[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 38 (Monday, March 30, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H1721-H1726]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THEATER MISSILE DEFENSE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1998
Mr. SPENCE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 2786) to authorize additional appropriations for the
Department of Defense for ballistic missile defenses and other measures
to counter the emerging threat posed to the United States and its
allies in the Middle East and Persian Gulf region by the development
and deployment of ballistic missiles by Iran, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 2786
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Theater Missile Defense
Improvement Act of 1998''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Development of medium-range ballistic missiles by
potential adversaries, such as Iran, has proceeded much more
rapidly than previously anticipated by the United States
Government.
(2) Existence of such missiles in potentially hostile
nations constitutes a serious threat to United States forces,
allies, and friends in the Middle East and Persian Gulf
region and cannot be adequately countered by currently
deployed ballistic missile defense systems.
(3) It is a matter of high national interest to quickly
reduce the vulnerability of United States forces, allies, and
friends to these threats.
(4) Meaningful and cost effective steps to reduce these
vulnerabilities are available and should be pursued
expeditiously.
SEC. 3. ACCELERATION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS TO
COUNTER ENHANCED BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT.
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 1998 for Defense-wide
research, development, test, and evaluation in the amount of
$147,000,000, to be available as follows:
(1) Joint composite tracking network.--$35,000,000 to be
available for the Joint Composite Tracking Network program.
(2) Patriot remote launch capability.--$15,000,000 to be
available to accelerate development of the remote launch
capability for the Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3)
missile defense system.
(3) PAC-3 and navy area defense tests.--$40,000,000 to be
available to test the capabilities of the Patriot Advanced
Capability (PAC-3) missile defense system, and to test the
capabilities of the Navy Area Defense System, against
missiles with the range of the Iranian ballistic missiles
under development.
(4) Early warning enhancement.--$6,000,000 to be available
for improved integration of the various elements of the
SHIELD system.
(5) PAC-3 production rate enhancements.--$41,000,000 to be
available for production rate enhancements for the Patriot
Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missile defense system.
(6) Israeli arrow missile defense system.--$10,000,000 to
be available to improve interoperability of the Israeli Arrow
tactical ballistic missile defense system with United States
theater missile defense systems.
SEC. 4. IDENTIFICATION OF OTHER POSSIBLE ACTIONS.
(a) Identification.--The Secretary of Defense shall
identify actions in addition to those authorized by section 3
that could be taken by the Department of Defense to counter
the threats posed to the United States and its national
security interests by the development or acquisition of
medium-range ballistic missiles by Iran and other nations.
(b) Specific Actions To Be Taken.--The Secretary
specifically shall explore--
(1) additional cooperative measures between the Department
of Defense and the Ministry of Defense of Israel to further
enhance Israel's ability to defend itself against the threat
posed by ballistic missiles deployed by Iran and other
nations; and
(2) actions within the existing Navy Theater Wide Missile
Defense System program that could provide additional
capabilities useful to addressing the threat posed by medium-
range ballistic missiles within one to two years.
(c) Intergovernmental Coordination.--The Secretary shall
undertake appropriate intergovernmental and interagency
coordination that would be necessary to the conduct of any of
the actions identified pursuant to subsection (a).
SEC. 5. REPORT TO CONGRESS.
Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a
report providing--
(1) a description of the Secretary's plans for use of funds
appropriated pursuant to the authorizations of appropriations
in this Act; and
(2) a description of possible additional actions identified
by the Secretary pursuant to section 4(a) and the steps taken
or planned (as of the time of the report) to carry out
section 4(c).
SEC. 6. OFFSETTING REDUCTIONS IN AUTHORIZATIONS.
The total amount authorized in section 201 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law
105-85) to be appropriated for fiscal year 1998 for research,
development, test, and evaluation for the Department of
Defense is hereby reduced by $147,000,000, of which--
(1) $126,000,000 is to be derived from savings from the use
of advisory and assistance services by the Department of
Defense in accordance with section 8041 of the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 105-56; 111
Stat. 1230); and
(2) $21,000,000 is to be derived from savings from the use
by the Department of Defense of defense federally funded
research and development centers in accordance with section
8035 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1998
(Public Law 105-56; 111 Stat. 1227).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Skelton) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence).
(Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
General Leave
Mr. SPENCE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks on H.R. 2786.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from South Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. SPENCE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, H.R. 2786, the Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act
of 1998, is intended to address the accelerated threat posed by recent
theater ballistic missile development around the world. North Korea has
deployed the No Dong-1 missile. Iran's development of the Shahab-3
missile has proceeded rapidly and could be flight tested within the
next year and will have sufficient range to strike Turkey, Saudi Arabia
and Israel.
The speed of these developments was unanticipated by the intelligence
community and they warrant an immediate response. Our currently
deployed missile defense systems were designed against older and slower
threats and have only limited capabilities against this new generation
of more lethal missiles. The steps taken in this bill will provide
additional defensive capabilities for our troops and their dependents
[[Page H1722]]
more quickly than is currently being planned.
The measures in this bill meet three important criteria. First, all
are executable in the current fiscal year. It is therefore important
for us to provide the funding and the authority to proceed in a timely
manner. Second, all measures in this bill are consistent with planned
missile defense systems and architectures. Third, this legislation is
entirely consistent with current international agreements.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), who has spearheaded
this effort with both patience and persistence, has been quite, quite
frankly, ahead of both the Intelligence Community and the Department of
Defense when it comes to the seriousness of this threat and the need
for a rapid response.
Likewise, the efforts of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Pickett)
and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) as cosponsors have
strengthened this legislation and helped make it a strong bipartisan
response to a serious threat.
The bill was approved unanimous by the Committee on National Security
on a vote of 45 to 0. I commend all three of the bills' sponsors for
their diligence. The Department of Defense believes that the bill's
measures are important and constructive steps in any effort designed to
address this rapidly evolving threat.
Madam Speaker, I once again commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Weldon), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Pickett) and the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for their leadership and
their effort. I express my strong support for this measure and urge my
colleagues' support as well.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) be allowed to control the remainder of my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from South Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, we are here today to approve H.R. 2786, the Theater
Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998 under the suspension of the
rules of this House.
This bill addresses the earlier than expected development of theater
or tactical ballistic threats to our men and women in uniform around
the world, threats that I believe are real and, given the limitations
of currently deployed theater missile defense systems, demand a
priority response.
H.R. 2786 is a bill that responds to the recent threat developments
quickly, crisply and affordably. Moreover, it was approved unanimously
by the committee.
In terms of process, I cannot be more pleased. H.R. 2786 is the
result of an open, deliberative and nonpartisan effort by our
committee. I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman
Spence) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), chairman of
the Subcommittee on Research and Development, for their openness and
willingness to work on this issue.
In addition, I believe we owe a debt of gratitude to the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Pickett) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), whose
vision brought us this bill today.
I also want to recognize the hard work of their staffs and the
committee staff in translating that vision into legislation that we can
all vote for today. In the strongest possible terms, Madam Speaker, I
urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill.
Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Pickett), the distinguished ranking member of the
Subcommittee on Research and Development, and ask that he be allowed to
control the time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.
(Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to
thank the distinguished chairman of the full committee, the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), and the ranking member, the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), and the ranking member of my subcommittee,
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Pickett) and the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Spratt), for their tireless efforts in putting forth this
compromise legislation today.
Madam Speaker, the largest loss of life that we have had in our
military troops from one single incident in this decade was 7 years ago
when 28 of our young soldiers were killed by a low complexity Scud
missile entering into a barracks in Dhahran. We vowed as a Nation not
to let that happen again, and we have been aggressively pursuing
various theater missile defense systems to protect our troops and our
allies from shorter range missiles that could not hit the United
States.
Unfortunately, our schedule for deploying those theater missile
defense systems was not able to meet the threats as they are in fact
emerging. We saw several years ago North Korea begin deploying a No
Dung missile that has a range of in the range of about 1,000
kilometers, and this past summer we saw, with the help of both Russia
and China, Iran get the capability to deploy two different types of
missiles that will have a range between 600 and 1,200 kilometers.
Looking at the chart, Madam Speaker, we can see that this missile
that Iran will be able to deploy within the period of 12 to 24 months
has the capacity to hit our allies, Israel, Saudi Arabia and other
countries in the area, as well as our troops stationed in the theater
around Iran.
This is unacceptable to us, Madam Speaker, and so back in the fall of
last year we got together and put together a bipartisan effort to
provide short-term enhancements to improve our capability to defeat the
missiles that Iran may in fact deploy, and that we know North Korea is
already deploying.
