[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 77 (Tuesday, May 19, 2015)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E748]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. JAMES R. LANGEVIN

                            of rhode island

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 13, 2015

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1735) to 
     authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2016 for military 
     activities of the Department of Defense and for military 
     construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for 
     such fiscal year, and for other purposes:

  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I want to first thank the Chairman, the 
Ranking Member, and the committee staff for their hard work and effort 
that the bill before us represents. I particularly want to express my 
sincere thanks to Chairman Wilson and the members of the Emerging 
Threats and Capabilities subcommittee for what I believe are very fine 
contributions to the final bill. These initiatives span a variety of 
important areas, including cyberspace programs and authorities; 
technology transition and reauthorization of the Rapid Innovation 
Program; and research, development, and integration of advanced 
technologies such as railgun and directed energy. Also included in this 
legislation are critical provisions that address Special Operations, 
Counter-Terrorism, and Unconventional Warfare, including increasing 
Congressional oversight of sensitive operations, and the threats posed 
at home and abroad by weapons of mass destruction.
  I also applaud the bill's investment in critically important undersea 
capabilities such as the peerless Virginia-class submarines, the 
Virginia Payload Module, the recapitalization of our national deterrent 
through the Ohio Replacement Program, and cutting-edge autonomous and 
unmanned systems.
  These provisions demonstrate a shared, bipartisan commitment to the 
defense of our nation and support for our troops.
  However, as we move forward with this bill, I note with great concern 
that it reflects a budget approach that locks in sequestration and 
severs that critical link between our national and economic security. 
I'm sure that dedicated public servants fighting organized crime at the 
Department of Justice, combatting terrorist financing mechanisms at the 
Treasury, or securing our borders and defending our critical 
infrastructure in cyberspace at Homeland Security would be shocked 
indeed to find out that what they did wasn't a matter of national 
security. One could just as soon tell the brilliant scientists and 
engineers at our national labs, or the teachers educating future 
generations that what they do isn't important to the future 
competitiveness of our nation. National security is not just tanks, 
ships, and airplanes.
  The one-year nature of the approach in the bill is a flagrant abuse 
of a system designed to fund incremental and unpredictable costs of 
overseas operations, not to get around politically difficult votes for 
Members of Congress. It's bad management and worse policy; it doesn't 
live up to our commitment to the troops; it undermines our capability 
to conduct long-term strategy; and worst of all, it sets us up to have 
yet another round of budgeting by brinksmanship in a matter of months. 
Ducking debates is not why our constituents sent us here.
  While I support the important policy measures contained in the bill, 
and I ultimately support its passage, it is so unfortunate that the one 
piece of legislation that has historically been the pinnacle of 
bipartisanship and one of the last vestiges of regular order has been 
taken hostage by a refusal to address the Budget Control Act. I applaud 
the bill's recognition that the President's budget accurately reflects 
the level of investment needed, but that is true across all departments 
and all of the elements of national power that together make the United 
States great. Let's take that realization to its logical conclusion and 
use the seeds of bipartisanship that the Armed Services Committee has 
worked so hard to preserve to build a long-term agreement that can 
finally unshackle us from the tyranny of budgetary uncertainty.

                          ____________________