[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 109 (Tuesday, July 29, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H5929-H5932]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2266, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 198 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 198

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 2266) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and 
     for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
     dispensed with. Points of order against consideration of the 
     bill for failure to comply with clause 2(1)(6) of rule XI, 
     clause 7 of rule XXI, or section 306 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974 are waived. General debate shall be 
     confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
     divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general 
     debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 
     five-minute rule. Points of order against provisions in the 
     bill for failure to comply with clause 2 or 6 of rule XXI are 
     waived. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the 
     Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in 
     recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an 
     amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
     Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 6 
     of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as 
     read. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may: (1) 
     postpone until a time during further consideration in the 
     Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any 
     amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time 
     for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows 
     another electronic vote without intervening business, 
     provided that the minimum time for electronic voting on the 
     first in any series of questions shall be fifteen minutes. At 
     the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the 
     Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with 
     such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 
     amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Coble). The gentleman from Florida [Mr. 
Goss] is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost], pending 
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration 
of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate on 
this issue only.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 198 is an open rule, as is customary 
for appropriations measures. The rule provides for 1 hour of general 
debate equally divided between the chairman and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Appropriations.
  The rule waives points of order against consideration of the bill for 
failing to comply with 2(L)(6) of rule XI, the 3-day requirement for 
availability of the report. The rule also waives points of order 
against consideration of the bill for failure to comply with clause 7 
of rule XXI, the 3-day requirement for availability of printed hearings 
on appropriations bills. Given the schedule we had have before us and 
the bipartisan manner with which this bill has been brought forward to 
the House, I think these waivers are entirely reasonable and fair.
  In addition, this rule waives points of order under section 306 of 
the Budget Act of 1974, which prohibits consideration of bills 
containing matters within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the 
Budget. In the Committee on Rules we heard no objection from the 
Committee on the Budget on this point, so I do not believe this caused 
anybody any trouble either.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, the rule waives points of order against 
provisions in the bill which do not comply with clause 2 of rule XXI, 
prohibiting unauthorized appropriations and legislation on general 
appropriations bills, as well as clause 6 of rule XXI, prohibiting 
transfers of unobligated balances. Again, I wish to advise my 
colleagues that these waivers have been reviewed by the authorizing 
committee and we have heard no objection to them.
  Mr. Speaker, as we have done frequently in the recent past to bring 
greater awareness to the membership of potential amendments, the rule 
grants priority in recognition of those Members who have caused their 
amendments to be preprinted in the Congressional Record.
  The rule also provides that the Chairman of the Committee of the 
Whole may postpone votes on any amendment and that the chairman may 
reduce voting time on postponed questions to 5 minutes, provided that 
the voting time on the first in a series of questions is not less than 
15 minutes, usual procedure. This is a useful time management tool, one 
that may be especially welcome during these last hectic days as we seek 
to conclude the historic budget agreement before the August work 
period.
  Lastly, Mr. Speaker, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, 
with our without instructions.
  That sounds like a fairly complicated rule, but actually it is a 
fairly straightforward open rule for appropriations that has gone 
through all the proper process. I believe it has been done in a 
bipartisan spirit.
  I wish to commend the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Young], the 
subcommittee chairman, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 
Murtha], the ranking member, for the extraordinary work they have done 
in crafting this bill. We sometimes resort to large adjectives and 
hyperbole in describing work here. In this case, I definitely mean it. 
This is a very good work product, and an awful lot of hard work has 
been put into it.
  These are lean budget times, as we as know. It is even more difficult 
to make tough choices about national security under such circumstances. 
When we find ourselves in occasions such as we have today, we find 
sometimes tensions and breakdown in communications. Things go wrong. 
But to the credit of both men, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Young] 
and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Murtha], that has not 
happened, and instead we have a bipartisan bill, as we should with 
something so important as our national security.
  On a personal note, as chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence, which authorizes programs within this appropriations 
subcommittee's jurisdiction, I am most grateful for the level of 
cooperation, attention, and support we have from the appropriators.

