[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 118 (Thursday, July 13, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H5801-H5823]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 440 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 2810.
  Will the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins) kindly resume the 
chair.

                              {time}  1706


                     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 further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 2810) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2018 
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, with Mr. Collins of Georgia (Acting 
Chair) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, 
a request for a recorded vote on amendment No. 10 printed in House 
Report 115-217, offered by the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. 
Hartzler), had been postponed.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 115-217 on 
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Garamendi of California.
  Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Buck of Colorado.

[[Page H5802]]

  Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania.
  Amendment No. 10 by Mrs. Hartzler of Missouri.
  Amendment No. 5 by Mr. Gosar of Arizona.
  Amendment No. 6 by Mr. Thomas J. Rooney of Florida.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Garamendi

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Garamendi) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 198, 
noes 220, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 366]

                               AYES--198

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Bridenstine
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gomez
     Gottheimer
     Graves (LA)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kinzinger
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (MN)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Massie
     Mast
     Matsui
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuster
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--220

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Beyer
     Biggs
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Schneider
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Bilirakis
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cummings
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Huffman
     Johnson, Sam
     Labrador
     Lieu, Ted
     Napolitano
     Rush
     Sanford
     Scalise

                              {time}  1729

  Messrs. CRAWFORD, POLIS, and DENHAM changed their vote from ``aye'' 
to ``no.''
  Messrs. CAPUANO, BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico, LEWIS of Minnesota, 
SHUSTER, DENT, and GRAVES of Louisiana changed their vote from ``no'' 
to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair would like to remind all Members that the 
upcoming votes are 2-minute votes. The Chair would also like to remind 
Members that they should stay close to the floor for 2-minute votes.


                  Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Buck

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. Buck) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 203, 
noes 218, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 367]

                               AYES--203

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Farenthold
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (NY)
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Mast
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer

[[Page H5803]]


     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vela
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                               NOES--218

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Bacon
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blum
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Emmer
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Estes (KS)
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Faso
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kinzinger
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (MN)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Marshall
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Noem
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Stefanik
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (IA)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Cleaver
     Cummings
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     Gutierrez
     Johnson, Sam
     Labrador
     Lieu, Ted
     Napolitano
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Speier


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  1734

  Mr. NUNES changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                  Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Perry

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) on which further proceedings were postponed 
and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 185, 
noes 234, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 368]

                               AYES--185

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Arrington
     Babin
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walker
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--234

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amodei
     Bacon
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Bridenstine
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Comstock
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Faso
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallagher
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Graves (LA)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hollingsworth
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Love
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Mast
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce (CA)
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Upton
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine

[[Page H5804]]


     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bishop (UT)
     Cleaver
     Cummings
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     Hudson
     Johnson, Sam
     Kaptur
     Labrador
     Lieu, Ted
     Napolitano
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Shuster


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  1738

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mrs. Hartzler

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Missouri 
(Mrs. Hartzler) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 209, 
noes 214, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 369]

                               AYES--209

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Conaway
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                               NOES--214

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amash
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Bergman
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Comstock
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Faso
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Knight
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Mast
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuster
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Tenney
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Cleaver
     Cummings
     Davis, Rodney
     Johnson, Sam
     Labrador
     Lieu, Ted
     Napolitano
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Valadao


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  1741

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 369, I mistakenly voted ``no'' 
when I intended to vote ``yes.''


                  Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Gosar

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Gosar) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 183, 
noes 242, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 370]

                               AYES--183

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Davidson
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     King (IA)
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)

[[Page H5805]]


     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stewart
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Trott
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (IA)

                               NOES--242

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Barletta
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     Denham
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duffy
     Ellison
     Emmer
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Faso
     Fitzpatrick
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gaetz
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     LaHood
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (MN)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Mast
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rosen
     Roskam
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Cleaver
     Cummings
     Davis, Rodney
     Johnson, Sam
     Labrador
     Napolitano
     Sanford
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  1745

  Mr. FERGUSON changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


       Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Thomas J. Rooney of Florida

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Thomas J. Rooney) on which further proceedings were postponed and 
on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 107, 
noes 318, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 371]

                               AYES--107

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amodei
     Barletta
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Bishop (GA)
     Blunt Rochester
     Bridenstine
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Carson (IN)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Comer
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Davidson
     Davis, Danny
     DeGette
     DelBene
     Demings
     Denham
     DeSantis
     Deutch
     Dunn
     Evans
     Fudge
     Gaetz
     Garrett
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gowdy
     Graves (MO)
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hastings
     Heck
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jones
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kilmer
     Kinzinger
     Krishnamoorthi
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lipinski
     Love
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Mast
     McKinley
     Messer
     Mooney (WV)
     Moore
     Murphy (FL)
     Nunes
     Payne
     Pearce
     Peters
     Pingree
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Roby
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Schiff
     Scott, David
     Shimkus
     Sinema
     Sires
     Swalwell (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Upton
     Vargas
     Velazquez
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson Coleman
     Webster (FL)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yoder

                               NOES--318

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barr
     Barragan
     Barton
     Bergman
     Beyer
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Connolly
     Cook
     Correa
     Costa
     Crawford
     Crist
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellison
     Emmer
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Estes (KS)
     Esty (CT)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gabbard
     Gallagher
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gomez
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gottheimer
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Grothman
     Hanabusa
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Higgins (NY)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huffman
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jayapal
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (MS)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Knight
     Kuster (NH)
     Kustoff (TN)
     Lance
     Langevin
     Latta
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (MN)
     Lieu, Ted
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Massie
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Moulton
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Norman
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Palmer
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pocan
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rosen
     Roskam
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce (CA)
     Ruiz
     Rush
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Slaughter
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Smucker
     Soto
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Suozzi
     Takano
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Valadao
     Veasey
     Vela
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Waters, Maxine
     Weber (TX)
     Welch
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (FL)
     Wilson (SC)

[[Page H5806]]


     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Cleaver
     Cummings
     Davis, Rodney
     Johnson, Sam
     Labrador
     Napolitano
     Sanford
     Scalise


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

                              {time}  1750

  Messrs. KIND and CHABOT changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. CROWLEY and Ms. JACKSON LEE changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                  Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Cole

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 
printed in House Report 115-217.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of subtitle H of title XII, add the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 12_. REPORT ON STRATEGY TO DEFEAT AL-QAEDA, THE TALIBAN, 
                   THE ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA (ISIS), AND 
                   THEIR ASSOCIATED FORCES AND CO-BELLIGERENTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the United States strategy to defeat Al-
     Qaeda, the Taliban, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria 
     (ISIS), and their associated forces and co-belligerents.
       (b) Elements.--The report required under subsection (a) 
     shall include the following:
       (1) An analysis of the adequacy of the existing legal 
     framework to accomplish the strategy described in subsection 
     (a), particularly with respect to the Authorization for Use 
     of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) 
     and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq 
     Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note).
       (2) An analysis of the budgetary resources necessary to 
     accomplish the strategy described in subsection (a).
       (c) Congressional Testimony.--Not later than 30 days after 
     the date on which the President submits to the appropriate 
     congressional committees the report required by subsection 
     (a), the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense 
     shall testify at any hearing held by any of the appropriate 
     congressional committees on the report and to which the 
     Secretary is invited.
       (d) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' 
     means--
       (1) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on 
     Armed Services of the Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on 
     Armed Services of the House of Representatives.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 440, the gentleman 
from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) and a Member opposed each will control 15 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Chair, since 2001 when we passed the original 
Authorization for Use of Military Force against al-Qaida and against 
associated enemies, the nature of the war on terror in which we find 
ourselves has changed dramatically. We now find ourselves fighting 
enemies that simply did not exist at the time in areas that nobody in 
Congress anticipated we would be at war.
  This has caused a number of us to have very serious concerns as to 
whether or not the original Authorization for Use of Military Force is 
still relevant, and frankly, many of us have concerns that the war-
making power of Congress is slipping away from us. Indeed, we find 
ourselves engaged since that original AUMF in 14 different countries on 
more than almost 40 different occasions without Congress authorizing 
the use of force. In our view, a new AUMF is necessary.
  However, I also recognize that needs to come through a process. My 
effort here is to try and set up a process where the administration can 
participate, we can have an orderly discussion, and the appropriate 
committees can mark up a new AUMF if Congress, indeed, thinks it does--
and again, I think many of us do.
  A new AUMF would provide clear authority for ongoing operations 
against ISIS and other terrorist groups, and it would fulfill the 
constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of 
force. My amendment directs the President to put forward a strategy, an 
analysis, and a framework that we can actually debate and take action 
on.
  The underlying bill being considered today provides authorization for 
training and equipping our military. Just as important is the time to 
debate and deliberate how that military should be used to defeat our 
enemies.
  Recently, in an appearance before the House Defense Appropriations 
Subcommittee, Secretary Mattis made an appearance, and I actually asked 
him would it be helpful to have an AUMF. At that time, he said it 
absolutely would be helpful.
  Our men and women who we have deployed in places, again, that nobody 
in 2001 thought they would be deployed to, need to know that the 
Congress of the United States is fully supportive of their deployment.
  So this amendment would direct that the President, within 30 days 
after the passage of the legislation, present to Congress a report 
that, again, justifies the action, tells us the strategy, lays out the 
objectives. Within 30 days after that report was received, the 
Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense could be called before 
the relevant committees to actually explain and defend that.
  Now, again, in my view, I still think we need a new Authorization for 
Use of Military Force, but I want to start a process whereby that would 
begin, and I think this would help us achieve that. If others have an 
opinion, that is fine too, but I think they would still find the report 
useful and the testimony invaluable.
  Sooner or later, Congress needs to take responsibility. I think with 
the best will in the world, we have slipped into almost endless warfare 
in a lot of places that none of us anticipated we would be.

                              {time}  1800

  Again, these are not actions that I necessarily question, but I think 
they have not been authorized, not been debated, not been examined, 
and, frankly, the American people have been denied that debate. Also, 
frankly, they have been denied the opportunity to hold their Members 
responsible.
  Remember, that original Authorization for Use of Military Force was 
2001. Almost 80 percent of the Members of this body have been elected 
since that original authorization. I think they ought to listen to the 
debate, and, frankly, their constituents ought to be able to hold them 
accountable.
  So I would urge adoption of the amendment, Mr. Chairman, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment, although I will not oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Palmer). Without objection, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Cole amendment. 
I am a great admirer of the gentleman from Oklahoma. We have worked 
together on several bipartisan letters to Speaker Ryan asking that the 
Speaker bring to the House floor an AUMF to address the fight against 
the Islamic State in Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere. I value the 
gentleman's leadership and desire to find common ground with Members on 
both sides of the aisle.
  But it is frustrating, Mr. Chairman, to know that this amendment was 
made in order while every other amendment to require the House to take 
concrete action on these wars were denied their right to debate.
  Maybe my good friend from Oklahoma is right and Congress has to take 
baby steps. It needs yet another report on Afghanistan, Iraq, and 
Syria. Its Committees on Foreign Affairs and Armed Services need to be 
ordered to hold hearings with the Secretaries of Defense and State to 
review these matters.
  But what then?
  According to this amendment, nothing.
  Now, I have had my fill of Congress doing nothing. I admire the 
gentleman from Oklahoma. I support his amendment. But I am sick and 
tired of reports. After 16 years in Afghanistan, we need a debate on 
the future of U.S. military engagement there, and we need it now.
  The gentleman said ``sooner or later.'' Well, after 16 years, we have 
already arrived at sooner and later. After

[[Page H5807]]

