[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 137 (Saturday, October 5, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H6293-H6296]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




EXPRESSING SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING NEED FOR CONTINUED AVAILABILITY 
          OF RELIGIOUS SERVICES TO MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES

  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the 
rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 58) 
expressing the sense of Congress regarding the need for the continued 
availability of religious services to members of the Armed Forces and 
their families during a lapse in appropriations.
  The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
  The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 58

       Whereas the Department of Defense has determined that some 
     military chaplains and other personnel, including contract 
     personnel, hired to perform duties of a military chaplain are 
     not able to perform religious services on military 
     installations during a lapse in appropriations;
       Whereas this determination threatens the ability of members 
     of the Armed Services and their families to exercise their 
     First Amendment rights to worship and participate in 
     religious activities; and
       Whereas the Department of the Interior has permitted the 
     performance of First Amendment activities in areas controlled 
     by the National Park Service despite the lapse in 
     appropriations: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That Congress--
       (1) recognizes that the performance of religious services 
     and the provision of ministry are protected activities under 
     the First Amendment of the United States Constitution;
       (2) urges and intends that the Secretary of Defense permit 
     the performance of religious services on property owned or 
     maintained by the Department of Defense, during any lapse in 
     appropriations, in the same manner and to the same extent as 
     such religious services are otherwise available; and
       (3) urges and intends that the Secretary of Defense permit 
     military chaplains and other personnel, including contract 
     personnel, hired to perform duties of a military chaplain to 
     perform religious services and ministry, during any lapse in 
     appropriations, in the same manner and to the same extent as 
     such chaplains and other personnel are otherwise permitted to 
     perform religious services and ministry.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Wilson) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.


                             General Leave

  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and 
extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on the concurrent 
resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from South Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  I rise in strong support of the concurrent resolution offered by my 
colleague, Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, a dedicated chaplain 
and Iraq veteran of the United States Air Force Reserve. His resolution 
goes to the heart of our constitutionally guaranteed ability to worship 
without interference. I thank him for bringing it to the floor.
  The resolution expresses the sense of Congress regarding the need for 
the continued availability of religious services to members of the 
Armed Forces and their families during a lapse of appropriations. As a 
grateful dad, with my wife, Roxanne, of four sons currently serving in 
the military, I know firsthand the importance of chaplains, such as 
Steve Shugart and Brian Bohlman.
  Specifically, it addresses the issue this House became aware of 
yesterday--that religious services for military personnel are being 
curtailed, or not offered at all, because Federal civilian employees 
serving as chaplains, or personnel contracted to perform the duties of 
military chaplains, have been furloughed.
  This is an extremely important issue for all of us to work together. 
There is no doubt that the furloughing of personnel hired or contracted 
to perform the duties of military chaplains is having an effect. Just 
in this region, church services, baptisms, weddings have been 
curtailed. For example, the Active Duty priest at the Navy Yard 
canceled mass there. He is needed at Joint Base Anacostia Bolling. It 
is a larger church and they don't have a priest there this weekend.
  At Fort Belvoir, half of the masses have been canceled.
  The impact is even more severe overseas, where options for worship 
are far more limited than in the United States.
  What is more disturbing is that General Schedule Federal civilian and 
contractor chaplains are being told that if they do come to their jobs 
they will be trespassing. This is just not right.
  The performance of religious services and the provision of ministry 
are protected activities under the First Amendment of the United States 
Constitution. If the Department of the Interior can permit World War II 
veterans in performance of First Amendment activities to visit the 
memorial constructed to honor their service, then certainly the 
Secretary of Defense can permit similar First Amendment activities.
  The Secretary can and must allow military chaplains and other 
personnel,

[[Page H6294]]