                              {time}  1030

  The system of congressional oversight does work. It has worked very 
well in this area, and I am very proud of our effort.
  Mr. Speaker, none of us wants to consider the possibility of threats 
to our

[[Page H5930]]

national security, the risks we face overseas, along our borders, and 
even here at home that seem to come from an ever increasing variety of 
threats. But in fact, I would say many Americans, especially the 
younger generations where there is no firsthand experience with war, 
seem willing to succumb to sort of a wishful thinking that the world is 
actually a safe place. This is dangerous and wrong. The world is not a 
safe place. While the type of threat has changed and the face of the 
enemy certainly looks different, we must never forget there are 
organizations, governments, and individuals who actively wish us harm.
  Just in a short attention span, if we will focus on the tragedy of 
Pan Am 103 and take it through the bombing of Khobar Towers and think 
of all that has happened in between, and we will understand, whether it 
is civilian or military, whether here or there, there are threats to 
America and American interests and there are casualties and there are 
tragedies and victims, and we must pay attention. We must remain 
vigilant and protect ourselves against threats.
  The spending bill before us makes the tough choices to live within 
the balanced budget agreement, while ensuring that crucial defense 
programs like missile defense are properly funded, and other programs 
that are not so spectacular.
  Frankly, this bill lays out a challenge to the administration to 
reverse dangerous trends of below adequate spending in some areas. This 
bill also provides unquestionable support to our troops, most of the 
men and women doing the hard work of peace at home and overseas every 
day on our behalf.
  We must never allow our budgetary concerns to tempt us to cut corners 
when it comes to troop readiness or ensuring our fighting forces have 
the equipment they need, when they need it, and where they need it.
  Lastly, this bill makes an important statement about our missions in 
Bosnia. We are all so proud of the work the American troops have done 
in that very difficult and uncertain environment, no matter how we feel 
about the policy questions. But we do not want their mission to be 
extended indefinitely, and so this bill includes language to enforce a 
June 30, 1998, deadline.
  To those who think it fashionable or politically useful to cut 
defense, may I suggest a visit to our troops in Bosnia? I think that 
Members' minds would be changed. May I suggest a review of the action 
in Desert Storm, of the work that was done by our military? May I 
suggest a trip to visit the remains of Khobar Towers, if one thinks it 
is not dangerous work?
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. It is a fair rule. I urge my 
colleagues to support both.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I rise in support of this open rule on H.R. 2266, the Department of 
Defense appropriation for fiscal year 1998.
  The appropriations in H.R. 2266 provide for our Nation's security and 
for our defense. Thus, they are critical to ensuring that the United 
States remains the world's leader. The funds recommended in this bill 
closely track the authorization levels passed by the House and reflect 
the major policy decisions which were decided in that legislation.
  While the funding levels in this bill do fail to keep pace with 
inflation, they reflect the reality of budgetary restraints and, 
consequently, the dollar figures in this bill are those that reflect 
the overall spending levels agreed upon by both the President and the 
Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, the cold war may be over, but we do not enjoy a 
peacetime that allows our military forces to stand down. Instead, they 
are being called upon to perform both military and peacekeeping roles 
all around the world. The soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who 
serve our country are being stretched to the limit, but they are up to 
the task and their performance under these trying circumstances should 
make us all very proud.
  Mr. Speaker, longer rotations and longer family separations and more 
work with fewer people is taking a toll on our men and women in uniform 
and their families. I commend the committee for putting our troops 
first by providing for the pay raise recommended by the President, 
improved housing and for quality of life initiatives. The Congress has 
an obligation to these men and women who serve us, and I hope the 
continuing commitment to those improvements will be a top priority for 
both the authorizing committee and the appropriating committee.
  Mr. Speaker, the rule provides for waivers of points of orders 
against the consideration of the bill for failure to comply with clause 
2 of rule XXI. This waiver is necessary, of course, because the 
authorization bill has not yet been signed into law. But as every 
Member knows, the House has done its work and has passed the 
authorization, and the provisions of this appropriation closely track 
that bill.
  This is especially true with reference to the major policy decisions 
and acquisitions in the authorization. I am pleased that the committee 
has provided funding for the B-2 stealth bomber at the level agreed to 
by the House in the authorization bill, at a level which will allow 
those parts of the production line, which had been shut down, to start. 
The B-2 will continue to serve the Air Force well into the next century 
and, by providing adequate funding for advance procurement, the 
Congress will ensure that production of this effective weapons system 
continues in future years.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, the bill provides $81 million for advanced 
procurement of the F-22, the fighter of the 21st century, as well as 
funding for acquisition of seven V-22 tiltrotor aircraft. Important 
components in the ability of the particular marines and special forces 
to deliver combat troops safely and effectively. The bill rightfully 
concentrates on important operations and maintenance accounts, but also 
looks toward the future by funding important research and development 
programs.
  A combination of quality of life initiatives, procurement, operations 
and maintenance, along with research into the future of our military 
needs, makes this an excellent bill in light of the cutbacks required 
by our need to balance the Federal budget.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a fair rule. It allows any Member to contest the 
spending levels recommended in the bill, but it does not permit the 
consideration of legislative issues which have already been decided by 
the House in the authorization bill.
  I commend this rule and the bill to my colleagues.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Glens Falls, NY [Mr. Solomon], the distinguished 
chairman of the Committee on Rules.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from 
Sanibel, FL, Mr. Porter Goss, the manager of this rule, for yielding me 
this time, and as the gentleman from Florida and the gentleman from 
Texas [Mr. Frost], have adequately described the rules of debate, I 
will not get into that except to say that, obviously, it is a fair and 
open rule.
  On the bill itself, Mr. Speaker, let me just again congratulate the 
chairman, the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Bill Young, and the ranking 
member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Murtha], and the entire 
Committee on Appropriations and their staffs, for once again putting 
together an excellent piece of legislation under very, very difficult 
circumstances.
  The defense appropriation bill, along with the companion 
authorization bill, probably is the most important thing we do around 
here, Mr. Speaker. It is absolutely imperative that this bill contain 
adequate funding for all of the military personnel in all branches of 
service who are right now out in the field standing vigilant on behalf 
of the American Government and the American people.
  It is imperative that this bill contain enough quality of life 
incentives to retain and recruit the best people we can for our 
military. It is imperative this bill contain enough funding for 
operations and maintenance, so that our troops can be as highly trained 
as possible in case they are called into battle. It is imperative this 
bill contain adequate funding for weapons procurement and for research 
and development so that our troops can fight and defend themselves with 
only the very best

