[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 68 (Friday, May 26, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E968]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, MILITARY QUALITY OF LIFE AND VETERANS AFFAIRS 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                          Friday, May 19, 2006

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5385) making 
     appropriations for the military quality of life functions of 
     the Department of Defense, military construction, the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other 
     purposes:
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, the Military Quality of Life-
Veteran's Administration appropriations bill we are voting on today is 
not nearly as good a bill as it should have been. I will support it 
today, but I'm very disappointed in the Republican leadership's 
priorities reflected in this legislation.
  The House Armed Services Committee, on which I sit, authorized these 
projects in the authorization bill that the House passed earlier this 
month. The Administration budget also requested these 20 projects, all 
of which are conventional military construction projects--things like 
hangars, barracks and unit headquarters.
  To try to square the military priorities funded in this bill with the 
budget resolution the Republican leadership forced through the House, 
the Appropriations Committee used budget gimmickry to designate $507 
million for 20 routine military construction projects as an `emergency' 
so that this funding would not count against the bill's allocation.
  Those in the Republican leadership concerned more about finding money 
for tax cuts than for our troops decided to cut these military 
construction projects today. Because of the projects' `emergency' 
funding status, Republicans chose to strike all $507 million.
  Regardless of whether or not they are labeled as `emergency funding,' 
for bookkeeping reasons, they are valid and needed projects, selected 
through long-term planning exercises developed by the services, vetted 
through the Administration, and requested by the President.
  The fact that the Republican budget put tax cuts ahead of the needs 
of our troops strikes me as backward and wrong. These are military 
priorities as defined by the President of the United States, and the 
majority chose to ignore them. They want to have it both ways--to say 
they support the troops, but also to be able to cut taxes for wealthy 
Americans. If this isn't a good example of how this approach doesn't 
work, I don't know what is.

                          ____________________