[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 143 (Thursday, September 14, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1790]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                 FEDERAL ACQUISITION REFORM ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                          HON. JERROLD NADLER

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 13, 1995

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1670) to 
     revise and streamline the acquisition laws of the Federal 
     Government, to reorganize the mechanisms for resolving 
     Federal procurement disputes, and for other purposes.

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment 
to eliminate this unwarranted subsidy for defense contractors.
  Every year, U.S. taxpayers spend more than $30 billion to develop 
weapons systems for the military. That Federal spending has led to the 
creation of the most technologically advanced military in the world, 
armed with Stealth bombers, Tomahawk missiles, and supersonic attack 
aircraft. Throughout the cold war and especially during the 1980's, 
this country sacrificed funding for education, nutrition, biomedical 
research, and health care in order to support a bloated Defense budget.
  Unfortunately, we see that trend continuing this year with cuts in 
nearly every social program, including Medicare and Medicaid, while 
increasing spending by $2.1 billion for the military.
  Now, we see that some in Congress would like to toss our costly 
investment out the window by allowing foreign countries to benefit from 
the technological advances, made through taxpayer funded R&D, without 
having to pay for it. When U.S. defense companies sell their wares 
abroad, the United States has a right to be compensated for our help in 
developing their weapons. In the past 5 years, that dividend has 
amounted to nearly $1 billion in deficit reduction for the United 
States. Are we really willing to throw away a billion dollars of our 
constituents money at time when we say we want to balance the budget? 
Are we going to ask veterans to endure cuts in their benefits, while at 
the same time voting for the Nation's wealthiest defense contractors? I 
say ``no.'' The Citizens Against Government Waste, who supports this 
amendment, say ``no.'' And most importantly, the military retirees, 
whose benefits will be slashed to pay for this subsidy for arms 
merchants, say no. I urge my colleagues to support the Maloney, 
DeFazio, Berman amendment.


                          ____________________