[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 30 (Thursday, March 7, 1996)]
[House]
[Page H1808]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT IN LIEU OF AMENDMENT TO H.R. 
               3019, BALANCED BUDGET DOWN PAYMENT ACT, II

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I had indicated earlier that I would be making 
this request in order to try to save $900 million by providing for 
multiyear funding for the C-17.
   Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during consideration of 
H.R. 3019, pursuant to House Resolution 372, it may be in order to 
consider the amendment relating to the C-17 aircraft that I have placed 
at the desk as though it were the amendment specified as No. 4 in House 
Report 104-474, except that the time for debate be limited to 20 
minutes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Obey: Add the following title to 
     the end of the bill:

                  ``Title V--C-17 Multi-Year Contract

       Funds appropriated under the heading, ``Aircraft 
     Procurement, Air Force,'' in Public Laws 104-61, 103-335, and 
     103-139 that are or remain available for C-17 airframes, C-17 
     aircraft engines, and complementary widebody aircraft/NDAA 
     may be used for multiyear procurement contracts for C-17 
     aircrafts: Provided, That the duration of multiyear contracts 
     awarded under the authority of this section may be for a 
     period not to exceed seven program years, notwithstanding 
     section 2306b(1) of title 10, United States Code.''

                              {time}  1330

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. LaHood). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Wisconsin?
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I 
would point out to the gentleman who offered the request that the 
Appropriations Subcommittee on National Security strongly supports the 
C-17 aircraft and also strongly supports multiyear contracting as a way 
to save, get more for the dollar.
  In this case the President's request is somewhat unique. Normally 
multiyear contracting is for a 5-year period. In this case it is for 7, 
and normally we are guaranteed at least a 10-percent savings because of 
going to multiyear. In this case we are only guaranteed 5 percent.
  We will be addressing this issue, and it will be addressed in 
conference since the other body will include it in their bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I will object.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield under his reservation 
before he does object?
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Further reserving the right to object, I yield 
to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I would simply point out that nothing in my 
language in any way prevents us from getting any deal that we want to 
get out of the contractor. But the fact is that, as the gentleman 
knows, items are often lost in conference because of trades. This is an 
opportunity for us to nail down at least $900 million in savings right 
now.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would respond simply by saying 
we think we might be able to do better than the $900 million. That is 
certainly what we intend to do.
  As far as this amendment getting lost in conference, I do not think 
that is a serious problem at all. If we agree to it here today, then 
there is no conference on this item and there is no further opportunity 
for us to try to get more for the dollar.
  Mr. Speaker, I must restate my objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.

                          ____________________