[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 139 (Thursday, September 29, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 29, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
 CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4650, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 
                               ACT, 1995

  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 554 just 
adopted, I call up the conference report on the bill, H.R. 4650, making 
appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1995, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the conference report 
is considered as having been read.
  (For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of 
September 26, 1994, at page H9607.)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Murtha] 
will be recognized for 30 minutes, and the gentleman from Pennsylvaniva 
[Mr. McDade] will be recognized for 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Murtha].


                             general leave

  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on 
the conference report on the bill, H.R. 4650, making appropriations for 
the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1995, and for other purposes and that I may include extraneous and 
tabular matter.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I first want to commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
[Mr. McDade] and also offer our condolences to him. I know he is here 
at a time when his mother-in-law, who was 82 and was a very vivacious 
lady, has just died. All of us offer our condolences to the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania. We appreciate him being here.
  Mr. Speaker, we are going to try to expedite the proceedings so Mr. 
McDade can attend the funeral.
  Mr. Speaker, I bring to the floor the conference report for the 
fiscal year 1995 Defense appropriations bill. This conference report 
provides the vast amount for the funds provided for the Department of 
Defense. Some additional funds for the Defense Department are included 
in separate legislation--the military construction appropriations bill 
and the energy and water appropriation bill.
  I would like to thank the distinguished ranking minority member of 
the committee, my friend, Congressman Joe McDade. He and all members of 
the committee have worked hard all year.
  I also would like to extend my special thanks to two of the 
committee's staff who are retiring--Mr. Donald Richbourg and Mr. J. 
David Willson. They have both worked for the appropriations for over a 
quarter of a century. Their expertise will be sorely missed.
  This bill provides $243.6 billion for DOD. The total provided in the 
bill is: Basically at the budget request; at the ceiling set for the 
national security function in the budget resolution; and at the 602(b) 
allocation set for the Defense Subcommittee.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to place in the Record this point a table 
listing the funding level for the major titles of the bill.

                                                BUDGET AUTHORITY                                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Fiscal year 1994                                         
                                                            enacted         1995 estimates        Conference    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I--Military Personnel.........................    $70,624,044,000     $70,475,397,000     $70,389,202,000 
Title II--Operation and Maintenance.................     76,616,787,000      81,926,891,000      80,925,585,000 
Title III--Procurement..............................     44,663,078,000      42,698,919,000      43,423,847,000 
Title IV--Research, Development, Test and Evaluation     35,191,491,000      36,225,013,000      35,870,044,000 
Title V--Revolving and Management Funds.............      2,643,095,000       1,777,638,000       1,669,638,000 
Title VI--Other Department of Defense Programs......     11,021,820,000      11,329,706,000      11,368,346,000 
Title VII--Related agencies.........................        403,588,000         305,384,000         349,184,000 
Title VIII--General provisions......................       -618,958,000           7,131,000        -266,058,000 
Title IX--FY 1994 Supplemental Appropriations.......  ..................        270,000,000         299,300,000 
Procurement: General Provisions.....................  ..................       -304,900,000        -304,900,000 
(Additional transfer authority).....................     (2,500,000,000)     (2,000,000,000)     (2,000,000,000)
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Department of Defense..................    240,544,945,000     244,711,179,000     243,724,188,000 
                                                     ===========================================================
Scorekeeping adjustments............................       -465,300,000        -261,200,000         -96,061,000 
Prior year (outlays only)...........................  ..................  ..................  ..................
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------
      Grand total...................................    240,079,645,000     244,449,979,000     243,628,127,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          defense perspective

