Congressional Record, Volume 153 Issue 82 (Thursday, May 17, 2007)

[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 82 (Thursday, May 17, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H5348-H5354]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer a personal
explanation of the reason I missed rollcall Nos. 367 through 374 on May
17, 2007. I was down in my district attending the funeral of Staff Sgt.
Timothy P. Padgett.
If present, I would have voted: rollcall vote No. 367, Tierney
Amendment on Defense Authorization to reduce the $8.1 billion specified
for Missile Defense Agency activities by $1.084 billion from specified
programs, ``no''; rollcall vote No. 368, Franks Amendment on Defense
Authorization to increase by $764 million the amount authorized for
ballistic missile defense, ``aye''; rollcall vote No. 369, King
Amendment on Defense Authorization to clarify that neither the bill nor
any other provision of law shall prevent the U.S. government from
establishing temporary military installations or bases by entering into
a basing rights agreement with the government of Iraq, ``aye'';
rollcall vote No. 370, Moran Amendment on Defense Authorization to
require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report that contains a
plan for the transfer of every enemy combatant at Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, ``no''; rollcall vote No. 371, Holt Amendment on
Defense Authorization to require the videotaping of interrogations and
other pertinent interactions between military personnel and/or
contractors and detainees, ``no''.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1585, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. The provisions
of this bill are critical to our national security and to improving the
readiness for our fighting men and women who serve our country so ably.
I commend Chairman Ike Skelton, Ranking Member Duncan Hunter, and my
colleagues on the Committee on Armed Services for their leadership and
work on writing this important legislation. The work of the committee
ensures that this Congress will make a meaningful and positive impact
on our Armed Forces.
Many members of the United States armed services, including scores of
servicemembers from Guam, are at duty stations in the United States, at
sea, or are deployed to combat zones and elsewhere around the world
today. I have had the unique opportunity, since I was elected to
Congress in 2002 and sworn into office in 2003, to travel to many of
the combat zones and visit with our servicemembers there. I remain
impressed by the professionalism of the members of the United States
armed services. I am inspired by their continued, steadfast commitment
to their achieving their missions. And I am heartened by their daily,
unquestioned acts of bravery performed in defense of the American way
of life, despite the hostile intentions and aggressive actions of
persistent and deadly enemies.
The responsibilities and obligations of members of the United States
armed services are significant and honorable, but not without great
risk. The tenth soldier from Guam to be killed in action during
operations support of the war on terror will soon be laid to rest by
his family, friends, and a grateful country. I, like all of my
colleagues, am deeply saddened when we learn that the life of one of
our country's finest young men and women has been ended as a result of
their service to our country. Such a loss is grave to the United States
and to the United States armed services. But there is no doubt their
passing is a more grievous loss to their family, friends, and
communities who knew and loved them as individuals. All of us should
try to find comfort in the thought that our service men and women serve
so that others might someday know the joys of liberty and justice. And
for that, we should all be proud and thankful.
We have the opportunity today to act and renew our commitment to our
servicemembers. Supporting this legislation will help provide for our
military heroes and their families. There are few who deserve our
support and gratitude more than these individuals and their spouses and
children. At home and abroad, they serve and represent our country and
government in a manner that is both honorable and admirable.
This legislation in particular addresses many critical issues that
face Guam, our community and the existing and planned military
facilities for our island. Included in this bill are authorizations for
a total of over $300 million of military construction projects on Guam
for fiscal year 2008. This amount represents a significant increase
above the amount of military construction funding that was authorized
and appropriated for Guam for fiscal year 2007. I welcome this
significant increase in investment in Guam. These increases improve the
facilities and capabilities of the military bases on Guam. But they
also help Guam's business community to begin to build the capacity that
it will need in order to successfully compete for, and complete the
scopes of work of, the tremendous amount of military construction
planned to support the rebasing of United States Marines from Okinawa,
Japan, to Guam.
The bill before us today includes approvals for full funding of
several key infrastructure projects at Naval Base Guam. Among them is
an authorization for $59.4 million to improve the base's electrical
system security; for $57.2 million for Naval family housing; for $51.8
million to expand wharf capacity at Kilo Wharf in Apra Harbor; for
$42.5 million for a new fitness center on base; for $40.8 million to
repair and upgrade the base's wastewater treatment plant; and for $31.4
million to build Phase I of a potable water distribution system on
base. This legislation would also provide authorizations to fund needed
projects at Andersen Air Force Base on Guam. The authorizations are for
$15.8 million for two projects at Northwest Field to support the 607th
Training Flight ``Commando Warrior'' unit that will soon relocate from
Osan Air Base, Korea, to Guam.
In addition to military construction projects, H.R. 1585 addresses
quality of life issues for military retirees and military dependents on
Guam. The Department of Defense has been unresponsive to the needs of
retirees on Guam who are reliant on the TRICARE system. Military
retirees who live on Guam who are referred off island for specialty
care are forced to travel to those locations at their own expense.
These trips to access referred specialty care in Hawaii or California
cost in the

