[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 96 (Thursday, June 26, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H5979-H5990]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2004

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 298 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2559.

                              {time}  1553


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2559) making appropriations for military construction, family 
housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes, 
with Mr. Bass in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) and the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg).
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. KNOLLENBERG asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to present to the 
House H.R. 2559, the fiscal year 2004 military construction 
appropriations bill. This legislation provides funds for all types of 
construction projects on military installations here in the U.S. and 
abroad. Projects range from barracks and housing to training ranges and 
runways.
  I would like to thank my ranking member, the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Edwards), for his advice and support and cooperation in producing 
this recommendation. He has been a good partner, and I appreciate 
having the gentleman there to work together on this bill.
  I would also like to express my appreciation to all members of the 
subcommittee for their help in putting together this year's bill. I 
commend the good work done by the subcommittee staff, Tom Forhan, Brian 
Potts, Mary Arnold, Kim Reath, and Valerie Baldwin. This has made my 
transition to chairman an easy one. I want to thank my personal staff, 
Jeff Onizuk and Lieutenant Commander Scott Gray. I appreciate the long 
hours they have put in making this the best bill possible.
  The bill presented today totals $9.196 billion, which complies with 
the 302(b) allocation for both budget authority and outlays. This 
recommendation is, however, $41 million below the President's request, 
a reduction of less than \1/2\ of 1 percent. Excluding funds provided 
in response to the global war on terrorism and Operation Iraqi Freedom, 
the bill is $605 million or 6 percent below fiscal year 2003 enacted 
levels.
  For the first time in recent memory, this subcommittee has produced a 
recommendation that is below the President's request. This is the hand 
that we were dealt under current budgetary constraints, and we have 
tried to deal with it in as fair a manner as possible.
  I assure Members the committee did due diligence to find as much 
savings as possible for the bill, and I believe we left no stone 
unturned in this process. This bill continues the subcommittee's 
bipartisan tradition of quality of life first for our service men and 
women. This is our paramount goal, and I believe we have reached it.
  As many Members are aware, the Department of Defense is undertaking a 
privatization effort for military housing. For those of us who have 
seen the results thus far, this is an exciting development. What it 
means for the family housing account of this bill is that less money 
does not mean less housing. It means that we are getting more bang for 
our buck. For example, take the Residential Communities Initiative at 
the Presidio of Monterey. Using only the basic allowance for housing, 
the BAH, 2,168 new homes will be built and 41 historic units will be 
renovated. In addition, the private contractor will build wider roads, 
playgrounds, amenities such as community centers and swimming pools, 
and so on. What had been substandard housing will become an enviable 
community for our military families, and it will come at no cost, no 
cost to the family housing account in this bill.
  The bottom line is that the funding in this bill does not slow down 
the effort to revitalize our military family housing. In fact, that 
effort is accelerating because of this privatization initiative.
  I would like to take a moment to highlight some key areas in the 
bill. First, $1.24 billion is provided for troop barracks. This is a 
$62 million increase from last year's level. This sends a positive 
message to our unaccompanied personnel stationed all around the world 
that their quality of life is a priority.
  The bill includes $194 million for hospital and medical facilities, 
an increase of $25 million above last year's level. This is another 
positive quality-of-life message, one intended for all service members 
as well as their families.
  $274 million is provided for community facilities, an increase of $45 
million above the President's request. These facilities include child 
development centers, fire stations, schools, and physical fitness 
centers.

[[Page H5980]]

  $465 million is provided for the Guard and Reserve components, an 
increase of $95 million above the President's request.
  The bill fully funds the President's request of $1.2 billion for new 
family housing units and improvements to existing units, and $2.7 
billion is provided for the operation and maintenance of existing 
family housing units.

                              {time}  1600

  I would like to highlight the overseas military construction program 
for just one moment. In support of a global repositioning effort, the 
President's amended budget submission and the recommendation before 
Members today rescinds and/or reduces overseas construction 
requirements by $327 million. Of these reductions, $279 million has 
been applied to construction requirements in the United States. It is 
my opinion additional cuts will adversely impact the quality of life 
and mission readiness of our troops living overseas, including those 
who are fighting the war against terrorism and also in Operation Iraqi 
Freedom. Therefore, I cannot recommend additional cuts in this area to 
my colleagues.
  We have worked closely with the authorization committee in producing 
this legislation. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) and his staff for their 
assistance.
  In conclusion, we have focused our efforts on programs that directly 
support the men and women in our Armed Forces. We would like to do 
more. We always have and always will. But in my opinion, the 
recommendations in this bill are solid and fully fund projects that are 
vital to the security of the United States. The bottom line is this: 
with this bill, we meet the military's mission critical infrastructure 
needs and enable its efforts to improve the quality of life for our men 
and women in the Armed Forces. This is a fair bill. I encourage all my 
colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I include the following tabular material for the 
Record:

[[Page H5981]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26JN03.001



[[Page H5982]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26JN03.002



[[Page H5983]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am going to vote for this military construction bill 
for one reason and for one reason alone. I believe the gentleman from 
Michigan, the chairman of our committee, has worked very hard and in a 
fair and bipartisan manner from day one on this bill. He and his 
capable staff have worked diligently and professionally to deal with a 
$1.5 billion military construction cut. This grossly inadequate funding 
level was not the decision of the gentleman from Michigan or myself. 
The gentleman from Michigan has a deep and genuine commitment to 
supporting a high quality of life for our servicemen and -women and 
their families. I know that firsthand. This decision was made above his 
pay grade and above mine. As the chairman and the ranking member of the 
Subcommittee on Military Construction, our responsibility is to take 
whatever funding level is given to us and invest those resources in a 
way that will fund the highest possible military construction 
priorities. I believe that is what the gentleman from Michigan, our 
subcommittee, and I have done; and that is why I will vote for this 
bill.
  However, Mr. Chairman, I would be remiss and I believe it would be 
the height of irresponsibility for me not to speak honestly to our 
colleagues about what I consider to be the serious implications of 
cutting military construction funding by $1.5 billion. By the way, that 
is before the consideration of inflation. In my opinion, cutting 
military quality of life and military training investments during a 
time of war breaks faith with America's servicemen and -women and their 
families. I am deeply disappointed that the administration and the 
House leadership would say in effect that it is okay to salute our 
troops with our words while cutting critical military quality-of-life 
programs with our deeds. I believe it is wrong to salute our servicemen 
and -women with words while insulting them with our deeds. It is wrong 
in a time of war in Afghanistan for the administration in a separate 
bill to want to cut military education funds for military children by 
$173 million and to cut funds for military family housing, health care, 
day care and training in this bill by $1.5 billion.
  Mr. Chairman, we are starting to see a pattern of respect to our 
servicemen and -women in time of war with our rhetoric and disrespect 
with our priorities and our actions. Frankly, in my opinion, we are 
reflecting the values of the majority leader of the House, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), who said during the Iraqi war that in 
time of war, nothing is more important than cutting taxes. I would like 
to invite the majority leader to my district to explain that statement 
and that value to the 44,000 soldiers I represent at Fort Hood, 20,000 
of whom are overseas in Iraq today.
  I believe it adds insult to injury to make these cuts in military 
quality-of-life programs to help pay for an $88,000 tax cut for people 
in America living here safely, comfortably at home, not fighting in 
war, people making over $1 million a year. It is not just wrong; it is 
outrageous. As public officials, our spending priorities are a better 
reflection of our values than our speeches and our rhetoric. What does 
it say about our values in Congress when we ask Americans to go into 
combat in Iraq and then the administration is trying to cut those very 
servicemen's and -women's children's education funding by 14 percent? 
What does it say about our values when a person making $1 million in 
dividend income this year just received a $200,000 tax cut while a 
soldier in Iraq must read that the House has voted to cut military 
housing, quality-of-life and training facility projects by $1.5 
billion? By the way, the House has voted to cut their future veterans 
benefits by $28 billion, a vote cast on March 21 just 8 minutes after 
we had overwhelmingly voted for a resolution saluting the service of 
our servicemen and -women in Iraq.
  Mr. Chairman, in my opinion that type of priority makes a mockery of 
the American ideals of fairness and shared sacrifice during time of 
war. What do these cuts mean? It means that tens and tens of thousands 
of servicemen and -women living in inadequate housing will have to 
continue to do so. We have 83,000 new barracks that are needed to meet 
minimum DOD standards for our single servicemen and -women. We have a 
need for 128,860 new housing units for military families who sacrifice 
so much for our country. This bill does not meet those needs. Why? Not 
because of the values or priorities of the gentleman from Michigan, but 
because the top leadership of this House and the administration decided 
that we must cut military construction by $1.5 billion to help pay for 
that massive tax cut that we have already signed into law.
  There is a lot of good in this bill, and the committee should be 
proud of its work. There are a lot of important priority programs 
funded. I salute the chairman and his very professional staff for, 
under very difficult circumstances, having to cut out important 
programs in order to adequately fund the highest-priority programs. I 
salute the gentleman from Michigan, his staff and the professional 
staff on both sides. This bill was put together without partisanship. 
It was put together under trying circumstances, with a last-minute 
decision by someone, I do not know and I do not know how, someone who 
said, we are going to have to cut our spending by $560 million below 
the amount authorized just a few weeks ago.
  I support this bill for the many good things in it and the good work 
that was done to produce it; but I say to my colleagues, Mr. Chairman, 
we should be ashamed that we are asking our servicemen and -women to 
have their housing, their quality of life, their day care, their health 
clinics, their training facility programs cut by $1.5 billion in time 
of war. We should salute our servicemen and -women and their families 
with our deeds, not just with our words.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to yield 3 
minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the 
Committee on Appropriations.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me this time, and I rise for two purposes: one, to express 
strong support for the bill and to compliment Chairman Knollenberg and 
Ranking Member Edwards for producing as good a bill as they could with 
what they had to work with. We have heard today as we heard during the 
Homeland Security appropriations bill earlier and I predict, Mr. 
Chairman, we will hear it from the other 11 appropriations bills, that 
they need more money, that they did not get enough money; that, as in 
this particular case, the bill is below the President's budget request.
  Mr. Chairman, the budget resolution that this committee is required 
to deal with was below the President's budget request. Somebody tell me 
how we can go above the President's budget request with a budget 
resolution that is below the President's budget request. That would 
take a little magic. The gentleman from Wisconsin and I have sat 
together many times trying to figure out that magic. We have not found 
the right magic wand yet. But the committees and the subcommittees are 
doing the best they can with what they have to work with, and they are 
producing good bills.
  The second part of my interest today is to say to our colleagues 
that, although there was a substantial delay in getting past some 
budgetary issues that were above the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
Appropriations, that 2 weeks ago when those issues were finally 
settled, your Committee on Appropriations has responded well. The 
Homeland Security bill was marked up, sent to the House, and it has 
gone on to the Senate. The military construction bill has been marked 
up, sent to the House and will go to the Senate today. The defense 
appropriations bill has been marked up. The labor, health and human 
services bill has been marked up. The interior appropriations bill has 
been marked up. The agriculture appropriations bill has been marked up, 
and the legislative branch bill has been marked up. So in that 2-week 
period, your committee has produced seven of the 13 bills. That is in 
addition to having completed 11 of last year's bills during this 
calendar year and one major wartime supplemental.
  I am very proud of the Committee on Appropriations on both sides. I 
am

[[Page H5984]]

proud of the subcommittees and their leadership. But you cannot have 
more money to spend than the budget resolution provides, whether it is 
with the President's number, above the President's number, or below the 
President's number. We are given that number, and that is what we have 
to deal with.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) 
for his comments. There is no Member of this House, Democrat or 
Republican, over the years who has been more committed to our 
servicemen and -women. As critical as I am of the funding level in this 
bill, I know if anyone will work hard to see if we can find more money 
to more adequately show our respect to our servicemen and -women with 
our dollars in military construction, the gentleman from Florida will 
be the person to fight that fight and to lead that fight.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to say to my colleagues that my comments, my 
critical comments about the funding level of this bill, not the way it 
was put together because the gentleman from Michigan did an excellent 
job and a fair job in doing that, but I want people to know this 
criticism does not just come from one Member of Congress. I would like 
to read an editorial dated June 30 of the ``Army Times.'' It says, 
``Nothing But Lip Service.''
  ``In recent months, President Bush and the Republican-controlled 
Congress have missed no opportunity to heap richly deserved praise on 
the military. But talk is cheap and getting cheaper by the day, judging 
from the nickel-and-dime treatment the troops are getting lately.''
  It goes on to say this:
  ``All of which brings us to the latest indignity, Bush's $9.2 billion 
military construction request for 2004, which was set a full $1.5 
billion below this year's budget on the expectation that Congress, as 
has become tradition in recent years, would add funding as it drafted 
the construction appropriations bill.
  ``But Bush's tax cuts have left little elbow room in the 2004 Federal 
budget that is taking shape, and the squeeze is on across the board.
  ``The result: not only has the House appropriations military 
construction panel accepted Bush's proposed $1.5 billion cut, it voted 
to reduce construction spending by an additional $41 million next 
year.''
  The editorial goes on after commending the gentleman from Wisconsin 
for his amendment to try to add nearly $1 billion to this bill to say 
this:
  ``Taken piecemeal, all these corner-cutting moves might be viewed as 
mere flesh wounds. But even flesh wounds are fatal if you suffer enough 
of them. It adds up to a troubling pattern that eventually will hurt 
morale, especially if the current breakneck operations tempo also rolls 
on unchecked and the tense situations in Iraq and Afghanistan do not 
ease.''
  Mr. Chairman, that is a statement not from a Democrat or Republican 
in this House, but from the ``Army Times'' editorial. I think we should 
listen to the words and spirit of that editorial. I do not think our 
servicemen and -women are going to accept lip service. They give us 
dedicated service, including the risking of their lives. It is time for 
us to give them more than lip service when it comes to committing to 
making tough choices, committing to ensure that they can have a better 
quality of life, live in decent housing, have day care for their 
children and quality schools for their families.

