[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 153 (Thursday, September 28, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H9643-H9645]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2126, 
             DEPARMENT, OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1996

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 232 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 232

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 2126) making appropriations for the Department of 
     Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, and 
     for other purposes. All points of order against the 
     conference report and against its consideration are waived.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss] is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas [Mr. 
Frost], pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yield is for the purpose of 
debate only.
  (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to include extraneous 
material in the Record.)
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, this is a very simple, very fair rule for the 
consideration of the conference report for H.R. 2126, the Department of 
Defense appropriation bill. We provide for an hour of debate, and all 
points of order against the report are waived. It is that simple. As we 
rapidly approach the end of the 1995 fiscal year, and it becomes clear 
that we will not be able to have all 13 appropriations bills signed 
into law by October 1, I am pleased that we are making defense a 
priority. The Constitution explicitly requires Congress to provide for 
the national defense, and it is entirely appropriate that we are moving 
this bill today. Many people, myself included, feel that this 
administration has allowed our military readiness to decline at an 
alarming rate. I am concerned that scaling our Armed Forces back too 
far in the name of peace may actually invite new aggression. Certainly 
the Soviet threat is gone, but in the wake of its passing, we are left 
with multiple problems. Mr. Speaker, the lessons of history serve us 
well here--allowing our defensive capabilities to be reduced too much 
could easily be an invitation to aggression against American interests 
abroad, or even here at home. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union 
and Warsaw Pact, United States troops have been far from idle--they 
have been actively involved in a major shooting war in the Gulf, and 
many hotspots such as Haiti, Somalia, and Bosnia. New threats have 
emerged, too. Many relatively small countries are gaining access to 
advanced equipment such as submarines and nuclear weapons. And 
international terrorism has reared its ugly head here at home. Mr. 
Speaker, being prepared means meeting our defense needs--from top to 
bottom. And the little things are important--it does an army no good to 
have thousands of soldiers, equipped with the latest weapons, if those 
soldiers do not have boots for their feet. My friend and colleague, 
Bill Young, chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, 
vividly demonstrated for the Rules Committee all the small needs like 
boots, laces, and so forth, that were not currently being met by 
stretching a list of these items from one end of the Rules Committee 
hearing room to the other. I am pleased that we have made some real 
headway in correcting these problems in this bill, and I urge adoption 
of the rule and the conference report.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule which provides for the 
consideration of the conference report to accompany the fiscal year 
1996 Department of Defense appropriation. The subcommittee chairman, 
Mr. Young, and his able ranking member, Mr. Murtha, are to be 
congratulated for negotiating an agreement which should receive strong 
support both in the House and the Senate.
  Mr. Speaker, I am personally pleased that the conference agreement 
contains $493 million for the continued production of the B-2 stealth 
bomber. I am a firm believer that in a troubled and dangerous world, a 
significant bomber capability is required to ensure our military 
preparedness and to protect our national interest. The B-2 stealth 
bomber is an important component in our overall national defense 
capability and the construction of additional aircraft in addition to 
the 20 already authorized will ensure the continued capability of our 
armed services to protect and defend our national interests.
  I am also gratified that the conference report provides $159 million 
for the procurement of six F-16's as well $2.2 billion for research and 
development funds for the F-22, the next-generation fighter intended to 
replace the F-16. The conferees are to be congratulated for providing 
for both the near-term and long-term tactical needs of the Air Force. 
And, while the conferees reduced the funds for research and development 
for the V-22 Osprey, I am pleased that the conference report does 
contain $758 million for this important addition to the Marine Corps 
arsenal.
  Mr. Speaker, this conference report represents a great deal of hard 
work and hard bargaining and I believe the rule merits the support of 
the House. I recognize that a number of my colleagues have reservations 
about the total amount of defense spending contained in the conference 
report. They will have an opportunity to express that concern by voting 
against the conference report itself and I urge that they support the 
rule. I urge my colleagues to support the conference agreement and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I have no speaker scheduled at this time and I 
continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], the ranking member of the Committee on 
Appropriations.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I would again urge defeat of this rule so that 
this bill could be sent back to conference and we can get serious about 
deficit reduction. As every Member of this House knows, we are being 
asked in virtually every domestic arena to make incredibly tough cuts 
that will squeeze people out of opportunity for a decent education; we 
are being asked to squeeze people who are on family farms; we are being 
asked to make savage reductions in environmental protection laws of the 
country; we are being asked to make huge reductions in Medicare; we are 
being asked to eliminate the protections that seniors now have so that 
when one partner goes in a nursing home the other does not have to go 
bankrupt before they can qualify for Medicaid.
  Mr. Speaker, we are being asked to swallow all of that, and yet we 
are being asked to swallow a defense appropriations bill which does the 
following: We have a half billion dollars in here as a downpayment for 
more B-2 bombers than the Pentagon wants to buy. Just the cost of one 
of those B-2 bombers would pay the tuition for every single 
undergraduate at the University of Wisconsin for the next 12 years.
  We are having a big controversy in our State about whether or not the 
State should buy a new stadium for the Milwaukee Brewers. Just the cost 
of one B-2 bomber would pay for four of those stadiums with a dome, and 
yet we will go ahead and build and buy those new B-2 bombers.
  We have a half billion dollars extra in here for star wars that the 
Secretary of Defense says is unneeded. We have another $350 million for 
C-130 aircraft built in Georgia for which the military cannot even 
identify a military requirement. We have a number of other 