[[Page H5349]]

thousands of dollars. The Department of Defense used to cover this
significant expense. But in 2005 it suddenly changed its policy and
practice and discontinued reimbursements to retirees for the travel
expenses they incur as a result of such referrals. I raised this matter
repeatedly during committee hearings since 2005. I have written to
Department officials regarding this issue, and discussed it with them
during meetings. The committee included report language on this matter
in the report that accompanied H.R. 1815, the National Defense
Authorization Act for fiscal year 2005. Unfortunately, the Department
has taken no action to provide relief to Guam's retirees.
I understand that this is a challenging issue. But Guam's retirees
deserve to be treated better and deserve resolution brought to this
matter. This is why I requested that H.R. 1585 include a provision that
would authorize retirees requiring specialty care at off-island medical
facilities to receive space-available category 4 level seating
priority. Additionally, I have requested that the Department of Defense
be required to submit to the committee a report that would identify the
administrative actions needed to be executed in order to provide relief
to the affected TRICARE beneficiaries residing in the territories of
the United States. I most sincerely hope that the Department takes a
very close look at its current policies and provides the committee with
a thoughtful, innovative, and actionable plan to resolve this matter. I
remain committed to working with the Department toward this end.

The report accompanying H.R. 1585 includes language that directs the
Department of Defense to conduct a study on the treatment of general
and flag officers, and other servicemembers who are called out of
retirement to serve their country. It has come to my attention that
there are numerous instances where officers left active duty or reserve
status only to return and were not allowed to retire at the highest
grade attained. In an era where our Reserve components are operational
forces, we can ill afford losing any servicemembers who have the
institutional knowledge and expertise that is critical to maintaining a
ready and operational force. Moreover, we must ensure that our Reserve
component members are treated equitably and fairly. I am committed to
ensuring that the affected servicemembers receive a fair and equitable
solution to this issue and that they be able to retire with the
benefits they have earned. I commit that I will work closely with the
Department to ensure that we come to a fair solution to this matter.
Finally, I was honored to co-sponsor the National Guard Empowerment
Act under the leadership of Mr. Taylor of Mississippi, Mr. Davis of
Virginia, and Mr. Hayes of North Carolina. I am pleased that a
substantial portion this legislation has been incorporated into H.R.
1595. After comprehensive studies undertaken by various research
institutions and by the Commission on the National Guard and Reserve we
finally have legislation that addresses the concerns brought forward in
these studies. We will finally give the National Guard a seat at the
table. As Lieutenant Governor, I know firsthand, how brave, valiant,
and essential the National Guard is to the safety and security of our
country. Elevating the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to a four-
star general allows the Bureau to overcome certain cultural dynamics
within the Department of Defense. The provisions making the National
Guard Bureau a joint activity and the requirement to have the Chief of
the National Guard Bureau help identify Department of Defense civil
support requirements are even more essential. If we are to give the
National Guard a seat at the table, then we must ensure that the root
problems are rectified. Nothing can be more important than ensuring
that we have a ready force to respond to natural disasters and
terrorist attacks. Where other departments and agencies have failed in
previous years, I am confident that the National Guard will develop a
solid lay down of requirements so that we, as a country, are truly
ready to respond to emergencies. I also believe, consistent with my
other initiatives, that the Department should give very serious
consideration to allowing State Adjutants Generals joint credit for
their service to the State. The National Guard is truly a joint force
and the work of their general officers should be recognized as such.
I support this bill Mr. Chairman. There are quality provisions in it
that will benefit the bases on Guam. The quality of life experienced by
military personnel who are stationed there and their families who
accompany them will be improved as a result of passage of this bill.
The provisions of this bill moreover will help us better serve retirees
who have served us so nobly in their careers. Indeed, this bill will
make notable contributions to the security of the United States and to
defending our country's interests around the world. But I want to take
this opportunity to note my concern regarding a couple of matters
contained in or related to the provisions of this bill.