including contract personnel, hired to perform duties of a military 
chaplain to perform religious services and ministry in the same manner 
and to the same extent as such chaplains and other personnel are 
otherwise permitted to perform religious services and ministry when 
there is an appropriation. It is that simple.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I urge the Secretary of Defense to do the simple 
thing, the right thing: allow all chaplains of the Armed Forces, be 
they military, Federal civilian employees or contractors, to minister 
unhindered to the men and women of the Armed Forces of the United 
States.
  I congratulate my colleague, Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, 
chaplain of the U.S. Air Force Reserve, for bringing this resolution to 
the floor and urge all Members to support it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I do not oppose this resolution--it sounds sensible going forward--
but I do want to raise a couple of process issues.
  We found out about this--I found out about this--20 minutes ago. I 
think it is just emblematic of how much this body has broken down. We 
have to talk to each other. I don't have an objection to this. I've got 
staff; the Armed Services Committee has a staff. We work together. We 
have worked together on the Armed Services Committee better than any 
other committee in this Congress. I will grant you that that isn't 
saying much, but we have.
  We just simply have to talk to each other. Why would they spring this 
on us at the last minute and not have a communication about it? It is 
not something we object to.
  Getting past this individual issue, it is emblematic of the entire 
problem. The Republicans are complaining because the Senate isn't 
talking to them and the President isn't talking to them about the CR 
and the debt ceiling. There are reasons for that. But we have reached 
an epidemic of not talking to each other. On something as small as this 
we can't even have a communication.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. I will gladly yield to the gentleman from 
South Carolina.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Smith, I agree, on the Armed 
Services Committee--and I want to commend you--we work together in an 
extraordinary fashion. In fact, the National Defense Authorization Act 
has passed the House as an indication of your goodwill and good faith.
  I believe the reason this has come up so quickly, of course, is 
because this was only learned late yesterday. The consequence of the 
thought of chaplains to be declared trespassing is inconceivable and it 
needs to be addressed.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Right. But again, the communications level 
has fallen apart. On our side of the aisle, we don't know from one 
minute to the next what we are going to be voting on. The schedule has 
been changed at a moment's notice.
  I will tell you, even back in the shutdown of 1995, there was greater 
communication between the majority and the minority about what was 
going on. In fact, we had a lot of these small little bills that funded 
little pieces of the government.
  But the one thing the majority did is they granted the full House a 
vote on a--and what a clean resolution means is it only pertains to 
spending; it doesn't pertain to other policy issues. That vote was 
granted. The House Republicans voted it down. That was their position. 
But at least we had a vote. Then we also had a discussion about what we 
could fund during the shutdown.
  The complete and utter breakdown in communication between the 
majority party, the minority party, the Senate and the House, the White 
House and us is doing an unbelievable disservice to this country. I 
don't care if we get in a room and yell at each other for 4 hours. 
Let's at least have a communication.

  I want to really paint the picture here. We all have our talking 
points, and I heard all of those talking points this morning. I have 
heard them so much--and I am sure that the American people and I are 
absolutely sick to death of those talking points. They are poll tested, 
they are wonderful, they play to the base, they are great, and here we 
are on day 5 going nowhere.
  The basic problem here, number one, on the CR is the health care 
policy issue, that basically the Republicans--this is no secret--want 
to get rid of the health care law. The trouble is they don't have the 
votes to do it, and they are, therefore, willing to hold up the funding 
of the government in order to advance their policy agenda. That is a 
very important point because that plays into the larger issue.
  I also want to tell you that we are--what is it--12 days now away 
from defaulting. We are going to default at this point, because what I 
hear from my Republican colleagues is, oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, we 
don't want to default. As long as we cut enough spending, as long as we 
do tax reform we will be fine, which, of course, is what we have been 
hearing since January of 2011.
  I just want to explain briefly to the American people what the 
difference in the positions are here, and I am going to be as fair and 
honest as I can be. The Republicans believe strongly that we should 
severely cut spending, and cutting spending at this point means 
mandatory programs, entitlements, because we have already cut 
discretionary spending down to the BCA level, down to the level they 
agreed to. That is what some of my colleagues are referencing about the 
CR. The spending level is down there. But they don't want to do that. 
The deficit is high, so they want to cut spending. The President has on 
more than one occasion put entitlement cuts on the table.
  The difference of opinion is whether or not we should also raise 
taxes as part of that deal to deal with the deficit. The President, the 
Senate, and the Democrats in the House--which I realize is irrelevant 
because we don't have the votes--but unfortunately for you guys they do 
in the Senate, and the President has the veto. If there is going to be 
any entitlement cuts, they have to be accompanied by tax increases. The 
Republicans say, absolutely not, we are not going to do that. So that 
is the divide.
  The problem is the Republicans won 234 seats in the House. 
Interestingly, they lost the overall vote in Congress by a count of 52 
to 48--but redistricting plays out the way it does. They did not win 
the Presidency and they did not win the Senate. So they are trying to 
take those 234 votes in the House and jam their broader agenda down 
everybody's throat. The piece that they have is they are willing to not 
fund the government and not raise the debt ceiling in order to put us 
in a bad position to do that.
  I will tell you, Democrats cannot vote to cut entitlements if there 
are not tax increases attached to them. So I hope somebody somewhere 
wakes up to this reality before we default and stops insisting that 
somehow miraculously in the next 12 days Democrats are going to 
magically agree to cut entitlements with no revenue, and maybe do some 
big complicated tax reform bill that cuts taxes even further. Because 
if that reality does not set in, we are in for several weeks of great 
calamity that is going to cause greater damage than what has been 
caused here.
  So with that, I support the resolution.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I want to, again, commend 
Mr. Smith. He, indeed, has reached across to try to work together. By 
referencing the shutdown in 1995, there is a difference, and it begins 
at the top.
  Sadly, the President of the United States 2 weeks ago last night 
called to announce he was not going to negotiate. In the 1995 shutdown 
there was communication between the President and the Speaker prior to 
a shutdown and during the entire shutdown.
  I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. John Fleming, 
my friend and colleague.
  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend Congressman Wilson. 
I also thank my good friend, Doug Collins, for bringing this measure up 
today.
  Mr. Speaker, the First Amendment rights of our military do not sunset 
with the lack of appropriations or even a shutdown. The free exercise 
of religion is codified in the Constitution of the United States and 
celebrated by every American, including those of us who have worn, do, 
or will wear the uniform.