These enhancements are basically contained in this bill. They involve
providing additional footprints to existing systems with enhanced radar
and providing interoperability between a number of different systems
which gives us a better capability to more quickly identify a target
and take that target out. So by putting forth the $147 million dollars
in this legislation, we are going to allow our missile defense programs
that are currently in place to come together in a unique way, to give
us enhanced interoperability, to give us a longer footprint in terms of
taking out systems and missiles that may in fact threaten our troops
and our allies, and to also begin to cooperate with other nations.
In fact, in this legislation, we include money for interoperability
with Israel, so that Israel, as it develops its Arrow program, will in
fact be able to have that system interoperate with our PAC-3 program
and eventually with our Navy and other Army programs.
So what we are talking about today, Madam Speaker, is a new
opportunity to protect our troops in the shortest possible time using
existing systems by enhancing them, not with new dollars, but with
dollars that are already available within the budget agreement.
Madam Speaker, the other body has in fact passed in its supplemental
bill a $151 million allocation that in fact is designed to fund almost
all of our priorities in this legislation. I have received a commitment
from the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Livingston). In fact, we
will do a colloquy on the floor in the supplemental that he will work
in the conference to make sure that funding is made available to fund
the authorization that we provide today in this legislation.
Finally, Madam Speaker, I want to add one other dimension to this
legislation. We are dedicating this legislation today to the memory of
those 28 young soldiers, many of them from Pennsylvania, who were
killed by that Scud missile attack 7 years ago. We do not want their
names to be left unnoticed in terms of protecting our other troops, and
so I will include for the record the names and classifications and
titles and cities of each of those 28 brave Americans who made the
ultimate sacrifice and lost their lives in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, 7
years ago, to that Scud missile.
[[Page H1723]]
This legislation, Madam Speaker, in honor of those 28 brave
Americans, will allow us to ensure that no other Americans will lose
their lives in a similar situation.
Madam Speaker, the measure before the House today, H.R. 2786, is the
result of a bipartisan effort to identify the most effective actions
that could be taken to enhance our defenses against a greatly
accelerated missile threat to our troops and allies around the globe.
Late last summer we learned that Iran, assisted by Russian technology
transfers, could deploy a missile capable of striking U.S. forces and
our allies in the Middle East within a year to eighteen months.
Recognizing that threat--which the intelligence community had
previously predicted to be several years away--and the lack of any U.S.
system fully capable of defending against it, I asked the ballistic
missile defense organization to recommend steps that could be taken to
enhance our defensive capabilities as soon as possible. Based on the
initial feedback I received, I introduced H.R. 2786, the Iranian
Missile Protection Act.
That bill gained strong, bipartisan support, with one hundred and ten
cosponsors. Although Congress adjourned before acting on the bill, the
case for timely TMD enhancements is stronger than ever. In the six
months since the bill was introduced, Iran successfully tested, the
engines of its medium-range missile, the Shahab-3. Despite Russia's
recent agreement with the U.S. to limit future missile technology
transfers, reports indicate that controlling such transactions may
still be a problem. Meanwhile, North Korea continues aggressive
development of its No-Dong missile, and Saddam Hussein remains intent
on intimidating the U.S. with all options at his disposal.
Unfortunately, seven years after twenty-eight American soldiers
perished in the Iraqi Scud attack on Dharan, we have no missile defense
system in place or planned for deployment within the next year fully
capable of defending against the increased Iranian missile threat--or
against one which could emerge sooner than we expect from North Korea.
At this point, we won't be able to get our longer range TMD systems
deployed in time to meet the accelerated Iranian threat. But there are
things we can do to make systems that will be fielded more effective
against that threat.
Initially, there was some disagreement between Congress and the
administration on how to proceed with theater missile defense
enhancements. But there was no argument that we would soon need better
capabilities to respond to the emerging threats. That is why committee
Republicans and Democrats approached the administration again
requesting a refined set of recommendations for near-term TMD
enhancements.
The legislation before the House today, renamed ``the Theater Missile
Defense Improvement Act'' in committee, is the product of that
bipartisan initiative. It reflects the advice of the services, the
Joint Theater Air and Missile Defense Organization (JTAMDO), the
commanders in chief of our military theaters of operation, and the
ballistic missile defense organization. It reflects the
administration's conclusion that there are concrete steps that we can
and should take to enhance TMD capabilities in the near term, and its
recommendation of several high payoff options that can be executed in
fiscal year '98. Based on this input, we narrowed the scope of the bill
to actions executable in 1998. As a result, the cost of the bill has
been cut by more than half--from $331 million to $147 million. It
includes:
(1) ($35m) Joint composite tracking network development--ensure
connectivity of ground-based radar, Pac-3 and Navy cooperative
engagement capability.