[[Page H5931]]

equipment and technology that money can buy.
  Mr. Speaker, to the best extent possible, I think this bill does all 
of that, considering the funds that are available. At $248 billion, the 
bill adds over $4 billion to President Clinton's wholly inadequate 
request. The bill adds $3.9 billion to the President's request for 
procurement, which is so important, and $770 million for research and 
development over and above what the President had asked for.
  These accounts contain adequate funding for the weapon systems of 
tomorrow, some of which were mentioned a minute ago, such as the F-22 
stealth fighter, the B-2 bomber, the Marine Corps V-22 troop carrier, 
and the next generation of aircraft carriers and submarines.
  These accounts also contain funding to bring us one step closer to 
developing and deploying defenses against ballistic missiles, something 
for which, and I guarantee my colleagues, we will all be grateful for 
some day.
  This bill contains a 2.8-percent pay raise for our soldiers and adds 
a significant funding increase for barracks, for family housing, and 
for child care centers, keeping in mind, Mr. Speaker, that when I 
served in the military, some 45 years ago, most of us were single. 
Today, most of them are married and we need adequate barracks, adequate 
family housing and child care centers in order to continue to attract a 
real cross section of America. That is so terribly important, 
especially in an all-volunteer military such as we have.
  Despite all of these excellent provisions in this bill, let me go on 
the record right now to say that we continue to provide inadequate, 
yes, inadequate funds for this Nation's defenses. This bill will 
represent the 13th straight year of inflation adjusted cuts to the 
defense budget. No other account in the Federal budget has been cut so 
much. Weapons procurement, which has been cut by nearly 70 percent 
since 1985 alone, remains at least $14 billion below where the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff said we need to be in order to retain our technology 
advantage over potential adversaries.
  Our military is vastly smaller and older than just 6 years ago during 
Desert Storm. Most experts agree today that such a mission would simply 
be impossible to undertake. Keep in mind, for instance, in 1991 we had 
18 Army divisions and used 7 of them in Desert Storm. Eighteen Army 
divisions, seven used in Desert Storm. Today, we have only 10 
divisions, not 18, and we are heading toward 9. Now, think about that, 
my fellow colleagues.
  As former Secretary of Defense William Perry said, we are already at 
the minimum force structure level that we need in order to retain our 
role as a global power. Think about that.
  Of course, this is not the fault of the Committee on Appropriations. 
As I said before, they have operated under severe constraints, and they 
have done one tremendous job with the dollars that they have had 
available to them. Those constraints are the balanced budget resolution 
this Congress has passed and, more importantly, the repeated 
unwillingness of this administration to pay adequate attention to our 
Nation's defenses.
  Despite his State of the Union pledge a number of years ago, 
President Clinton continues to cut national defense funding in his 
budgets that he presents to this body and has fought our defense 
increases tooth and nail. If we had not persevered, think where we 
would be today.
  Mr. Speaker, that is a scandal, but it is one we can overcome by 
voting for this rule and for this bill today and then working together 
to find additional moneys for the No. 1 constitutional duty of this 
House. And if my colleagues read the Constitution, that constitutional 
duty is providing for a national defense for all Americans. That is the 
reason we formed this republic of States, 200 some years ago. And to do 
that, it is imperative that we give our young men and women the very 
best.
  Some people, Mr. Speaker, would criticize the military. They would 
criticize serving in the military. But it is one of the most honorable 
careers that anyone could ever pursue. Anyone. Today, when our young 
men and women go in our all-volunteer military, first of all they come 
from a cross section of America. They are the finest. They are young 
men and women looking for a career. And when they serve, whether it is 
for 3 years or 5 years or 20 years, they learn a trade but, more 
importantly, they learn things like the words ``pride'' and 
``patriotism'' and ``volunteerism'' and ``community.'' They learn how 
not to use drugs.
  Did my colleagues know that back in the early 1980's that 25 percent 
of the military personnel were admittedly using some kind of illegal 
drugs. And because of drug testing that was implemented by this 
Congress, a bill that I introduced and Ronald Reagan's Executive order, 
that through random drug testing of every single buck private all the 
way up to every general and admiral, that the use of drugs in our 
military today has dropped 82 percent, and now less than 4 percent are 
using drugs? If we could only do that with the rest of America, we 
would solve this drug problem.
  Yes, they do learn words like ``pride'' and ``patriotism,'' and they 
learn words like ``discipline'' and how terribly important that is. 
Many of them come from broken homes, where they do not have a father 
and a mother, and they do not have a mother that is there during the 
daytime to help teach them some discipline. Today, they learn words 
like ``courtesy'' and ``respect,'' and they even get a little 
``religion.''
  Mr. Speaker, serving in the all-volunteer military today is an 
honorable and respectable career, and that is why we must do everything 
we can to give these young men the very best if we are going to put 
them in harm's way someday. And that is why this particular budget is 
so important here today and why I again just take off my hat to the 
chairman, the gentleman from Florida, and to the ranking member, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania, and their entire committee and staff for 
the great work they have done in putting this together.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend them, and I urge support of this rule and the 
bill that will follow it.