  Mr. Speaker, before providing the House with some of the highlights 
of the bill in the separate accounts, I would like to make a few 
general comments about the overall status of defense spending. The DOD 
has proceeded with a dramatic force structure downsizing in the wake of 
the end of the cold war.
  For example:
  From fiscal year 1985 through fiscal year 1995 over 1,000,000 
personnel have been reduced from the manpower levels of the Active 
Force, the Guard and Reserve, and civilians employed by the DOD.
  Measured in constant fiscal year 1995 dollars the procurement account 
has declined from $132.7 billion in fiscal year 1985 to $43.4 billion 
fiscal year 1995.
  A dramatic downsizing in the domestic and international base 
structure continues.
  Despite the end of the cold war, our troops have been called on time 
and time again in recent years to support the foreign policy of 
America: The Persian Gulf war; Somalia; enforcing the no-fly zone in 
northern and southern Iraq; enforcing the no-fly zone and arms embargo 
in the former Yugoslavia; deploying to Haiti; and numerous other small 
operations.
  This high tempo of operations has been taking place in the midst of a 
dramatic downsizing of our forces. Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is that 
our servicemen and servicewomen are spread very thin. Because of the 
nature of the military operations that some units conduct, these same 
units are called on time after time to be deployed to various global 
locations.
  I remember inspecting a Marine unit in Somalia about 18 months ago. 
This unit had been deployed to the Persian Gulf during Christmas 1990, 
deployed to Okinawa for a rotational deployment during Christmas 1991, 
deployed to Somalia during Christmas 1992 and at the time of my 
inspection was scheduled to be overseas on a rotational deployment 
during Christmas 1993. The simple reality is that such a high tempo of 
deployment is eroding the morale of our troops and ultimately, if it 
continues, will erode the fabric of the quality of our forces.
  While I believe the funding provided in this bill should be adequate 
to meet our military objectives for the upcoming fiscal year, I must 
admit our readiness is now on the razors edge and I am very concerned 
about the outyears. Deputy Secretary of Defense, John Deutch recently 
testified that the funding profile for the Department of Defense for 
the next 5 years has a $40 billion shortfall. Suffice it to say, we all 
face some very tough budget decisions during the next few years.


                     conferees emphasize readiness

  The conferees fully funded the administration's 1995 readiness 
requests in the operation and maintenance account. The administration's 
budget request increases constant dollar operating resources by +14 
percent per Army combat battalion, +11 percent per Navy ship, and +12 
percent per Air Force aircraft between fiscal year 1993 and fiscal year 
1995.
  To further strengthen the administration's initiative, the conferees 
recommended major readiness enhancements totaling over $1,850,000,000 
over the budget request. some of those increases are listed below.

                                                               Millions
Depot Maintenance..................................................$262
Real Property Maintenance...........................................156
Military Pay Increase...............................................186
Ammunition..........................................................336
Sealift.............................................................135
OPTEMPO, Training, Spares...........................................360
Korean Patriot/Apache................................................51
Military family programs.............................................85

                          highlights by title

  Mr. Speaker, I would like to briefly highlight some of the major 
issues and programs included in the bill in the first four titles.

                      Title I.--Military Personnel

  The conferees recommend $70.4 billion for the military personnel 
account. The Active Force, Guard and Reserve and civilian employed by 
the DOD will be downsizing by 180,000 in fiscal year 1995--15,000 
people a month or 500 per day. Fortunately, the pace of the personnel 
downsizing slows down significantly after fiscal year 1995. This 
stability should have a positive effect on morale, quality of life, and 
overall combat readiness.
  The conferees included an increase of $186 million to provide a pay 
raise for the men and women of our armed forces.

                  Title II.--Operation and Maintenance

  The conferees recommend $80.9 billion for the operation and 
maintenance account. As discussed earlier in my statement, numerous 
increases were made to improve readiness and the bulk of those funds 
were included in the operation and maintenance account.
  The conferees also fully funded the request of $400 million to 
continue the demilitarization program for the former Soviet Union.

                        Title III.--Procurement

  The conferees recommend $43.4 billion for the procurement account. 
Measured in constant fiscal year 1995 dollars, this is a reduction of 
$89.3 billion from the 1985 level of $132.7 billion. Funding highlights 
for fiscal year 1995 include the following:
  Army.--Blackhawk helicopters: Provided $318.4 million for continued 
procurement of the Blackhawk helicopter.
  AHIP: Provided $120 million for the AHIP helicopter program.
  Navy.--F/A-18 Aircraft: Conferees provided $1 billion for the 
procurement of 24 F/A-18 aircraft.
  Trident II Missiles: Provided $616 for 18 Trident II Missiles.
  Carrier Replacement Program: Provided $2.2 billion to complete 
financing of the next aircraft carrier.
  DDG-51 Destroyers: Provided $2.7 billion for the procurement of three 
DDG-51 destroyers.
  Air Force.--C-17 Aircraft: Included $2.2 billion for six aircraft 
$189 million for advanced procurement.
  E-8 JSTARS Aircraft: Included $441 million for procurement of two 
aircraft.
  ABRAAM Missiles: Included $289 million for the procurement of 413 
missiles.