(2) ($15m) Pac-3 remote launch capability development--accelerates
doubling of Pac-3 footprint from 2000 to 1999.
(3) ($40m) Pac-3 and Navy area defense systems testing--provides for
one test on each system to determine capabilities against Iranian
threat.
(4) ($41m) Pac-3 production enhancement--funds tooling and equipment
to double production in 2001-2.
(5) ($10m) Arrow interoperability testing--tests with U.S. TMD
systems.
(6) ($6m) Early warning enhancement--links sensors, communications
and command and control to provide improved early warning.
The ballistic missile defense organization believes these are the
most valuable steps we can take in the near term to enhance TMD
capabilities against emerging threats. This package is supported by the
administration and was reported out of committee 45-0. Our commanders
in the field want this protection, and our allies such as Israel are
calling for added enhancements in light of the imminent Iranian threat.
The House has already passed legislation calling for sanctions against
Russian entities that aided Iran in its missile development. Now it
must pass this bill to provide the best protection possible for our
troops and allies. Passage of this measure will do just that, allowing
our existing missile defense systems to ``be all they can be'' against
the near-term missile threats. In honor of those who lost their lives
in the Scud attack on Dharan:
Specialist Stephen Atherton--Dayton, PA.
Specialist Stanley Bartusiak--Romulus, MI.
Specialist John Boliver--Monogahela, PA.
Sergeant Joseph Bongiomi--Hickory, PA.
Sergeant John Boxler--Johnstown, PA.
Specialist Beverly Clark--Armagh, PA.
Sergeant Alan Craver--Penn Hills, PA.
Specialist Rolando A. Deigneau--Unknown address.
Specialist Steven Famen--Salisbury, Missouri.
Specialist Duane Hollen--Bellwood, PA.
Specialist Glen Jones--Grand Rapids, Minnesota.
Specialist Frank Keough--Rochester Mills, PA.
Specialist Anthony Madison--Monessen, PA.
Specialist Steven Mason--Paragould, Arkansas.
Specialist Christine Mayes--Rochester Mills, PA.
Specialist Michael Mills--Panora, Iowa.
Specialist Adrienne Mitchell--Moreno Valley, CA.
Specialist Ronald Rennison--Dubuque, IA.
Private First Class Timothy Shaw--Alexandria, VA.
Sergeant Stephen Siko--Latrobe, PA.
Specialist Brian Simpson--Indianapolis, IN.
Specialist Thomas Stone--Falconer, NY.
Specialist James Tatum--Athens, TN.
Private First Class Robert Wade--Savannah, GA.
Sergeant Frank Walls--Hawthorne, PA.
Corporal Jonathan Williams--Portsmouth, VA.
Specialist Richard Wolverton--?, PA.
Specialist James Worthy--Albany, GA.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for H.R. 2786 and join me in
dedicating passage of this bill to their memory.
Mr. PICKETT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2786, the Theater
Ballistic Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998. I want to thank our
committee chairman and ranking member, and also our subcommittee
chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), for the fine
work they have done in bringing this bill to this point.
The Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act is a quick, direct and
bipartisan response to the earlier than expected development of theater
ballistic missile threats to our troops by Iran and North Korea. It
would authorize $147 million to increase the defended footprints of our
current theater missile ballistic defense system by enhancing early
warning, increasing connectivity among systems and providing for an
increased deployment rate for the Patriot PAC-3 TMD system.
Supported by the Department of Defense, the bill is fully consistent
with current and planned United States TMD programs and can be carried
out by the Pentagon almost immediately. Further, it does not require
future funding that DOD is not in a position to request, and it is
within the scope of existing international agreements.
Because it responds to actual threat developments that would put our
deployed troops at risk, I believe it is our duty to pass this bill
today. Therefore, and in the strongest possible terms, I urge my
colleagues to support our men and women in uniform and vote for H.R.
2786, the Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Livingston), the distinguished chairman
of the Committee on Appropriations, a Member who has been a tireless
advocate for missile defense for this country, and we welcome his
participation today.
(Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
time.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2786, the Theater
Missile Improvement Act, because it is a good bill. It is a good
initiative.
Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to thank my friend for his time,
but also his dedication to our Nation's defense and to this particular
subject of missile defense. This issue has gone too far unattended.
[[Page H1724]]
Many of us in Congress have been convinced for a very long time that
we need to protect against the possible threat of incoming missiles and
that we need to protect our troops and our cities but the fact is,
while most American people think we can defend against such missiles,
in truth we cannot defend against the first missile.
{time} 1815
We do not have the first defense system deployed.
So while I might disagree in some of the assessments of priorities in
this bill, I rise in support of it for two critical reasons: North
Korea and Iran.
North Korea has already deployed the No Dong-1 missile, which has a
range of 1,000 kilometers, a sufficient range to threaten Japan; and it
is developing the Taepo Dong-1, expected to have a range in excess of
1,500 kilometers, which would have the capacity to threaten Alaska and
Hawaii.
According to our own director of Central Intelligence, Iran is very
close to deploying the medium range Shahab-3 Missile. This missile will
have the capability of striking areas in the Middle East such as
Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Secondly, I think it is absolutely imperative that we begin to
actually deploy systems; not just study them, or research them forever,
as this administration continues to propose, but to deploy them. We
need systems in place to defend against incoming missiles.
I believe this act will further our ability to do exactly that. I
urge passage of H.R. 2786.
Mr. PICKETT. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
(Mr. SPRATT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, the bill before us is carefully crafted.
It was worked out in a completely bipartisan spirit by the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Pickett), and myself and, truth be told, by our staff, in close
consultation with the ballistic missile defense office, BMDO.
Over a period of weeks, we went through an exacting process to winnow
down the increases to BMDO programs that can be used to deal with this
emerging intermediate-range missile threat. Our process identified
those programs with the most potential in the short term to enhance
missile defense capability which can be executed this year, fiscal year
1998.
Wherever possible, we tried to speed up program improvements that had
already been planned or programmed by BMDO and link up or improve
interoperability among existing systems. As a result, we have a bill
which is focused on the emerging threat, consistent with the progress
that the ballistic missile defense organization is making, and
affordable.
Each item in this bill has been scrubbed by the Defense Secretary,
Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre, and stamped with his approval
as a sensible use of the funds. The authorizations are fully offset
within the Department of Defense, and we have sought to work with the
Committee on Appropriations to find outlay offsets, in order to
appropriate these dollars this year.
In addition to increasing our BMDO capabilities in the short term,
this bill will enhance the long-term performance of our systems as
well. The Joint Composite Tracking Network, funded by this bill at $35
million, will network the sensing, tracking, command and control
capabilities of PAC-3, THAAD, Navy Area Defense system and, eventually,
the Israel Arrow and the Navy's Upper Tier systems, so missiles can be
detected as soon as possible after launch and defenses can be cued up
as soon as possible. The total flight time for these missiles is
measured in seconds, and every second we gain in locating them is a
gain towards taking them out.
This network is probably the single greatest step we can take in the
short term to enhance our existing capabilities. It is also the logical
next step to a layered defense or a family of systems architecture,
which BMDO is working on.
This bill will lower the operational risks of the PAC-3 and Navy Area
Defense Systems also by funding more testing. The bill allocates $20
million each for testing of these systems against longer or
intermediate range threat. Although this testing is primarily designed
to probe and stretch the limits of these systems, we will gain more
knowledge and we hope more confidence in their general performance by
more testing. And this goes to a recommendation pointedly made by
General Larry Welsh in a recently completed review of our theater
ballistic missile systems.
This bill also contains $41 million for production enhancements to
the PAC-3 system, and that will allow for increased production of PAC-3
missiles and a faster deployment of this system, which has some
potential for dealing with this threat into the field.
That is why I say this bill is a measured response to emerging
threats. It is a sensible piece of legislation. I urge every Member of
the House to support it.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
(Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Madam Speaker, I have sat in hearing after
hearing where our intelligence community has told us that it would take
rogue nations using indigenous capabilities 10 to 15 years to develop
missile technologies that would threaten us or our allies. I never
quite understood this. If I needed a moped, I am not sure that I would
build a factory to build a moped. I think that I would go buy one from
people who build them, which is precisely what Iran has done.