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking Democrat on the full 
Committee on Appropriations who made an effort earlier this day to 
offer an amendment that was closed off by the Republican leadership to 
add nearly $1 billion of commitment to our servicemen and women's 
quality of life programs.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I want to express my agreement with the comments made by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the distinguished chairman of this 
committee.
  And then I want to say this: Budgets are not just presentations of 
numbers. Budgets really reflect and define and exhibit our priorities 
and our values. And that is why this bill is such a sad commentary on 
the nature of this House.
  When President Bush came into office, thanks to the fiscal discipline 
demonstrated by the previous administration, we expected to see at 
least $6 trillion worth of surpluses over the next decade. We were in 
the best shape that we had been fiscally in more than a generation. So 
the President decided that we could afford to provide very large tax 
cuts, and he estimated we would still have billions left over for other 
purposes, and the House passed those tax cuts.
  My point is that then something happened that was totally unexpected. 
We got hit by 9/11 and the economic downturn that followed that. Any 
person of prudence in my view, having seen such a shocking change, 
would have been careful about the next step that they took, but this 
Congress and this White House, alas, was not. So despite the fact that 
the bottom was falling out of the economy and the bottom was falling 
out of Government revenues, the White House and this Congress decided 
they were going to push on with even larger tax cuts. They said that we 
needed to do it in order to create jobs.
  But, not a single job has been created during the tenure of the Bush 
administration. In fact, we have lost almost 3 million jobs since 
President Bush took office. Part of that is not his responsibility; 
part of it in my view is, and the Congress's as well. My point is that 
when conditions change one would think that their approach and their 
remedies change, but they have not. We have gotten only one answer out 
of the administration in terms of dealing with the economy: Tax cuts, 
tax cuts, tax cuts, no matter how badly they are skewed to the upper 
reaches of the income ladders and no matter what they cost to the other 
people in this society. And this bill is one of the examples of what it 
costs.
  When this House passes these tax cuts, it pretends that there is no 
cost to anyone else. Let me just spell out what some of the costs are. 
Those tax cuts mean that we will be paying $23 billion more in interest 
payments next year than we would otherwise be paying. Before these tax 
cuts play out we will be spending more on interest payments in the 
Federal budget than we will be spending on all domestic appropriation 
items reported by this committee, and it will be a gargantuan share of 
the Federal budget. We ought to be able to make better judgments than 
that.
  But there are other costs as well. We passed the ``No Child Left 
Behind Act'' for education, sent mandates out to the States and said we 
would send cash out to help pay for those mandates. I've news for you, 
the appropriations bill that is going to come out will short sheet 
those education programs by $8 billion. Nobody knows that, but that is 
what is going to happen. And this is happening at a time when budget 
crunches all over the country are going to be squeezing States and 
squeezing schools. We are also having to squeeze down on what we 
provide in health care. There are thousands and thousands of families 
being pushed off health care in many States in the Union. And this bill 
represents what is going to happen to military families, because we are 
cutting $1.5 billion below the deliverable amount in the previous 
year's budget for military families under military construction. And we 
wind up making only token progress in improving the housing for 
military families and for single enlisted people.
  The cost of the estate tax elimination, which this House just passed: 
For the cost of that money it took to take millionaires off the tax 
roll when we passed that estate tax change--that is going to cost $800 
billion--for that $800 billion, we could close one-third of the gap in 
financing that will be existing in the Social Security system. We 
should have done that first. But we did not. We passed another huge tax 
cut for the high rollers.
  So there are consequences, and there are costs to those tax cuts. The 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) is right. He cannot perform a 
miracle.

[[Page H5985]]

