear
reactor' means--
``(A) a nuclear fission reactor with significant
improvements over the most recent generation of nuclear
fission reactors, which may include inherent safety features,
lower waste yields, greater fuel utilization, superior
reliability, resistance to proliferation, and increased
thermal efficiency; or
``(B) a nuclear fusion reactor.''
Page 1014, lines 8 and 9, strike ``advanced fission reactor
systems, nuclear fusion systems,'' and insert ``advanced
nuclear reactor systems''.
Page 1016, lines 12 and 13, strike ``fusion and advanced
fission experimental reactors'' and insert ``experimental
advanced nuclear reactors''.
Page 1018, lines 3 and 4, strike ``next generation nuclear
energy technology'' and insert ``advanced nuclear reactor
technologies''.

amendment no. 115 offered by mr. donovan of new york

At the end of title XXXV add the following:

SEC. 35__. EXPEDITED PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CARDS FOR SEPARATING
MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND VETERANS.

(a) In General.--Section 70105 of title 46, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(r) Expedited Issuance for Separating Service Members.--
The Secretary shall, using authority available under other
provisions of law--
``(1) seek to expedite processing of applications for
transportation security cards under this section for members
of the Armed Forces who are separating from active duty
service with a discharge other than a dishonorable discharge;
``(2) in consultation with the Secretary of Defense--
``(A) enhance efforts of the Department of Homeland
Security in assisting members of the Armed Forces who are
separating from active duty service with receiving a
transportation security card, including by--
``(i) including under the Transition Assistance Program
under section 1144 of title 10--

``(I) applications for such cards; and
``(II) a form by which such a member may grant the member's
permission for government agencies to disclose to the
Department of Homeland Security findings of background
investigations of such member, for consideration by the
Department in processing the member's application for a
transportation security card;

``(ii) providing opportunities for local officials of the
department in which the Coast Guard is operating to partner
with military installations for that purpose; and
``(iii) ensuring that such members of the Armed Forces are
aware of opportunities to apply for such cards;
``(B) seek to educate members of the Armed Forces with
competencies that are transferable to maritime industries
regarding--
``(i) opportunities for employment in such industries; and
``(ii) the requirements and qualifications for, and duties
associated with, transportation security cards; and
``(C) cooperate with other Federal agencies to expedite the
transfer to the Secretary the findings of relevant background
investigations and security clearances; and
``(3) issue or deny a transportation security card under
this section for a veteran by not later than 13 days after
the date of the submission of the application for the card,
unless there is a substantial problem with the application
that prevents compliance with this paragraph.''.
(b) Reports.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for each of
the subsequent 2 years, the Secretary of the department in
which the Coast Guard is operating, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense, shall submit a report to the Committee
on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of
the Senate describing and assessing the efforts of such
department to implement the amendment made by this section.

SEC. 35__. TRAINING UNDER TRANSITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ON
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES ASSOCIATED WITH
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CARDS.

(a) In General.--Section 1144(b) of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(10) Acting through the Secretary of the department in
which the Coast Guard is operating, provide information on
career opportunities for employment available to members with
transportation security cards issued under section 70105 of
title 46.''.
(b) Deadline for Implementation.--The program carried out
under section 1144 of title 10, United States Code, shall
comply with the requirements of subsection (b)(10) of such
section, as added by subsection (a), by not later than 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

amendment no. 116 offered by mr. frankel of florida

At the end of title XXXV add the following:

SEC. __. APPLICATION OF LAW.

Section 4301 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(d) For purposes of any Federal law except the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any
vessel, including a foreign vessel, being repaired or
dismantled is deemed to be a recreational vessel, as defined
under section 2101(25), during such repair or dismantling, if
that vessel--
``(1) shares elements of design and construction of
traditional recreational vessels (as so defined); and
``(2) when operating is not normally engaged in a military,
commercial, or traditionally commercial undertaking.''.

amendment no. 117 offered by mr. wilson of south carolina

Page 1081, in the table of section 4102, strike ``JOINT
IMPROVISED-THREAT DEFEAT FUND'' both places it appears and
insert ``JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND''.