[[Page H 9644]]
items. We have $2.4 billion for a new fighter to be built in Georgia, 
the F-22, which the GAO has repeatedly recommended should be put on 
hold for at least 7 years because we already have hundreds and hundreds 
of F-15's, the best fighter plane in the world.
  And speaking of F-15's, Mr. Speaker, this bill also buys six new ones 
that the Pentagon did not ask for at a cost of $300 million. And yet 
the supporters of this bill pretend that they are going to abide by the 
budget limits in the Kasich budget resolution.
  There is a very well kept secret in the defense portion of this 
budget. The secret is that the Kasich budget resolution in the 7th year 
winds up taking the military budget below that of President Clinton. 
The problem is, if we buy every new weapon system in this bill, we will 
never be able to live within that budget ceiling imposed by the Kasich 
budget resolution. And so what this bill represents is the first shot 
fired in the effort to blow the lid off the budget ceilings in the 
Kasich budget resolution with respect to military spending in this 
country over the next 7 years.
  Mr. Speaker, I would suggest there are an awful lot of reasons to 
vote against this bill. The best reason is simply that we cannot 
seriously uphold the budget limitations in the Kasich budget resolution 
for the defense portion of the budget if we vote to pass this bill and 
turn it into law. The White House is absolutely correct to say that 
this bill is going to be vetoed in its present form. I think the 
President has no choice if he wants to impose fiscal prudence on all 
parts of the Federal budget.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to my 
colleague, the distinguished gentleman from Florida [Mr. Young], the 
chairman of the appropriations subcommittee.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
me time, and I take this time just to maybe clear up a misperception 
that the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] might have created in his 
statement.
  We are within the budget limits. As a matter of fact, if the 
gentleman will recall when the bill was on the floor, we were $2.2 
billion below the armed services authorized level. When we went to 
conference, actually during the conference, we were presented with an 
additional cut in our 602(b) allocation, so we have been coming down, 
since the first of the year, from the numbers that we thought we should 
have. We have been coming down in a very dramatic way.
  The gentleman talked about several areas where we could do this or 
that if we did not build a particular airplane or ship or whatever. Let 
me make this case. If we were to freeze the level, as he suggested, 
what that would do is keep us basically at last year's level and 
provide for the pay raise that we have promised our men and women who 
serve in the military. If he wants further cuts, the Defense Department 
would like to cut the program for breast cancer. They do not want to 
spend the breast cancer money for the purpose we appropriated. We are 
going to insist that they spend it.
  Mr. Speaker, just in the interest of time, and the Members have other 
things to do today, I would like to say this. We can stand here with a 
long list of things that we could do if we did not have a Defense 
Department or if we did not built a ship or if we did not buy an 
airplane or if we did not pay the troops an increase in their salaries. 
But most of those things can actually be done by the State governments 
through block grant programs with their own funds or by the local 
governments. But, Mr. Speaker, if there is one thing that State 
governments cannot do, or one thing that local governments cannot do, 
that is to provide for the national defense, the national security and 
the intelligence requirements of the United States of America. The 
Congress and the President, as Commander in Chief, that is our 
obligation. And the bill that this rule provides for meets that 
obligation in a very straightforward way.
  Mr. Speaker, this is not a political bill. There are no big pork 
projects in here. There was a rule that I applied at the subcommittee 
level that any item in this bill had to have military application, 
number one, or there had to be a requirement for it. Military 
application by itself would not do it, there also had to be a 
requirement.