     Title IV.--Research, Development, Test and Evaluation [RDT&E]

  Provides $35.9 billion for the research, development, test and 
evaluation account. Highlights include:
  Army.--Medical Research: Provided $258 million for medical research, 
an increase of $217 million above the budget. This includes an increase 
of $150 million for breast cancer research.
  Comanche Helicopters: Provided almost $500 million for the Army's 
next generation reconnaissance helicopter, the Comanche.
  Armored System Modernization: Provides $175 million for the 
development of a tank to replace the Sheridan.
  Navy.--New Attack Submarine: Provided $470 million development of the 
new attack submarine.
  F/A-18 E/F: Provided $1.3 billion for continued development for the 
next generation of F-18 aircraft.
  Air Force.--F-22: Provided $2.35 billion for the next generation 
tactical fighter.
  Milstar: Provided $607.2 billion for the Milstar communications 
satellite.


                           GUARD AND RESERVE

  Another high priority of the conferees was to provide increased 
funding for the Guard and Reserve. The valuable role of the Guard and 
Reserve within the total force concept was shown in the Persian Gulf 
war. The President has also authorized the call up of 1,600 reservists 
for the Haitian deployment.
  The conferees added a total of $800 million for equipment for the 
Guard and Reserve. Within those funds, $505 million are for aircraft.


                          clarifying language

  Mr. Speaker, there are two minor matters which I would like to 
briefly address to clarify the conferees position.
  The conferees direct the Department of the Air Force to initiate the 
process of transferring the Air Force Reserve 928th Tactical Airlift 
Group out of the O'Hare Air Reserve Forces facility in Illinois. The 
Department should make all funds necessary to accomplish the transfer 
available during the course of fiscal year 1995. Further, priority 
consideration should be given to relocating the unit to Scott Air Force 
Base, IL.
  The following language clarifies the intent of the conferees 
concerning the William Langer Jewel Bearing Plant.
  The conferees agreed to eliminate Senate bill language providing 
$2,500,000 only for ``capital investment, operations, and such other 
expenditures as may be necessary to maintain the William Langer Plant 
as a going concern while it is being excessed under the provisions of 
the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act''. The conferees 
felt that bill language was unnecessary to carry out the Senate's 
direction and agreed to provide the $2,500,000 required for this effort 
within the Statement of the Managers in the missile procurement, Air 
Force account. The conferees specifically provided an additional 
$2,500,000 within the industrial facilities line, P-1 line No. 10, only 
to carry out the Senate's directions as explained in Senate Report 103-
321, page 129. It was further the intent of the conferees that the Air 
Force transfer the funds provided for the Langer plant to the manager 
of the National Defense Stockpile for execution.