The Committee has authorized the funding for the Kilo Wharf project
at Naval Base Guam, but has directed a phased approach to executing
this project. The administration opposes this approach. I share these
concerns. I am particularly concerned that the funding for this project
will receive further cuts as this bill proceeds through the legislative
process. I encourage the Department of the Navy to redouble its efforts
to ensure that this project can proceed according to plan and to engage
with me in dialogue regarding potential barriers to success for it. The
Kilo Wharf project is critical to increasing wharf capacity at Naval
Base Guam. Guam offers the United States Armed Forces a strategic
location to counter threats posed by the People's Republic of China,
North Korea, and al Qaeda affiliated terrorist forces in Southeast
Asia. Further funding reductions for the Kilo Wharf project will
negatively impact the ability of our commander to re-fit and re-supply
vessels operating in, and to respond to contingencies, in the region.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this
bill.
I applaud Chairman Skelton for his leadership in guiding this bill to
the floor today. He and Ranking Member Hunter have done a tremendous
job, and they have been ably supported by the expert staff of our
committee.
I'm grateful to Chairman Skelton for working with me to include
things important for Colorado, including limits on how the Army can
pursue possible expansion of the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site in
Colorado. I agree with Senator Salazar and others in the Colorado
delegation that any expansion, if it takes place at all, must be
conducted in a way that it is a win-win situation for the Army and for
Colorado and that any expansion plan should not involve condemnation of
private land. My proposal will shine a necessary caution light before
the Army charges forward, and force the Army to do what it has so far
failed to do--that is, to make a compelling case for why the proposed
expansion is necessary to meet the training needs of our soldiers in
the 21st century.
Other provisions I offered in the bill include--funding for a new
squadron operations facility for the Colorado Air National Guard;
promoting agreement between the Air Force and the city of Pueblo about
flight operations at the Pueblo airport; urging the Defense Department
to use on-site disposal of chemical weapons stockpiled at the Pueblo
Chemical Depot; asking the Army to track pilots who train at the High-
Altitude Aviation Training School in Eagle, Colorado; and reporting on
opportunities for leveraging Defense Department funds with States'
funds to prevent disruption in the event of electric grid or pipeline
failures and encouraging the Defense Department to leverage Energy
Savings Performance Contracts with Energy Conservation Investment
Program funds to provide additional opportunity for renewable energy
projects; and naming a housing facility at Fort Carson in honor of our
former colleague Joel Hefley.
I am also pleased that the committee adopted two of my amendments,
including one to repeal a provision adopted last year that makes it
easier for the president to federalize the National Guard for domestic
law enforcement purposes during emergencies. By repealing this, my
amendment restores the role of the Governors with regard to this
subject. My other amendment will continue the office of the Ombudsman
that assists people claiming benefits under the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) and expands its
authority.
Mr. Chairman, this bill rightly focuses on our military's readiness
needs. After 5 years at war, both the active duty and reserve forces
are stretched to their limits. The bill will provide what's needed to
respond, including a substantial Strategic Readiness Fund, adding funds
for National Guard equipment and training, and establishing a Defense
Readiness Production Board to mobilize the industrial base to address
equipment shortfalls.
It also provides important funds for the Base Realignment and Closure
process, including $62 million to assist communities expected to absorb
large numbers of personnel as a result of the BRAC decision. This
funding is especially important to Colorado, given that Fort Carson in
Colorado Springs will add 10,000 soldiers and will be home to 25,000
troops by 2009.
The bill provides substantial resources to improve protection of our
troops, including additional funds for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected
Vehicles, body armor, and up-armored Humvees for our troops in the
field. The bill enlarges the Army and Marine Corps, consistent with the
Tauscher-Udall Army expansion bill in the last Congress. And it will
provide for a 3.5 percent across-the-board pay raise for service
members, boost funding for the Defense Health Program, and prohibit
increasing TRICARE and pharmacy user fee increases.
The bill incorporates provisions from the Wounded Warrior Assistance
Act, which recently passed the House and was driven by the revelations
of mistreatment and mismanagement at Walter Reed Army Medical