6 years of military operations in Iraq and Syria, we need to vote on an 
AUMF to address the fight against the Islamic State, and we need it 
now.
  How much longer will Congress keep sending our brave servicemen and -
women to war while it sits on its hands back here in Washington safe 
and sound?
  So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, but I demand that 
the House Republican leadership find the courage to act on these 
matters now. Our troops and their families deserve more than silence 
from a Congress that has no qualms about sending them to war but fails 
to have the political courage to take a vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Thornberry), who is the distinguished chairman of the House Armed 
Services Committee.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from 
Oklahoma and his consistent and strong leadership on this issue. I, 
like him, believe that it is time to have a new AUMF, given the change 
of circumstances and the evolution of the threats which we face. This 
is the third administration that has had to take the 2001 AUMF and 
stretch its meaning to encompass all sorts of groups in all sorts of 
countries in all sorts of circumstances.
  I think, from a legal standpoint, we need to update the AUMF so that 
we are consistent with the intent of the Constitution. The even more 
important point is the point that the gentleman from Oklahoma made, and 
that is that the men and women who are out there risking their lives 
deserve to know that they have the full backing of the country that 
comes from an AUMF that Congress has passed.
  I do want to take exception with one point that is sometimes made. 
This House has voted twice to update the 2001 AUMF. It voted in 2011 
and in 2012 to update that AUMF to include associated forces. It 
happened to be part of the NDAA, even though the Armed Services 
Committee is not the committee of jurisdiction. The Foreign Affairs 
Committee worked with us, and we passed it twice in the House. It did 
not survive contact with the Senate, and although there was some 
detention language that came from it, but there had been efforts in 
this House to update this language.
  But I think the gentleman's approach is exactly right as for the 
strategy, the budget that goes with it, and the legal framework we are 
to follow, including the AUMF. So I do think it is a methodical, 
deliberate process that will take us closer to doing what we ought to 
do, and that does include updating this Authorization for Use of 
Military Force against terrorist groups as that terrorist threat 
evolves.
  I commend the gentleman for his amendment and I support it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Smith), who is the distinguished ranking member of the 
Armed Services Committee.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I really want to follow up on 
the committee chairman's remarks. He is absolutely right. In 2011 and 
2012, I was actually very intimately involved in the process of trying 
to update the AUMF, and I have all the bruises and scars to show for 
it. It is a very difficult process.
  The main thing I want to accomplish in my 2 minutes here is to 
explain to everybody why we haven't updated it, because there are 
actually very clear reasons. I am not sure they are good reasons, but 
they are very clear. Everyone sort of acts like: Well, we just haven't 
done it. Why are we twiddling our thumbs?
  The reason is because, well, lawyers and how words are interpreted. 
As we went through and tried to word it exactly correctly, and as we 
negotiated with the Senate, we discovered that basically no matter how 
you word it, two groups are going to oppose it for diametrically 
opposite reasons. One side is going to say that it is too broad; it 
gives the President way too much power for too long a period of time 
and gives him too open a hand. Other groups will look at that exact 
same language and say that this unfairly restricts the President; it is 
going to make it more difficult.
  You have these conversations those of us on the committee have with 
the Pentagon as they are trying to figure out--I haven't had as many 
conversations with the current administration as with the previous, but 
I talked at length with the Obama folks about deciding what could they 
do? Where could they commit a strike? Against which groups? It was a 
very lengthy process to go back through and try to figure out whether 
or not it was under the law allowed.
  So if we change this, the lawyers on both sides are going to go 
bananas saying that this new language proves that you can't do that or 
it is too broad.
  Now, all of that is not to say that we shouldn't do it. We should. 
But I just want people to understand the difficulty of it and for our 
House to actually be willing--and the Senate--to do the work we should 
do.
  Don't kid yourself that this is something, well, gosh, we could just 
do it, it would be easy, and if everyone understands it, we are just 
ducking it for no good reason.
  It is going to be really, really hard. It is going to take 
bipartisan, bicameral cooperation. But it is way past time for us to do 
it. Yeah, when we do it, lawyers will interpret it, and there will be 
some uncertainty. But there is uncertainty now as they try to, as the 
chairman described, bootstrap the 2001 AUMF on to a whole bunch of 
other things. We have an obligation to do this even if it is difficult.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend both the chairman and the 
ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee for their approach 
to this problem. It is well known in this body that probably the House 
Armed Services Committee is the most bipartisan committee that we have. 
The fact that you have tried in the past and the fact that you are 
willing to work with us here today is deeply appreciated.
  I also thank my friend from Massachusetts, and I want to associate 
myself with his frustration. He has every right to be frustrated. My 
friend, the ranking member, is correct. This is a difficult job. It 
will require bipartisan cooperation and bicameral cooperation.
  But isn't that what war is about, to achieve a national consensus?
  I think that is exactly what Secretary Mattis was asking for: We will 
go do any mission that you as the Congress and the administration ask 
us to do, but give us a clear mission and give us your absolute support 
in carrying that through.
  If we have this debate, there will undoubtedly be dissenting views. 
That is what democracy is supposed to be about, too. So my friends that 
would oppose the use of force, for instance, in Afghanistan, that voice 
ought to be heard and that case ought to be made. Frankly, those of us 
who are supportive of what we are trying to accomplish against ISIS 
need to make our case and persuade the majority of this House and of 
the United States Senate to move forward.
  So I take this as the first step on a road. Like my friend, it is a 
baby step. I would agree with his characterization, but at least it is 
a step. This couldn't have happened without the cooperation of our 
leadership in the House and certainly without the help of the chairman 
and the ranking member of the committee. But, also, it couldn't have 
happened without the persistence of my friend from Massachusetts. We 
have worked together, and, believe me, that is unusual. We don't agree 
on a lot of issues, but we respect one another.
  This is also a question of congressional authority. I think it is a 
profoundly important constitutional issue, and I do believe we have 
inadvertently--because of the difficulty of the task--allowed war-
making power to slip away from us. That needs to stop. We are 
responsible to the American people. The Constitution is very clear 
about where war-making power lies.
  Frankly, it ought to be difficult to go to war. It ought to demand a 
lot of cooperation. It ought to be something that we think is worth 
setting aside our differences, working together, because we are asking 
men and women to risk their lives. We are putting them in harm's way, 
and they deserve to know that we are 100 percent supporting them.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H5808]]

  

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Schiff).
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Cole amendment. I 
thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank the gentleman from 
Oklahoma for his work in pushing Congress to have a debate on an AUMF.
  I had offered an amendment as well to the defense bill, along with 
Mr. Sanford and Mr. Moulton, that would put in place a new consolidated 
AUMF, and I wanted to describe it.
  I know there has been considerable debate over whether this is the 
right bill for an amendment of this nature. But what we have tried to 
do in this language is avoid the red lines that both parties seem to 
have in this debate. As I perceive those red lines, my friends on the 
Republican side of the aisle are reluctant to--in what would be 
considered too restrictive a way--tie the hands of the Commander in 
Chief by putting limits on geography or the introduction of ground 
troops.
  On the Democratic side, we are resistant to the idea of giving the 
Commander in Chief too much of a blank check.
  The way that we have sought to navigate the distance between these 
two red lines is a resolution that would repeal the old authorizations 
which no longer really apply to our current situation, replace it with 
an authorization of use of force against al-Qaida, ISIS, the Taliban, 
and their associated forces.

  It would place no geographic limits and no limits on the introduction 
of ground forces, but it would have these necessary safeguards. First, 
it would have a sunset date of 3 years so that we don't again get to a 
15-year period where we can't get a vote on an authorization and it 
goes on beyond its intended life.
  But it would also provide that, if a President decided to introduce 
ground troops in a combat mission, a privileged motion would be in 
order that any Member could trigger where within a discrete period of 
time set up by the War Powers Act you could compel a vote to either 
approve or modify or repeal the existing authority.
  That would, of course, not prevent us from taking a vote at any other 
time, but it would at least allow a vote and some accountability.
  So I commend it for people's consideration as a way that we might 
navigate the distance between the parties. I appreciate, again, my 
colleague from Oklahoma's efforts to get us to weigh in and consider 
and live up to our constitutional responsibility.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I want to advise my friend that I am prepared 
to close, although, believe me, I could talk about this a long time.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I always enjoy hearing the gentleman talk 
about this. When we agree on things, it is always pleasant. I commend 
the gentleman from Oklahoma for this amendment because I think it is 
important that we move forward, even if it is a small step forward.
  As I said initially, I am frustrated. I know Mr. Schiff is 
frustrated, and a lot of other people are frustrated who had amendments 
that were perfectly germane to this bill that I think should have been 
debated and that many of us think they are long overdue.
  Mr. Chairman, 16 years in Afghanistan is an awful long time. Some of 
us fear that these wars are becoming endless. They are essentially on 
automatic pilot. We don't give the attention that I think is 
appropriate to what is happening, especially given the fact that so 
many brave men and women have their lives on the line on behalf of our 
country.
  But beyond that, this AUMF in Afghanistan that has now been going on 
for 16 years has also been used to justify what we are doing in Syria, 
what we are doing in Iraq, in Somalia, and I could go on and on. This 
is ludicrous.

                              {time}  1815

  As the gentleman from Oklahoma knows, before we began to get sucked 
in militarily in Syria, some of us tried to have a debate on an AUMF in 
Syria, because we thought the time to debate an AUMF, the time to 
debate military action, actually should be before we get involved.
  Once we are involved, it is a lot harder to have these debates and to 
raise the questions that are so important as to whether or not some of 
these interventions are actually the right thing to do. But we skirted 
that issue, and we continue to put this on the back burner.
  As I said, I have no objection to this amendment. I support this 
amendment. I just think we are at a point where we should be doing much 
more. We are much further along than to just require a report or to 
mandate hearings. I am concerned that after these reports and these 
hearings are done, then what? The gentleman's amendment doesn't require 
that Congress take up an AUMF or that we actually have to have a vote 
in so many days or so many months.
  So I look forward to working with the gentleman to make sure that not 
only are these reports and these hearings conducted as we all want them 
to be, but to continue to press this leadership to do the right thing: 
to not give away Congress' constitutional responsibilities and to do 
what is right by the men and women who sacrifice so much for our 
country.
  There are only a small group of people who are directly impacted by 
these wars, and that is the men and women who are fighting and their 
families. The rest of us are asked to do basically nothing. I think 
that Congress has shirked its responsibility. We can't tolerate that.
  I hope there is a big, strong bipartisan, if not unanimous vote, for 
the gentleman's amendment, but this is just the first teeny step in 
what we need to do. I promise him that he has my cooperation in any 
efforts to get it to the point where we actually debate these wars and 
develop AUMFs where people, as he said, can vote for them or against 
them.
  My view of what we should be doing, I know, is very different from 
the gentleman from Oklahoma, and perhaps even different from the 
gentleman from California, but that is the kind of genius and the 
wonder of this place. We can all have different points of view, and we 
can even differ, but at the end of the day, the majority decides.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote for the Cole amendment, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by associating myself very much with 
the remarks of my good friend from Massachusetts.
  Frankly, this is an area where we have found common ground because I 
think we both deeply revere this institution and, frankly, respect the 
Constitution of the United States.
  When he says that we have shirked our duty, in my view, we have. I 
think it is absolutely a fair statement to make. I think the gentleman 
from Washington is also correct that it is hard. This is a very 
complex, difficult kind of war. It is a new kind of war, its enemies 
morphing into different forms and different places.
  All that is true, but it doesn't excuse us from the obligation to do 
our job and give those men and women the assurance that they are acting 
at the direct request and order of the American people in fulfilling 
the responsibility we have asked them to take.
  It doesn't directly relate to this issue, but I felt very much the 
same way as my friend did at the time about Libya. We stretched the 
NATO alliances so far to get involved in a country where, in my view, 
we should have never been involved. More importantly, Libya didn't 
attack NATO. It really didn't make a lot of sense to use that kind of 
instrument to justify a war.
  I aim this at no particular President, either the last one or current 
one, but, frankly, Presidents don't like Congress very much to tell 
them what they have to do. They want to be able to do it. Well, I am 
sorry; the Constitution is very clear about that.
  One of the reasons we have a Constitution is because we didn't want 
to live under a system where it is a monarchy as opposed to a 
Presidency. It is part of our duty to keep a check on the extraordinary 
power that we place in the hands of the Chief Executive of the United 
States, regardless of who that person is, regardless of what party they 
represent.
  My friend makes a good point when he says sometimes we don't trust 
one another, or we don't want to give the President too much power. We 
also

[[Page H5809]]

don't want to take too much responsibility ourselves, sometimes. For 
that, we ought to look in the mirror. We ought to be willing to take 
that awesome responsibility that the Constitution entrusts us with and 
make the tough decisions that the American people send us here to make. 
I actually think going through this process will be very good for this 
institution.
  My friend is correct, it is a baby step, and I share his frustration. 
But I think the current administration deserves a chance to be heard 
and to present a justification, not just inherit an ongoing conflict.
  I think the committee of jurisdiction, the Foreign Affairs Committee, 
deserves the opportunity to hear this.
  My friend expresses a concern which, quite frankly, I share, that we 
will have a hearing and not much more. That would not be where I would 
propose that we end. I would hope and would work with my friend to make 
sure that is not where we end.
  I think at the end of the day, whatever the deliberation is, whatever 
the recommendation is for a new AUMF, it needs to come to this floor, 
and it needs to be open for full debate. If we can't muster a majority 
to approve that, then we shouldn't be fighting in the places we are 
fighting if we are not willing to actually vote and use that.
  So I am going to pledge to continue to work with my friend and urge 
the administration, assuming this actually gets in the final bill, to 
take it as an opportunity to establish a very clear set of objectives, 
a very clear strategy, a very clear estimate of the budgetary cost, and 
a very clear analysis of the legal framework under which they are 
operating.

  I think they, and we, owe that to the country. We certainly owe it to 
the men and women that we have asked to go and do difficult things and 
risk their lives on our behalf. They do it willingly. Again, the 
Secretary of Defense said this would be helpful. This kind of debate 
would make a difference.
  I, again, thank my friends for their cooperation in this. I thank 
particularly the chairman and the ranking member for allowing us to use 
this particular vehicle to express it. I thank the leadership of the 
House for being willing to grapple with this issue. I thank my friend 
from Massachusetts for his persistent efforts; and my friend from 
California, Ms. Lee, who has also worked on this. A lot of people on 
our side of the aisle feel exactly the same way.
  This is a debate about the future of a conflict, but it is also a 
debate about the appropriate constitutional authority of the Congress 
of the United States and a willingness by the Members to embrace this.
  So it is actually, I think, a good day, even though it is the first 
step in a long journey.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).
  The amendment was agreed to.


           Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Franks of Arizona

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13 
printed in House Report 115-217.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of subtitle H of title XII, add the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 12_. STRATEGIC ASSESSMENTS OF THE USE OF VIOLENT OR 
                   UNORTHODOX ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE TO 
                   SUPPORT EXTREMIST OR TERRORIST MESSAGING AND 
                   JUSTIFICATION.

       (a) In General.--Not later than one year after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     conduct two concurrent strategic assessments of the use of 
     violent or unorthodox Islamic religious doctrine to support 
     extremist or terrorist messaging and justification and submit 
     the results of the assessments to the appropriate 
     congressional committees. These concurrent assessments shall 
     be carried out by the following:
       (1) A team of United States government employees, from 
     relevant departments and agencies with appropriate background 
     and expertise to contribute to such an assessment.
       (2) A team of non-governmental experts from academia, 
     industry, or other entities not currently a part of the 
     United States Government, with appropriate background and 
     expertise to contribute to such an assessment.
       (b) Elements.--The assessments required under subsection 
     (a) shall include the following elements:
       (1) Identification of major or significant identifiable 
     Islamic religious doctrines, concepts, or schools of thought 
     used by various extremist groups for specific purposes, such 
     as recruitment, radicalization, financing, or propaganda.
       (2) How key elements of these doctrines, concepts, or 
     schools of thought are incorporated into extremist or 
     terrorist messaging and justification.
       (3) Identification of major or significant identifiable 
     Islamic religious doctrines, concepts, or schools of thought 
     that can be used to counter the threads identified in 
     paragraphs (1) and (2).
       (4) Recommendations for identifying key thought leaders or 
     proponents for these major or significant identifiable 
     Islamic religious doctrines, concepts, or schools of thought 
     in paragraphs (1) through (3).
       (5) Recommendations for technological capability, training 
     improvements, or process developments to speed the 
     identification of harmful or destabilizing Islamic religious 
     doctrines, concepts, or schools of thought used by extremist 
     groups.
       (c) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' 
     means--
       (1) the Committees on Armed Services, Foreign Relations, 
     Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Select 
     Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, 
     Homeland Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the House of Representatives.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 440, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Franks) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, it has been 15 years and 10 
months since the attacks on September 11, which killed nearly 3,000 
people and wounded nearly 6,000 others.
  Since then, America has fought five operations in eight countries, 
prosecuting wars against those responsible, their allies, and 
sympathizers, and the foundational ideology that fomented it. And 5,400 
American heroes have given the last full measure of devotion in service 
to their country to combat this vile enemy.
  Yet, in spite of all of this, there are those who continue to oppose 
any attempts to study the ideological roots of this enemy. Their 
zealous commitment not to understand our enemies' motivations would 
almost be impressive if it weren't so harmful.
  As my friends across the aisle were so eager to point out, this is 
not a war which can be won with bombs and bullets alone. Despite the 
peerless capability of our warrior class, we cannot kill our way out of 
this problem, nor is this a war which can be won by increasing the 
State Department's budget for providing ``jobs programs'' for 
jihadists.
  It has to be noted by even the most intransigent of those who would 
oppose my amendment today that so many of the young men who buy into 
this destructive movement come from families who are more than 
comfortable financially.
  Osama bin Laden's family was not going hungry when he declared war on 
America, twice. Many of the significant leaders of the various groups 
and factions are men with postdoctorate degrees in Islamic studies from 
some of those most prestigious universities in the Muslim world.
  Yet we are told by countless talking heads and politicians that men 
and women who carry out these terrible attacks and cry, Allahu Akbar, 
in that moment when they detonate bombs in the midst of the crowds of 
innocent men, women, and children, have nothing to do with Islamist 
ideology.
  Mr. Chairman, to embrace that flagrant fallacy means we will never be 
able to address this evil on a strategic level, and our noble men and 
women in uniform will be forced to combat it on a tactical level only.
  This present struggle against the vast majority of terrorism in the 
world is fundamentally one of ideas, and it will be won on the 
battlefield in the hearts and minds of human beings.
  Mr. Chairman, I know that there are many brands of violent extremism, 
and I eagerly would join my colleagues in any effort to combat them 
all. If the FBI does not have enough resources to combat neo-Nazis or 
White supremacists, then I want to know about that,