Neither can the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg). 
Appropriations are the table scraps that are left over after this House 
has decided to plunge ahead, promising all of these out-sized tax cuts 
to the American people with a huge share of those tax cuts going to the 
most well off, and then we see what happens to the rest.
  So that is why I am not pleased with this bill, not because of the 
work of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) or the staff but 
because this House made a basic bad judgment to begin with and it is 
being compounded and illustrated and demonstrated with every other bill 
we bring to the floor.
  That is the problem. There are consequences. The budget process is 
being handled in this House to try to hide those consequences. It is 
our responsibility to try to lay out what those consequences are, and 
that is why we have gone through this operation this afternoon.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I do not think there are any other 
speakers on this side. I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I never thought I in my 12 years in this House would 
come to the floor and speak out in favor of a military construction 
bill that cuts quality of life and training investments for servicemen 
and women even in time of war by $1.5 billion. I never thought I would 
ask my colleagues to vote for a bill that decreases Navy and Marine 
Corps family housing construction investment by $193 million compared 
to last year. I never thought I would ask my colleagues to vote for a 
bill that decreases family Air Force construction housing by $48 
million compared to last year.
  But I do ask my colleagues to vote for this bill because we had to do 
the best we could with the allocation given to us. Because of the 
needs, the important needs, military family needs that this bill meets, 
I will vote for it. Because of the needs that will remain unmet, I will 
not be proud that this House will go on record as saying in time of war 
to our servicemen and women thanks for risking their lives, thanks for 
fighting in Iraq, thanks for taking care of their children at home 
while they are wondering if their loved one will ever come home alive, 
while at the same time cutting their quality of life programs by $1.5 
billion. I guess it is a testament to my respect for the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), his fairness, his dedication to our 
servicemen and women, his commitment to working as hard as any human 
could to see that we make the best with an unfair, horrible situation 
in this funding level, that I will vote for this bill. And I do want to 
pay a special thanks to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) 
for standing up for people who often do not have someone speaking for 
them in this House, and that is our servicemen and women overseas, 
because I know there was an effort made to make additional cuts in some 
of those facilities. There is not much to be gained personally or 
politically by defending quality of life commitments overseas because 
those folks are not living in our districts at the time. The gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) said no to that kind of cut because he 
knew that would have been the wrong thing to do. I salute him and I 
hope with his dedication and the gentleman from Florida's (Mr. Young) 
and the gentleman from Wisconsin's (Mr. Obey) and other Members of this 
House's dedication, we will see before this year ends we can pass a 
military construction bill that we can look our servicemen and women in 
the eye and say we are proud of them and we do salute them with more 
than just words.
  So I ask my colleagues, despite my reservations, to support the 
tremendous effort and work of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Knollenberg) and our subcommittee.
  Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise this evening in support of our men 
and women in the Armed Services. For many weeks now, we have all 
declared our gratefulness to these warriors and their families of the 
sacrifices they have made on behalf of our Nation.
  Besides their incredible efforts in fighting the War on Terrorism, 
these patriots and their families have had to learn to live without 
their fathers or mothers or spouses present on a daily basis because of 
numerous, long, and dangerous deployments, or even worse, if their 
loved one has paid the ultimate sacrifice. I, myself, have had more 
than my share of families in my district that have paid this price.
  I have traveled extensively to our military facilities and have 
observed the substandard housing we force our military personnel and 
families to live in. We must address this situation.
  We are all grateful for these sacrifices, but how will we show this 
gratefulness? Will we support the Ranking Member in his effort to scale 
back the tax cuts by a mere 5 percent for those who make over a million 
dollars a year, so we can restore funding and adequately house our 
forces?
  Even though we are cutting military construction spending by $1.5 
billion from last year's funding, we can still do the right thing at 
this time by voting for the Previous Question. We must support the 
Ranking Member's efforts and truly show our gratitude to our troops.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend Chairman Knollenberg 
and Ranking Member Edwards for their work on this bill. They have done 
their best with an unreasonable and unacceptable allocation. I know 
they share my deep disappointment over this level of funding, which is 
$1.5 billion less than was appropriated for Military Construction & 
Family Housing last year.
  Unfortunately this cut makes a bad situation worse. When the Bush 
administration came into office, they found a Department of Defense 
where the recapitalization rates for facilities varied from 80 to over 
100 years in the various services. They rightly condemned this 
situation. However, under this budget, the recapitalization rate for 
the active Air Force will increase to 183 years. The Navy 
recapitalization rate will increase to 140 years. The recapitalization 
rate for the Marines actually goes down, but is still an unacceptable 
88 years. And the Army recapitalization rate in this budget increases 
to 144 years. The DOD goal is 67 years. I strongly support the effort 
by Mr. Obey to increase funding for Military Construction and Family 
Housing in this bill by $1 billion. This funding, and much more, is 
sorely needed.
  I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for working 
with me on the vital installations in Washington state. We will make a 
start in this bill on fixing a Navy pier at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard 
which today is not up to Navy standards for performing its mission, 
which is mooring nuclear powered aircraft carriers. And the bill 
includes several important projects to build barracks at Ft. Lewis, 
refurbish the Mission Support Center at McChord Air Force Base, and 
rebuild the service pier at Subase Bangor. Also, this bill continues to 
support the privatization of family housing at Ft. Lewis, WA. Mr. 
Chairman, beautiful new houses have been built and are under 
construction there, and this Congress can be proud about the new houses 
being built for military families through this innovative program.

  I hope as this bill proceeds through the Congressional process, that 
additional funds can be found to make this a truly responsible piece of 
legislation. Having voiced my deep concerns, I will vote today in 
support of this bill in order to ensure that those important projects 
which do receive funding here are allowed to move forward.
  Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Chairman, America is indebted to the men and women 
of the armed forces. Their success in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the 
world give witness to their bravery and commitment. In order to 
maintain this dedicated, all-volunteer force and to ensure its 
readiness, we must be proactive in providing them adequate quality of 
life and training facilities.
  The reality is that we are still correcting the spending deficiencies 
of the past. Even after years of funding plus-ups to the Department's 
military construction budget, service men and women continue to live 
and work in aging and inferior facilities. In fact, more than two-
thirds of the services' current facilities are classified at ``C-3'' or 
``C-4'' readiness levels. This signifies that their ability to carry 
out missions has been appreciably degraded.
  I am glad that we are able to work across party lines to ensure that 
military construction is funded at the highest levels possible.
  H.R. 2559 addresses many of the pressing construction and family 
housing needs facing the services. The bill would provide $1.2 billion 
for barracks, $16 million for child development centers, and $1.2 
billion for new family housing units and improvements to existing ones.
  I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2559, because these new and 
improved facilities will enhance the quality of life for our service 
members while they are doing their jobs and training to defend America.
  We must never let our military deteriorate as we have seen in the 
past, because, as recent events have demonstrated, we will never know 
when our nation's security will be challenged.
  Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2559, the 
Military Construction

[[Page H5986]]

Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2004. It is the second bill we are 
considering pursuant to the 302(b) allocations adopted by the 
Appropriations Committee on June 17th. I am pleased to report that it 
is consistent with the levels established in H. Con. Res. 95, the House 
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2004, which 
Congress adopted on April 10. The budget resolution provided $400.1 
billion in discretionary budget authority for national defense. This 
bill funds the military construction and family housing portion of that 
commitment to our men and women in uniform.
  H.R. 2559 provides $9.196 billion in new budget authority and $10.282 
billion in outlays for fiscal year 2004. It is therefore identical to 
its 302(b) allocation to the House Subcommittee on Military 
Construction Appropriations. It does not contain emergency-designated 
new BA. It does include $340.5 million in rescissions of previously 
enacted BA. Although budget authority in the bill declines by 12.8 
percent from the previous year, it is $81 million above the President's 
request. This mainly because H.R. 2559 contains a procurement 
appropriation of $120 million that, according to CBO, was part of the 
administration's request for the Defense appropriation bill rather than 
this bill.
  The bill complies with section 302(f) of the Budget Act, which 
prohibits consideration of bills in excess of an appropriations 
subcommittee's 302(b) allocation of budget authority and outlays 
established in the budget resolution.
  H.R. 2559 represents this House's solemn commitment to the quality of 
life of those who put their lives on the line for freedom. It not only 
addresses the long-term infrastructure problems at military bases, it 
sustains barracks, family housing, medical facilities, and child 
support centers across the country and overseas. It also provides 
infrastructure funding for National Guard and Reserve troops who now 
find themselves on the front lines of the war against terrorism. 
Finally, it incorporates the results of real-world national security 
policy changes: The redeployment south of U.S. military forces away 
from the North Korean border to better-protected bases, and the gradual 
drawdown of troops from some Central European bases.
  In conclusion, I express my support for H.R. 2559.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 
2559, making appropriations for military construction for fiscal 2004. 
This legislation is a strong product for tough times and I want to 
commend the Subcommittee Chairman, the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. 
Knollenberg, and the Gentleman from Texas, Mr. Edwards.
  This legislation provides $9.2 billion in funding for military 
construction and family housing projects across the country.
  While no one is satisfied with the bottom line on this bill and we 
all wish that we could not do more, this is a solid product. It 
satisfies our obligation to ensure that our men and women in uniform 
live in, train at, and deploy from adequate facilities. This bill shows 
our commitment to our service members by constructing and upgrading 
military installations, and military family housing in the United 
States and overseas.
  Improving the quality of life for our men and women in uniform 
throughout the world is critically important. If we are asking these 
brave men and women to protect our national security, then we must 
ensure that they have the tools and the facilities to protect 
themselves.
  America's armed forces have been charged with developing the 
capabilities to fight jointly and with coalition partners to secure 
victory across the full spectrum of warfare while continuing the 
transition to a more flexible, more agile, lighter and more lethal 
force.
  In this context, I am pleased the Committee has included funding for 
a state-of-the-art explosives loading facility at the Army's ``Home of 
Lethality''--Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey.
  In Afghanistan and Iraq, the achievements of our young men and women 
in uniform are due in part to the incredible technological advances 
employed by our military, much of which has been researched and 
developed by Picatinny Arsenal--the only Army-owned, Army-operated 
facilities for the research and development of energetics materials 
(mines, armor, warheads, artillery, etc.) in the nation. The new 
facility will mark a substantial upgrade in safety, environmental 
protection and process controls that will benefit the other branches of 
the military that rely on Army research and development expertise.
  Mr. Chairman, once again I commend Mr. Knollenberg and Mr. Young and 
I urge support for this bill.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, today I urge your consideration 
of the authorization of $14.3 million for land acquisition to preserve 
access to the Barry M. Goldwater Range. This land acquisition would 
serve to prevent incompatible land uses and encroachment, and to 
increase the margin of safety in the Live Ordnance Departure Area 
located southwest of Luke Air Force Base.
  The Barry M. Goldwater Range, a 2.7 million acre land and airspace 
area in southwest Arizona, is the crown jewel of all flight ranges, 
providing the Air Force with the space necessary to conduct live-fire 
training and simulating realistically the dimensions of a modern 
battlefield.
  Luke Air Force Base-with its year-round idyllic weather-is the 
training home to the F-16 Fighting Falcon. With an average of 170 
sorties flown each day, access to the Barry M. Goldwater Range is an 
essential part of the advanced training and practice required of the 
Air Force fighter pilots. The southern departure corridor from Luke Air 
Force Base is the only air corridor where live ordnance can be carried 
out by F-16 Fighters. The threat of advancement and increased pressure 
of residential development from what has traditionally been isolated 
farmland places the mission and the future of Luke Air Force Base at 
risk.
  The Air Force has also made this $14.3 million request stating, 
``Continued residential development of the departure corridors could 
impair Luke [Air Force Base's] ability to support sorties carrying live 
ordnance and to fully utilize the [Barry M. Goldwater Range] . . . 
[and] further encumbering Luke [Air Force Base's] access to the [Barry 
M. Goldwater Range] may adversely impact Luke's mission and result in a 
degradation to the national security.''
  Mr. EDWARDS. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule. During consideration of the bill for 
amendment, the Chair may accord priority in recognition to a Member 
offering an amendment that has been printed in the designated place in 
the Congressional Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 2559

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated for military 
     construction, family housing, and base realignment and 
     closure functions administered by the Department of Defense, 
     for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other 
     purposes, namely:

                      Military Construction, Army


                        (including rescissions)

       For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment 
     of temporary or permanent public works, military 
     installations, facilities, and real property for the Army as 
     currently authorized by law, including personnel in the Army 
     Corps of Engineers and other personal services necessary for 
     the purposes of this appropriation, and for construction and 
     operation of facilities in support of the functions of the 
     Commander in Chief, $1,533,660,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2008: Provided, That of this amount, not to 
     exceed $122,710,000 shall be available for study, planning, 
     design, architect and engineer services, and host nation 
     support, as authorized by law, unless the Secretary of 
     Defense determines that additional obligations are necessary 
     for such purposes and notifies the Committees on 
     Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of his 
     determination and the reasons therefor: Provided further, 
     That of the funds appropriated for ``Military Construction, 
     Army'' under Public Law 107-249, $142,200,000 are rescinded: 
     Provided further, That of the funds appropriated for 
     ``Military Construction, Army'' under Public Law 107-64, 
     $24,000,000 are rescinded: Provided further, That of the 
     funds appropriated for ``Military Construction, Army'' under 
     Public Law 106-246, $17,415,000 are rescinded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Obey:
       On page 2, line 13, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Army'', delete the dollar amount and insert 
     $1,726,660,000;
       On page 3, line 13, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Navy'', delete the dollar amount and insert 
     $1,311,907,000;
       On page 4, line 5, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Air Force'', delete the dollar amount and 
     insert $968,509,000;
       On page 4, line 21, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Defense-Wide'', delete the dollar amount and 
     insert $872,110,000;
       On page 5, line 20, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Army National Guard'', delete the dollar amount 
     and insert $231,860,000;
       On page 6, line 3, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Air National Guard'', delete the dollar amount 
     and insert $95,605,000;
       On page 7, line 19, under the heading ``Family Housing 
     Construction, Army'', delete the dollar amount and insert 
     $601,191,000;
       On page 8, line 13, under the heading ``Family Housing 
     Construction, Navy and

[[Page H5987]]

     Marine Corps'', delete the dollar amount and insert 
     $288,193,000;
       And on page 9, line 6, under the heading ``Family Housing 
     Construction, Air Force'', delete the dollar amount and 
     insert $841,065,000.
       At the end of the bill, add the following:
       Section ______. In the case of taxpayers with adjusted 
     gross income in excess of $1,000,000 for the tax beginning in 
     2003, the amount of tax reduction resulting from enactment of 
     the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 
     shall be reduced by five percent.

  Mr. OBEY (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent 
that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is reserved.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I have already explained to the House what 
the intention of this amendment is. This amendment would reinstate the 
$160 million in cuts from the President's budget for hangers, 
maintenance shops, office space, physical fitness facilities for the 
military that even the White House thought were crucial. It adds $480 
million for family housing to help at least 2,500 military families. 
There are 134,000 inadequate units that service those families to date. 
It would add $318 million for new barracks. It would help get 5,300 
single service personnel into decent housing. The Pentagon says there 
is a need for over 83,000 unit fix-ups. And it would pay for that by 
reducing the expected tax cut for those with adjusted gross incomes of 
more than $1 million dollars annually. We would adjust their tax cuts 
from $88,000 to $83,000, thus enabling them to keep 95 percent of their 
tax cut. That would free up enough money to meet these military needs, 
and I would urge the House, despite the action of the Committee on 
Rules, to allow this amendment to go forward.