                               conclusion

  In conclusion Mr. Speaker, this conference report: Provides $243.6 
billion in budget authority for the fiscal year 1995 activities of the 
Department of Defense; is just below the budget request; is within 
ceiling for the national security function established in the budget 
resolution; is within the 602(b) allocation set for defense; emphasizes 
readiness by increasing funding for a number of programs and reduces 
funding for lower priority programs.
  I urge support and passage of the fiscal year 1995 defense conference 
report.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  (Mr. McDADE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. McDADE. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this conference report, and 
I begin my remarks by paying tribute to my dear friend from 
Pennsylvania, Mr. Murtha, who, as chairman of the subcommittee, has set 
a standard for all other Members of the House to live up to as they do 
their work. He has brought to this committee great industry, great 
intellect, and great integrity.
  The result is that this particular conference report we bring to you 
today is supported on both sides of the aisle by all members of the 
committee, as indicated by my colleagues, the gentleman from Florida 
[Mr. Young] and the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], in a 
difficult environment and try to bring our resources to bear, making 
sure that our military preserves the quality of life for our people, 
preserve its readiness and continues, to the extent that we can, with 
the modernization program which enables our young people to be able to 
confront the problems of the world in a well-trained and equipped 
manner.
  That is our goal, that is what this bill does, and that is what we 
believe it ought to do.
  In closing, I know we have Mr. Don Richbourg, staff director of the 
Defense Subcommittee, on the floor here today, as well as Mr. David 
Willson. This is their last bill as both are retiring at the end of the 
session.
  Mr. Speaker, between the two of these gentlemen they have over 50 
years of service to this institution and to their country. It is a 
better country and a better institution because they were willing to 
devote that much of their lives to making it a better country. We 
appreciate their efforts.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report and urge its 
adoption.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill, supported by every member of the 
Defense Subcommittee, both sides of the aisle. We are not aware of any 
problems and I expect we will be able to bring it to a vote quickly.
  Having said that, I want the record to show I support this conference 
report not because of its resemblance to the Defense budget submitted 
by the administration--to the contrary. I support it because we have 
done our best, within the limited dollars available, to correct the 
most serious flaws in that budget.
  Exhibit A: Taking care of the troops. The budget proposed, for the 
second year in a row, to hold military pay below the level needed to 
keep pace with inflation. This at a time when we are asking our troops 
more than ever to ``do more with less;'' when we are sending them away 
from home with disturbing frequency; and when we are shamed by reports 
that a growing number of military families need Federal assistance such 
as food stamps. This bill says ``we can do better * * * we must do 
better.'' It provides a full cost-of-living allowance for the military, 
and restores equity between the COLA's received by our military 
retirees and their civilian counterparts.
  Another example: Readiness. I agree the Pentagon deserves credit for 
placing readiness at the top of its priorities--but the budget they 
sent us did not do enough. Problems abound--from an alarming growth in 
maintenance backlogs, to cuts in training resulting directly from the 
overseas deployments which have become a fixture of this 
administration's foreign policy. A situation which if left unaddressed 
takes us right back to a hollow force.
  We can't fix all these problems today, but we're recommending a 
series of changes which collectively are a step in the right direction. 
We add nearly a billion over the budget for critical readiness areas, 
ranging from enhancing our posture in Korea to correcting dangerous 
shortages in spare parts and repair funds. And we've included a $300 
million supplemental to pay for the added costs resulting from Rwanda 
and refugee relief in the Caribbean.
  We also reverse what I consider a series of misguided budget 
proposals--be it the premature retirement of half the B-52 fleet, or 
the dismantling of the ammunition industrial base, and others. And we 
reject completely the administration's plan to siphon off $300 million 
from the Defense budget to pay U.N. assessments.
  We do this while keeping what is left of the Pentagon's modernization 
program intact--we fund the new aircraft carrier, the C-17 airlifter, 
and the continued development of new generation aircraft for the 
military services.
  In all, we recommend a reordering of priorities, intended first and 
foremost to keep faith with the men and women in the service and 
to give them the training and equipment needed to carry out their 
missions.

  Have we been able to do enough? Regrettably, in this Member's 
opinion, no, we have not. We can't do everything because we have to 
live under the confines of the overall budget, which until we can 
change it is without question taking our defense posture down too fast 
and too deep.
  But that is a debate for another day. For now I would ask all Members 
to support this conference report which has the consensus support of 
the committee.
  Mr. Speaker, at this point I want to express my appreciation to all 
the members of the conference committee on both sides of the Capitol 
for their contributions in what was our toughest Defense conference 
yet. In particular I wish to congratulate our chairman, my friend from 
Pennsylvania, whose tireless efforts brought our work to a successful 
conclusion. And I would be remiss if I didn't thank the committee staff 
who have once again lived up to their reputation as the best on the 
Hill.
  In that regard I want to recognize two members of the staff who are 
with us here on the floor for the last time, who between them have 
served the committee and the House for over 50 years.
  The first is David Willson, who has been with the committee since 
1971. I've had the good fortune of working closely with Dave for over 
20 years, starting on the Interior Subcommittee and then Defense, where 
for the past 17 years he has been the senior staffer responsible for 
the weapons procurement accounts, especially those for the U.S. Army. 
Those of us who have seen his work firsthand know his quiet 
professionalism has saved the taxpayer billions.
  Mr. Speaker, perhaps the most dramatic way to see what Dave Willson 
has done for the country is to think back a few years to those vivid 
scenes from the desert. We all remember seeing APACHE helicopters, 
Bradley fighting vehicles, M-1 tanks--the tools our Army used to bring 
Desert Storm to a quick and decisive end. Each and every one of those 
systems were literally on the drawing board when Dave began his work 
with the subcommittee and his contributions have been instrumental in 
getting them to the troops in the field. We've had a good run together, 
David, and I thank you.
  And then there's the staff director of the Defense Subcommittee, Ron 
Richbourg. Don has been with us for 28 years, over which time he has 
deservedly gained a reputation as one of the best staff members on the 
Hill. He has truly become an institution on the committee, and I can't 
say enough about the skill and judgment he's shown year after year in 
helping us handle one of the most complex and critically important 
bills before the Congress. He has been scrupulously nonpartisan, in the 
best traditions of the Appropriations Committee, and I speak for all 
the members on our side who have benefited from his steadiness and hard 
work. It's hard for me to imagine a hearing or a markup without you, 
Don. To both of you, the country is better off for your contributions 
and we wish you well in your future endeavors.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], the chairman of the full committee.
  Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to inform the House that 
the conference report we are now considering is the 13th and final 
conference report to come before the House for the fiscal year which 
begins on Saturday. Assuming that the Senate behaves responsibly, there 
should be no reason for a continuing resolution this year.
  This is the first time the House will have completed action on all 
conference reports before the end of the fiscal year since 1988 and it 
is the first time the House will have cleared all appropriations 
matters before September 30 since that day was made the end of the 
fiscal year in 1977. I think that was made possible because of the 
extraordinary cooperation which the committee has received from almost 
all quarters.
  Completion of all work on our appropriations bills prior to the 
beginning of the fiscal year did not happen without a lot of hard work 
and a great deal of cooperation, not only from those who serve on the 
committee but many who do not. I thank all members for their 
cooperation. The lead role was obviously played by the subcommittee 
chairmen of each of the 13 subcommittees, and without exception they 
did an excellent job.
  Every member of the committee had to work long hours and demonstrate 
more flexibility than ever before, given the hard decisions that had to 
be made. A great portion of the credit for what was accomplished has to 
go to Joe McDade and the ranking Republican members on the 13 
subcommittees. I think our committee did its work in a bipartisan 
manner, and without the cooperative efforts of Joe and the other 
ranking members, we would not have been able to achieve the results we 
did.
  I want to thank the leadership of the House on both sides of the 
aisle and their staffs for their efforts in getting our bills to the 
floor. Also the Rules Committee ought to be mentioned for their 
important role in providing for the orderly consideration of our 
appropriation bills and conference reports. Many times, our bills 
require the Rules Committee to do its works on short notice. I 
appreciate the cooperation we received.