[[Page H6295]]

  Military chaplains faithfully serve a unique role in the military, 
bridging the gap between faith and freedom and ensuring that people of 
all beliefs are able to celebrate mass or participate in a worship 
service according to the dictates of their faith.
  Despite this protective right, the Department of Defense has decided 
to effectively close the doors of many churches and chapels this 
weekend by not allowing military chaplains to perform their religious 
duties on military installations because the Federal Government has not 
passed the relevant appropriations bill for FY 2014.
  Mr. Speaker, I contend that the freedom of religion does not follow 
the Federal Government's fiscal policy. The freedom of religion is a 
24/7 constitutional right that should garner unconditional support from 
this administration and our military leaders.
  I stand strong with the brave men and women serving in our Nation's 
military and urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.
  The President of the United States has spent weeks of his term 
negotiating with the Republican Party. What he has been confronted with 
each time is a demand to either shut the government down or default on 
the country's debt.
  I want to put this in another frame of reference as I rise in support 
of this bill. On eight occasions when President George W. Bush was 
President, we had the majority on our side and we agreed to a 
continuing resolution, a clean continuing resolution. We had our many 
differences with President Bush over the Iraq war, over issues of 
health care, over issues of the budget, but on eight occasions 
President Bush came to the Democratic majority and asked to continue to 
run the government, and we said yes.