[[Page H5810]]

and I want to help. There is no desire in my heart whatsoever to single 
out any group of innocent people or denigrate their faith in any way.
  However, the reality remains that there is one spectrum of Islamic 
ideology whose variants are responsible for the 9/11 attacks, feeling 
the insurgency in Iraq, the countless attacks on civilians in Europe, 
and the boundless evil of the Islamic State.
  In 2017 alone, there have been 1,134 attacks in 49 countries, in 
which more than 8,000 people have been killed and 8,000 more were 
injured.
  Our allies across the world, including in the Muslim world, have now 
begun to study and analyze the ideology that foments Islamic terrorism 
so they can begin to resist it on a strategic ideological level.
  If we in America do not also address this on a strategic level, this 
underlying ideology that catalyzes the evil of jihadist terrorism 
across the world, then its list of victims will only grow longer.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment will help us to categorize those 
perpetrating violence in the name of Islam and help us to identify our 
allies within the Muslim world who can assist in countering the Islamic 
message of global jihad. Those who would oppose this amendment choose 
to continue the status quo, that is to say, no strategy at all.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I would just implore the Members of this body to 
pass this amendment and join this sincere effort in finally identifying 
our enemies, empowering our friends, and ending this evil destructive 
ideology once and for all.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am a Marine Corps infantryman. When I was fighting 
door-to-door in Iraq, some of the bravest marines in my unit, men of 
valor and patriotism, were Muslims. They stood with the Iraqis to risk 
their lives and endangered loved ones to help us.
  At this very moment, marines are still fighting in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. Many of them are Muslim. They still rely on the steadfast 
support of our Muslim allies. That is why I find this amendment so 
troubling.

                              {time}  1830

  Mr. Chairman, at a time when American forces are deployed across the 
Muslim world and depend on the support of Muslim governments, the 
Franks amendment will send exactly the wrong message to our friends and 
adversaries alike.
  By singling out a faith tradition for a strange and unprecedented 
study by our military, we are sending a dangerous message and signal 
that America is at war with Islam. America is not ever going to be at 
war with a single religion.
  It is our task as Members of Congress who care about our military and 
about the American values that our servicemembers risk their lives for 
to defend it and to reaffirm those values, and we can do that by 
defeating this misguided amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 13, 2017, on page H5810, the following appeared: amendment. 
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chair,
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: amendment. Mr. 
Chair, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. 
Mr. Chair,


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chair, how much time remains on this side?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 15 seconds 
remaining.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, if the Congress of the United States were to 
direct the Department of Defense to study and examine and scrutinize 
your religion to list leaders in that religion and teachers, to decide 
what was orthodox and unorthodox, you would be among--I don't know--the 
Christian community, the Jewish community, Buddhists, Hindus, and 
Muslims.
  But only Islam is selected out in the Franks amendment, only one 
religion is done so. Mr. Chair, if you select out one religion for 
particular scrutiny, to scrutinize their doctrine, to declare to the 
government what is orthodox and unorthodox, and to identify teachers of 
it, you have simply abridged the free exercise of that religion. That 
is unconstitutional.
  Nobody is saying you can't study terrorism. You can study what 
motivates people to commit acts of terrorism; and we should, but we 
don't, not equally. The fact is that this amendment singled out and 
stigmatizes one religious group. It is wrong, and it should be voted 
down.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. Jayapal).
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
dangerous and divisive amendment that is the latest attempt to 
criminalize the religious beliefs of Muslims in this country.
  Let me remind my colleague from Arizona that our country was founded 
on the principle of religious liberty, and the First Amendment 
guarantees that right.
  In calling for a strategic assessment, this amendment tramples on our 
Constitution's separation of religion and State, singles out the Muslim 
religion, its practices and leaders, and it does nothing to keep our 
Nation safe. In fact, fear-mongering undermines trust and national 
security, and pits neighbor against neighbor, community against 
community, and is an insult to our American Muslim communities.
  This amendment doesn't even apply its arbitrary surveillance equally, 
because if it did, it would include assessments of White supremacist 
terrorism or terrorism committed against abortion clinics and doctors.
  Mr. Chairman, our fight against terrorism is not against any 
religion. It is against the acts that are committed and those who 
commit the acts. It violates our Constitution and runs counter to who 
we are as a nation.
  Frankly, it is horrifying, and I urge my colleagues to resoundingly 
oppose it.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Raskin).
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment, which 
selectively requires the military to identify Islamic religious 
doctrines, concepts, or schools of thought used by various extremist 
groups and how they have been incorporated into terrorist messaging.
  The problem, of course, is that terrorist killers have used religious 
doctrines and concepts from every major religion on earth, including 
not just Islam, but Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, Hinduism, 
Buddhism, for homicidal purposes. Because religion is based on faith 
and not reason, and because religious texts are not self-explanatory, 
good people will invoke scripture for good causes and evil people will 
invoke scripture for evil causes.
  We don't need a big government study to teach us something so 
commonsensical, which the Founders taught us a long time ago. If we 
want to study the exploitation of religion for terrorism, let's study 
it universally.
  Focusing on one religion not only vastly understates the problem, but 
exacerbates the problem by fomenting the myth that religious fanaticism 
and terrorism are unique to the charlatans and predators of Islam when 
they are common to the charlatans and predators of nearly every 
religious faith and identification.
  Constitutionally, we do not single out particular religions for 
governmental inspection and suspicion under the First Amendment.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have available?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 45 seconds 
remaining.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I think what we need to remember is there is some 
commonality here; and I am reminded of this almost every weekend, 
especially when I stay here in Washington, D.C. I go to section 60 of 
Arlington National Cemetery to visit my friends that died in the war in 
Iraq. In every headstone there, you will see a lot of different symbols 
of religions, whether it is the Jewish star, whether it is the Islamic 
symbol or the Christian symbol, or the nonbeliever, no symbols 
whatsoever.

[[Page H5811]]

  The one thing they all have in common is they are all sharing the 
same ground. They are all sharing the same sacred ground of Arlington 
National Cemetery because they all died for the same American values. 
That American value says that we will not ostracize somebody else for 
their religion, for who they believe or who they don't believe. Any 
steps towards that is dangerous.
  If we want to continue to reaffirm the values that those men and 
women have died for that are now sitting in section 60, we need to 
defeat this amendment and do it because we know it is the right thing 
to do, and it reaffirms those American values that those men and women 
have died for.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of 
the time.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment will empower America to identify those 
heroes within the Muslim world who are working so bravely to counter 
the odious violent ideology which continues to use Islam to justify the 
murder of tens of thousands of innocent men, women, and children. It 
will save American lives, it will save Muslim lives, it will save lives 
across the world, and I would encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will 
be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 14 Offered by Ms. Cheney

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 
printed in House Report 115-217.
  Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of subtitle E of title XVI, add the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 1673. PROHIBITION ON REDUCTION OF THE INTERCONTINENTAL 
                   BALLISTIC MISSILES OF THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Prohibition.--Except as provided by subsection (b), 
     none of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act 
     or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2018 for the 
     Department of Defense shall be obligated or expended for--
       (1) reducing, or preparing to reduce, the responsiveness or 
     alert level of the intercontinental ballistic missiles of the 
     United States; or
       (2) reducing, or preparing to reduce, the quantity of 
     deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles of the United 
     States to a number less than 400.
       (b) Exception.--The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not 
     apply to any of the following activities:
       (1) The maintenance or sustainment of intercontinental 
     ballistic missiles.
       (2) Ensuring the safety, security, or reliability of 
     intercontinental ballistic missiles.
       (3) Reduction in the number of deployed intercontinental 
     ballistic missiles that are carried out in compliance with--
       (A) the limitations of the New START Treaty (as defined in 
     section 494(a)(2)(D) of title 10, United States Code); and
       (B) section 1644 of the Carl Levin an Howard P. ``Buck'' 
     McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2015 (Public Law 113-291; 128 Stat. 3651; 10 U.S.C. 494 
     note).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 440, the gentlewoman 
from Wyoming (Ms. Cheney) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wyoming.
  Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer an amendment that will help 
ensure the strength of our nuclear deterrent by preventing further 
reductions to our deployed ICBM fleet below 400 missiles.
  At this point, our deployed fleet at 400 missiles is at the basic 
level necessary to maintain a strong and effective nuclear deterrence. 
Mr. Chair, our ICBMs are a critical leg of our triad as they provide 
our commanders with a responsive, flexible, and survivable military 
response ready 24/7, 365 days a year.
  Our ICBM leg of the triad also adds significantly to our deterrence 
capability by increasing the number of targets our adversaries must 
hold at risk.
  My amendment is a safeguard that prevents any unilateral disarmament 
that would leave our Nation vulnerable to attack. My amendment does not 
impact our compliance with the New START, and it does not change our 
current alert level or require the deployment of any additional ICBMs 
at this point.
  The amendment simply reaffirms to our adversaries and our allies that 
our nuclear deterrence will remain strong.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Rhode Island is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is simply not necessary, as it is a 
solution in search of a problem.
  Now, the budget request for fiscal year 2018 has no funding for 
reducing the level or reducing the number of deployed ICBMs below 400, 
and there are no plans to do so in the future.
  It also presupposes the completion of the nuclear posture review, 
which is currently ongoing and is expected at the end of this year. So 
instead of jumping the gun and acting precipitously, we should allow 
the administration time to finish the review and base our actions on 
its findings.
  This is particularly true because it may be that reducing the number 
of ICBMs and reducing alert levels could, in fact, be beneficial to 
enhance strategic stability. Preventing such a reduction also 
disregards the crucial and fundamental role of our Nation's submarines, 
which provide an assured, survivable second-strike capability, and 
which dissuades an adversary from thinking they could launch a 
disarming attack against the United States.
  ICBMs can be seen as destabilizing in that they would force a very 
rapid decision by the President and are use-or-lose nuclear weapons. 
History has shown us concerns about the potential for a rushed decision 
in response to a false alarm that none of us wish to see repeated.
  Mr. Chairman, if we are going to talk about keeping ICBMs, it should 
be done in a meaningful, informed discussion based on the findings of 
the Nuclear Posture Review instead of yet another annual amendment 
driven by what seems like a parochial interest, which does not consider 
the other legs of the nuclear deterrent.
  Instead, we should focus on increasing accountability and ensuring 
that we are improving the morale and culture inside the Air Force with 
regard to nuclear weapons so that some of the serious and embarrassing 
problems that have plagued the ICBM missileers and security forces in 
recent years may be properly addressed.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Chair, there is nothing in my amendment that has any 
negative impact on our submarine fleet. In fact, I support strongly, as 
does the NDAA, the importance of the triad, as have administrations of 
both parties over many years.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. 
Rogers), the distinguished chairman of the Strategic Forces 
Subcommittee.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding and for offering this amendment. A provision nearly identical 
to this has been in the final version of the last two NDAAs, and it 
should be in the final version of this year's NDAA.
  As chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, I understand that 
the responsiveness and distributive nature of our ICBMs are the most 
critical features. Without ICBMs, an adversary would need to strike 
less than 10 targets to disarm our nuclear forces. But with ICBMs, an 
adversary needs to strike hundreds of hardened targets deep in 
America's homeland. That is a much more difficult proposition and is at 
the very heart of our deterrence.
  During his confirmation hearing, Secretary of Defense Mattis agreed

[[Page H5812]]

with this assessment, noting: ``The ICBM force provides a cost-imposing 
strategy on our adversaries.''
  We should confirm this policy once more. It is vital that our ICBM 
force remain robust and responsive. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this 
amendment.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Rhode Island has 3 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Smith), the distinguished ranking member of the House 
Armed Services Committee.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, this amendment basically 
unnecessarily ties the hands of our administration in terms of choosing 
how best to spend Defense dollars.
  Now, the gentlewoman mentions that this does not say anything about 
reducing our submarine force or reducing our bomber force. It does, 
however, lock in a certain amount of ICBMs that we have to have, and, 
in that sense, it does impact all other choices in terms of our Defense 
policy not just within the nuclear framework.

  But within the nuclear framework, there is, as I keep emphasizing and 
people keep resisting, a finite amount of resources available to fund 
the Department of Defense. In fact, that is the central problem with 
this whole bill, as I have mentioned.
  We don't have a budget resolution. This is $72 billion over-the-
budget caps that the House has shown no willingness to vote to lift. So 
here we have $72 billion that we are just kind of hoping is going to be 
there. So at some point we are going to have to make some choices. I 
keep saying that. We keep delaying it--doing CRs. We even shut down the 
government once.
  We continue to sort of stumble forward with no clear plan, but 
amendments like this are just another example of how we lock in a lack 
of flexibility in terms of how we spend our money.
  What is the best approach to our national security?
  Now, it has been mentioned and I keep harping on the fact that we 
don't have a national security plan yet. And it has been mentioned, 
well, Presidents usually take awhile to deliver them. And okay, fine, 
we will, you know, sometime in the next year hopefully get that plan. 
But amendments like this trap that plan, restrict the ability of the 
President to deal with a finite amount of resources to come with what 
is the best approach.