[[Page H2783]]

Page 1085, in the table of section 4103, strike ``JOINT
IMPROVISED-THREAT DEFEAT FUND'' both places it appears and
insert ``JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND''.

amendment no. 118 offered by ms. meng of new york

Page 1191, after line 7, insert the following:
``(F) Conspiracy to commit an offense specified in
subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) that is punishable under
section 881 of this title (article 81).''.

amendment no. 120 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

At the end of subtitle B of title XXXI, add the following
new section:

SEC. 31__. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NUCLEAR FACILITIES FROM
UNMANNED AIRCRAFT.

(a) In General.--The Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C.
2501 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 4509 the
following new section:

``SEC. 4510. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NUCLEAR FACILITIES FROM
UNMANNED AIRCRAFT.

``(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Energy may take such
actions described in subsection (b)(1) that are necessary to
mitigate the threat of an unmanned aircraft system or
unmanned aircraft that poses an imminent threat (as defined
by the Secretary of Energy, in coordination with the
Secretary of Transportation) to the safety or security of a
covered facility.
``(b) Actions Described.--(1) The actions described in this
paragraph are the following:
``(A) Disrupt control of the unmanned aircraft system or
unmanned aircraft.
``(B) Seize and exercise control of the unmanned aircraft
system or unmanned aircraft.
``(C) Seize or otherwise confiscate the unmanned aircraft
system or unmanned aircraft.
``(D) Use reasonable force to disable or destroy the
unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft.
``(2) The Secretary of Energy shall develop the actions
described in paragraph (1) in coordination with the Secretary
of Transportation, consistent with the protection of
information regarding sensitive defense or national security
capabilities.
``(c) Forfeiture.--(1) Any unmanned aircraft system or
unmanned aircraft described in subsection (a) shall be
subject to seizure and forfeiture to the United States.
``(2) The Secretary of Energy may prescribe regulations to
establish reasonable exceptions to paragraph (1), including
in cases where--
``(A) the operator of the unmanned aircraft system or
unmanned aircraft obtained the control and possession of such
system or aircraft illegally; or
``(B) the operator of the unmanned aircraft system or
unmanned aircraft is an employee of a common carrier acting
in manner described in subsection (a) without the knowledge
of the common carrier.
``(d) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Energy and
the Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe regulations
and issue guidance in the respective areas of each Secretary
to carry out this section.
``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `covered facility' means any facility that--
``(A) is identified by the Secretary of Energy for purposes
of this section;
``(B) is located in the United States (including the
territories and possessions of the United States); and
``(C) is owned by the United States, or contracted to the
United States, to store or use special nuclear material.
``(2) The terms `unmanned aircraft' and `unmanned aircraft
system' have the meaning given those terms in section 331 of
the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-
95; 49 U.S.C. 40101 note).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents for such Act
is amended by inserting after the item relating to section
4509 the following new item:

``Sec. 4510. Protection of certain nuclear facilities from unmanned
aircraft.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
I just want to thank the chairman, and I want to thank the staff and
the Members for putting together this piece of legislation. It is
always a long process but I think a good process, in which we pull
together a variety of different amendments. And, as the chairman has
said many times, it is a bottom-up process. It starts with the Members
offering their ideas in putting together the bill. I think, once again,
we have done that process fairly well.
The problem and the challenge, as I had mentioned earlier, comes from
the budget number and the problems that we face. I know the chairman
has said earlier, you know, we can't solve all these problems; so let's
help the troops now.
The problem is, it is like you have got a credit card and you say:
wow, off in the future there may be problems, but let's just buy
whatever we want, put it on the credit card now, and that will help
everybody in the long run. But it doesn't. It is not helping the troops
to pass a bill that has 6 months worth of funding for a yearlong's
worth of overseas contingency operations, and it is not helping them to
hope that the Budget Control Act goes away.
The chairman mentioned that last year we had this same problem and we
did wind up getting an agreement, and that is true. Part of the reason
we got that agreement, however, is because we, on this side, insisted
on that agreement and did not merely accept the defense bill that was
offered without resolving those issues.
And, once again, we have to insist upon that: that it does not make
sense to have the Budget Control Act and continue to insist on spending
more money on defense. Essentially, what the majority party wants is
they want a Ferrari, but they only want to provide the money to pay for
a Honda, and they keep hoping that somehow that extra money is going to
appear. That hurts our troops.
We have heard all of these stories about the terrible state of our
readiness. Consistently, over the course of the last 4 years, the bill
that has been passed in the House and the Senate has put less money
into readiness than the President asked for. Why? Because they wanted
to pay for a wide variety of programs, including the A-10, an important
plane, we have heard.
I am not saying that there is anything in this bill that you can't
make an argument for as being important. The problem is it doesn't add
up, and it leaves us in a position where the military is continually
having to stare at a cliff, knowing that the money is not going to be
there and trying to figure out how to plan through that.
I want a more sensible process. We should fully fund the OCO and fund
the base budget at the level that it is funded at. If we don't find
that sufficient--and I know just about every member of the Armed
Services Committee on the Republican side does not find that number
sufficient--then provide the money. This isn't a matter of saying,
well, what has that got to do with this? That has got everything to do
with this.
If you are not willing to provide the money to pay for these
programs, starting them, or telling the military that they have to have
a fixed number of members of the Army and the Marine Corps, and then
knowing that the money isn't going to be there a year from now, is not
helpful. We have to bring some sanity to the budget process. This bill,
artfully, just imagines that 6 months from now, we will magically make
up the extra money in OCO. That is a big problem that, once again, we
need to confront.
But just like last year, I am confident that we will come together in
conference, we will talk about this, we will work it out, and we will
come up with a bill. But I hope that we will start understanding the
money a little bit better and making this actually work so that the
bill we pass is helping the men and women of the armed services who
serve us so well.
So it is not about whether or not you support the troops or not; it
is a matter of whether or not you think this bill is the best way to do
it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
Mr. LIPINSKI. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chair, I rise to thank Ranking Member Smith and Chairman
Thornberry for an amendment that was included in one of the prior en
bloc groups of amendments.
The amendment that I joined Mr. Pompeo in offering requires the DOD
to report to Congress on the cooperation between Iran and the Russian
Federation and the extent to which that cooperation affects our
national security interests.
Even before the Iran nuclear deal, we watched Tehran and Moscow
become

[[Page H2784]]

closer partners, as Russia announced it would lift its ban on selling
advanced missiles to Iran and began military cooperation with Iran in
Syria to prop up the Assad government.
This year, Russia and Iran have worked together to undermine U.N.
Security Council ballistic missile resolutions and announced an $800
million missile defense contract.
It is imperative that we fully understand the impact of this alliance
on our national security interests because both nations continue to be
hostile towards the U.S. and our allies. This amendment will help do
just that.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington has 5 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Texas has 10 minutes remaining.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of
my time just to, again, emphasize that this is a very, very important
piece of legislation, and it is important that we get it right. This is
one step in the process.
At the committee level, we worked together and got the bill out. At
the time, I raised the concerns that I am raising now. I voted in favor
of the bill, hoping that we would make improvements on the floor.
Instead, we went the other way.
We had one amendment that was supported in the committee that the
Rules Committee stripped without allowing a vote, a rule that would
have women sign up for the Selective Service, an amendment that was
supported by my caucus. The Rules Committee didn't even allow us to
have a vote on that. They just stripped it.
On another one, on the amendment that we didn't like that was in the
bill, they went the other way and didn't allow a vote on that to keep
it in place. That is not a fair process.
I will say that there are ultimately two objections to this bill and
preface it with one thing. I think the chairman in committee has been
very, very fair, has worked very well with Democrats, and I do
appreciate that. The Rules Committee, on the other hand, has been the
exact opposite. They have been completely and totally partisan in a way
that is not in keeping with the tradition of the Armed Services
Committee and the way we do business in a fair way: to allow members to
have votes on amendments that are important to them. They didn't do
that, and that made this bill even worse than it was when it came out
of committee. I hope the Rules Committee will do better in the future.
I don't think that is likely, but that is certainly one issue.
The second issue is, again, the funding. If we are really going to
provide for the troops, we have to realistically look at the next 10
years and begin building a national security strategy that can support
them, based on the budget that we are prepared to provide. There is no
new revenue coming. Even if the budget caps go away, typically the way
the budget caps go away is they are extended for another year, and
basically we use 10-year money to pay for 1 year's worth of goods and
services, which only puts us in a further hole.
Lastly, I will point out those other portions of the budget. The
defense budget has grown as a proportion of the discretionary budget.
It is now over 55 percent of it.