[[Page H5350]]

Center. These provisions establish new requirements to provide the
people, training, and oversight needed to ensure high-quality care and
efficient administrative processing at Walter Reed and throughout the
active duty military services. The bill also establishes a Military
Mental Health Initiative to coordinate all mental health research and
development within the Defense Department, and establishes a Traumatic
Brain Injury Initiative to allow emerging technologies and treatments
to compete for funding.
Given the increased use of the National Guard and Reserves in recent
years, the bill gives important new authorities to the National Guard
to fulfill its expanded role, including authorizing a fourth star for
the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, making the National Guard
Bureau a joint activity of the Department of Defense, and creating a
bipartisan Council of Governors to advise the President on how best to
use the National Guard for civil support missions. The bill also
requires the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to consider how to
incorporate more National Guard and Reserve personnel into positions at
Northern Command, based in Colorado.
I'm pleased that the bill fully supports the goals of the Department
of Energy nonproliferation programs and the Department of Defense
Cooperative Threat Reduction program, consistent with the 9/11
Commission recommendations. The bill also slows development of a
Reliable Replacement Warhead and the construction of a new plutonium
production facility, and establishes a bipartisan commission to
evaluate U.S. strategic posture for the future, including the role that
nuclear weapons should play in our national security strategy.
I also want to mention funding for missile defense in the bill. The
bill increases missile defense funding for systems that address current
needs and vulnerabilities, while reducing funding for less mature and
higher risk systems. The cuts in missile defense programs in the bill
have been cause for concern among some on the other side of the aisle.
But the bill funds 93 cents of every dollar of the President's missile
defense request, so the cuts are far from extreme. It fully funds the
budget request for the Patriot PAC-3 missile, the Ground Based Missile
Defense System, and THAAD development and deployment, and adds funding
for Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense. But it makes reductions to the
Airborne Laser program and funding for the 3rd BMD Site which the
Administration has proposed building in Eastern Europe.
Importantly, the bill provides for an independent study to examine
the political, technical, operational, force structure, and budgetary
aspects of the proposed European missile defense deployment; an
independent study to examine the future roles and missions of the
Missile Defense Agency; a two year extension of the requirement for GAO
to annually assess the missile defense program; and assurance that the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation has access to all MDA
operational test evaluation information.
In my view, the bill strikes the right balance with regard to missile
defense. I did not support the amendment by Representative Franks to
increase missile defense funds because I believe the Committee takes a
better approach in its bill. Likewise, I did not support the amendment
offered by Representative Tierney to decrease missile defense funds
because I thought it went too far in the other direction. There are
emerging and real, near-term threats facing the Nation, the warfighter,
and our allies that we need to be able to counter, so I think it would
be irresponsible to terminate the longer-term missile defense as
Representative Tierney's amendment proposed to do.
Finally but no less importantly, the bill requires the Secretary of
Defense to submit a detailed report on the implementation of the Joint
Campaign Plan for Iraq, on national reconciliation efforts on the part
of the Iraqi government, and on metrics to measure American efforts in
Iraq, based on assessments by GEN David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to
Iraq Ryan Crocker. The bill also requires the Secretary to produce a
report outlining the direction of U.S. activities in Afghanistan along
with indicators of progress, and the bill establishes a Special
Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.
Mr. Chairman, the bill we are considering today does an excellent
job of balancing the need to sustain our current warfighting abilities
with the need to prepare for the next threat to our national security.
It is critical that we are able to meet the operational demands of
today even as we continue to prepare our men and women in uniform to be
the best trained and equipped force in the world.
This is a good bill, a carefully drafted and bipartisan bill, and I
urge its passage.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, this year's Defense Authorization
presented us with a great opportunity to bring the focus of the
American military back in line with American values. Unfortunately,