                              {time}  1845

  And there are a lot of arguments that ICBMs are not the best approach 
to nuclear deterrence. Do we need an absolute fixed amount? I don't 
think so. I think we need greater flexibility, particularly as we await 
the findings of the Nuclear Posture Review to figure out what our best 
strategy going forward is.
  So we have all these little parochial pieces where we make sure that 
the piece that is closest to us, you can't touch that. We have to have 
exactly the same number. That is not in the best interests of a 
comprehensive National Security Strategy.
  We need flexibility in this budget. We are not going to have as much 
money as everybody seems to think that we are going to have. That is 
just the fact. We are $20 trillion in debt, running up deficits of $700 
billion a year. We have the budget caps. At some point, we are going to 
have to start making choices. This amendment does not help in that.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. As I like to quote: ``Gentlemen, we are out 
of money; it is time to think.''
  We are, in fact, running out of money--that is a Winston Churchill 
quote, by the way--but we appear to not be willing to do the thinking 
part about making choices on where we should not and should spend our 
money.
  Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Chair, how much time do I have left?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Wyoming has 2\3/4\ minutes 
remaining.
  Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bacon), a retired brigadier general and the former 
commander of Offutt Air Force Base.
  Mr. BACON. Mr. Chair, I just want to point out, when I came to the 
Air Force in 1985, we have since then reduced our ICBM force by 60 
percent. Enough is enough. Four hundred is the level we should not go 
below.
  Our strategic nuclear force enterprise is America's force of last 
resort and has, for decades, asserted peace through strength for the 
United States and its allies around the world.
  I would like to remind my colleagues that every one of us in the 
House and the many millions of Americans we represent have lived and 
prospered in peace precisely because we have made the conscious 
decision as a nation many years ago to keep a strong, responsive, and 
resilient nuclear deterrent.
  The ICBM leg of the nuclear triad is, by design, the largest, safest, 
and most responsive part of our central strategic forces. It is the 
very foundation of our nuclear deterrent, and we must preserve the 
longstanding bipartisan consensus that our ICBMs be kept at high levels 
of alert and at sufficient numbers to ensure our nuclear deterrent 
stays credible.
  As we continue down to a new START level, a treaty level of 400 
ICBMs, it is essential that we go no lower. When we say ``promote the 
common defense,'' this is what those words mean.
  Mr. Chair, I urge support of this amendment.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe, as I said before, this amendment is an 
unnecessary amendment. It does not meaningfully address the three legs 
of the nuclear triad. Let's wait until the Nuclear Posture Review is 
done and base our decision then on facts and not on speculation.
  I, therefore, urge my colleagues to oppose it, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Chairman, we have seen over the years many misguided 
efforts to unilaterally cut our strategic forces and to do so in a way 
that has been really based on a notion that somehow if we reduce the 
level of weapons in our inventory, that our adversaries will do the 
same. We know that is simply not the case.
  This amendment is crucial to ensure that we maintain the kind of 
deterrent that is necessary in a world in which we are facing 
increasing threats.
  Our ability to deter against the threats of our adversaries depends 
in large part both upon their understanding of our will to use our 
forces as well as their belief in our capability, and the last thing we 
should be doing is reducing below a safe and secure number.
  Mr. Chairman, in offering this amendment, my intention is very much 
to say, look, our obligation as Members of the House of Representatives 
is to provide for the common defense and to ensure that, while we are 
overseeing activities by the executive branch, we are not allowing the 
kind of irresponsible cuts that could put us at risk.
  So I urge the adoption of my amendment, Mr. Chairman, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Cheney).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Lamborn

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 
printed in House Report 115-217.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 681, line 15, insert ``(a) Integration of Patriot 
     Missiles Into Integrated Master Test Plan.--'' before ``Not 
     later than''.
       Page 682, after line 5, insert the following new 
     subsection:
       (b) Normalizing Operational Test and Evaluation.--
       (1) Condition for proceeding beyond low-rate initial 
     production.--Section 2399(a)(1) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking ``or a covered designated major 
     subprogram'' and inserting ``a covered designated major 
     subprogram, or an element of the ballistic missile defense 
     system''.
       (2) Conforming repeal.--Section 1662 of the Carl Levin and 
     Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291; 10 U.S.C. 2431 
     note) is repealed.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 440, the gentleman

[[Page H5813]]

from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The goal of this amendment is simple: given the rising nuclear and 
ballistic missile threat from North Korea and Iran, we have a renewed 
urgency to do everything we can to make sure that the Missile Defense 
Agency goes as fast and as far as possible. This includes cutting 
unnecessary bureaucracy.
  This amendment would normalize the operational test and evaluation 
process for our ballistic missile defense system, simply treating it 
like every other major weapons system that we have.
  This amendment fixes an outdated bureaucratic requirement which 
requires the Secretary of Defense, himself, to guarantee in advance a 
system will work before it can even be bought. This is such a high bar, 
we don't use it anywhere else.
  Under this amendment, we will still have a robust, rigorous testing 
program, without the Secretary of Defense needing to get personally 
involved. The Director of OT&E, which is the Pentagon's testing office, 
would still be required by law to evaluate and approve testing plans, 
analyze and evaluate testing results, and publish an annual public 
report with this information. Congress and the Secretary of Defense 
will still have the power to say no. The difference is MDA won't have 
needless obstacles to prevent them from moving forward.
  Let's free the Missile Defense Agency and unshackle it so it can 
better do its vital job of protecting us from missile attack.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Tennessee is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I regret that my good friend from Colorado 
has offered this amendment. It was not voted on in either subcommittee 
or in full committee. It should be rejected by this House, and rejected 
overwhelmingly.
  Why? We need to make sure that our missile defense works. This is not 
a vote on whether we are for or against missile defense. I am strongly 
for missile defense. I just want to make sure that it works. In the 
National Defense Authorization Act of 2015, there is a strong section 
in that act that requires that it work.
  The gentleman's amendment is not supported by the Missile Defense 
Agency, it is not supported by the Pentagon.
  What it is is a vendor's dream, what it is is a defense contractor's 
dream, because it would enable them to sell stuff to us, the American 
taxpayer and to the citizens of this country, promising national 
defense, but not proving it.
  We need to fly it before we buy it. We need to test it before we 
invest in it. We need to make sure that it works before we fork over 
the dough.
  If this loophole were to be established into law, allowing missiles 
to be flown through this loophole, it would delight the defense 
contractor industry. This is an amazing breach of what really, I think, 
has been American law for 150 years.
  Back during the Civil War, there was a law passed called the Lincoln 
Law. And because so many Americans were outraged that the bullets sold 
to the Union soldiers did not work and the cannonballs did not work and 
the boots didn't last in the rain, they passed one of the toughest laws 
ever passed by this Congress, to penalize defense contractors who sold 
us stuff that did not work.
  We need to make sure these missiles work. The gentleman is absolutely 
correct. The threat from North Korea is real, the threat one day from 
Iran could be real. We need to make sure these missiles work. And to 
short-circuit, to obviate a testing requirement would be an appalling 
thing for us to do.
  This has been law since 2015. It is working, it works fine, the 
Missile Defense Agency is all for it. Let's keep it. If it ain't broke, 
don't fix it.
  And to allow contractors to sell us stuff that is unproven, that is 
not tested, that has not flown before we buy it, oh, my gosh, I 
wouldn't want to be on that side of that transaction.
  So the gentleman is an outstanding Member, he does great work. As I 
say, this was not voted on in either subcommittee or full committee. It 
would be a mistake for the full House to support this amendment at this 
time.
  So I would urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, if there is any evidence that MDA or DOD 
does not favor this amendment, I sure haven't seen it, and I would like 
to see that produced so I could see that.
  At this point, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. 
Rogers), my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Strategic Forces.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
and for his amendment.
  This committee has been trying to seek out and remove impediments to 
speedy acquisition for years. Section 1662 of fiscal year 2015 NDAA is 
just such an impediment. I don't understand why Congress believed it 
was prudent to let DOD's testers prevent the Secretary of Defense from 
deploying military capability.
  Further, I do not agree with the contention that this amendment will 
further reduce oversight of the testing of missile defense 
capabilities. In fact, the plain language of the amendment inserts 
ballistic missile defense systems into the existing title 10 DOD OT&E 
testing requirement, just like every other DOD acquisition program.
  This is literally where the so-called ``fly before you buy'' term 
comes from.
  Every year, we already receive another report from DOD OT&E on the 
testing of ballistic missile defense, and then there is the Integrated 
Master Test Program that MDA and DOD OT&E collaborate on. And then, 
finally, the GAO does a report, also, that helps Congress oversee BMD 
programs.
  How many reports do we need to do the same thing? Especially when 
North Korea is making unprecedented progress on its ballistic missile 
capability, we should be making MDA more efficient and nimble, and I 
think removing redundant reporting requirements and impediments on the 
deployment of proven capabilities is a commonsense step.
  Mr. Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, this Congress in 2015 passed this 
requirement because it made sense.
  Institutional memory can be short. The MDA is already exempt from 
normal Pentagon acquisition processes. No one in this body should think 
that MDA is subjected to the DOD 5000 regular acquisition rules.
  What this amendment would do would be to short-circuit that process. 
And which Member of this House in either party would want to admit to 
the constituency that they represent that they voted to allow missiles 
to be purchased by this country before we knew they would work?
  The threat is real, and we need to be prepared for that threat and we 
need defense missiles that work. Already the shot doctrine is several 
to one. We have to shoot up four missiles and hope that we can stop the 
one from coming over. We need things that actually work better than 
that. We need to make sure this equipment that the U.S. taxpayer is 
buying functions correctly.
  We have already expedited the acquisition process for the MDA. Let's 
not expedite it further. If our missile defenses don't work, we are all 
in trouble. The Congress decided wisely and rightly in 2015.
  The MDA, as I say, does not support this amendment. They have had 
ample opportunity to come to us and say that they want more 
flexibility, more freedom, they want things that work too. This House 
should want things that work. So I urge my colleagues to support what 
works and oppose this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAMBORN. How much time does each side have?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado has 2 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Tennessee has 1\1/4\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chair, as my colleagues know, just one successful 
ballistic missile attack on U.S. territory

[[Page H5814]]

or forward deployed forces or allies would carry an enormous cost of 
life and treasure. I am pleased that we are finally making some real 
progress in this bill at funding missile defense programs that have 
been underfunded for years. General John Hyten, who is in charge of 
missile defense, said recently: ``What really worries me the most is 
I'm worried that our Nation won't be able to go fast enough to keep up 
with our adversaries anymore.'' He argues that we need to empower our 
engineers with the authority and responsibility so they can go faster.
  We have the greatest minds at the Missile Defense Agency. They are 
motivated people that serve our country every day when they come into 
work. We just need to let them do their job. But we must not let 
outdated, duplicative bureaucratic requirements keep us from defending 
ourselves from ballistic missile threats.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, which would free the 
Missile Defense Agency to move faster to defend us from future threats.

  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I know this amendment comes late in the 
process and my colleagues are tired of hearing all these National 
Defense Authorization Act amendments, but this one is really important. 
Already the North Koreans threaten the United States. Other countries 
could do so. We need to make sure that our missile defense works, and 
our constituents will not accept excuses.
  Now, as I say, defense contractors love this approach if they can 
sell us something that is not proven to work, but this equipment must 
work.

                              {time}  1900

  This Congress got it right in 2015. The MDA is on board with the 
testing that they have to do. The process now works. Let's not change 
it, and this amendment would change it for the worse. It would be a 
defense contractor's dream.
  Let's not cave in to the lobbyists, let's not give away the American 
taxpayers' money, and let's make sure that the defense equipment we buy 
works. By stopping this amendment, we will do so. This amendment would 
be a giveaway to the defense contracting industry.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Tennessee 
(Mr. Cooper), my colleague. He is very sincere in what he says.
  I believe we have so many checks and balances that we will not be 
buying things that don't work. But, we need to unshackle MDA so they 
can get their job done faster and better than they can right now.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Tennessee has 15 seconds 
remaining.
  Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, Admiral Syring has been a great leader of 
MDA. He did not request this change. Admiral Syring has done a great 
job. Let's follow his lead, and let's reject this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado 
will be postponed.


      Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 440, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 2, 8, 9, 11, 
19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, and 35 
printed in House Report 115-217, offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

        amendment no. 2 Offered by Mr. Hudson of North Carolina

       At the end of subtitle C of title I, add the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 1__. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR THE 
                   ENHANCED MULTI MISSION PARACHUTE SYSTEM.

       (a) Limitation.--None of the funds authorized to be 
     appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for the 
     Department of Defense for fiscal year 2018 for the enhanced 
     multi mission parachute system may be used to enter into, or 
     to prepare to enter into, a contract for the procurement of 
     such parachute system until the date on which the Secretary 
     of the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees 
     the certification described in subsection (b) and the report 
     described in subsection (c).
       (b) Certification.--The certification described in this 
     subsection is a certification by the Secretary of the Navy 
     that--
       (1) neither the Marine Corps' currently fielded enhanced 
     multi mission parachute system nor the Army's RA-1 parachute 
     system meet the Marine Corps requirements;
       (2) the Marine Corps' PARIS, Special Application Parachute 
     does not meet the Marine Corps requirements;
       (3) the testing plan for the enhanced multi mission 
     parachute system meets all regulatory requirements; and
       (4) the Department of the Navy has performed an analysis 
     and determined that a high glide canopy parachute system is 
     not more prone to malfunctions than the currently fielded 
     free fall parachute systems.
       (c) Report.--The report described in this subsection is a 
     report that includes--
       (1) an explanation of the rationale for using the Parachute 
     Industry Association specification normally used for sports 
     parachutes that are employed from relatively slow flying 
     civilian aircraft at altitudes below 10,000 feet for a 
     military parachute;
       (2) an inventory and cost estimate for any new equipment 
     and training that the Marine Corps will have to be acquire in 
     order to employ a high glide parachute;
       (3) an explanation of why the Department of the Navy is 
     conducting a paper down select and not conducting any testing 
     until first article testing; and
       (4) a discussion of the risk assessment for high glide 
     canopies, and specifically how the Department of the Navy is 
     mitigating the risk for malfunctions experienced in other 
     high glide canopy programs.


            amendment no. 8 Offered by Mr. Buck of Colorado

       Page 375, after line 8, insert the following:

     SEC. 1039. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO DESIGNATE OR EXPAND 
                   FEDERAL NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS.

       None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act 
     or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2018 for the 
     Department of Defense may be obligated or expended to 
     designate or expand any Federal National Heritage Area in any 
     of Baca, Bent, Crowley Huerfano, Kiowa, Las Animas, Otero, 
     Prowers, or Pueblo counties, Colorado.


              amendment no. 9 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

       At the end of subtitle D of title X, add the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 1040. REQUIREMENT RELATING TO TRANSFER OF EXCESS 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EQUIPMENT TO FEDERAL AND 
                   STATE AGENCIES.