{time} 1915

Essentially, what the Republican party is trying to do is to spend
all of the money on defense, and then there will be nothing left over
for the other priorities. Those other priorities do matter, and it is
wrong to ask: Well, what has the defense bill got to do with our
crumbling infrastructure? What has the defense bill got to do with long
lines at the TSA or at Homeland Security or at the Department of
Justice or anywhere else?
It has got everything to do with it in a year when we don't have a
budget resolution, so we don't have set amounts of money for each bill.
Every dollar that we put into this is taking out of the overall
allocation and is taking from all of those other priorities.
Yes, national security is incredibly important, but I think
infrastructure is important as well. I think the Department of Homeland
Security is important, as is the Department of Justice, as is the
Department of the Treasury, which tries to stop terrorists from raising
money. What we are doing here is refusing to pass a budget resolution,
to put the numbers in place, and then spending all of the money on
defense first--sorry. It is an exaggeration as it is not all of the
money but more of the money than was agreed upon--and then what is left
over goes to everything else. That is not a responsible way to budget.
That is not a responsible way to provide for this country.
For those reasons, I am going to oppose the bill. I hope, again, as
we did last year, we will work this out in conference, come up with a
more sensible approach, and have a bill that we can all support.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I appreciate the gentleman's comments that he believes I have tried
to be fair with Members of the minority in constructing this bill. I
have tried to be; although I have to say, Mr. Chair, if one leans over
backwards to make sure Members of the minority contribute to the bill
even to the point at which some of the provisions Members of the
minority are interested in are opposed by Members of the majority--if
you still try to do that and yet Members of the minority vote against
the bill--I have got to ask myself: Why? Why do I do such things?
Just in the past hour and a half, maybe 2 hours, we have spent time
with basically equal numbers of Members on the Republican and
Democratic sides in their talking about their amendments--discussing
very important issues--but none of those issues happen without having
the bill pass. Yet I get the feeling that, at least for some Members,
there may always be that next bridge that we have got to get to before
they can support the bill.
Mr. Chair, the ranking member described my view really better than I
did. He said that my opinion is we have to help the troops now, and
that is exactly my view. Just think about what the alternative is: no,
we are not going to help the troops now because we are not sure where
the money is going to come from next year or 5 years from now or the
next 10 years. In the meantime, while we are not sure about all of
that, we are going to continue to let class A mishaps grow. What that
means is more people stand in danger of losing their lives, but we are
going to go ahead and allow that to happen because we don't know where
the money is going to come from or we object to this provision, et
cetera.
It is absolutely true. My view is to help the troops now because now
is the time that they are cannibalizing the aircraft, not getting the
minimum number of training hours, seeing class A mishaps go up, have
only nine B-1s that are available to fly. The statistics go on and on.
Mr. Chair, the other point I would make is that readiness is not just
a question of funding the operation and maintenance accounts. That is
really what I have thought most of the time I have been here. What I
have come to understand, however, is that you can cut end strength, you
can cut the number of people in the military, down to the point that
you can never get ready. I think that is part of what the Air Force is
facing now. They have cut the number of people. We are 700 pilots
short, and we are 4,000 maintainers short. It doesn't matter how much
money you are putting toward them when you have only so many mechanics.
The average experience of a mechanic in the military has dropped
significantly just in the last 2 years. People are part of fixing
readiness, and procurement is part of fixing readiness.
How many times do I have to explain that you can't fix a 1979 Black
Hawk helicopter?
You have to get a new one. You can't replace an early 1980s F/A-18
model. There are no more parts for it. You have to replace it with an
F-35. That is what we do in this bill.
Mr. Chair, I continue to be perplexed at how the funding approach
that was good and passed by a Democratic majority in 2008, between Bush
and Obama, is somehow unacceptable between Obama and whoever is next.
None of us knows who is next. We don't

[[Page H2785]]

know who is going to be the next President. To fully fund the readiness
requirements for the whole year so as to deal with those problems of
maintenance and training and people and procurement, to fully fund
those and then have the new President take a fresh look at the
deployments, seems to make sense. It sure made sense in 2008. I think
it makes sense in 2016 as well.
Mr. Chair, the Rules Committee made in order 180 amendments for
consideration here on the floor. I understand not everybody's amendment
was made in order, but it is a little hard for me to understand how
people could complain about the process when 180 amendments were made
in order, many by Democrats, many by Republicans. I realize not every
amendment was made in order, but, surely, a lot of topics have been
discussed.
Finally, Mr. Chair, I just have to take a moment and read one of the
amendments that some Members have complained about that was placed into
the bill in committee by Mr. Russell of Oklahoma.
It reads:

Any branch or agency of the Federal Government shall
provide protections and exemptions consistent with section
702(a) and 703(e)(2) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and
section 103(d) of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

That is it. It is one paragraph. That is it. I don't know who is
opposed today to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or to the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. That is the reason I just get this feeling,
personally, that there may be those who are just looking for some
excuse to vote against the bill. The price of that is that readiness
problems--class A mishaps--will continue on the trend they are on.
Absolutely. Help the troops now. I can't predict the future. I don't
know who is going to be elected President. I don't know who is going to
be elected to Congress. I don't know what the budget will be in future
times, but I know what I can do now. I know what I can do today. I can
help the troops now. You bet. Sign me up.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

Amendment No. 119 Offered by Ms. Bordallo

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 119
printed in House Report 114-571.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill, add the following:

TITLE LXXIII--GUAM WORLD WAR II LOYALTY RECOGNITION ACT

SEC. 7301. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Guam World War II Loyalty
Recognition Act''.

SEC. 7302. RECOGNITION OF THE SUFFERING AND LOYALTY OF THE
RESIDENTS OF GUAM.

(a) Recognition of the Suffering of the Residents of
Guam.--The United States recognizes that, as described by the
Guam War Claims Review Commission, the residents of Guam, on
account of their United States nationality, suffered
unspeakable harm as a result of the occupation of Guam by
Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II, by
being subjected to death, rape, severe personal injury,
personal injury, forced labor, forced march, or internment.
(b) Recognition of the Loyalty of the Residents of Guam.--
The United States forever will be grateful to the residents
of Guam for their steadfast loyalty to the United States, as
demonstrated by the countless acts of courage they performed
despite the threat of death or great bodily harm they faced
at the hands of the Imperial Japanese military forces that
occupied Guam during World War II.

SEC. 7303. GUAM WORLD WAR II CLAIMS FUND.

(a) Establishment of Fund.--The Secretary of the Treasury
shall establish in the Treasury of the United States a
special fund (in this title referred to as the ``Claims
Fund'') for the payment of claims submitted by compensable
Guam victims and survivors of compensable Guam decedents in
accordance with sections 7304 and 7305.
(b) Composition of Fund.--The Claims Fund established under
subsection (a) shall be composed of amounts deposited into
the Claims Fund under subsection (c) and any other payments
made available for the payment of claims under this title.
(c) Payment of Certain Duties, Taxes, and Fees Collected
From Guam Deposited Into Fund.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 30 of the Organic
Act of Guam (48 U.S.C. 1421h), the excess of--
(A) any amount of duties, taxes, and fees collected under
such section after fiscal year 2014, over
(B) the amount of duties, taxes, and fees collected under
such section during fiscal year 2014,

shall be deposited into the Claims Fund.
(2) Application.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply after the
date for which the Secretary of the Treasury determines that
all payments required to be made under section 7304 have been
made.
(d) Limitation on Payments Made From Fund.--
(1) In general.--No payment may be made in a fiscal year
under section 7304 until funds are deposited into the Claims
Fund in such fiscal year under subsection (c).
(2) Amounts.--For each fiscal year in which funds are
deposited into the Claims Fund under subsection (c), the
total amount of payments made in a fiscal year under section
7304 may not exceed the amount of funds available in the
Claims Fund for such fiscal year.
(e) Deductions From Fund for Administrative Expenses.--The
Secretary of the Treasury shall deduct from any amounts
deposited into the Claims Fund an amount equal to 5 percent
of such amounts as reimbursement to the Federal Government
for expenses incurred by the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission and by the Department of the Treasury in the
administration of this title. The amounts so deducted shall
be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.

SEC. 7304. PAYMENTS FOR GUAM WORLD WAR II CLAIMS.