                              {time}  1110

  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the many support personnel of 
the House for the hard work that has led to the successful completion 
of appropriations legislation for the 103d Congress: the 
Parliamentarians, the reading clerks who expedite getting the papers to 
the Senate, the Reporters of Official Debates, the tally clerks who are 
personally affected when we get midnight filing consent, the enrolling 
clerks who have to adjust the bills to reflect conference action and 
then proofread all the changes, the Journal clerks, the bill clerks, 
the Cloakroom staff and the committee reporters who transcribe our 
committee hearings. In short, I want to thank the entire legislative 
operations support group. I think too often we forget about the extra 
effort these people make, and I want to personally thank them for all 
their hard work. It has meant a lot to our committee. Mr. Speaker, 
these are all people who, through their hard work, their care and pride 
in doing a quality job, can share my pleasure in getting our work done 
and doing a good job well.
  Mr. Speaker, I also should say that the House should be proud, not 
only of the timeliness of these bills, but also the content. We are 
witnessing a major shift in the availability of resources away from the 
discretionary portion of the Federal budget, the portion that is under 
the jurisdiction of this committee. The outlays from the Federal 
Treasury in the coming fiscal year, occurring as a result of the 
passage of these 13 bills, will actually drop below the nominal levels 
of the current year. Spending on nonmandatory appropriated items will 
decline markedly as a percentage of the overall budget and as a 
percentage of the economy.
  To find room to fund some new initiatives, Mr. Speaker, we needed to 
reduce, or terminate, hundreds of ongoing programs, and nearly three 
dozen existing programs have been eliminated in the course of 
considering these 13 bills. The reality of this has been painfully 
brought home to Members as the bills were considered because we did not 
have the money to fund all the programs that individual Members thought 
were important.
  Mr. Speaker, to stay within our tight limits we brought difficult 
choices to the House. The House faced up to those choices. The deficit 
was not increased in order to support new programs. Instead we reduced 
and terminated other ongoing programs. By adopting these bills Members 
agreed to $4.4 billion in committee recommended reductions below the 
President's request. House action cut another $75 million. In the next 
few days I will be providing Members with more detailed information on 
program reductions, terminations and increases.
  Mr. Speaker, again I thank all Members for their support. I urge 
adoption of the defense appropriation conference report so we can 
complete our job, and I also want to second the remarks made by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. McDade] in saluting the staff members 
who have done such great work, and, as we know, are leaving. I say to 
the gentlemen, ``We have come to count on you for a lot these years, 
and you're going to be missed. I appreciate the efforts that have been 
expended on behalf of the committee and the House.''
  Mr. McDADE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. McDADE. If I may, I just want to take a few seconds to say to my 
friend from Wisconsin that we are very grateful for the leadership that 
he has provided as the new chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. 
He has done an excellent job. I want to say, as members of the minority 
side, we have never been more included in the decisionmaking process, 
and I think that is probably one reason that all these bills are here 
in such a timely way before the end of the fiscal year.
  I say to the gentleman, you've done a great job, Dave. We have 
enjoyed working with you. We look forward to working with you next 
year.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Washington [Mr. Dicks].
  (Mr. DICKS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, in the fiscal year 1995 Defense 
appropriations conference bill, H.R. 4650, the conferees agreed to 
include $25 million for the GPS-aided munitions [GAM's], in missile 
procurement, Air Force, at page 97 of the conference report.
  I support this provision, and want to stress the importance of this 
program.
  The $25 million is provided to support the acquisition of a limited 
stockpile of GPS-aided munitions [GAM's] as an interim near-precision 
conventional bomb capability on block 20 B-2 bombers in association 
with the GPS-aided targeting system [GATS].
  In order to accomplish this effort, the Air Force is directed to 
implement an acquisition strategy and contract type which will provide 
the earliest possible near-precision conventional all-weather 
capability for the B-2. The conferees have determined that this 
procurement will ensure the lowest risk schedule, accordingly, the 
acquisition strategy may include noncompetitive procurement through the 
B-2 prime contractor for the initial limited stockpile.
  Specifically, the funds were included to provide operational GAM 
capability on the first available block 20 aircraft, that will exist as 