                              {time}  0930

  The principle at stake here is whether ``negotiation'' means you have 
to have everything you want all the time and shut the government down 
if you don't. That's not the way we do business. That's why three-
quarters of the American people agree that shutting the government down 
over the health care law is the wrong thing to do.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. I yield 2 minutes to the Congresswoman 
from Tennessee, Marsha Blackburn, my friend and colleague.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, as we have all heard, we received the 
news yesterday that our priests and ministers could end up facing 
government arrest if they attempt to celebrate mass or to openly 
practice their faiths on a military base during this government 
shutdown--a shutdown that we did not want, a shutdown that could have 
been avoided had the President and Senator Reid agreed to negotiate 
with us.
  This is so unfortunate. What we see is no mass, no communion, no 
confession, no prayer, no faith, no religion. Mr. Speaker, what we have 
to realize is that religious beliefs predate government. Government 
should not be able to tell those who are religious whether they can 
practice their faiths freely regardless of our government-funding 
situation.
  What we are seeking is accountability, transparency, and reducing 
what the Federal Government spends. Government funding is irrelevant to 
the religious rights and freedoms that are enshrined in the First 
Amendment of our Constitution, and some don't get to throw away the 
Constitution just because they are unwilling to sit down and negotiate 
and work with us through this process. We are not going to sit here and 
say, Even if you volunteer to serve the faithful, we are going to deny 
you.
  So I ask you, Mr. Speaker: Will our priests and ministers this 
weekend--some of them on my post at Fort Campbell in my district--be 
arrested if they recite a Hail Mary? if they lead in prayer?
  I think that it is time for us to pass this legislation to agree that 
we let our men and women in uniform pray. Let America pray. Government 
shouldn't arrest anyone because some want to play politics with this 
situation.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, first of all, again, I support this resolution. Nobody 
is getting arrested for praying. I really wish we could keep the debate 
here in the realm of reality. I believe the issue is that they have 
been furloughed in some instances so that they are not allowed to carry 
on the services. I don't want that misimpression left dangling out 
there that somehow we are arresting people for going to church. We are 
most certainly not, and I wish the debate would remain a little more 
accurate. I want to make just one other point.
  While it is true that, in 1995, President Clinton talked to 
Republicans, ultimately, he did not give them any of the policy items 
that they were asking for. All President Obama is basically saying is, 
Look, if you want to talk, we can talk; but we can't talk about 
dismantling my health care law, and we can't talk about adding policy 
riders to the CR or to the debt ceiling, because we need to keep the 
government running.
  And there is one other difference which I know my Republican 
colleagues will not address. The Republican majority under Newt 
Gingrich in 1995 gave this House a vote just like the Senate has given 
everything you've sent over to them a vote. They voted it down, but 
they had a vote. This House will not give us a vote on the CR that the 
Senate has passed. If you feel as strongly about it as you do, do what 
the Republicans did in 1995--bring it up and vote it down. That's 
democracy. That's in the Constitution, too, by the way. That would be 
helpful.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Smith, again, I appreciate your 
support of this, but it is important because, sadly, information has 
been provided that chaplains would be subject to trespassing charges. 
So this does, obviously, interfere with the ability of freedom of 
speech and religion and assembly.
  Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas, Mr. 
Tim Huelskamp, my friend and colleague.
  Mr. HUELSKAMP. Mr. Speaker, is it really the policy of this 
administration to make church services illegal? to threaten Catholic 
priests with jail if they celebrate mass this weekend?
  Unfortunately, this policy seems to be another tragic reflection of 
the complete disregard this administration has for Americans of faith. 
What is worse is that it's an unprecedented denial of a fundamental 
constitutional right of our men and women in uniform, like denying 
access to the World War II or Lincoln Memorials for the first time. 
This is the first time in 17 previous funding lapses, covering 16 
Sundays, that our brave chaplains have been threatened with arrest if 
they perform their Godly duties.
  Secretary Hagel must issue an immediate directive that chaplains 
should continue to perform their duties and that DOD facilities 
normally used for religious services should continue to be used.
  Mr. Speaker, the First Amendment is not some empty words on a dusty, 
archaic document to be viewed somewhere in a museum. I know for men 
like my uncle, Father Leonard Stegman, who was an Active Duty chaplain 
for nearly 30 years, the First Amendment is what you do every day as a 
chaplain, leading men and women of all faiths. It's something real.
  For the late Father Emil Kapaun, who was recently awarded the Medal 
of Honor by President Obama on April 11 of this year, the First 
Amendment was, again, not some empty words. It's what he did every day, 
and it's the reason he gave his life for his country. It's the reason 
he was honored and recognized and how he drew men and women of all 
faiths.
  In honor of Father Kapaun and of all current and former military 
chaplains and of all members of the Armed Forces, let's strike a blow 
for religious liberty today. I urge my colleagues to join me in 
supporting this resolution. Let's send a clear message to 
this administration that the rights of those serving in the Armed 
Forces cannot be suspended simply to create political and personal 
pain.

[[Page H6296]]