(a) Payments for Death, Personal Injury, Forced Labor,
Forced March, and Internment.--After the Secretary of the
Treasury receives the certification from the Chairman of the
Foreign Claims Settlement Commission as required under
section 7305(b)(8), the Secretary of the Treasury shall make
payments, subject to the availably of appropriations, to
compensable Guam victims and survivors of a compensable Guam
decedents as follows:
(1) Compensable guam victim.--Before making any payments
under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall make payments to
compensable Guam victims as follows:
(A) In the case of a victim who has suffered an injury
described in subsection (c)(2)(A), $15,000.
(B) In the case of a victim who is not described in
subparagraph (A), but who has suffered an injury described in
subsection (c)(2)(B), $12,000.
(C) In the case of a victim who is not described in
subparagraph (A) or (B), but who has suffered an injury
described in subsection (c)(2)(C), $10,000.
(2) Survivors of compensable guam decedents.--In the case
of a compensable Guam decedent, the Secretary shall pay
$25,000 for distribution to survivors of the decedent in
accordance with subsection (b). The Secretary shall make
payments under this paragraph only after all payments are
made under paragraph (1).
(b) Distribution of Survivor Payments.--A payment made
under subsection (a)(2) to the survivors of a compensable
Guam decedent shall be distributed as follows:
(1) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is living as of
the date of the enactment of this Act, but who had no living
children as of such date, the payment shall be made to such
spouse.
(2) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is living as of
the date of the enactment of this Act and who had one or more
living children as of such date, 50 percent of the payment
shall be made to the spouse and 50 percent shall be made to
such children, to be divided among such children to the
greatest extent possible into equal shares.
(3) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is not living as
of the date of the enactment of this Act and who had one or
more living children as of such date, the payment shall be
made to such children, to be divided among such children to
the greatest extent possible into equal shares.
(4) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is not living as
of the date of the enactment of this Act and who had no
living children as of such date, but who--
(A) had a parent who is living as of such date, the payment
shall be made to the parent; or
(B) had two parents who are living as of such date, the
payment shall be divided equally between the parents.
(5) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is not living as
of the date of the enactment of this Act, who had no living
children as of such date, and who had no parents who are
living as of such date, no payment shall be made.
(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this title:
(1) Compensable guam decedent.--The term ``compensable Guam
decedent'' means an individual determined under section 7305
to have been a resident of Guam who died as a result of the
attack and occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military
forces during World War II, or incident to the liberation of
Guam by United States military forces, and whose death would
have been compensable under the Guam Meritorious Claims Act
of 1945 (Public Law 79-224) if a timely claim had been filed
under the terms of such Act.
(2) Compensable guam victim.--The term ``compensable Guam
victim'' means an individual who is not deceased as of the
date of

[[Page H2786]]

the enactment of this Act and who is determined under section
7305 to have suffered, as a result of the attack and
occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military forces
during World War II, or incident to the liberation of Guam by
United States military forces, any of the following:
(A) Rape or severe personal injury (such as loss of a limb,
dismemberment, or paralysis).
(B) Forced labor or a personal injury not under
subparagraph (A) (such as disfigurement, scarring, or burns).
(C) Forced march, internment, or hiding to evade
internment.
(3) Definitions of severe personal injuries and personal
injuries.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission shall promulgate regulations to specify the
injuries that constitute a severe personal injury or a
personal injury for purposes of subparagraphs (A) and (B),
respectively, of paragraph (2).

SEC. 7305. ADJUDICATION.