of July 1996.
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the 
conference report.
  Mr. Speaker, contained in this report are two extremely important 
provisions. The first may be found in section 8106. It sends money 
Congress appropriated in fiscal year 1994 to ARPA to NASA--and then it 
sends it from NASA back to the Air Force, to PE 63401F.
  At first glance this would seem a silly thing to do, but we in 
Congress have been forced to do so by the actions and in-actions of the 
Advanced Research Projects Agency--[ARPA].
  A year ago Congress appropriated $40 million for ARPA to begin work 
on a Single-Stage-To-Orbit [SSTO] X-vehicle; an experimental test 
vehicle meant to be the follow-on to the successful DC-X1 test vehicle. 
This money was also meant to be used to fund the remaining flight test 
program of the DC-X1. But here we are, only hours away from the end of 
fiscal year 1994, and ARPA has yet to take any steps toward fulfilling 
the law, other than to propose a program that has yet to be briefed to 
anyone in Congress; a program designed to waste and dissipate the money 
we had appropriated to it.
  When the executive fails to observe the law, Congress must act. 
Section 8106 takes fiscal year 1994 money from ARPA and sends it to 
NASA for NASA to pursue the start of construction of the X-33 SSTO test 
vehicle. NASA is also obligated by section 8106 to spend this money as 
the Air Force's Phillips Laboratory in New Mexico, where the Air 
Force's SSTO expertise currently resides. These actions, Mr. Speaker, 
are consistent with President Clinton's space launch policy and his 
call for a supporting role for DOD in the NASA-led development of the 
X-33. Section 8106 also provides for this money to be available to be 
spent to fund the completion of the original flight test program of the 
DC-X1.
  Mr. Speaker, the second important provision in this conference report 
that I'd like to highlight is the inclusion of $30 million in new, 
fiscal year 1995 money, also contained in PE 63401F, that is meant to 
be spent by the Air Force at Phillips Lab in support of their 
activities in helping to build and, soon, to fly, the X-33.
  Mr. Speaker, these two provisions go a long way toward helping to 
start to implement the President's space launch policy mandates for 
DOD, and give DOD equity in the NASA-led program to build and fly the 
X-33 SSTO experimental vehicle. Flying the X-33 will give this Nation, 
in just a few years, revolutionary new space capabilities.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend Chairman Murtha for his 
foresight and leadership on this issue, and for his service to this 
Nation's vital interests in assuring a robust future space launch 
capability. I would also like to commend in similar fashion my 
colleagues Mr. Skeen of New Mexico, Mr. Livingston of Louisiana, Mr. 
McDade of Pennsylvania, and Mr. Lewis of my own State of California, 
all of whom were critical to the inclusion of these provisions in the 
final conference report, as was also Mr. Visclosky of Indiana on the 
majority side of the aisle. Finally, I'd like to also thank Mr. 
Domenici of New Mexico, a Member of the other body who was also a 
member of the conference committee, and without whose gracious help and 
understanding these two provisions would not be here in this conference 
report.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises in strong support for 
the Defense Appropriations Act of 1995. This Member would commend the 
chairman of the subcommittee, the distinguished gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Murtha], and the distinguished ranking member [Mr. 
McDade] for their efforts to present a conference report with 
bipartisan support.
  In particular, the conference report contains language that addresses 
the status of the military technicians for the National Guard and 
Reserves. As the chairman knows, these technicians are a vital 
component of maintaining the high readiness level of our Guard and 
Reserves. Section 8118 of the conference report prohibits funds from 
being used to reduce military--civilian--technicians of the Reserve 
components, and states that there should be no administratively imposed 
ceiling on the technicians unless those reductions are the direct 
result of a reduction in military force structure. Mr. Speaker, this is 
essential language that addresses the deep concern that has been voiced 
by our local Guard and Reserve components, and this Member thanks his 
colleagues for acting on this matter.
  A second provision of particular interest to this Member of the 
inclusion of a reporting requirement on new membership in NATO. The 
issue of new members in NATO is fast upon us, with nations such as 
Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary eager to become full members of 
the Alliance. Indeed, just last month, United States and other NATO 
forces conducted exercises in Poland as part of the Partnership for 
Peace. It is time to start thinking seriously about specific criteria 
for membership. The reporting requirement included in the conference 
report calls for the Secretary of Defense to present specific military, 
economic, and political criteria for admission of new members. The 
report will also include the measures that NATO members need to 