        Section 2576a of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Preference for Border Security Purposes.--(1) In 
     transferring the items of personal property described in 
     paragraph (2) under this section, the Secretary of Defense 
     may give first preference to the Department of Homeland 
     Security and then to Federal and State agencies that agree to 
     use the property primarily for the purpose of strengthening 
     border security along the southern border of the United 
     States.
       ``(2) The items of personal property described in this 
     paragraph are--
       ``(A) unmanned aerial vehicles;
       ``(B) the Aerostat radar system;
       ``(C) night-vision goggles; and
       ``(D) high mobility multi-purpose wheel vehicles (commonly 
     known as `humvees').''.


           amendment no. 11 Offered by Ms. Cheney of Wyoming

       At the end of subtitle G of title XII, add the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 12_. PLAN TO ENHANCE THE EXTENDED DETERRENCE AND 
                   ASSURANCE CAPABILITIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN 
                   THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION.

       (a) Finding.--Congress recognizes that North Korea's first 
     successful test of an intercontinental ballistic missile 
     (ICBM) constitutes a grave and imminent threat to United 
     States security and to the security of United States allies 
     and partners in the Asia-Pacific region.
       (b) Plan.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in 
     consultation with the Commander of the United States Pacific 
     Command and the Commander of the United States Strategic 
     Command, shall submit to the congressional defense committees 
     a plan to enhance the extended deterrence and assurance 
     capabilities of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region.
       (c) Matters to Be Included.--Such plan shall include 
     consideration of actions that will enhance United States 
     security by strengthening deterrence of North Korean 
     aggression and providing increased assurance to United States 
     allies in the Asia-Pacific region, including the following:

[[Page H5815]]

       (1) Increased visible presence of key United States 
     military assets, such as missile defenses, long-range strike 
     assets, and intermediate-range strike assets to the region.
       (2) Increased military cooperation, exercises, and 
     integration of defenses with allies in the region.
       (3) Development and deployment of ground-based 
     intermediate-range missiles, whether by allies or by the 
     United States, if the United States were no longer bound by 
     the limitations of the INF Treaty.
       (4) Increased foreign military sales to allies in the 
     region.
       (5) Planning for, exercising, or deploying dual-capable 
     aircraft to the region.
       (6) Any necessary modifications to the United States 
     nuclear force posture, including re-deployment of submarine-
     launched nuclear cruise missiles to the region.
       (7) Such other actions the Secretary considers appropriate 
     to strengthen extended deterrence and assurance in the 
     region.
       (d) Form.--Such plan shall be submitted in unclassified 
     form, but may contain a classified annex.
       (e) INF Treaty Defined.--In this section, the term ``INF 
     Treaty'' means the Treaty between the United States of 
     America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the 
     Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range 
     Missiles, signed at Washington December 8, 1987, and entered 
     into force June 1, 1988.


           amendment no. 19 Offered by Mr. Poliquin of Maine

       Page 38, line 10, strike ``not fewer than two'' and insert 
     ``the two''.
       Page 38, beginning on line 23, strike ``the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 
     114-92) or''.
       Page 39, line 2, strike the period and insert ``and that 
     was fully funded.''.
       Page 39, after line 2, insert the following:
       (d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) destroyers authorized to be appropriated by the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
     (Public Law 114-92) should be configured as Arleigh Burke 
     class Flight IIA guided missile destroyers, as initially 
     authorized in section 123 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239; 
     126 Stat. 1655 ); and
       (2) the Department of the Navy should bear the majority 
     risk associated with the share line on a covered destroyer.


          amendment no. 20 Offered by Mr. Larsen of Washington

       Strike subsection (d) of section 211 and insert the 
     following:
       (d) Form of Contracts.--
       (1) Requirement for fixed-price type contracts.--The 
     contract awarded for the procurement of the unmodified 
     commercial aircraft under the PAR program shall be a fixed 
     price type contract.
       (2) Analysis for fixed-price type contracts.--The Secretary 
     of the Air Force shall work with the contractor and conduct 
     an analysis of risk and explore opportunities to enter into 
     additional fixed price type contracts for engineering and 
     manufacturing development beyond the procurement of the 
     unmodified commercial aircraft as described in paragraph (1).


  amendment no. 21 Offered by Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico

       At the end of subtitle B of title II, add the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 2__. PILOT PROGRAM ON INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES.

       The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 
     Secretary of Energy, shall conduct a pilot program among 
     defense laboratories (as defined in section 2199 of title 10, 
     United States Code), national laboratories (as defined in 
     section 188(f) of title 10, United States Code), and private 
     entities to facilitate the licensure, transfer, and 
     commercialization of innovative technologies.


            amendment no. 22 Offered by Mr. Loebsack of Iowa

       At the end of subtitle B of title II in division A, add the 
     following:

     SEC. ___. STEM(MM) JOBS ACTION PLAN.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Jobs in science, technology, engineering, and math in 
     addition to maintenance and manufacturing (collectively 
     referred to in this section as ``STEM(MM)'') make up a 
     significant portion of the workforce of the Department of 
     Defense.
       (2) These jobs exist within the organic industrial base, 
     research, development, and engineering centers, life-cycle 
     management commands, and logistics centers of the Department.
       (3) Vital to the continued support of the mission of all of 
     the military services, the Department needs to maintain its 
     STEM(MM) workforce.
       (4) It is known that the demographics of personnel of the 
     Department indicate that many of the STEM(MM) personnel of 
     the Department will be eligible to retire in the next few 
     years.
       (5) Decisive action is needed to replace STEM(MM) personnel 
     as they retire to ensure that the military does not further 
     suffer a skill and knowledge gap and thus a serious readiness 
     gap.
       (b) Assessments and Plan of Action.--The Secretary of 
     Defense, in conjunction with the Secretary of each military 
     department, shall --
       (1) perform an assessment of the STEM(MM) workforce for 
     organizations within the Department of Defense, including the 
     numbers and types of positions and the expectations for 
     losses due to retirements and voluntary departures;
       (2) identify the types and quantities of STEM(MM) jobs 
     needed to support future mission work;
       (3) determine the shortfall between lost STEM(MM) personnel 
     and future requirements;
       (4) analyze and explain the appropriateness and impact of 
     using reimbursable and working capital fund dollars for new 
     STEM(MM) hires;
       (5) identify a plan of action to address the STEM(MM) jobs 
     gap, including hiring strategies and timelines for 
     replacement of STEM(MM) employees; and
       (6) deliver to Congress, not later than December 31, 2018, 
     a report specifying such plan of action.


            amendment no. 23 Offered by Mr. Castro of Texas

       At the end of subtitle B of title II, add the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 2__. APPROPRIATE USE OF AUTHORITY FOR PROTOTYPE 
                   PROJECTS.

       Section 2371b(d)(1)(A) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting ``or nonprofit research institution'' 
     after ``defense contractor''.


            amendment no. 24 Offered by Ms. Meng of New York

       At the end of subtitle B of title II, add the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 2__. JET NOISE REDUCTION PROGRAM OF THE NAVY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Navy, acting through 
     the Director of the Office of Naval Research, may carry out a 
     jet noise reduction program to study the physics of, and 
     reduce, jet noise produced by high-performance military 
     aircraft.
       (b) Elements.--In carrying out the program under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary may--
       (1) identify material and non-material solutions to reduce 
     jet noise;
       (2) develop and transition such solutions to the fleet;
       (3) communicate relevant discoveries to the civilian 
     aviation community; and
       (4) support the development of theoretical noise models, 
     computational prediction tools, noise control strategies, 
     diagnostic tools, and enhanced source localization.


      amendment no. 25 Offered by Mr. Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania

       At the end of subtitle B of title II, add the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 2__. PROCESS FOR COORDINATION OF STUDIES AND ANALYSIS 
                   RESEARCH OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

       The Secretary of Defense shall implement a Department of 
     Defense-wide process under which the heads of the military 
     departments and Defense Agencies responsible for managing 
     requests for studies and analysis research are required to 
     coordinate annual research requests and ongoing research 
     efforts to minimize duplication and reduce costs.


        amendment no. 26 Offered by Mr. Norman of South Carolina

       Page 104, after line 6, insert the following:

     SEC. 337. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   COST MODELS USED IN MAKING PERSONNEL DECISIONS.

       (a) Review Required.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall conduct a review of--
       (1) the extent to which the Department of Defense has 
     incorporated feedback and lessons learned from cost 
     comparisons of the performance of Department of Defense 
     functions by members of the Armed Forces, Department of 
     Defense employees, and contractor personnel in making 
     workforce decisions;
       (2) the extent to which the Department has used such 
     feedback and lessons learned to improve guidance, including 
     DODI 7041.04 and the full cost of manpower tool; and
       (3) any other related matter the Comptroller determines 
     appropriate.
       (b) Report and Briefing.--
       (1) Briefing.--Not later than March 1, 2018, the 
     Comptroller General shall provide to the Committees on Armed 
     Services of the Senate and House of Representatives an 
     interim briefing on the review required by subsection (a).
       (2) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit 
     to such committees a report on such review.


       amendment no. 27 Offered by Mr. McKinley of West Virginia

       At the end of subtitle E of title III, add the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 345. INCREASE IN FUNDING FOR CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS.

       (a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, as 
     specified in the corresponding funding table in section 4301, 
     for Civil Military Programs is hereby increased by 
     $25,000,000 (to be used in support of the National Guard 
     Youth Challenge Program).
       (b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide, as 
     specified in the corresponding funding table in section 4301, 
     for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide is hereby reduced 
     by $25,000,000.

[[Page H5816]]

  



            amendment no. 28 Offered by Ms. Meng of New York

       Page 108, after line 23, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 345. REPORT ON MATERNITY UNIFORMS.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     issue to the congressional defense committees a report 
     regarding maternity uniforms for pregnant members of the 
     Armed Forces.
       (b) Elements.--The report under subsection (a) shall 
     address the following:
       (1) The design of maternity uniforms.
       (2) Materials used in the fabrication of maternity 
     uniforms.
       (3) The sizing of maternity uniforms.
       (4) Prices of maternity uniforms.
       (5) The availability of maternity uniforms.
       (6) The quality of maternity uniforms.
       (7) The utility of maternity uniforms.


       amendment no. 29 Offered by Mr. Cartwright of Pennsylvania

       At the end of subtitle E of title III, add the following:

     SEC. 345. STATUS OF COMPLIANCE WITH PROCESS FOR COMMUNICATING 
                   AVAILABILITY OF SURPLUS AMMUNITION.

        Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
     Technology, and Logistics shall provide to the congressional 
     defense committees a briefing on the status of compliance 
     with section 344 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328; 130 Stat. 2084).


         amendment no. 30 Offered by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania

       Page 115, line 21, strike ``10'' and insert ``4.8''.


     amendment no. 31 Offered by Ms. Herrera Beutler of Washington

       Page 126, after line 12, insert the following:

     SEC. 516. CONFIDENTIAL REVIEW OF CHARACTERIZATION OF TERMS OF 
                   DISCHARGE OF MEMBERS WHO ARE SURVIVORS OF SEX-
                   RELATED OFFENSES.

       (a) Codification of Current Confidential Process.--
       (1) Codification.--Chapter 79 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 1554a a new 
     section 1554b consisting of--
       (A) a heading as follows:

     ``Sec. 1554b. Confidential review of characterization of 
       terms of discharge of members of the armed forces who are 
       survivors of sex-related offenses''; and

       (B) a text consisting of the text of section 547 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (10 
     U.S.C. 1553 note, Public Law 113-291).
       (2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 79 of such title is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to section 1554a the following new 
     item:
``1554b. Confidential review of characterization of terms of discharge 
              of members of the armed forces who are survivors of sex-
              related offenses.''.

       (3) Conforming repeal.--Section 547 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (10 U.S.C. 1553 note, 
     Public Law 113-291) is repealed.
       (b) Clarification of Applicability to Individuals Who 
     Allege Sex-related Offenses During Military Service.--
     Subsection (a) of section 1554b of title 10, United States 
     Code, as added by subsection (a) of this section, is amended 
     by striking ``sex-related offense'' and inserting the 
     following: ``sex-related offense, or alleges that the 
     individual was the survivor of a sex-related offense,''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--Section 1554b of title 10, 
     United States Code, as added by subsection (a), is further 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``Armed Forces'' each place it appears in 
     subsections (a) and (b) and inserting ``armed forces'';
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``boards for the correction of military 
     records of the military department concerned'' and inserting 
     ``boards of the military department concerned established in 
     accordance with this chapter''; and
       (B) by striking ``such an offense'' and inserting ``a sex-
     related offense'';
       (3) in subsection (b), striking ``boards for the correction 
     of military records'' in the matter preceding paragraph (1) 
     and inserting ``boards of the military department concerned 
     established in accordance with this chapter''; and
       (4) in subsection (e), as redesignated by subsection 
     (d)(1)--
       (B) in paragraph (1), by striking ``title 10, United States 
     Code'' and inserting ``this title''; and
       (C) in paragraphs (2) and (3), by striking ``such title'' 
     and inserting ``this title''.


     amendment no. 32 Offered by Mrs. Watson Coleman of New Jersey

       Page 146, after line 16, insert the following:

     SEC. 531. SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE.