                             Point of Order

  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) 
insist on his point of order?
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I do. I make a point of order against 
the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and 
constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill and therefore 
violates clause 2 of rule XXI, which states in part ``An amendment to a 
general appropriations bill shall not be in order if changing existing 
law.''
  At this time I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard on the point of 
order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, what has been happening in this House is that 
the Committee on Rules has routinely been waiving points of orders for 
the majority but denying those same waivers to the minority. That puts 
us in an uneven position on the House floor. We are in that kind of 
position on this amendment. I want to simply say in conceding the point 
of order that I will continue to make this motion on this bill. I will 
have it in my motion to recommit. I will try at every stage of the 
process to get this matter before the House so we can make these 
priority judgments, and it is up to the majority whether it wants to 
knock them off the floor or not.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's point of order is conceded and 
sustained.
  The Clerk will read.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
remainder of the bill, through page 19, line 19 be considered as read, 
printed in the Record and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the remainder of the bill, from page 3, line 5, though 
page 19, line 19 is as follows:

                      Military Construction, Navy


                        (including rescissions)

       For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment 
     of temporary or permanent public works, naval installations, 
     facilities, and real property for the Navy as currently 
     authorized by law, including personnel in the Naval 
     Facilities Engineering Command and other personal services 
     necessary for the purposes of this appropriation, 
     $1,211,077,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008: 
     Provided, That of this amount, not to exceed $65,612,000 
     shall be available for study, planning, design, architect and 
     engineer services, as authorized by law, unless the Secretary 
     of Defense determines that additional obligations are 
     necessary for such purposes and notifies the Committees on 
     Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of his 
     determination and the reasons therefor: Provided further, 
     That of the funds appropriated for ``Military Construction, 
     Navy'' under Public Law 107-249, $27,213,000 are rescinded: 
     Provided further, That of the funds appropriated for 
     ``Military Construction, Navy'' under Public Law 107-64, 
     $12,109,000 are rescinded.

                    Military Construction, Air Force

       For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment 
     of temporary or permanent public works, military 
     installations, facilities, and real property for the Air 
     Force as currently authorized by law, $896,136,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That of this 
     amount, not to exceed $80,543,000 shall be available for 
     study, planning, design, architect and engineer services, as 
     authorized by law, unless the Secretary of Defense determines 
     that additional obligations are necessary for such purposes 
     and notifies the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses 
     of Congress of his determination and the reasons therefor.

                  Military Construction, Defense-Wide


              (including rescission and transfer of funds)

       For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment 
     of temporary or permanent public works, installations, 
     facilities, and real property for activities and agencies of 
     the Department of Defense (other than the military 
     departments), as currently authorized by law, $813,613,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That 
     such amounts of this appropriation as may be determined by 
     the Secretary of Defense may be transferred to such 
     appropriations of the Department of Defense available for 
     military construction or family housing as he may designate, 
     to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes, 
     and for the same time period, as the appropriation or fund to 
     which transferred: Provided further, That of the amount 
     appropriated, not to exceed $63,884,000 shall be available 
     for study, planning, design, architect and engineer services, 
     as authorized by law, unless the Secretary of Defense 
     determines that additional obligations are necessary for such 
     purposes and notifies the Committees on Appropriations of 
     both Houses of Congress of his determination and the reasons 
     therefor: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated 
     for ``Military Construction, Defense-wide'' under Public Law 
     107-249, $32,680,000 are rescinded.

               Military Construction, Army National Guard

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the Army National Guard, and contributions 
     therefor, as authorized by chapter 1803 of title 10, United 
     States Code, and Military Construction Authorization Acts, 
     $208,033,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.

               Military Construction, Air National Guard

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the Air National Guard, and contributions 
     therefor, as authorized by chapter 1803 of title 10, United 
     States Code, and Military Construction Authorization Acts, 
     $77,105,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.

                  Military Construction, Army Reserve

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the Army Reserve as authorized by chapter 
     1803 of title 10, United States Code, and Military 
     Construction Authorization Acts, $84,569,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2008.

                  Military Construction, Naval Reserve

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the reserve components of the Navy and 
     Marine Corps as authorized by chapter 1803 of title 10, 
     United States Code, and Military Construction Authorization 
     Acts, $38,992,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2008.

                Military Construction, Air Force Reserve

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the Air Force Reserve as authorized by 
     chapter 1803 of title 10, United States Code, and Military 
     Construction Authorization Acts, $56,212,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2008.

                   North Atlantic Treaty Organization

                      Security Investment Program

       For the United States share of the cost of the North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program for 
     the acquisition and construction of military facilities and 
     installations (including international military headquarters) 
     and for related expenses for the collective defense of the 
     North Atlantic Treaty Area as authorized in Military 
     Construction Authorization Acts and section 2806 of title 10, 
     United States Code, $169,300,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

[[Page H5988]]

                   Family Housing Construction, Army


                         (including rescission)

       For expenses of family housing for the Army for 
     construction, including acquisition, replacement, addition, 
     expansion, extension and alteration, as authorized by law, 
     $409,191,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008: 
     Provided, That of the funds appropriated for ``Family Housing 
     Construction, Army'' under Public Law 107-249, $52,300,000 
     are rescinded.

             Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Army

       For expenses of family housing for the Army for operation 
     and maintenance, including debt payment, leasing, minor 
     construction, principal and interest charges, and insurance 
     premiums, as authorized by law, $1,043,026,000.

           Family Housing Construction, Navy and Marine Corps


                         (including rescission)

       For expenses of family housing for the Navy and Marine 
     Corps for construction, including acquisition, replacement, 
     addition, expansion, extension and alteration, as authorized 
     by law, $184,193,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2008: Provided, That of the funds appropriated for ``Family 
     Housing Construction, Navy and Marine Corps'' under Public 
     Law 107-249, $3,585,000 are rescinded.

    Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps

       For expenses of family housing for the Navy and Marine 
     Corps for operation and maintenance, including debt payment, 
     leasing, minor construction, principal and interest charges, 
     and insurance premiums, as authorized by law, $852,778,000.

                 Family Housing Construction, Air Force


                        (including rescissions)

       For expenses of family housing for the Air Force for 
     construction, including acquisition, replacement, addition, 
     expansion, extension and alteration, as authorized by law, 
     $657,065,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008: 
     Provided, That of the funds appropriated for ``Family Housing 
     Construction, Air Force'' under Public Law 107-249, 
     $19,347,000 are rescinded: Provided further, That of the 
     funds appropriated for ``Family Housing Construction, Air 
     Force'' under Public Law 105-237, $9,692,000 are rescinded.

          Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

       For expenses of family housing for the Air Force for 
     operation and maintenance, including debt payment, leasing, 
     minor construction, principal and interest charges, and 
     insurance premiums, as authorized by law, $826,074,000.

               Family Housing Construction, Defense-Wide

       For expenses of family housing for the activities and 
     agencies of the Department of Defense (other than the 
     military departments) for construction, including 
     acquisition, replacement, addition, expansion, extension and 
     alteration, as authorized by law, $350,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2008.

         Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

       For expenses of family housing for the activities and 
     agencies of the Department of Defense (other than the 
     military departments) for operation and maintenance, leasing, 
     and minor construction, as authorized by law, $49,440,000.

         Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund

       For the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement 
     Fund, $300,000, to remain available until expended, for 
     family housing initiatives undertaken pursuant to section 
     2883 of title 10, United States Code, providing alternative 
     means of acquiring and improving military family housing and 
     supporting facilities.

                  Base Realignment and Closure Account

       For deposit into the Department of Defense Base Closure 
     Account 1990 established by section 2906(a)(1) of the 
     Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1991 (Public Law 
     101-510), $370,427,000, to remain available until expended.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 101. None of the funds appropriated in Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts shall be expended for 
     payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee contract for 
     construction, where cost estimates exceed $25,000, to be 
     performed within the United States, except Alaska, without 
     the specific approval in writing of the Secretary of Defense 
     setting forth the reasons therefor.
       Sec. 102. Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense 
     for construction shall be available for hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles.
       Sec. 103. Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense 
     for construction may be used for advances to the Federal 
     Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, for the 
     construction of access roads as authorized by section 210 of 
     title 23, United States Code, when projects authorized 
     therein are certified as important to the national defense by 
     the Secretary of Defense.
       Sec. 104. None of the funds appropriated in this Act may be 
     used to begin construction of new bases inside the 
     continental United States for which specific appropriations 
     have not been made.
       Sec. 105. No part of the funds provided in Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts shall be used for purchase 
     of land or land easements in excess of 100 percent of the 
     value as determined by the Army Corps of Engineers or the 
     Naval Facilities Engineering Command, except: (1) where there 
     is a determination of value by a Federal court; (2) purchases 
     negotiated by the Attorney General or his designee; (3) where 
     the estimated value is less than $25,000; or (4) as otherwise 
     determined by the Secretary of Defense to be in the public 
     interest.
       Sec. 106. None of the funds appropriated in Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts shall be used to: (1) 
     acquire land; (2) provide for site preparation; or (3) 
     install utilities for any family housing, except housing for 
     which funds have been made available in annual Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts.
       Sec. 107. None of the funds appropriated in Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts for minor construction may 
     be used to transfer or relocate any activity from one base or 
     installation to another, without prior notification to the 
     Committees on Appropriations.
       Sec. 108. No part of the funds appropriated in Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts may be used for the 
     procurement of steel for any construction project or activity 
     for which American steel producers, fabricators, and 
     manufacturers have been denied the opportunity to compete for 
     such steel procurement.
       Sec. 109. None of the funds available to the Department of 
     Defense for military construction or family housing during 
     the current fiscal year may be used to pay real property 
     taxes in any foreign nation.
       Sec. 110. None of the funds appropriated in Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts may be used to initiate a 
     new installation overseas without prior notification to the 
     Committees on Appropriations.
       Sec. 111. None of the funds appropriated in Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts may be obligated for 
     architect and engineer contracts estimated by the Government 
     to exceed $500,000 for projects to be accomplished in Japan, 
     in any NATO member country, or in countries bordering the 
     Arabian Sea, unless such contracts are awarded to United 
     States firms or United States firms in joint venture with 
     host nation firms.
       Sec. 112. None of the funds appropriated in Military 
     Construction Appropriations Acts for military construction in 
     the United States territories and possessions in the Pacific 
     and on Kwajalein Atoll, or in countries bordering the Arabian 
     Sea, may be used to award any contract estimated by the 
     Government to exceed $1,000,000 to a foreign contractor: 
     Provided, That this section shall not be applicable to 
     contract awards for which the lowest responsive and 
     responsible bid of a United States contractor exceeds the 
     lowest responsive and responsible bid of a foreign contractor 
     by greater than 20 percent: Provided further, That this 
     section shall not apply to contract awards for military 
     construction on Kwajalein Atoll for which the lowest 
     responsive and responsible bid is submitted by a Marshallese 
     contractor.
       Sec. 113. The Secretary of Defense is to inform the 
     appropriate committees of Congress, including the Committees 
     on Appropriations, of the plans and scope of any proposed 
     military exercise involving United States personnel 30 days 
     prior to its occurring, if amounts expended for construction, 
     either temporary or permanent, are anticipated to exceed 
     $100,000.
       Sec. 114. Not more than 20 percent of the appropriations in 
     Military Construction Appropriations Acts which are limited 
     for obligation during the current fiscal year shall be 
     obligated during the last 2 months of the fiscal year.


                          (transfer of funds)

       Sec. 115. Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense 
     for construction in prior years shall be available for 
     construction authorized for each such military department by 
     the authorizations enacted into law during the current 
     session of Congress.
       Sec. 116. For military construction or family housing 
     projects that are being completed with funds otherwise 
     expired or lapsed for obligation, expired or lapsed funds may 
     be used to pay the cost of associated supervision, 
     inspection, overhead, engineering and design on those 
     projects and on subsequent claims, if any.
       Sec. 117. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 
     funds appropriated to a military department or defense agency 
     for the construction of military projects may be obligated 
     for a military construction project or contract, or for any 
     portion of such a project or contract, at any time before the 
     end of the fourth fiscal year after the fiscal year for which 
     funds for such project were appropriated if the funds 
     obligated for such project: (1) are obligated from funds 
     available for military construction projects; and (2) do not 
     exceed the amount appropriated for such project, plus any 
     amount by which the cost of such project is increased 
     pursuant to law.


                          (transfer of funds)

       Sec. 118. During the 5-year period after appropriations 
     available to the Department of Defense for military 
     construction and family housing operation and maintenance and 
     construction have expired for obligation, upon a 
     determination that such appropriations will not be necessary 
     for the liquidation of obligations or for making authorized 
     adjustments to such appropriations for obligations incurred 
     during the period of availability of such appropriations, 
     unobligated balances of such appropriations may be 
     transferred into

[[Page H5989]]

     the appropriation ``Foreign Currency Fluctuations, 
     Construction, Defense'' to be merged with and to be available 
     for the same time period and for the same purposes as the 
     appropriation to which transferred.
       Sec. 119. The Secretary of Defense is to provide the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives with an annual report by February 15, 
     containing details of the specific actions proposed to be 
     taken by the Department of Defense during the current fiscal 
     year to encourage other member nations of the North Atlantic 
     Treaty Organization, Japan, Korea, and United States allies 
     bordering the Arabian Sea to assume a greater share of the 
     common defense burden of such nations and the United States.


                          (transfer of funds)

       Sec. 120. During the current fiscal year, in addition to 
     any other transfer authority available to the Department of 
     Defense, proceeds deposited to the Department of Defense Base 
     Closure Account established by section 207(a)(1) of the 
     Defense Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and 
     Realignment Act (Public Law 100-526) pursuant to section 
     207(a)(2)(C) of such Act, may be transferred to the account 
     established by section 2906(a)(1) of the Department of 
     Defense Authorization Act, 1991, to be merged with, and to be 
     available for the same purposes and the same time period as 
     that account.