undertake in order to establish full military cooperation and 
interoperability with aspiring members. This is a logical and a 
necessary step that will advance the Partnership for Peace, and will 
speed the day when Eastern and Central European nations can be full and 
contributing members of the Alliance. This Member appreciates the 
willingness of the conferees to include this provision.
  Mr. Speaker, this Member would urge adoption of H.R. 4650.
  Mr. FAWELL. Mr. Speaker, as cochairman of the bipartisan Porkbusters 
Coalition, I often rise to point out unauthorized projects in each of 
the 13 appropriations bills. Today we have before us the conference 
report for Defense appropriations for fiscal year 1995. I come not to 
point to a particular project, but a phrase included in the conference 
report. Included in amendment 13, which was reported in technical 
disagreement, is this phrase: ``Deletes House language prohibiting 
obligation of $473 million until authorized.'' In other words, the 
House had originally prohibited spending an additional $473 million on 
operations and maintenance for the Army until it was authorized. The 
conference deleted the authorization requirement.
  Mr. Speaker, I have been criticized for my strict scrutiny of 
appropriations bills. My colleagues ask why I would question 
unauthorized projects in appropriations bill when language specifically 
mandates that the project must be authorized before funds are 
obligated? Because sometimes these authorization provisions are 
dropped.
  As we see in today's conference report, authorization language is 
deleted, enabling $473 million to slide by without authorization. This 
is why I fight unauthorized projects regardless of language which 
requires authorization at some point in the future. This is why the 
House of Representatives requires two steps before taxpayer's money can 
be spent. First the authorization, then the appropriation. First the 
horse, then the cart. This ensures that when the House proceeds to fund 
a project, we know what we are funding. We can have confidence that 
this expenditure has been approved by a committee of authorization, 
that congressional hearings have been held, that this expenditure is in 
the national interest of our country!
  The Porkbusters and I will continue to fight unauthorized projects. 
We will continue to carefully analyze each of the appropriations bills 
for authorization language which may or may not be included in final 
versions of legislation. We will continue to insist on authorization, 
and then appropriation, as established by the rules of the House. And, 
we will fight again.
  Mr. GLICKMAN. Mr. Speaker, while I am generally supportive of this 
conference report, I do take objection to the inclusion of a provision 
to reactivate the SR-71 Blackbird reconnaissance aircraft. A similar 
provision was included by the defense authorization conference, of 
which I was a member, and it was the reason I did not sign that 
conference report.
  The SR-71 was an excellent intelligence platform--in its day. The 
trouble is that its day has long since passed. Nearly 5 years ago, 
Congress and the Department of Defense looked at the SR-71's 
limitations--it can effectively operate only in good weather and cannot 
transmit the images it collects directly to those who need them--and 
concluded that the aircraft should be retired. New systems with an 
ability to stay over a target for long periods of time, in any weather 
conditions and relay images instantly to military commanders on the 
ground were planned. The availability of those systems has been 
delayed, in part because of opposition from some of the same quarters 
now advocating the reactivation of the SR-71 as necessary to fill an 
intelligence collection gap.
  Reactivating the SR-71 will only exacerbate those delays. The $100 
million appropriated in this conference report will not solve the 
Blackbird's problems. The aircraft needs new sensors and it is 
extremely expensive to maintain. Meeting those costs will require 
hundreds of millions of dollars more, money which will be taken from 
the development of more modern and more capable systems. The 
realization that the SR-71 would be a drain on scarce resources is one 
of the reasons that the Department of Defense does not support bringing 
it out of retirement. The Intelligence Committee, which I chair, shares 
that judgment.
  Mr. Speaker, if one precept should guide our expenditure of the 
taxpayer's dollars, it is that we should only invest in technologies 
which will be useful in the future. We are not doing that with the 
decision we will make today on the SR-71. Spending money to return to 
active service an aircraft now housed in museums across the country 
does not make sense. I hope that this issue will be given more thought 
next year and that this decision will be reversed.
  Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the conference report.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Visclosky). The question is on the 
conference report.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. McDADE. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 327, 
nays 86, not voting 21, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 446]