       (a) Army.--The Secretary of the Army, in coordination with 
     the Chiefs of the National Guard Bureau and the Army Reserve 
     shall--
       (1) conduct an evaluation of staffing approaches used to 
     administer the sexual assault prevention and response program 
     in the Army National Guard and the Army Reserve. In 
     conducting such evaluation, the Secretary consider 
     opportunities to leverage resources across all Army 
     components and shall conduct an assessment of the number and 
     allocation of full-time and collateral-duty personnel, the 
     fill rates for program positions, and the types of positions 
     used; and
       (2) direct the Chief of the Army Reserve to develop and 
     implement an expedited line-of-duty determination process for 
     Army Reserve sexual assault victims, along with a method for 
     tracking the length of time to make the determinations, that 
     ensure members of the Armed Forces who wish to file a 
     confidential or restricted report are able to go through the 
     determination process without disclosing their circumstances 
     to the chain of command.
       (b) SHARP Program Office.--The Director of the SHARP 
     Program Office of the Army National Guard shall--
       (1) communicate and disseminate its guidance on budget 
     development and execution for the SHARP program to all full-
     time SHARP program personnel;
       (2) develop clear guidance on budget development and 
     execution for the SHARP program and disseminate this guidance 
     to its full-time SHARP program personnel; and
       (3) expand the scope of the midyear review to include 
     monitoring and providing oversight of SHARP program 
     expenditures at the Army National Guard state and Army 
     Reserve command level.
       (c) National Guard Bureau.--The Chief of the National Guard 
     Bureau, in collaboration with the Secretaries of the military 
     departments concerned, shall reassess the Office of Complex 
     Administrative Investigation's timeliness and resources to 
     determine how to improve the timeliness of processing sexual 
     assault investigations involving members of the Army National 
     Guard and identify the resources needed to improve the 
     timeliness of such investigations.


        amendment no. 33 Offered by Mr. Jenkins of West Virginia

       At the end of subtitle E of title III, add the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 3__. INCREASE IN FUNDING FOR NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 1403 for drug interdiction and 
     counter-drug activities, Defense-wide, as specified in the 
     corresponding funding table in section 4501, for drug 
     interdiction and counter-drug activities, Defense-wide, is 
     hereby increased by $10,000,000 (to be used in support of the 
     National Guard counter-drug programs).
       (b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 201 for research, development, test, 
     and evaluation, Defense-wide, as specified in the 
     corresponding funding table in section 4201, for Operational 
     System Development, Global Command and Control System, Line 
     210, is hereby reduced by $10,000,000.


        amendment no. 34 Offered by Mr. Gowdy of South Carolina

       Page 116, line 1, after ``Representatives'' insert the 
     following: ``and the Committee on Oversight and Government 
     Reform of the House of Representatives''.


          amendment no. 35 Offered by Mr. Crawford of Arkansas

       Page 125, after line 2, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 505. DESIGNATING THE EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL CORPS 
                   AS A BASIC BRANCH OF THE ARMY.

       Section 3063(a) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (12), by striking ``and'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (13) as paragraph (14); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (12) the following new 
     pargraph (13):
       ``(13) Explosive Ordnance Disposal Corps; and''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 440, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast), a combat veteran.
  Mr. MAST. Mr. Chairman, I rise today because veteran suicide is an 
epidemic. Nearly every week, I hear from a veteran who is thinking 
about taking their own life--maybe walking into their garage, turning 
on their car, and never coming out.
  That is why I introduced the Oath of Exit, and why I urge you to pass 
this bill as a part of the National Defense Authorization Act. The bill 
creates a voluntary operation oath for members of the Armed Forces with 
a specific aim of reducing veteran suicide.
  The idea for this bill came from friends of mine who have struggled 
with suicidal thoughts since leaving the military--people like my 
friend Boone; people who have actually been there on the edge.
  I think we all know that, throughout our lives, the most important 
commitments that we make are spoken--

[[Page H5817]]

whether it is an oath upon joining the military, the vows at our 
wedding, or saying the Pledge of Allegiance--and this verbal commitment 
to reach out to a brother- or sister-in-arms is important, as well.
  Mr. Chairman, integrity is more than a word to a servicemember. So, 
if we commit that we will reach out to a brother or a sister because we 
need help, then we will do it.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Watson Coleman).
  Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Smith for including my 
amendment en bloc and for allowing me to speak on it today.
  Mr. Chairman, among the amendments under consideration in this en 
bloc measure is one that I have authored to address various challenges 
to the Army, National Guard, and Army Reserve sexual assault prevention 
and response programs.
  While sexual assault among our Active Duty forces has been a frequent 
topic of discussion, I rise today to draw attention to the same issue 
that remains just as prevalent within our Reserve component forces.
  More than half a million members currently serve in the Army Guard 
and Reserve. Hundreds of incidents of sexual assault are reported each 
year, and it is estimated that several hundred more go unreported.
  The Reserve components of the Army continue to suffer from staffing 
imbalances, poor budget management, and slow investigations that delay 
access to care for hundreds of sexual assault victims. My amendment 
directs the Department of Defense to take steps to address these 
issues.
  Sexual violence is a criminal behavior, and it has no place in our 
military.
  We must regain the trust of the servicemembers, who have been brave 
enough to come forward to report those crimes, by bettering our 
military justice system.
  Congress has a responsibility to protect the servicemembers who make 
immeasurable sacrifices to serve and protect our country. We must 
foster a system that encourages servicemembers to seek help and care, 
and that protects the very people who keep our Nation safe.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 4 
minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Washington 
and the gentleman from Texas for their leadership, making their way 
through a very important action on behalf of the American people, and 
that is the defense authorization. I thank them for the amendments that 
were made en bloc, and I hope to speak quickly about these important 
amendments.
  I am very grateful. Over the years, I have consistently introduced 
the triple negative breast cancer amendment because of the many women 
in the United States military who benefit from the research necessary.
  My amendment authorizes and encourages increased collaboration 
between the DOD and the National Institutes of Health regarding 
combating triple negative breast cancer.
  It has a particular impact on African-American women, but it impacts 
White women, Hispanic women, and others, as well. This is a serious 
illness that affects between 10 to 17 percent of female breast cancer 
patients and is more likely to cause death.
  My amendment would help to save lives. I am delighted because this 
would impact Active-Duty women, as well as veterans; but, in 
particular, Active-Duty women with testing. It affects women under 50 
years of age, and, therefore, women who would be in the United States 
military.
  I am very grateful for the acceptance of the South Sudan amendment. 
My amendment directs the Department of Defense to prepare contingency 
plans to assist relief organizations and delivery of humanitarian 
assistance efforts in South Sudan and to engage in consultation with 
South Sudan military counterparts to deescalate conflict.
  Famine in South Sudan has been created by conflict. On February 20, 
2017, famine was declared formally in two counties of Unity State. 
100,000 people will be in jeopardy of dying from famine. It has come 
about between the conflicts between the President and his former Chief 
of Staff, or his former Vice President.
  We need to have the engagement to save lives, and I thank the support 
for this amendment.
  Likewise, the North Korean ICBMs. As I was in Europe, during the 
Fourth of July, my amendment, in particular, supports upholding the 
goals of the 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the 
atmosphere, in outer space, and under water; addresses the fact that 
our Nation should take the next step in preparing for a nuclear North 
Korea; and establishes that the stakes may be far greater.

  We have all been discussing the question of North Korea and ICBMs. We 
have to be studious in assessing it.
  Let me also say, however, that I am disappointed that the amendment 
dealing with the AUMF on North Korea did not get in. I believe it is an 
important issue that we must be concerned about.
  I want to continue to work with the committee on PTSD and ensuring 
that, even though authorized, more funding can come. I had asked for 
$2.5 million.
  And then I want to indicate the importance of recognizing, in light 
of the large footprint that Russia now has in its effort to undermine 
the democracy in this country, that we be very concerned about 
recruitment of college students by foreign agents.
  I had an amendment for us to be concerned about that. I look forward 
to working with the committee. I plan to introduce this as legislation 
because a young man by the name of Glenn Shriver, an outstanding 
college student, majoring in international relations at a college in 
Michigan, while doing a study abroad in China, developed an interest in 
Chinese culture, and he was sought after by the Chinese.
  I also want to work with the committee on addressing the question of 
elections for our soldiers.
  And, finally, I want to make sure that we stop cyber attacks by 
foreign entities into our elections.
  But, I am asking support for my amendment on the Korea ICBMs, the 
Triple-Negative Breast Cancer, and the support of helping humanitarian 
aid get to South Sudan.
  Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member and chairman, and I ask support 
for my amendments.
  Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member 
Smith for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their 
devotion to the men and women of the Armed Forces who risk their lives 
to keep our nation safe.
  I especially wish to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for 
including Jackson Lee Amendment No. 56 in the Chairman's En Bloc 
Amendment to H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
FY2018.
  This Jackson Lee Amendment authorizes and encourages increased 
collaboration between the DOD and the National Institutes of Health 
(NIH) to combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer.
  ``Triple Negative Breast Cancer'' is a term used to describe breast 
cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone 
receptors, and do not have an excess of the ``HER2'' protein on their 
cell membrane of tumor cells.
  This makes commonly used test and methods to detect breast cancer not 
as effective.
  This is a serious illness that effects between 10-17 percent of 
female breast cancer patients and this condition is more likely to 
cause death than the most common form of breast cancer.
  Seventy percent of women with metastatic triple negative breast 
cancer do not live more than five years after being diagnosed.
  The Jackson Lee Amendment will help to save lives.
  TNBC disproportionately impacts younger women, African American 
women, Hispanic/Latina women, and women with a ``BRCA1C genetic 
mutation, which is also prevalent in Jewish women.
  TNBC usually affects women under 50 years of age and makes up more 
than 30 percent of all breast cancer diagnoses in African American.
  African American women are far more susceptible to this dangerous 
subtype than white or Hispanic women.
  The collaboration between the Department of Defense and NIH to combat 
Triple Negative Breast Cancer can support the development of multiple 
targeted therapies for this devastating disease.
  A Triple negative breast cancer is a specific strain of breast cancer 
for which no targeted treatment is available.
  The American Cancer Society calls this particular strain of breast 
cancer ``an aggressive subtype associated with lower survival rates.''

[[Page H5818]]

  Triple negative breast cancer is a term used to describe breast 
cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone 
receptors, and do not have an excess of the HER2 protein on their cell 
membrane of tumor cells.
  In 2011, the Centers for Disease Control predicted that year 26,840 
black women would be diagnosed with TNBC.
  The overall incidence rate of breast cancer is 10 percent lower in 
African American women than white women.
  African American women have a five year survival rate of 78 percent 
after diagnosis as compared to 90 percent for white women.
  The incidence rate of breast cancer among women under 45 is higher 
for African American women compared to white women.
  Triple Negative Breast Cancer cells account for between 13 percent 
and 25 percent of all breast cancer in the United States and are 
usually of a higher grade and size, are more aggressive and more likely 
to metastasize, and onset at a much younger age.
  Currently, 70 percent of women with metastatic triple negative breast 
cancer do not live more than five years after being diagnosed.
  African American women are 3 times more likely to develop triple-
negative breast cancer than white women.
  African-American women have prevalence TNBC of 26 percent versus 16 
percent in non-African-Americans women.
  African-American women are more likely to be diagnosed with larger 
tumors and more advanced stages of breast cancer.
  Currently there is no targeted treatment for TNBC exists.
  Breast cancers with specific, targeted treatment methods, such as 
hormone and gene based strains, have higher survival rates than the 
triple negative subtype, highlighting the need for a targeted 
treatment.
  Because there continues to be a need for research funding for 
biomarker selection, drug discovery, and clinical trial designs that 
will lead to the early detection of TNBC and to the development of 
multiple targeted therapies to treat this awful disease, the Jackson 
Lee Amendment is essential to paving a way for advancements in these 
areas.
  That is why I am pleased that Jackson Lee Amendment No. 56 has been 
included in the Chairman's En Bloc Amendment and I urge all Members to 
join me in voting for its adoption.
  I also wish to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for including 
Jackson Lee Amendment No. 168 in the Chairman's En Bloc Amendment to 
H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018.
  This Jackson Lee Amendment directs the Department of Defense to 
prepare contingency plans to assist relief organizations in delivery of 
humanitarian assistance efforts in South Sudan and to engage in 
consultation with South Sudan military counterparts to deescalate 
conflict.
  As a member of the South Sudan Caucus, and the sponsor of H.R. 48, 
the ``Equal Rights and Access for the Women of South Sudan Act,'' I 
have long advocated and supported emergency assistance to South Sudan, 
the world's newest nation, located in the center of Africa and bordered 
by six countries.
  Such emergency assistance is desperately needed now to respond to the 
famine in South Sudan.
  On February 20, 2017 famine was declared formally in two counties of 
Unity State, which is located in the northern region of South Sudan.
  The United Nations currently estimates that more than 100,000 people 
in two Unity State counties are directly affected by the famine.
  In addition, food security experts are concerned that famine will 
spread.
  According to expert analyses, in the absence of urgent humanitarian 
action, as many as 4.9 million South Sudanese, about 4o percent of the 
country's population, face the grim and certain prospect of starvation.
  In 1998 the region suffered from a famine spurred by civil war and 
approximately 70,000 to several hundred thousand people died during 
that famine.
  Although South Sudan has previously experienced widespread food 
insecurity, the present famine crisis is different because it is almost 
entirely man-made.
  South Sudan is rich in oil, but following decades of civil war it is 
also one of the least developed regions on earth--only 15 percent of 
its citizens own a mobile phone and there are very few tarmac roads in 
an area larger in land mass than Spain and Portugal combined.
  This makes the Nile River, which flows through regional centers, an 
important transport and trade route.
  Since South Sudan overwhelmingly voted to break away from Sudan in 
2011, the government's main concern has been to get oil flowing 
following disagreements with the regime in Khartoum.
  There have been a few small armed rebellions, border clashes and 
deadly cattle feuds but these have all taken place far from the capital 
city of Juba.
  Signs of friction within the governing party, Sudan People's 
Liberation Movement (SPLM), came when President Salva Kiir, an ethnic 
Dinka, the country's largest group, fired his deputy Riek Machar, who 
is from the second largest tribe, the Nuer.
  President Kiir believes Mr. Machar was behind a coup plot to oust him 
and seize power.
  Mr. Machar denies the accusations, but has publicly criticized Mr. 
Kiir for failing to tackle corruption and vowed to challenge President 
Kiir for leadership of the SPLM.
  It is not clear what led to the breach in their relationship but what 
started out as a political squabble has escalated into ethnic violence.
  The loyalties of the South Sudan army are divided with each of the 
principals commanding significant military support and forces loyal to 
each man have clashed around the country.
  And some of the most intense fighting has taken place in areas where 
famine is most severe.
  Compounding matters, South Sudan is awash with guns after decades of 
conflict and there is a history of ethnic tension for politicians to 
exploit if they believe that could help them gain, or remain in, power.
  Complicating this situation is the fact that while the Government of 
South Sudan has reportedly promised access to the most at-risk areas, 
humanitarian organizations remain unable to provide vital food, water 
and shelter in many locations.
  The actions of South Sudan Government in prohibiting humanitarian 
assistance from getting to starving communities has undermined the most 
proactive attempts by the United States and others to address what has 
now become a famine.
  The Jackson Lee Amendment directs the Department of Defense to 
prepare contingency plans to assist relief organizations delivering 
humanitarian assistance and consult with South Sudan's military leaders 
to deescalate intra-party conflict, put petty disputes aside, and to 
put the well-being of the South Sudan people first.
  Mr. Chair, let me conclude by observing that while bringing an end to 
the civil war and humanitarian relief the famine-stricken in South 
Sudan must be our first order of business, it is also very important to 
note that all of us who worked to secure its independence want the 
country to succeed and become a productive and constructive member of 
the community of nations.
  That is why I have reintroduced the ``Equal Rights and Access for the 
Women of South Sudan Act'' (H.R. 48), which promotes the human rights 
of women in South Sudan as the country transitions to a long-term 
government and to ensure women enjoy the right to participate fully in 
the political and economic life of the country.
  Despite its newly won independence women in South Sudan continue to 
face brutal violations of their human rights.
  A lack of infrastructure as well as gender inequality has the 
potential to regress much of the progress that has been made in South 
Sudan.
  Such a lack of human development factors only furthers the 
marginalization of women in South Sudan.
  The ``Equal Rights and Access for the Women of South Sudan Act'' puts 
equal rights and access for the women of South Sudan at the forefront 
by:
  1. Encouraging the appointment of women to high level positions 
within Republic of South Sudan Government;
  2. Ensuring that a significant portion of United States development, 
humanitarian, and relief assistance is channeled to local and United 
States-based South Sudanese organizations, particularly South Sudanese 
women's organizations;
  3. Providing long-term financial assistance for primary, secondary, 
higher, nontraditional, and vocational education for South Sudanese 
girls, women, boys, and men;
  4. Providing financial assistance to build health infrastructure and 
deliver