A few months ago, we were informed by our intelligence community that
Iran has now acquired technologies from Russia which will permit them,
years and years ahead of any projected schedule, to launch missiles
with 600 and 1,200 kilometer ranges that threaten our allies.
This bill is a very measured response to this. It is not forging new
frontiers. What we are doing in this bill is accelerating programs
which are already in existence, where additional funds could move them
forward so that we could meet the emerging threats.
I want to compliment those on both sides of the aisle that worked to
craft this bill. My only regret is that it could not have come to us
several years ago, because we needed it then. We need it far worse now.
Please support this very good legislation.
Mr. PICKETT. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Harman).
Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time.
Madam Speaker, this bill is a very good example of bipartisanship
producing good policy. I am proud to be an original cosponsor.
I commend my friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon),
for his leadership and his bipartisanship. Like him, I believe the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver
them is the key national security threat in the post-Cold War world.
In particular, many of us have been concerned about the transfer of
ballistic missile capabilities from Russia to Iran. This is profoundly
destabilizing to the region, and it presents a direct threat to U.S.
forces in the region and to U.S. allies. To properly stem this threat,
we need a two-pronged approach, prevention and defense.
Last fall, Senator Kyl and I introduced a concurrent resolution which
passed both Chambers overwhelmingly, urging the President to impose
sanctions on the Russian entities that have been providing technical
assistance and technology to Iran's programs.
The Harman-Kyl resolution addressed the preventive aspect of a
nonproliferation strategy. Sanctions make it unprofitable for anyone to
transfer sensitive weapons technology to Iran, but stopping the flow is
only part of the answer. We also need to defend against the capability
that has already slipped through.
This bill is an important step in that process. It accelerates the
development of important capability that can improve the region's
missile defense in the short term. Assembled in cooperation with the
Defense Department, these measures are designed to put in place the
best defense possible by the time Iran's medium-range missile
capability is fully realized.
[[Page H1725]]
Let me underscore just one measure that is in this bill and was
mentioned by its sponsor, that is funding for interoperability of
Israel's cost-share Arrow system, our best bet short term to protect
our only democratic ally in the region.
Madam Speaker, I strongly support this bill and urge our colleagues,
all of them, on a bipartisan basis, to support it, too.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the distinguished chairman of
the Committee on International Relations.
(Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GILMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2786, the
Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998; and I commend the
gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman Spence), the author of this
measure, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) for their
extensive work on this important bill.
One of our Nation's most important national security and
nonproliferation objectives is to reduce the vulnerability of our own
forces, allies and friends in the Middle East from the threat of
ballistic missiles by Iran and other potential adversaries.
As my colleagues well know, most critical in the short term is the
threat posed by Iran's acquisition of ballistic missiles with a range
of up to 1,300 kilometers or more. I fully support providing additional
resources for those programs which can counter that kind of threat,
which is the primary purpose of this bill.
I want to focus our colleagues' attention on the language contained
in section 4 of the bill, which directs the Secretary of Defense to
explore additional cooperative measures between our Defense Department
and the Ministry of Defense in Israel to further enhance Israel's
ability to defend itself against the threat posed by ballistic missiles
deployed by Iran and other nations.
Just as important, perhaps even more important, as increasing funding
for programs to counter the threat posed by Iran's missile programs is
the necessity to halt assistance to the Iranian program in the first
place. It is obvious that Russia has already provided Iran with
critical know-how and technological support which has resulted in the
Iranians achieving a significant leap in their missile programs.
An incremental approach to this issue relies on friendly persuasion.
It is not achieving any demonstrable results in our negotiations with
the Russians. Dialogue cannot substitute for more forceful and
immediate action, including the imposition of sanctions on those
entities engaging in missile cooperation with Iran. That is why we urge
the Senate to take action on H.R. 2709, the Iran missile Proliferation
Sanctions Act of 1997, which was passed by the House last November.
As I have stated on a number of occasions, it is hard to believe that
Russia's assistance to Iran does not violate Russia's international
obligations as an adherent to the Missile Technology Control Regime. It
is inconceivable that such transfers do not trigger U.S. missile
sanctions laws.
In the 1980s, the world sat by while Saddam Hussein built up his
arsenal of weapons of mass destruction that we have not yet fully
identified and destroyed; and our Nation cannot afford to do the same
with Iran, as it uses its petrodollars to purchase weapons systems that
will threaten its neighbors and endanger our forces throughout the
Persian Gulf region.
I urge my colleagues to support this important measure.