                               YEAS--327

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews (ME)
     Andrews (NJ)
     Andrews (TX)
     Baesler
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barca
     Barcia
     Barlow
     Barrett (NE)
     Bateman
     Beilenson
     Bentley
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blackwell
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Brooks
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Byrne
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carr
     Castle
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Cooper
     Coppersmith
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Darden
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLauro
     Derrick
     Deutsch
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Durbin
     Edwards (TX)
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fazio
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Fish
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford (MI)
     Ford (TN)
     Fowler
     Franks (CT)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gingrich
     Glickman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Grandy
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamburg
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings
     Hefner
     Hinchey
     Hoagland
     Hobson
     Hochbrueckner
     Holden
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hughes
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inhofe
     Inslee
     Istook
     Jacobs
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kennedy
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kolbe
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     LaFalce
     Lambert
     Lancaster
     Lantos
     LaRocco
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lehman
     Levin
     Levy
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (FL)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Machtley
     Maloney
     Mann
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Margolies-Mezvinsky
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     Mazzoli
     McCandless
     McCloskey
     McCollum
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McMillan
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Mica
     Michel
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Mink
     Moakley
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Pickett
     Pickle
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Ravenel
     Reed
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Ridge
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Rowland
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sangmeister
     Santorum
     Sarpalius
     Sawyer
     Schenk
     Schiff
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sharp
     Shaw
     Shepherd
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Snowe
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Studds
     Stupak
     Swett
     Swift
     Synar
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas (CA)
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Tucker
     Unsoeld
     Upton
     Valentine
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Walsh
     Waters
     Weldon
     Whitten
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--86

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus (AL)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Becerra
     Bunning
     Burton
     Buyer
     Clement
     Coble
     Collins (IL)
     Combest
     Conyers
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     DeFazio
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Diaz-Balart
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards (CA)
     Ehlers
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Gekas
     Goodling
     Goss
     Grams
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Huffington
     Inglis
     Johnson, Sam
     Johnston
     Klein
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kyl
     Linder
     McInnis
     Meyers
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Myers
     Nadler
     Nussle
     Paxon
     Penny
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Ramstad
     Roberts
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Roukema
     Royce
     Sanders
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Sensenbrenner
     Shays
     Solomon
     Stump
     Thomas (WY)
     Walker
     Watt
     Waxman
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                             NOT VOTING--21

     Applegate
     Bacchus (FL)
     Baker (CA)
     Fields (LA)
     Gallo
     Hayes
     Hilliard
     Hutto
     Jefferson
     Lloyd
     McCrery
     McCurdy
     McNulty
     Neal (NC)
     Slattery
     Smith (IA)
     Sundquist
     Thompson
     Torkildsen
     Washington
     Wheat

                              {time}  1138

  The Clerk announced the following pair:
  On this vote:

       Mr. McCrery for, with Mr. Baker of California against.

  Messrs. EDWARDS of California, SOLOMON, ZELIFF, DOOLITTLE, FIELDS of 
Texas, WATT, THOMAS of Wyoming, and BECERRA changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the conference report was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________