that opportunity was missed. This bill does little to correct the
President's misplaced priorities of missile defense, indefinite
detainment of prisoners, pre-emptive war, and weapons for wars we are
not fighting today.
Last year the House passed the Military Commissions Act which
attempted to add legitimacy to the improper actions of the Bush
administration to ignore habeas corpus rights for prisoners at
Guantanamo Bay. By not adhering to the strictest standards when putting
suspected terrorists on trial, we run the risk of punishing innocent
people who could simply have been in the wrong place at the wrong time.
It is now widely known that hundreds of inmates at Guantanamo Bay may
in fact have had nothing to do with terrorism. Sadly this bill does
nothing to change the status quo of wrongdoing.
It perplexes me that while we are fighting an urban war against
improvised explosive devices, snipers, and suicide bombers in Baghdad,
we continue to spend precious resources on weapons that are unproven or
designed for an obsolete Cold War. We had an opportunity today to push
the Department of Defense to review these weapons and report back to
Congress on their viability and value, but unfortunately the amendment
failed. I also voted for an amendment to ensure that the power to
declare war solely resided with Congress, as our forefathers intended,
and not with the Executive Branch. This amendment also failed. This
administration has repeatedly shown that it will make bad judgment and
has repeatedly crossed the line of its constitutional powers. I am
deeply concerned that the House is unprepared to rein in the
President's stance of pre-emptive war with Iran and it is my hope that
we will not regret this decision in the future.
Finally, I planned to offer an amendment that would have simply
required the Department of Defense to create a database of incidents
involving unexploded ordnance. I am disappointed that it was not made
in order, and that we were not able to deal with that critical issue
today.
With so little progress made in this year's authorization, I am
forced to vote against this bill. I will continue to work for the
changes that the American people and our men and women in the military
deserve.
Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, the principal role of our Federal
Government is to help keep America safe.
As such, we in Congress must make our national defense a top budget
priority.
This means we must pledge our steadfast support to American troops
serving both at home and abroad, and we must renew our unwavering
commitment to homeland security, in recognition of the dangerous world
in which we live.
H.R. 1585, the National Defense Authorization Act, makes a genuine
effort to achieve each of these goals. That's why I will vote for it,
and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
In 1945, at the end of World War II, the defense budget of the United
States represented 34.5 percent of our Gross Domestic Product. By 1968,
that number had shrunk to 9.8 percent. Today, the number is less than
half of that: about 4.3 percent.
Certainly, the overall dollars spent on defense have increased as our
economy has grown, but it is clear that our priorities have shifted.
This bill, while not perfect, commits to funding our defense budget in
a way that many of us would have thought impossible just a few months
ago, given the nature of the debate at that time. Some would argue that
the tenor of the debate on national defense has shifted from talk of
cutting off funds for our troops in battle to this bipartisan bill.
Some of the bipartisan provisions contained in this defense funding
blueprint include: Continued support for our troops in harm's way,
serving in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom and
elsewhere. $4.1 billion for state-of-the-art Mine-Resistant Ambush
Protected (MRAP) vehicles to help protect our soldiers from IEDs.
Increased Army and Marine Corps active duty end strength, as well as a
3.5 percent pay raise for all members of the armed forces in 2008, and
guaranteed pay raises in 2009, 2010, and 2011. $1 billion in new
funding for National Guard equipment to benefit both our homeland
security and national defense missions.
These are great and welcome achievements for our national defense--
achievements that each of us can be proud to support. But make no
mistake: this bill is far from perfect. The measure contains some
critical funding cuts that, in my opinion, will hurt our ability to
protect our homeland and our national defense interests from missile
attacks.
The Democratic bill guts funding for a ballistic missile defense
system capable of intercepting missiles in each phase of flight. This
type of program can help protect against growing threats in a changing
world. Though I was pleased we Republicans were able to restore some of
the funding for this important program through the amendment process, I
am disappointed that cuts still exist. But in terms of helping achieve
our most critical role--keeping America safe--this bill has, and
deserves, bipartisan support.