(a) Authority of Foreign Claims Settlement Commission.--
(1) In general.--The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission
shall adjudicate claims and determine the eligibility of
individuals for payments under section 7304.
(2) Rules and regulations.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Chairman of the
Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall publish in the
Federal Register such rules and regulations as may be
necessary to enable the Commission to carry out the functions
of the Commission under this title.
(b) Claims Submitted for Payments.--
(1) Submittal of claim.--For purposes of subsection (a)(1)
and subject to paragraph (2), the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission may not determine an individual is eligible for a
payment under section 7304 unless the individual submits to
the Commission a claim in such manner and form and containing
such information as the Commission specifies.
(2) Filing period for claims and notice.--
(A) Filing period.--An individual filing a claim for a
payment under section 7304 shall file such claim not later
than one year after the date on which the Foreign Claims
Settlement Commission publishes the notice described in
subparagraph (B).
(B) Notice of filing period.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Foreign Claims
Settlement Commission shall publish a notice of the deadline
for filing a claim described in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in the Federal Register; and
(ii) in newspaper, radio, and television media in Guam.
(3) Adjudicatory decisions.--The decision of the Foreign
Claims Settlement Commission on each claim filed under this
title shall--
(A) be by majority vote;
(B) be in writing;
(C) state the reasons for the approval or denial of the
claim; and
(D) if approved, state the amount of the payment awarded
and the distribution, if any, to be made of the payment.
(4) Deductions in payment.--The Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission shall deduct, from a payment made to a compensable
Guam victim or survivors of a compensable Guam decedent under
this section, amounts paid to such victim or survivors under
the Guam Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (Public Law 79-224)
before the date of the enactment of this Act.
(5) Interest.--No interest shall be paid on payments made
by the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission under section
7304.
(6) Limited compensation for provision of representational
services.--
(A) Limit on compensation.--Any agreement under which an
individual who provided representational services to an
individual who filed a claim for a payment under this title
that provides for compensation to the individual who provided
such services in an amount that is more than one percent of
the total amount of such payment shall be unlawful and void.
(B) Penalties.--Whoever demands or receives any
compensation in excess of the amount allowed under
subparagraph (A) shall be fined not more than $5,000 or
imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
(7) Appeals and finality.--Objections and appeals of
decisions of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall
be to the Commission, and upon rehearing, the decision in
each claim shall be final, and not subject to further review
by any court or agency.
(8) Certifications for payment.--After a decision approving
a claim becomes final, the Chairman of the Foreign Claims
Settlement Commission shall certify such decision to the
Secretary of the Treasury for authorization of a payment
under section 7304.
(9) Treatment of affidavits.--For purposes of section 7304
and subject to paragraph (2), the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission shall treat a claim that is accompanied by an
affidavit of an individual that attests to all of the
material facts required for establishing the eligibility of
such individual for payment under such section as
establishing a prima facie case of the eligibility of the
individual for such payment without the need for further
documentation, except as the Commission may otherwise
require. Such material facts shall include, with respect to a
claim for a payment made under section 7304(a), a detailed
description of the injury or other circumstance supporting
the claim involved, including the level of payment sought.
(10) Release of related claims.--Acceptance of a payment
under section 7304 by an individual for a claim related to a
compensable Guam decedent or a compensable Guam victim shall
be in full satisfaction of all claims related to such
decedent or victim, respectively, arising under the Guam
Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (Public Law 79-224), the
implementing regulations issued by the United States Navy
pursuant to such Act (Public Law 79-224), or this title.

SEC. 7306. GRANTS PROGRAM TO MEMORIALIZE THE OCCUPATION OF
GUAM DURING WORLD WAR II.

(a) Establishment.--Subject to subsection (b), the
Secretary of the Interior shall establish a grant program
under which the Secretary shall award grants for research,
educational, and media activities for purposes of
appropriately illuminating and interpreting the causes and
circumstances of the occupation of Guam during World War II
and other similar occupations during the war that--
(1) memorialize the events surrounding such occupation; or
(2) honor the loyalty of the people of Guam during such
occupation.
(b) Eligibility.--The Secretary of the Interior may not
award a grant under subsection (a) unless the person seeking
the grant submits an application to the Secretary for such
grant, in such time, manner, and form and containing such
information as the Secretary specifies.

SEC. 7307. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Guam World War II Claims Payments and Adjudication.--
For the purposes of carrying out sections 7304 and 7305,
there is authorized to be appropriated for any fiscal year
beginning after the date of enactment of this act, an amount
equal to the amount deposited into the Claims Fund in a
fiscal year under section 7303. Not more than 5 percent of
funds make available under this subsection shall be used for
administrative costs. Amounts appropriated under this section
may remain available until expended.
(b) Guam World War II Grants Program.--For purposes of
carrying out section 7306, there are authorized to be
appropriated $5,000,000 for each fiscal year beginning after
the date of the enactment of this Act.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentlewoman
from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chair, I appreciate this amendment being made in
order.
It is time that we bring resolution to the people of Guam and all
U.S. citizens who have suffered under enemy occupation during World War
II. We found an offset to address its costs, which was one of the
problems. I look forward to adopting this amendment and working with
the Senate during conference.
Again, I thank very much Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith
and Chairman Bishop for their support of this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time
in opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Womack). Is there objection to the request of
the gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the many contributions the
gentlewoman from Guam has made to our committee as the ranking member
on the Subcommittee on Readiness, among other capacities. I think this
is a good amendment, and I certainly hope our Members will support it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Collins of Georgia) having assumed the chair, Mr. Womack, Acting Chair
of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R.
4909) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2017 for military
activities of the Department of Defense and for military construction,
to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for
other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

[[Page H2787]]

____________________