Mr. PICKETT. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Guam, Mr. Underwood.
Mr. UNDERWOOD. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
the time.
Madam Speaker, I enthusiastically support the bill, H.R. 2896, as
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Pickett), and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Spratt). The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) deserves our
gratitude for his persistence in moving this legislation, which is
cosponsored by no less than 111 members.
The Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998 is one of the
most important and timely pieces of legislation to be presented before
this body.
As a member of the Committee on National Security, I have become
keenly aware of the many threats posed by adversarial missile defense
development and deployments and illicit technology transfers around the
world. We only know too well the potential for destruction these
weapons hold.
In the hands of our friends and allies, these weapons are valuable
tools that safeguard democracy. In the hands of our adversaries, where
the potential exists to arm them with chemical and biological warheads,
the results are potentially catastrophic.
Madam Speaker, in a world rocked with uncertainties, we must remove
the cloak of fear utilized by our adversaries. This important
legislation will ensure in no small manner that the United States will
have the technology and capability to defend our troops, no matter
where they are, and citizens of every State and territory in the land.
The real danger posed by rogue states such as Iran, North Korea, and
Iran compel us to prepare to defend our vital assets.
I support this bill because it is the best way to assure our friends
and allies that we will not be placed in a tactically compromising
position. I support H.R. 2786 because it is non-scenario, non-
geographic specific. It cuts to the core of the issue, to produce for
the defense of the United States a highly capable, highly robust TMD
system that could be deployed anywhere our enemies pose a ballistic
missile threat.
Finally, Madam Speaker, on behalf of the people of Guam, I support
this bill for the safety and defense of our fellow U.S. citizens, who
have been specifically targeted by North Korean military as they
develop the Taepo Dong-1 and 2.
I congratulate this bipartisan effort and especially the work of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Pickett).
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pappas), one of our young rising stars
in this Congress.
(Mr. PAPPAS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
{time} 1830
Mr. PAPPAS. Madam Speaker, I believe this country owes a great deal
of gratitude to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) for his
leadership on this issue. This Congress is faced with a situation of
whether to stick our heads in the proverbial sand or open our eyes to
see the threats that we have to our national security. This bill moves
us from the hand-wringing stage into the stage of action.
This bill will leverage existing systems to advance missile defense
for our troops. Part of the ability to leverage existing technologies
is to capitalize on what has worked elsewhere. For example, Israel has
an ongoing missile defense system that has demonstrated favorable
results. In this age of limited defense dollars, the Pentagon cannot
afford to, quote-unquote, ``reinvent the wheel'' or be a slave to
bureaucracy to develop technology and implement systems that will
protect our troops now.
Recently, 36 members of the Committee on National Security signed a
letter to the President circulated by myself and the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Harman) urging him to work with Israel and leverage
existing technology to develop Arrow, THEL, and BPI. Many share my
concern about a seeming lack of commitment by this administration to
deal with missile defense and the very real risks our troops,
interests, and allies face in the Middle East, Korea and throughout the
world.
Madam Speaker, this bill is a first step and I am hopeful that this
Congress will seek to protect our troops. Failure to do so would be to
shirk our duty to uphold the Constitution and to provide for the common
defense. I urge passage of this bill.
Mr. PICKETT. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Reyes).
Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to speak in
support of this important bill which will provide our troops better
protection from ballistic missile threats. I
[[Page H1726]]
am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill, and I am pleased
that this issue is finally getting the attention of the full House of
Representatives.
Fort Bliss, which is located in my district, trains all the soldiers
who provide air and missile defense for our military. Also, and perhaps
most importantly for the purposes of this bill, most of the Patriot
batteries are located at Fort Bliss.
As such, the increased funds for PAC-3 technologies will directly
affect our soldiers. The Fort Bliss air defenders will be using these
technologies to better defend our military and our allies. Our soldiers
at Fort Bliss are pleased that we are working to provide the resources
necessary to move PAC-3 into the field as effectively and as quickly as
possible.
The bill includes $15 million to accelerate completion of the PAC-3
remote launch capability. This technology will allow the Patriot
soldiers to place their missiles and launchers further out in front of
the radar and the battery, which in turn expands the battle space. This
will allow each Patriot unit to defend a larger area.
Second, the bill provides $41 million to allow for an increased rate
of production for PAC-3. This will move PAC-3 missiles out into the
field more rapidly so that every Patriot unit will have the PAC-3
capability.