  Mr. Speaker, this is actually a good bill. This is a good defense 
bill, and there is no reason why it cannot pass the House and the 
Senate and be signed by the President, who, incidentally, his press 
aide today, in a press conference, indicated they had not decided to 
veto this bill. We have reason to believe that we can persuade the 
President, who claims to be a strong national defense President, to 
sign this bill because that is what this bill is.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] has 
requested 1 additional minute in response to some remarks that the 
previous gentleman just made, and I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Wisconsin.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Young], 
compulsively mentions the question of military pay every time someone 
dares to question the total dollar amount in any of these appropriation 
bills. Let me stipulate I know of not a single person in this House who 
does not want to see the full military pay increase go through. It 
will. We have $243 billion in this bill.

                              {time}  1645

  We are suggesting this bill is $7 billion over where it ought to be. 
That still leaves $236 billion in this bill. The first dollars that 
will go out under that bill, whenever it is signed, will go for pay. 
There is no action that any Member is going to be taking to eliminate 
in any way any of the contemplated pay increase for our military 
personnel, and the gentleman ought to know better than to suggest 
otherwise.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I do not have any further speakers at this 
time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and I 
urge a vote for the rule.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I will only say that this vote is about the 
rule. It is a good rule. It is a fair rule. They do not get any simpler 
or better, when we come to rules.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. YATES. 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 284, 
nays 139, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 694]

                               YEAS--284

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bentsen
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chambliss
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coleman
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Cremeans
     Cunningham
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Everett
     Farr
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Ford
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)

[[Page H 9645]]

     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lightfoot
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Longley
     Lucas
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meek
     Menendez
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moakley
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myers
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (FL)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Reed
     Regula
     Richardson
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roth
     Roukema
     Royce
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Scott
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Solomon
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Traficant
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Ward
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--139

     Baker (CA)
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bonior
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bryant (TX)
     Chabot
     Chenoweth
     Clay
     Coburn
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Coyne
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Danner
     DeFazio
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Emerson
     Engel
     Evans
     Ewing
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Forbes
     Frank (MA)
     Funderburk
     Furse
     Gephardt
     Graham
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hayworth
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     Hutchinson
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnston
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lincoln
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Metcalf
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Norwood
     Obey
     Olver
     Orton
     Owens
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Souder
     Stark
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Tate
     Thompson
     Tiahrt
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     White
     Williams
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Chapman
     Greenwood
     Linder
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Sisisky
     Tejeda
     Torkildsen
     Tucker
     Volkmer
     Wise

                              {time}  1708

  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky, Mrs. SMITH of Washington, and Messrs. BRYANT 
of Tennessee, HILLEARY, LUTHER, OWENS, EWING, ISTOOK, FAZIO of 
California, and ORTON, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. SALMON, Ms. JACKSON-LEE, Mr. 
BARCIA, and Mr. EMERSON changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mrs. CLAYTON, and Messrs. WAMP, ENSIGN, and 
CHRISTENSEN changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________