[[Page H5819]]

high-quality comprehensive health care programs, including primary, 
maternal, child, reproductive, and mental health care;
  5. Requiring military training regarding the protection, rights, and 
particular needs of women and emphasizing that violations of women's 
rights are intolerable and should be prosecuted; and
  6. Taking all necessary steps to ensure that internally displaced 
South Sudanese women are directly receiving food aid, shelter, relief 
supplies, and other services from United States-sponsored programs.
  Mr. Chair, as a nation, we should support the Republic of South Sudan 
in its efforts to become a freer, more equitable society that respects, 
supports, and endorses the rights of women.
  That is why I am pleased that Jackson Lee Amendment No. 168 has been 
included in the Chairman's En Bloc Amendment and I urge all Members to 
join me in voting for its adoption.
  Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to explain the 
Jackson Lee Amendment No. 83, as designated by the Rule governing 
debate on H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018.
  This Jackson Lee Amendment directs the Secretary of Defense to 
develop measures to defend against deployment of nuclear ICBMs by North 
Korea to protect against damage or destruction of satellites critical 
to U.S national defense and global communications, International Space 
Station, and other vital assets.
  I request the support of my colleagues for this Jackson Lee Amendment 
because it: upholds the goals of the 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon 
Tests in the atmosphere, in outer space, and underwater; addresses the 
fact that our nation should take the next step in preparing for a 
nuclear North Korea; establishes that the stakes may be far greater 
than a nuclear North Korea when they may have the capacity to launch a 
device using an ICBM, because of our nation's dependence on the global 
telecommunications infrastructure that includes Geo-stationary 
satellites as well as its implications for Space Stations and our space 
program; and may have serious consequences for a range of environmental 
factors that are critical to the health and wellbeing of our planet.
  On July 4th, our nation's Independence Day, the U.S. confirmed that 
North Korea had achieved a major step toward its objective of 
delivering a nuclear weapon as far as U.S. shores.
  This test represents a new escalation of the threat that a nuclear 
North Korea poses to the United States and our interest.
  The launch of Hwasong-14 missile reached a range of approximately 
4160 miles, a distance capable of reaching Alaska, according to 
experts.
  The timing of this test launch was confirmed as a calculated insult 
when North Korean Leader Kim Jung-Un stated that the missile was a 
``gift to Americans for the July 4th Anniversary.''
  The United States must attempt to manage this situation and retain 
the peace in the region.
  We understand the end to the Korean War was a Armistice Agreement 
signed in 1953, that put into place a cease fire.
  North Korea still views itself as being at war with the United 
States.
  Otto Warmbier, an American college student who died days following 
his release from a North Korean prison was held as a prisoner of war.
  Given the unstable nature of the North Korean government, which has 
political purges in recent years that included members of North Korean 
President's Kim Jongun's family we can hold little hope for cooperation 
that is essential to avoid unintended conflicts and reduce tensions 
with its neighbors.
  A nuclear-armed North Korea does not mean that country will be able 
to shoulder the burden of managing a responsible nuclear weapons 
program, given their single minded pursuit of a nuclear armed ICBM.
  Nuclear arms programs are not always safe or easy for the nation 
attempting to develop weapons.
  The United States had its share of near disasters.
  For example, in 1961, a B-52 Stratofortress carrying two 4-megaton 
Mark 39 nuclear bombs broke up in mid-air, dropping its nuclear payload 
in the process over North Carolina.
  Fortunately, neither bomb detonated averting a catastrophic nuclear 
incident at our own hands.
  North Korea's program poses a danger to the entire Korean Peninsula, 
Japan, and the Asia Pacific region because it insists on using the 
world as its nuclear testing ground.
  Even if an unarmed ICBM should land in a populated area, this could 
trigger a conflict.
  If North Korea decides to test nuclear weapons on its ICBM rockets 
this poses serious problems for peace and stability not only that 
region of the world, but the United States as well.
  Since the entry of the space age, America has lead and we now rely on 
the fruits of our investments in manned and unmanned missions to 
support a global telecommunications infrastructure; a permanent 
research presence in the International Space Station; plans for going 
much further.
  A nuclear North Korea armed with ICBMs can put all of that in 
jeopardy.
  We also have interest in the environment within our atmosphere, but 
also the physical environment that envelopes the earth.
  One component of the earth's space environment that protects against 
solar radiation is called the Van Allen Belts.
  The Van Allen belts present another factor to be considered when 
talking about North Korea's nuclear program.
  The Van Allen belts may respond to incoming solar radiation and is 
known to change size.
  The primary benefit to people on earth is they protect us from solar 
radiation.
  Should North Korea's tests of ICBM include nuclear devices of 
significant size this could pose risks to not only our satellites, 
space stations, but extend to the Van Allen Belts.
  This Jackson Lee amendment allows for a deliberative approach to 
addressing the potential for a nuclear North Korea.
  This amendment works to develop plans to develop effective 
countermeasures to the threat that North Korea's nuclear program 
presents.
  I ask that my Colleagues join me in support of this Amendment.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Smucker).
  Mr. SMUCKER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support my bipartisan amendment, introduced with Representative 
Gottheimer and Representative Sinema.
  This amendment would expand opportunities for Active-Duty military 
men and women to learn career skills and provide education that would 
assist them as they transition back to civilian life.
  The current United Services Military Apprenticeship Program is an 
effective program that provides this employer specific training. But, 
that program is only offered to the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast 
Guard, which is less than half of our uniformed services personnel.
  This amendment expands the program to offer it to any member of U.S. 
uniformed services--Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Coast Guard, 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Public Health 
Service.
  We should make it easier for these brave men and women who have 
served to transition to civilian life with a steady job, and, at the 
same time, infuse our workforce with the strong leadership skills that 
the military can provide.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schneider).
  Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Washington for 
yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my support for my amendment to 
the National Defense Authorization Act.
  Our men and women in uniform are not immune from the epidemic of 
opioid addiction, an abuse that is ravaging our country. In fact, the 
National Institutes of Health reports opioid misuse are higher among 
servicemembers than among civilians, due to the use of these drugs to 
treat the symptoms of PTSD and chronic pain.
  Our brave servicemembers have earned our gratitude and deserve our 
highest quality of care. We need to do all we can to ensure our 
military doctors are equipped with the most up-to-

[[Page H5820]]

date, best practices to help fight back against this disease.
  This amendment requires medical professionals in the Department of 
Defense that prescribe opioids for pain management to undertake 12 
hours of training every 3 years in order to prevent overprescribing and 
better identify and treat abuse.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this commonsense 
amendment to ensure that our Active-Duty military get the medical care 
they truly deserve.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham).
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today 
in support of my amendment, which encourages partnerships between the 
DOD, DOE, and the private sector, to facilitate the licensure, 
transfer, and commercialization of innovative technologies.
  We cannot let groundbreaking research and new technologies in our 
Nation's Federal laboratories sit idle when they have the potential to 
reenergize domestic manufacturing, create high-paying jobs, and 
transform our economy.
  It is not government or private sector, it is government and private 
sector working together to create opportunities that have led to the 
development of many products in the marketplace today, including 
batteries powering electric vehicles, internet servers, and GPS.
  Both the DOD and DOE have separate programs that support technology 
transfer to the private sector, but they don't work very well together. 
My amendment would fix that and ensure that these departments are 
actively collaborating to support the commercialization of cutting-edge 
technologies and make them more widely available to American businesses 
and consumers.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues' support.

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers, 
and I urge adoption of the amendments en bloc.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I, too, urge adoption of the amendments 
en bloc, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chair, my amendment is similar to an amendment 
of mine that passed the House 243-180 in the FY2017 NDAA. This 
amendment mirrors language that I have introduced called the SEND Act.
  While the Department of Homeland Security--not the Department of 
Defense--is tasked with maintaining the safety of our southern border, 
it has long received help and assistance from the DOD and our military.
  One of the ways the DOD helps the border patrol is through the 
transfer of equipment it deems ``excess'' to its needs.
  Under current law, the transfer of this ``excess'' equipment already 
gives preference to counterdrug, counterterrorism, and border security 
activities.
  My amendment simply takes that preference a step further, giving 
border security preference for a few specific pieces of equipment which 
are particularly useful for border security applications: unmanned 
surveillance vehicles including Aerostat blimps, night-vision goggles, 
and Humvees.
  The border patrol is the first and last line of defense against those 
criminal gangs.
  In my home state of Texas, and in other border states like New Mexico 
and Arizona, the war against the cartels is an ongoing affair. Cartels 
are involved in labor and sex slavery.
  Just last week in Southern Texas, border patrol agents raided a home 
to find 37 illegal immigrants, including three children.
  These men, women and children were being held by cartel drug runners 
for ransom.
  I've been to the border countless times, Mr. Chair.
  I've spoken with the men and women who have sworn to protect the good 
folks of Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico from the dangerous people who 
cross the southern border.
  A Texas Ranger told me that they are outmanned, outgunned, out-
financed and out-equipped by the drug cartels.
  I've heard firsthand the need these men and women have for new 
equipment, specifically the equipment I just listed.
  In fact when I recently visited the border in April, I met with the 
Border Patrol in the Rio Grande sector and they informed me that in 
areas where they were using Aerostat surveillance blimps, crossings 
were way down.
  When asked what we could do to help the sector, the answer was clear: 
More Aerostat blimps.
  Well, that is what we are trying to do here with this amendment, Mr. 
Chair.
  This idea isn't new. In 2010, with our help, the excess equipment 
program sent 6 excess military Humvees to Texas Border Sheriffs. Often, 
before this transfer, the border sheriffs were forced to chase the drug 
cartels in Crown Victorias.
  This amendment mandates that DOD give border security applicants an 
additional preference for the equipment listed in this amendment.
  I've heard from our agents down on the border and this is the 
equipment they need.
  Let's put this ``excess'' equipment to use on the southern border in 
the war against the drug cartels and help bring security, peace of 
mind, and more safety to those Americans living in the area.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Marshall). The question is on the amendments en 
bloc offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


      Amendments En Bloc No. 2 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 440, I 
offer additional amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 2 consisting of amendment Nos. 36, 37, 38, 39, 
40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, and 53 printed in House 
Report 115-217, offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

           amendment no. 36 offered by mr. kildee of michigan

       Page 155, after line 5, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 544. ANNUAL TRAINING REGARDING THE INFLUENCE CAMPAIGN OF 
                   THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

       In addition to any currently mandated training, the 
     Secretary of Defense may furnish annual training to all 
     members of the Armed Forces and all civilian employees of the 
     Department of Defense, regarding attempts by the Russian 
     Federation and its proxies and agents to influence and 
     recruit members of the Armed Forces as part of its influence 
     campaign.


           amendment no. 37 offered by mr. taylor of virginia

       Page 155, after line 5, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 544. PROGRAM TO ASSIST MEMBERS IN OBTAINING PROFESSIONAL 
                   CREDENTIALS.

       Section 2015(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``and'' and inserting ``or''.


        amendment no. 38 offered by mr. smucker of pennsylvania

       Page 155, after line 5, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 544. EXPANDING ELIGIBILITY FOR THE UNITED STATES 
                   MILITARY APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     expand eligibility for the United Services Military 
     Apprenticeship Program to include any member of the uniformed 
     services.
       (b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``uniformed 
     services'' has the meaning given such term in section 101 of 
     title 10, United States Code.


            amendment no. 39 offered by ms. meng of new york

       At the end of subtitle E of title V in division A, add the 
     following new section:

     SEC. ___. ENHANCING MILITARY CHILDCARE PROGRAMS AND 
                   ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

       (a) Hours of Operation of Childcare Development Centers of 
     the Department of Defense.--
       (1) In general.--The hours of operation of each childcare 
     development center (CDC) of the Department of Defense shall, 
     to the extent practicable, be set and maintained in manner 
     that takes into account the demands and circumstances of 
     members of the Armed Forces, including members of the reserve 
     components, who use such center in facilitation of the 
     performance of their military duties.
       (2) Matters to be taken into account.--The demands and 
     circumstances to be taken into account under paragraph (1) 
     for purposes of setting and maintaining the hours of 
     operation of a childcare development center shall include the 
     following:
       (A) Mission requirements of units whose members use such 
     center.
       (B) The unpredictability of work schedules, and 
     fluctuations in day-to-day work hours, of such members.
       (C) The potential for frequent and prolonged absences of 
     such members for training, operations, and deployments.
       (D) The location of such center on the military 
     installation concerned, including the location in connection 
     with duty locations of members and applicable military family 
     housing.
       (E) The geographic separation of such members from their 
     extended family.

[[Page H5821]]

       (F) The extent to which spouses of such members are 
     employed or pursuing educational opportunities, whether on a 
     full-time basis or a part-time basis.
       (G) Such other matters as the Secretary of the military 
     department concerned considers appropriate for purposes of 
     this section.
       (b) Childcare Coordinators for Military Installations.--
       (1) Childcare coordinators.--Each Secretary of a military 
     department shall provide for a childcare coordinator at each 
     military installation under the jurisdiction of such 
     Secretary at which are stationed significant numbers of 
     members of the Armed Forces with accompanying dependent 
     children, as determined by such Secretary.
       (2) Nature of position.--The childcare coordinator for a 
     military installation may be an individual appointed to that 
     position on full-time or part-time basis or an individual 
     appointed to another position whose duties in such other 
     position are consistent with the discharge by the person of 
     the duties of childcare coordinator.
       (3) Duties.--Each childcare coordinator for an installation 
     shall carry out the duties as follows:
       (A) Act as an advocate for military families at the 
     installation on childcare matters both on-installation and 
     off-installation.
       (B) Work with the commander of the installation in order to 
     seek to ensure that the childcare development centers at the 
     installation, together with any other available childcare 
     options on or in the vicinity of the installation--
       (i) provide a quality of care (including a caregiver-to-
     child ratio) commensurate with best practices of private 
     providers of childcare services; and
       (ii) are responsive to the childcare needs of members 
     stationed at the installation and their families.
       (C) Work with private providers of childcare services in 
     the vicinity of the installation in order to---
       (i) track vacancies in the childcare facilities of such 
     providers;
       (ii) seek to obtain favorable prices for the use of such 
     services by members stationed at the installation; and
       (iii) otherwise ease the use of such services by such 
     members.
       (D) Such other duties as the Secretary of the military 
     department concerned shall specify.


       amendment no. 40 offered by mr. meadows of north carolina

       At the end of subtitle F of title V, insert the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 5__. AWARD OF VIETNAM SERVICE MEDAL TO VETERANS WHO 
                   PARTICIPATED IN MAYAGUEZ RESCUE OPERATION.