At the beginning of the Gulf War conflict, our Patriot soldiers had
only three PAC-2 missiles, missiles that were capable of defending
against other ballistic missiles. Not only were there few PAC-2
missiles, but PAC-2 could only achieve missile kill against the
incoming ballistic missile and not kill the actual warhead. As a
result, some diverted incoming missiles caused collateral damage in
civilian areas.
PAC-3 will have hit-to-kill capability, eliminating the fear of
hitting other areas and destroying offensive missiles and their
warheads which could include weapons of mass destruction. The funds we
provide today will equip our Patriot units more quickly with this
technology.
Third, the bill provides $40 million for tests of PAC-3 and Navy
Area. Our air defenders will feel more comfortable knowing that these
technologies have been sufficiently tested with live fire tests against
longer range missiles.
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Spence), the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Pickett)
and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for their bipartisan
work to get this bill to the House floor today. I strongly urge all of
my colleagues to support this legislation in a bipartisan manner.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Fowler), one of the
leading advocates for a strong defense in our country.
Mrs. FOWLER. Madam Speaker, I rise to commend the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), my good friend, and the other authors of
this bill for their hard work in putting together a measure that will
help address critical threats that will soon be facing our service
personnel in the Persian Gulf.
The Iran Missile Protection Act would authorize the shifting of $147
million in Defense Department funds to proceed with the most promising
technologies available for enhancing theater missile defense
capabilities. This step is necessary because recent intelligence
indicates that Iran, thanks to Russian technology transfers, is much
closer to developing a medium-range ballistic missile capable of
threatening U.S. forces and regional allies that was previously
believed to be the case.
This bill would pursue technologies that are executable in fiscal
year 1998 and provide the most immediate return on investment. It
received strong support in the House Committee on National Security and
merits the approval of the House. I urge my colleagues to support H.R.
2786.
Mr. PICKETT. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance
of my time.
Madam Speaker, first of all, let me again thank the leadership of our
committee. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) are outstanding leaders working
in a true bipartisan manner.
Let me also thank Ron Dellums, who was our ranking member up until a
few short weeks ago. He, too, lent his support from the time we
introduced the original legislation until the time it appears on the
floor, and I appreciate his role in that process as well. I also thank
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Pickett) and the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for their tireless effort on the other side.
Madam Speaker, let me also thank the Speaker of the House, who agreed
to move this legislation through, and our colleagues in the other body
for their commitment to move this legislation off the desk and get it
passed in the Senate as well, and to the appropriators for their
commitment to fund these priorities.
Madam Speaker, when we look at what is really going to happen in
terms of this legislation, I think this chart perhaps sums it up best.
We cannot get into actual distances and capabilities because that is
classified information.
But if we look at the Patriot system, which all of America knows was
the workhorse in Desert Storm, and its capability for knocking down
Scuds, the capability of the Patriot system against the kind of threat
that Iran will have 1 year from now means the Patriot could not handle
this at all. Patriot has no capability against a 1,000 kilometer DBM
threat. None whatsoever. If we just had the original Patriot system, we
could do nothing. We would be shooting missiles in the air with no real
capability of knocking those offensive missiles down.
By enhancing the Patriot system as we have done to improve it to
become the PAC-2, this green area shows the approximate area that this
missile would be effective, in these two concentric circles. From a
distance standpoint, that is the approximate distance that PAC-2
upgrade would give us.
When we implement the provisions of this legislation, we provide for
the enhanced radar, the interoperability, the use of existing systems
interconnected, the blue area is the result that we get. So my
colleagues can see that we are much better able to protect our troops
and protect our allies. We have a much greater distance where we can
take out that offensive missile while it is still over the country that
is shooting at us, and if there is any hostile material in the warhead
of that missile, it will rain down on their own citizens and not on our
troops or allies.
Madam Speaker, this legislation is critically important. It will give
us a short-term capability in fiscal year 1998 to give enhanced
protection for our troops and for our allies around the world. I thank
my colleagues for their support.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PICKETT. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I
urge passage of the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Emerson). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2786, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The title of the bill was amended so as to read:
``A bill to authorize additional appropriations for the Department of
Defense for ballistic missile defenses and other measures to counter
the emerging threat posed to the United States and its allies by the
accelerated development and deployment of ballistic missiles by nations
hostile to United States interests.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________