                              {time}  1045

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. Pryce], a member of the Committee on Rules.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida 
[Mr. Goss] for yielding me this time, and I rise in strong support of 
this open rule.
  Providing for the national defense is one of the few Federal duties 
that is very, very clearly defined in our Constitution. As such, we 
have the responsibility to ensure that the men and women of our Armed 
Forces have the training and resources that they need to defend our 
Nation from the global threats that still remain.
  Make no mistake about it, Mr. Speaker. Despite the end of the cold 
war, there are many threats still out there that require the United 
States to be vigilant and ready for conflict in the sad event it should 
arise.
  The bill which this open rule makes in order is a sound effort to put 
balance back into our defense priorities. I commend the chairman and 
the ranking minority member of the Subcommittee on National Security of 
the Committee on Appropriations for crafting a bill that addresses the 
many competing challenges facing our military establishment in a very 
responsible manner.
  As in the past, this bill focuses on enhancing quality of life, 
especially for military families, addressing shortfalls in readiness 
and training, modernizing our fighting force, and downsizing our Armed 
Forces overall. And it does so while staying true to the bipartisan 
goal of balancing the Federal budget.
  Most importantly, H.R. 2266 puts the troops first and recognizes that 
the heart and soul of our defense is the all-volunteer army. By 
providing the funding for improved military housing, child development 
centers and even programs like breast cancer detection and treatment, 
this bill respects the hard work and sacrifices made by our military 
personnel and attempts to give them the quality of life and standard of 
living that they deserve.
  Mr. Speaker, the safety and prosperity of the American people depend 
on safeguarding our national security in a changing world. We simply 
cannot afford to let the gains we have made for freedom and democracy 
be jeopardized by any insufficient defense strategy. Under this open 
rule we will have full

[[Page H5932]]

and fair debate on preparing our military for the next century. I would 
urge a yes vote on both measures.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I urge 
adoption of the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I 
would simply say that I believe this is No. 8 of the appropriations 
bills. We have cleared seven in the House. This is the eighth. The 
Committee on Rules has cleared 2 others, which will make 10. I think 
there are three left. We are chugging along on schedule doing the work 
of America. I urge our colleagues to support this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I yield back the 
balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________