                          (transfer of funds)

       Sec. 121. Subject to 30 days prior notification to the 
     Committees on Appropriations, such additional amounts as may 
     be determined by the Secretary of Defense may be transferred 
     to the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund 
     from amounts appropriated for construction in ``Family 
     Housing'' accounts, to be merged with and to be available for 
     the same purposes and for the same period of time as amounts 
     appropriated directly to the Fund: Provided, That 
     appropriations made available to the Fund shall be available 
     to cover the costs, as defined in section 502(5) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of direct loans or loan 
     guarantees issued by the Department of Defense pursuant to 
     the provisions of subchapter IV of chapter 169, title 10, 
     United States Code, pertaining to alternative means of 
     acquiring and improving military family housing and 
     supporting facilities.
       Sec. 122. None of the funds appropriated or made available 
     by this Act may be obligated for Partnership for Peace 
     Programs in the New Independent States of the former Soviet 
     Union.


                          (transfer of funds)

       Sec. 123. During the current fiscal year, in addition to 
     any other transfer authority available to the Department of 
     Defense, amounts may be transferred from the account 
     established by section 2906(a)(1) of the Department of 
     Defense Authorization Act, 1991, to the fund established by 
     section 1013(d) of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan 
     Development Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 3374) to pay for expenses 
     associated with the Homeowners Assistance Program. Any 
     amounts transferred shall be merged with and be available for 
     the same purposes and for the same time period as the fund to 
     which transferred.
       Sec. 124. Notwithstanding this or any other provision of 
     law, funds appropriated in Military Construction 
     Appropriations Acts for operations and maintenance of family 
     housing shall be the exclusive source of funds for repair and 
     maintenance of all family housing units, including general or 
     flag officer quarters: Provided, That not more than $35,000 
     per unit may be spent annually for the maintenance and repair 
     of any general or flag officer quarters without 30 days 
     advance prior notification to the appropriate committees of 
     Congress, except that an after-the-fact notification shall be 
     submitted if the limitation is exceeded solely due to costs 
     associated with environmental remediation that could not be 
     reasonably anticipated at the time of the budget submission: 
     Provided further, That the Under Secretary of Defense 
     (Comptroller) is to report annually to the Committees on 
     Appropriations all operations and maintenance expenditures 
     for each individual general or flag officer quarters for the 
     prior fiscal year.
       Sec. 125. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality 
     of the United States Government, except pursuant to a 
     transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act 
     or any other appropriation Act.
       Sec. 126. None of the funds appropriated in this Act for 
     the Department of the Army for military construction projects 
     in the Republic of Korea may be obligated or expended for 
     projects at Camp Humphreys in the Republic of Korea until the 
     Secretary of Defense certifies and reports to the appropriate 
     committees of Congress that the United States and the 
     Republic of Korea have entered into an agreement on the 
     availability and use of land sufficient for such projects. 
     The certification must be presented to the committees no 
     later than September 30, 2004, or the funds expire.

                              {time}  1630

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments?
  If not, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       This Act may be cited as the ``Military Construction 
     Appropriations Act, 2004''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments?
  If not, under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore, Mr. 
Thornberry, having assumed the chair, Mr. Bass, Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2559) 
making appropriations for military construction, family housing, and 
base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes, pursuant 
to House Resolution 298, he reported the bill back to the House.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                 Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. OBEY. Without the motion to recommit, yes.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order against the 
motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
  The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Obey moves to recommit the bill, H.R. 2559, to the 
     Committee on Appropriation with instructions to report the 
     same forthwith with the following amendment:
       On page 2, line 13, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Army'', delete the dollar amount and insert 
     $1,726,660,000;
       On page 3, line 13, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Navy'', delete the dollar amount and insert 
     $1,311,907,000;
       On page 4, line 5, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Air Force'', delete the dollar amount and 
     insert $968,509,000;
       On page 4, line 21, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Defense-Wide'', delete the dollar amount and 
     insert $872,110,000;
       On page 5, line 20, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Army National Guard, delete the dollar amount 
     and insert $231,860,000;
       On page 6, line 3, under the heading ``Military 
     Construction, Air National Guard'', delete the dollar amount 
     and insert $95,605,000;
       On page 7, line 19, under the heading ``Family Housing 
     Construction, Army'', delete the dollar amount and insert 
     $601,191,000;
       On page 8, line 13, under the heading ``Family Housing 
     Construction, Navy and Marine Corps'', delete the dollar 
     amount and insert $288,193,000;
       And on page 9, line 6, under the heading ``Family Housing 
     Construction, Air Force'', delete the dollar amount and 
     insert $841,065,000.
       At the end of the bill, add the following:
       Section ____. In the case of taxpayers with adjusted gross 
     income in excess of $1,000,000 for the tax year beginning in 
     2003, the amount of tax reduction resulting from enactment of 
     the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 
     shall be reduced by five percent.

  Mr. OBEY (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the motion be considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) on his motion to recommit.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I will not take the 5 minutes. This is simply 
the same motion I offered before. If this House were operating on the 
basis of any degree of fairness today, it would be before the House, 
and I would simply ask that the majority refrain from offering the 
point of order against it. I know they have their marching orders. They 
have to do what they have to do, and I have to do what I have to do.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
motion to recommit because it proposes to change existing law and 
constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill, and, therefore, 
violates clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The rule states, in pertinent part, ``An amendment to a general 
appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''
  The amendment proposes to alter the application of existing law.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Wisconsin wish to be 
heard on the point of order?

[[Page H5990]]

  Mr. OBEY. Yes, I do, Mr. Speaker.
  As I said earlier, this is the same motion I made before. What is 
happening here is that because of a technical difference in the way the 
rules are being applied to the majority and the minority, we are being 
prevented from offering a motion which would strike a much better 
balance between the needs of our military and the needs of the most 
well-off people in this society.
  With that, I concede the point of order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin concedes the 
point of order. The point of order is sustained.


                 Motion To Recommit Offered by Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. OBEY. I am, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Obey moves to recommit the bill, H.R. 2559, to the 
     Committee on Appropriations.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The motion is not debatable.
  The question is on the motion to recommit offered by the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  The motion was rejected.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clauses 8 and 9 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on 
passage of H.R. 2559 will be followed by 5-minute votes on suspending 
the rules and adopting House Resolution 277 and on agreeing to the 
Speaker's approval of the Journal.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 428, 
nays 0, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 325]

                               YEAS--428

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Bell
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Janklow
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner (OH)
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Cox
     Gephardt
     McInnis
     Paul
     Smith (WA)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry) (during the vote). Members 
are reminded less than 2 minutes remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1654

  Mr. ACKERMAN changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea''.
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________