       (a) Award Authorized.--The Secretary of the military 
     department concerned shall, upon the application by or on 
     behalf of an individual who is an eligible veteran, award 
     that individual the Vietnam Service Medal, notwithstanding 
     any otherwise applicable requirements for the award of that 
     medal. Any such award shall be made in lieu of any Armed 
     Forces Expeditionary Medal awarded the individual for the 
     individual's participation in the Mayaguez rescue operation.
       (b) Treatment of Deceased Veterans.--In the case of a 
     veteran who is deceased, the application described in 
     subsection (a) may be submitted by the next of kin of the 
     veteran.
       (c) Eligible Veteran.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term ``eligible veteran'' means a veteran of the Armed 
     Forces--
       (1) who was awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal 
     for participation in military operations known as the 
     Mayaguez rescue operation of May 12-15, 1975; or
       (2) who participated in such operation.


          amendment no. 41 offered by mr. lance of new jersey

       At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 5__. AWARD OF MEDALS OR OTHER COMMENDATIONS TO HANDLERS 
                   OF MILITARY WORKING DOGS AND MILITARY WORKING 
                   DOGS.

       (a) Program of Award Required.--Each Secretary of a 
     military department shall carry out a program to provide for 
     the award of one or more medals or other commendations to 
     handlers of military working dogs, and to military working 
     dogs, under the jurisdiction of such Secretary to recognize 
     valor or meritorious achievement by such handlers and dogs.
       (b) Medal and Commendations.--Any medal or commendation 
     awarded pursuant to a program under subsection (a) shall be 
     of such design, and include such elements, as the Secretary 
     of the military department concerned shall specify.
       (c) Regulations.--Medals and commendations shall be awarded 
     under programs under subsection (a) in accordance with 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense for 
     purposes of this section.


          amendment no. 42 offered by mr. graves of louisiana

       Page 170, after line 14, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 564. ELIGIBILITY OF VETERANS OF OPERATION END SWEEP FOR 
                   VIETNAM SERVICE MEDAL.

       The Secretary of the military department concerned shall, 
     upon the application of an individual who is a veteran who 
     participated in Operation End Sweep, award that individual 
     the Vietnam Service Medal, notwithstanding any otherwise 
     applicable requirements for the award of that medal.


            amendment no. 44 offered by mr. soto of florida

       Page 170, after line 14, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 564. EXPEDITED REPLACEMENT OF MILITARY DECORATIONS FOR 
                   VETERANS OF WORLD WAR II AND THE KOREAN WAR.

       Section 1135 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``When'' and inserting 
     ``Subject to subsection (c), when'';
       (2) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and
       (3) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new 
     subsection (c):
       ``(c) Recipients of Military Decorations for Service in 
     World War II or the Korean War.--If the recipient was awarded 
     the military decoration for which a replacement is requested 
     for service in World War II or the Korean War, the Secretary 
     concerned shall perform all actions described--
       ``(1) in subsection (b)(1) in not more than 180 days; and
       ``(2) in subsection (b)(2) in not more than 60 days.''.


           amendment no. 45 offered by mr. heck of washington

       At the end of subtitle G of title V, add the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 575. PROOF OF PERIOD OF MILITARY SERVICE FOR PURPOSES OF 
                   INTEREST RATE LIMITATION UNDER THE 
                   SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF ACT.

       Section 207(b)(1) of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act 
     (50 U.S.C. 3937(b)(1)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) Proof of military service.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of a servicemember's termination or release from military 
     service, in order for an obligation or liability of the 
     servicemember to be subject to the interest rate limitation 
     in subsection (a), the servicemember shall provide to the 
     creditor written notice and a copy of--
       ``(i) the military orders calling the servicemember to 
     military service and any orders further extending military 
     service; or
       ``(ii) any other appropriate indicator of military service, 
     including a certified letter from a commanding officer.
       ``(B) Independent verification by creditor.--
       ``(i) In general.--Regardless of whether a servicemember 
     has provided to a creditor the written notice and 
     documentation under subparagraph (A), the creditor may use, 
     in lieu of such notice and documentation, information 
     retrieved from the Defense Manpower Database Center through 
     the creditor's normal business reviews of the Database Center 
     for purposes of obtaining information indicating that the 
     servicemember is on active duty.
       ``(ii) Safe harbor.--A creditor that uses the information 
     retrieved from the Defense Manpower Database Center under 
     clause (i) with respect to a servicemember has not failed to 
     treat the debt of the servicemember in accordance with 
     subsection (a) if--

       ``(I) such information indicates that, on the date the 
     creditor retrieves such information, the servicemember is not 
     on active duty; and
       ``(II) the creditor has not, as of such date, received the 
     written notice and documentation required under subparagraph 
     (A) with respect to the servicemember.''.


          amendment no. 46 offered by ms. esty of connecticut

       Page 175, after line 24, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 575. REPORT REGARDING POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS TO 
                   PROCESSING RETIREMENTS AND MEDICAL DISCHARGES.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, 
     in consultation with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall 
     issue a report to the congressional defense committees and 
     the Committees on Veterans' Affairs of the Senate and House 
     of Representatives regarding possible improvements to the 
     transition of members of the Armed Forces to veteran status.
       (b) Elements.--The report under subsection (a) shall 
     address the following:
       (1) Feasibility of requiring members of the Armed Forces to 
     apply for benefits administered by the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs before such members complete discharge from the Armed 
     Forces.
       (2) Feasibility of requiring members of the Armed Forces to 
     undergo compensation and pension examinations (to be 
     administered by the Secretary of Defense) for purposes of 
     obtaining benefits described in paragraph (1) before such 
     members complete discharge from active duty in the Armed 
     Forces.
       (3) Possible improvements to the timeliness of the process 
     for transitioning members who undergo medical discharge to 
     care provided by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.


            amendment no. 47 offered by mr. mast of florida

       Page 175, after line 24, insert the following:

     SEC. 5__. ESTABLISHMENT OF SEPARATION OATH FOR MEMBERS OF THE 
                   ARMED FORCES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The United States Armed Forces is the largest, all-
     volunteer military force in the world, yet less than one 
     percent of the American population serves in the Armed 
     Forces.

[[Page H5822]]

       (2) Each branch of the Armed Forces (Army, Navy, Air Force, 
     Marine Corps, Coast Guard) instills in its members a sense of 
     duty and obligation to the United States, their branch of 
     service, and their comrades-in-arms.
       (3) The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates that 
     approximately 20 veterans of the Armed Forces commit suicide 
     each day and a veteran's risk of suicide is 21 percent higher 
     compared to an adult who has not served in the Armed Forces.
       (4) The Department of Veterans Affairs is aggressively 
     undertaking measures to prevent these tragic outcomes, yet 
     suicide rates among veterans remain unacceptably high.
       (5) Upon enlistment or appointment in the Armed Forces, a 
     new member is obligated to take an oath of office or oath of 
     enlistment.
       (6) Most members of the Armed Forces view this oath not as 
     an imposition, but as a promise that they are bound to 
     fulfill.
       (b) Establishment of Separation Oath.--Section 502 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c) and, 
     in such subsection, by striking ``The oath'' and inserting 
     ``An oath established by this section''; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection (b):
       ``(b) Separation Oath.--Prior to retirement or other 
     separation from the armed forces, other than separation 
     pursuant to the sentence of a court-martial, a member of an 
     armed force may take the following oath:
       `` `I, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, recognizing that my oath to 
     support and defend the Constitution of the United States 
     against all enemies, foreign and domestic, has involved me 
     and my fellow members in experiences that few persons, other 
     than our peers, can understand, do solemnly swear (or affirm) 
     to continue to be the keeper of my brothers- and sisters-in-
     arms and protector of the United States and the Constitution; 
     to preserve the values I have learned; to maintain my body 
     and my mind; and to not bring harm to myself without speaking 
     to my fellow veterans first. I take this oath freely and 
     without purpose of evasion, so help me God.' ''.
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--
       (1) Section heading.--The heading of section 502 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 502. Enlistment oath and separation oath: who may 
       administer''.

       (2) Table of sections.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 31 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking the item relating to section 502 and 
     inserting the following new item:

``502. Enlistment oath and separation oath: who may administer.''.


     amendment no. 48 offered by mrs. watson coleman of new jersey

       Page 175, after line 24, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 575. EXTENSION OF REPORTING REQUIREMENT REGARDING 
                   DIVERSITY IN MILITARY LEADERSHIP.

       Section 115a(g) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``2017'' and inserting ``2022''.
       Strike section 1051(a)(2) (page 376, lines 4 through 10).
       Page 396, after line 4, insert the following:4
       (5) Annual defense manpower requirements report.--By 
     inserting after paragraph (64), as added by paragraph (4), 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(65) Section 115a.''.


          amendment no. 50 offered by mr. donovan of new york

       Page 185, after line 19, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 605. REEVALUATION OF BAH FOR THE MILITARY HOUSING AREA 
                   INCLUDING STATEN ISLAND.

       Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense, using the most recent 
     data available to the Secretary, shall reevaluate the basic 
     housing allowance prescribed under section 403(b) of title 
     37, United States Code, for the military housing area that 
     includes Staten Island, New York.


           amendment no. 51 offered by mr. trott of michigan

       At the end of subtitle B of title VI, insert the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 619. IMPROVED EMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE 
                   ARMED FORCES AND VETERANS.

       (a) Improved Employment Skills Verification.--Section 
     1143(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Secretary of 
     Defense''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) In order to improve the accuracy and completeness of 
     a certification or verification of job skills and experience 
     required by paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense and the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast 
     Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy 
     shall--
       ``(A) establish a database to record all training performed 
     by members of the armed forces that may have application to 
     employment in the civilian sector; and
       ``(B) make unclassified information regarding such 
     information available to States and other potential employers 
     referred to in subsection (c) so that State and other 
     entities may allow military training to satisfy licensing or 
     certification requirements to engage in a civilian 
     profession.''.
       (b) Improved Accuracy of Certificates of Training and 
     Skills.--Section 1143(a) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     further amended by inserting after paragraph (2), as added by 
     subsection (a), the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard when it is 
     not operating as a service in the Navy shall ensure that a 
     certification or verification of job skills and experience 
     required by paragraph (1) is rendered in such a way that 
     States and other potential employers can confirm the accuracy 
     and authenticity of the certification or verification.''.
       (c) Improved Responsiveness to Certification Requests.--
     Section 1143(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``For the purpose''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) A State may use a certification or verification of 
     job skills and experience provided to a member of the armed 
     forces under subsection (a) and request the Department of 
     Defense or the Coast Guard, as the case may be, to confirm 
     the accuracy and authenticity of the certification or 
     verification. A response confirming or denying the 
     information shall be provided within five business days.''.
       (d) Improved Notice to Members.--Section 1142(b)(4)(A) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting before 
     the semicolon the following: ``, including State-submitted 
     and approved lists of military training and skills that 
     satisfy occupational certifications and licenses''.


        amendment no. 52 offered by mr. courtney of connecticut

       At the end of subtitle A of title VII, add the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 704. EXPANSION OF SEXUAL TRAUMA COUNSELING AND TREATMENT 
                   FOR MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE COMPONENTS.

       Section 1720D(a)(2)(A) of title 38, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``on active duty''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``that was suffered by the member while serving on 
     active duty, active duty for training, or inactive duty 
     training.''.


         amendment no. 53 offered by mr. schneider of illinois

       At the end of subtitle B of title VII in division A, add 
     the following:

     SEC. ___. TRAINING REQUIREMENT FOR HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS 
                   PRESCRIBING OPIOIDS FOR TREATMENT OF PAIN IN 
                   THE ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure 
     that to serve as a health care professional in the Department 
     of Defense as an individual who is authorized to prescribe or 
     otherwise dispense opioids for the treatment of pain, the 
     professional (other than a pharmacist) must comply with the 
     12-hour training requirement of paragraph (2) at least once 
     during each 3-year period or be licensed in a State that 
     requires equivalent (or greater) training described in 
     paragraph (2) with respect to the prescribing or dispensing 
     of opioids for the treatment of pain.
       (2) The training requirement of this paragraph is that the 
     professional has completed not less than 12 hours of training 
     (through classroom situations, seminars at professional 
     society meetings, electronic communications, or otherwise) 
     with respect to--
       (A) pain management treatment guidelines and best 
     practices;
       (B) early detection of opioid addiction; and
       (C) the treatment and management of opioid-dependent 
     patients,
     that is provided by the American Society of Addiction 
     Medicine, the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry, the 
     American Medical Association, the American Osteopathic 
     Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the 
     American Academy of Pain Management, the American Pain 
     Society, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American 
     Board of Pain Medicine, the American Society of 
     Interventional Pain Physicians, or any other organization 
     that the Secretary of Defense determines is appropriate for 
     purposes of this subsection.
       (b) Establishment of Training Modules.--(1) The Secretary 
     of Defense shall establish or support the establishment of 
     one or more training modules to be used to meet the training 
     requirement under subsection (a).
       (2) To be eligible to receive support under paragraph (1), 
     an entity shall be--
       (A) one of the organizations listed in paragraph (2) of 
     subsection (a); or
       (B) any other organization that the Secretary determines is 
     appropriate to provide training under such subsection.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 440, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, this en bloc package consists of a 
variety of amendments from Members from both sides of the aisle. I 
believe that they deserve the support of the House. I recommend 
adoption of the en bloc package.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H5823]]

  

  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I agree with the chairman. I 
support the en bloc package, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Smucker) having assumed the chair, Mr. Marshall, Acting Chair 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. 2810) to 
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2018 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, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________