[[Page H5351]]

Again, Mr. Chairman, though there are some aspects of this
legislation that I clearly oppose, it is an important step in the
direction of making national defense and homeland security a continued
priority of this Congress.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the committee amendment in
the nature of a substitute, as amended.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended,
was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Weiner) having assumed the chair, Mr. Pastor, Acting 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. 1585) to
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities
of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths
for fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes, pursuant to House
Resolution 403, he reported the bill back to the House with an
amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment
reported from the Committee of the Whole? If not, the question is on
the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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. Hunter

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

Mr. Hunter moves to recommit the bill H.R. 1585 to the
Committee on Armed Services with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
Title II, subtitle C, add at the end the following:

SEC. 2__. EXPAND UNITED STATES BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE
SYSTEM INTEGRATION WITH ISRAEL.

(a) Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense shall expand the
ballistic missile defense system of the United States to
better integrate with the defenses of Israel to provide
robust, layered protection against ballistic missile attack.
(b) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the
appropriate congressional committees a progress report on the
status of integrating the ballistic missile defense system of
the United States with the defenses of Israel including the
status of implementation of those programs identified in
subsection (c). This report may be provided in classified
form as necessary to protect U.S. national security
interests.
(2) Content.--The report submitted under this subsection
shall include the following:
(A) A description of the capabilities needed to fully
integrate the ballistic missile defense system of the United
States with the ballistic missile defense system of Israel.
(B) A description of systems and capabilities currently
providing ballistic missile defense of Israel and the United
States, an assessment of the sufficiency of current
capabilities; and identification of the Department's actions
for addressing any insufficiencies, if required.
(C) A description of the policy, doctrine, operational
concepts, tactics, techniques and procedures, exercises, and
training that currently support the integrated ballistic
missile defense of Israel and the United States, an
assessment of the sufficiency of current policy, programs,
and processes; and identification of the Department's actions
for addressing any insufficiencies, if required.
(3) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``appropriate
congressional committees'' means--
(A) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed
Services, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House
of Representatives; and
(B) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed
Services, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate.
(c) Increase.--The amount in section 201(4), research,
development, test, and evaluation, Defense-wide, is hereby
increased by $205,000,000, of which--
(1) $25,000,000 is to be available to complete accelerated
co-production of Arrow missiles and continue integration with
the ballistic missile defense system of the United States;
(2) $45,000,000 is to be available to continue system
development of the Missile Defense Agency and Israel Missile
Defense Organization joint program to develop a short-range
ballistic missile defense capability, David's Sling weapon
system, and integrate the weapon system with the ballistic
missile defense system and force protection efforts of the
United States; and
(3) $135,000,000 is to be made available to begin
acquisition of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
fire unit, which would provide Israel with a follow-on
missile defense system of greater performance than the
current Arrow system and provide a capability which is
already fully integrated with the ballistic missile defense
system of the United States.
(d) Offset.--The amounts in title I and title II are hereby
reduced by an aggregate of $205,000,000, to be derived from
amounts other than amounts for ballistic missile defense, as
determined by the Secretary of Defense.