  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield the remainder of 
my time to the gentleman from Georgia, Congressman Doug Collins, who is 
the sponsor of this resolution and a U.S. Air Force Reserve chaplain.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from South 
Carolina, whose dedication to our men and women in uniform is among no 
peer's in this body, and I thank him for his service and for the fight 
of his family and others as we come along.
  I'll tell you today that I rise, Mr. Speaker, really with a troubled 
heart and also with one that is on behalf of the men and women in the 
Air Force and the Armed Forces and others who are facing something 
today that they should not have to face. There is no doubt our Nation 
is facing many difficulties, and all of us and those across the aisle 
can understand that. The majority in this body is standing united to 
fight for the future of our children and grandchildren. Those are 
legitimate fights, and I respect my colleagues from across the aisle. 
These are legitimate fights that we are having here. However, today, as 
I stand, I came to this body also looking for practical things and 
looking for things that amaze me at times, and this is one that does.
  As we do and as we fight for others, we must ensure that the basic 
rights of all Americans are protected and do not fall victim to the 
political theater occurring in this body. Military personnel and their 
families make sacrifices that many of us cannot fathom, and they do so 
to protect the freedom that we take far too often for granted. Because 
of their sacrifices, our Nation is a beacon of hope to the dark corners 
of the world where freedom of speech and religion exist only in fairy 
tales.
  Yet today, military chaplains who have been contracted to come to 
bases face a closed door. They cannot go on these bases during a lapse 
of appropriations even if they wanted to volunteer to practice their 
faiths. Each of us in this body and across the Nation should pause for 
a moment to consider and think about what I just said. If a contract 
chaplain wants to minister to a military member stationed abroad who 
has no access to a church, a mosque or a synagogue, he would be in 
violation of the law. I am a military chaplain, and this breaks my 
heart.
  Too often, we come to this floor and we talk in abstracts. We talk 
about concepts and political jargon, arguing about problems that only 
matter, probably, within less than 3 miles of this building, but today 
is different. Today, we stand with one resounding voice to tell our 
servicemembers and the chaplaincy that we will not stand for their 
First Amendment rights to be violated because the leaders in the other 
body want to make a point. The laws in this Nation require the Federal 
Government to ensure that military personnel can express their faiths 
or non-faith in all corners of the world. That is why the military 
chaplaincy exists and, when we cannot serve the needs of those, why we 
contract with others who can provide that basis of one's faith.
  General George Washington issued an order on July 9, 1776, providing 
through the Continental Congress for a chaplain for each regiment, 
stating:

       The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times 
     necessary but especially so in times of public distress and 
     danger.

  The administration is apparently unsatisfied with denying veterans 
access to memorials and is unsatisfied with closing off unmanned scenic 
overlooks to motorists. Now they must go after, in the words of George 
Washington, the ``blessing and protection of Heaven'' for our military 
families.
  The body has seen its share of political discord and policy 
disagreements. The government has experienced numerous lapses in 
appropriations over the decades, but never before in the history of 
this Nation have the military chaplains and those they contract with to 
serve our military personnel been prevented from meeting the religious 
and spiritual needs of our servicemembers.
  As a chaplain, I lived and worked alongside men and women in Iraq. 
Many were religious and many were not, but my purpose was to ensure 
that they were able to express their First Amendment rights however 
they wished. Military chaplains and their contract counterparts must be 
allowed to provide religious service and ministry regardless of our 
Nation's fiscal state.
  If the administration wants to play games and score points through 
unnecessary theatrics, so be it; but I will not stand by and let these 
games occur at the expense of the basic rights of our men and women in 
uniform.
  During this lapse in funding, Active Duty chaplains are permitted to 
continue serving military personnel. However, there is a chronic 
shortage of Active Duty chaplains, particularly for Catholic and Jewish 
faiths. For example, roughly 25 percent of the military ascribe to the 
Catholic faith; yet Catholic priests make up only 8 percent of the 
Chaplain Corps. That means that approximately 275,000 men and women in 
uniform and their families are served by only 234 Active Duty priests, 
thus the need to have contract chaplains.
  Due to the shortage of Active Duty chaplains, it is extremely common 
for the government to employ chaplains via contracts to ensure that the 
spiritual needs of all of our military members are met. With the 
government shutdown, contract members of the Chaplain Corps on military 
bases worldwide are not permitted to work--they are not even permitted 
to volunteer--even if they are the only chaplains on base.
  As my friend from South Carolina and others have mentioned, the 
restrictions on basic freedoms that are being had around here--and just 
within this area at Langley, at the Navy Yard and at Fort Belvoir--are 
all areas that have already been cut back, and that is a shame. I am 
grateful to my colleagues who have joined me this morning and the House 
leadership for their commitment to ensuring that military chaplains are 
able to serve the men and women of our Armed Forces.
  If this body does not pass this legislation, the ability of military 
personnel and their families to worship and participate in religious 
ceremonies will continue to be at great risk. I ask all of my 
colleagues to join me in protecting the First Amendment rights of those 
who give their lives to protect ours.
  Before I close, I agree that many times we haven't communicated, and 
we don't communicate as many would want us to; but I have also heard 
that timing was a problem here and that we should have seen this 
coming. Let me just say timing should never be a hindrance to this 
body's protecting the First Amendment rights of any of our citizens, 
especially of our military personnel. In fact, it should be our highest 
calling and the thing we run to this floor to discuss.
  Should we have seen it coming?
  I'll tell you, what saddens me is I would have never believed that 
the administration or anyone else would deem protecting a 
constitutional right as nonessential.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson) that the House suspend the 
rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 58.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas 
and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________