Mr. HUNTER (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that the motion to recommit be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
Mr. WICKER. I object, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
The Clerk will continue.
The Clerk continued to read.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California is recognized
for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, this is a good Defense bill, and I want to
compliment my great friend the gentleman from Missouri for his
leadership in helping to put together this bill that passed the
committee unanimously, came to the floor, and we can expect a big vote,
I think, of support from the Members of this body. We are about to make
this bill better.
In 1987 this committee, the Armed Services Committee, sent a letter
to the leadership in Israel, and we told them that there were lots of
things that they could defend against very effectively, that if
tactical aircraft were sent into Israel in an attack they would shoot
down all of them, and they have proven that, but that if ballistic
missiles were launched for Tel Aviv, every single one of them would
impact because they had no defenses. And we urged them to join with the
United States in developing a system of missile defense. And upon our
urging, they started what is known as the Arrow missile program. It has
come a long way. It has been deployed.
And that prophetic letter that we sent them in 1987, of course, was
followed by real missile attacks on Israel. They didn't quite have that
system up at that time. We rushed PATRIOTs over. They now have the
Arrow missile defense system up. But in the most recent attacks we have
seen short-range missiles that also impacted in Israel.
This motion to recommit is $200 million that is dedicated to
integrating our missile defense systems with those of Israel, using the
great innovation of Americans along with their great innovative
capabilities, to defend against this new era of terrorists with high
technology.
Mr. Speaker, I yield at this time such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), who has been a leader in putting
this motion to recommit together.
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
If you could vote against a second genocide against the Jewish
people, would you? If you could defend America's best ally in the
Middle East from an attack by Iran, would you? If you could stand with
the people of Israel and tell them that their children could feel safer
in the new and dangerous 21st century, would you?
History teaches us that dictators say what they will do and then do
what they say. The Iranian leader has indicated that one Holocaust
against the Jewish people is not enough. Last April he said that Israel
was headed towards annihilation.
This week the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency
Director General announced that Iran has fully mastered uranium
enrichment technology and Iran's military test fired a missile that can
now harm the people of Israel.
This amendment restores funding for the missile defense of our
country and says that the defenses of our country should be fully
integrated with the missile defense of Israel. This motion

[[Page H5352]]

to recommit stands for the principle that democracies are best when
they stand together; as our Founding Fathers said, when we face the
threat from a tyrant that we will either hang separately or hang
together.
Unless this motion to recommit carries, we will fail to put the full
missile defenses of the American people against the full threat facing
the people of Israel. But if this motion carries, then those who would
seek to harm the people of Israel would know that they face the full
weight of the great democracy across the sea who is standing behind the
safety and security of our best ally in the Middle East, the State of
Israel.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
And let me just remind all my colleagues that the day will come when
missiles from other countries, adversarial countries, will not fall
harmlessly into the Sea of Japan. They will not fall harmlessly into
desert sands. We will have a time when we have to defend against
incoming ballistic missiles in this country and across the borders of
our allies, including Israel.
Do what is right for the United States, and what we do today in
providing missile defense will protect the next generation of
Americans. Vote ``yes'' on this motion to recommit.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time
in opposition though I am not opposed to the motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missouri is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. SKELTON. I am somewhat disturbed, Mr. Speaker, procedurally on
something this important not being shown to anyone on this side until
moments ago and it takes a speed reader to go over the amendment and
digest it.
We are going to accept this amendment. In truth, in fact, the
committee, the Armed Services Committee, fully funded, and I will say
it again, fully funded the administration's request for Israeli missile
defenses. The committee strongly supports efforts to work with Israel
on missile defense. This has been true for years. The bill fully funds
the President's request of $73.5 million for the Arrow missile defense
system. It fully funds the President's request of $7 million for the
joint U.S.-Israeli ``David's Sling'' short-range ballistic missile.

{time} 1215

The committee also supports Israel's effort to obtain information on
the THAAD system, which is being held up by the Pentagon.
It's interesting to point out that Representative Terry Everett and I
wrote a letter on March 12 of this year to the Secretary of Defense
asking that he work to release the THAAD information to Israel.
Mr. Speaker, at this moment, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from
California, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces (Mrs.
Tauscher).
Mrs. TAUSCHER. I thank the chairman.
Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues are rushing to clap and pat themselves
on the back, I just want to make very clear; this is not new, this is
just more, and that is why we're happy to accept it.
If you look at the report language on page 242, we make it very clear
that our cooperative relationship with Israel is not only significant,
but primary, and that our efforts to invest with them over these many
years on programs like David's Sling and Arrow are significant and are
fully funded at the President's request in this bill.
What we don't have, however, which perhaps you could help with, is
the cooperation of the Department of Defense to share critical
information with Israel on THAAD.
So I think, frankly, that this is of more of a ``me too'' than it is
anything else. We are happy to accept it. But I think if you check the
language on 242, you will see that this committee has done all that
needs to be done, going along with the President to fully fund these
programs, but we could use some help with the administration and the
Pentagon to get them to work cooperatively on THAAD.
Mr. SKELTON. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I associate myself with the remarks of the
chairwoman of the committee, and I will support the amendment.
I just am curious as to why, in a process of bipartisan negotiation,
the amendment wasn't raised before now; why in a 14-hour markup it
wasn't raised before now; why in a rule that made dozens of amendments
in order it wasn't raised until now. The chairman of the committee saw
the amendment 5 minutes before it was issued. It says a lot about the
devotion of the minority to this cause.
Mr. HUNTER. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SKELTON. I yield, Mr. Speaker, 30 seconds to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Berman).
Mr. BERMAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to get one sense of anger off my chest.
I have great respect for the gentleman from Illinois, but to talk
about the Holocaust, to talk about Ahmadinejad, to talk about the
historic deep commitment of this Congress and this country to the
survival and the security of the State of Israel in the context of an
unshown, unshared motion to recommit on a very sensitive issue
partisanizes and cheapens a very important question, and I resent it.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire if I have any additional
time?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The chairman has 30 additional seconds.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, we will accept this amendment.
Mr. HUNTER. Will the gentleman yield for just 5 seconds?
Mr. SKELTON. I will yield to the gentleman from California 15
seconds.
Mr. HUNTER. I thank my friend for yielding.
This amendment was offered by Mr. Cantor and was not ruled in order
by the Rules Committee. So this was not without precedent.
Mr. SKELTON. That was not the same amendment, I must point out to my
friend from California; that was not the one that was offered to the
Rules Committee.
Nevertheless, let's point out that we have fully funded. We have
worked with in the past and we will continue to work with Israel. It is
of primary importance. No one can doubt the commitment of the Armed
Services Committee in this regard.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by
5-minute votes on the passage of H.R. 1585, if ordered, and adoption of
House Resolution 404.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 394,
noes 30, not voting 8, as follows:

[Roll No. 372]

AYES--394

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clarke
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)

[[Page H5353]]

Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
English (PA)
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOES--30

Abercrombie
Blumenauer
Clay
Conyers
Dingell
Eshoo
Farr
Hinchey
Hirono
Holt
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Kaptur
Kucinich
Lee
Loebsack
McDermott
Miller, George
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Paul
Price (NC)
Rahall
Stark
Tierney
Watt
Woolsey

NOT VOTING--8

Baird
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Engel
Harman
Jones (OH)
McMorris Rodgers
Shays

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2
minutes remain.

{time} 1238

Messrs. TIERNEY, BLUMENAUER, HOLT, FARR and CONYERS changed their
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. CLYBURN, HALL of New York and ELLISON changed their vote from
``no'' to ``aye.''
So the motion to recommit was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the instructions of the House
on the motion to recommit, I hereby report H.R. 1585 back to the House
with an amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment:
Title II, subtitle C, add at the end the following:

SEC. 2__. EXPAND UNITED STATES BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE
SYSTEM INTEGRATION WITH ISRAEL.

Mr. SKELTON (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 397,
noes 27, not voting 8, as follows:

[[Page H5354]]

[Roll No. 373]

AYES--397

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McNerney
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOES--27

Baldwin
Blumenauer
Capuano
Conyers
Delahunt
Duncan
Ellison
Frank (MA)
Jackson (IL)
Kucinich
Lee
Lewis (GA)
Markey
McDermott
McNulty
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore (WI)
Olver
Paul
Serrano
Stark
Tierney
Waters
Watson
Watt
Woolsey

NOT VOTING--8

Baird
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Engel
Harman
Jones (OH)
McMorris Rodgers
Shays

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2
minutes remaining in this vote.

{time} 1248

Ms. WATSON changed her vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the
Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense
activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________