[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 149 (Tuesday, September 17, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H7737-H7741]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 MOTION TO GO TO CONFERENCE ON S. 1790, NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION 
                        ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020

  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

[[Page H7738]]

take from the Speaker's table the bill (S. 1790) to authorize 
appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for military activities of the 
Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense 
activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel 
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, and ask for its 
immediate consideration in the House; to strike out all after the 
enacting clause of such bill and insert in lieu thereof the provisions 
of H.R. 2500 as passed by the House; to pass the Senate bill, as 
amended; and to insist on the House amendment thereto and request a 
conference with the Senate thereon.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the title of the bill.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Washington?
  There was no objection.


              Motion to Instruct Offered by Mr. Thornberry

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to instruct conferees at 
the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       Mr. Thornberry moves that the managers on the part of the 
     House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two 
     Houses on the House amendment to the bill S. 1790 be 
     instructed to agree to section 2906 of the Senate bill with 
     the following amendments:
       In subsection (a), strike ``military construction projects 
     authorized by such Acts'' and insert ``the military 
     construction projects described in subsection (d)''.
       Add at the end the following new subsection:
       (d) Military Construction Projects Described.--The military 
     construction projects described in this subsection are the 
     projects set forth in the following table:

                                     Deferred military construction projects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             State/Location                     Installation                  Project                Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama................................  Anniston Army Depot.......  Weapon Maintenance Shop..        $5,200,000
Alaska.................................  Eielson AFB...............  Repair Central Heat/Power       $41,000,000
                                                                      Plant Boiler PH 4.......
                                         Eielson AFB...............  Repair Central Heat &           $34,400,000
                                                                      Power Plant Boiler Ph3..
                                         Eielson AFB...............  Eielson AFB Improved CATM       $19,000,000
                                                                      Range...................
                                         Fort Greely...............  Missile Field #1                 $8,000,000
                                                                      Expansion...............
Arizona................................  Fort Huachuca.............  Ground Transport                $30,000,000
                                                                      Equipment Building......
California.............................  Channel Islands ANGS......  Construct C-130J Flight          $8,000,000
                                                                      Simulator Facility......
Colorado...............................  Peterson AFB..............  Space Control Facility...        $8,000,000
Florida................................  Tyndall AFB...............  Fire/Crash Rescue Station       $17,000,000
Hawaii.................................  Joint Base Pearl Harbor-    Consolidated Training            $5,500,000
                                          Hickam...................   Facility................
                                         Kaneohe Bay...............  Security Improvements           $26,492,000
                                                                      Mokapu Gate.............
Indiana................................  Crane Army Ammunition       Railcar Holding Area.....       $16,000,000
                                          Plant....................
                                         Hulman Regional Airport...  Construct Small Arms             $8,000,000
                                                                      Range...................
Kentucky...............................  Fort Campbell, Kentucky...  Ft Campbell Middle School       $62,634,000
Louisiana..............................  Joint Reserve Base New      NORTHCOM - Construct            $15,000,000
                                          Orleans..................   Alert Apron.............
                                         Joint Reserve Base New      NORTHCOM - Construct            $24,000,000
                                          Orleans..................   Alert Facilities........
Maryland...............................  Fort Meade................  Cantonment Area Roads....       $16,500,000
                                         Joint Base Andrews........  PAR Relocate Haz Cargo          $37,000,000
                                                                      Pad and EOD Range.......
                                         Joint Base Andrews........  Child Development Center.       $13,000,000
Mississippi............................  Jackson IAP...............  Construct Small Arms             $8,000,000
                                                                      Range...................
New Mexico.............................  Holloman AFB..............  MQ-9 FTU Ops Facility....       $85,000,000
                                         White Sands...............  Information Systems             $40,000,000
                                                                      Facility................
New York...............................  U.S. Military Academy.....  Engineering Center.......       $95,000,000
                                         U.S. Military Academy.....  Parking Structure........       $65,000,000
North Carolina.........................  Camp Lejeune, North         2nd Radio BN Complex,           $25,650,000
                                          Carolina.................   Phase 2.................
                                         Camp Lejeune, North         Ambulatory Care Center          $15,300,000
                                          Carolina.................   Add-Alt.................
                                         Fort Bragg................  Butner Elementary School        $32,944,000
                                                                      Replacement.............
                                         Seymour Johnson AFB.......  KC-46A ADAL for Alt              $6,400,000
                                                                      Mission Storage.........
Oklahoma...............................  Tulsa IAP.................  Construct Small Arms             $8,000,000
                                                                      Range...................
Oregon.................................  Klamath Falls IAP.........  Construct Indoor Range...        $8,000,000
                                         Klamath Falls IAP.........  Replace Fuel Facilities..        $2,500,000
South Carolina.........................  Beaufort..................  Laurel Bay Fire Station         $10,750,000
                                                                      Replacement.............
Texas..................................  Fort Bliss................  Defense Access Roads.....       $20,000,000
                                         Joint Base San Antonio....  Camp Bullis Dining              $18,500,000
                                                                      Facility................
Utah...................................  Hill AFB..................  Composite Aircraft              $26,000,000
                                                                      Antenna Calibration Fac.
                                         Hill AFB..................  UTTR Consolidated Mission       $28,000,000
                                                                      Control Center..........
Virginia...............................  Joint Base Langley-Eustis.  Construct Cyber Ops             $10,000,000
                                                                      Facility................
                                         Norfolk...................  Replace Hazardous               $18,500,000
                                                                      Materials Warehouse.....
                                         Pentagon..................  Pentagon Metro Entrance         $12,111,000
                                                                      Facility................
                                         Portsmouth................  Replace Hazardous               $22,500,000
                                                                      Materials Warehouse.....
                                         Portsmouth................  Ships Maintenance               $26,120,000
                                                                      Facility................
Washington.............................  Bangor....................  Pier and Maintenance            $88,960,000
                                                                      Facility................
Wisconsin..............................  Truax Field...............  Construct Small Arms             $8,000,000
                                                                      Range...................
Guam...................................  Joint Region Marianas.....  Earth Covered Magazines..       $52,270,000
                                         Joint Region Marianas.....  PRTC Roads...............        $2,500,000
                                         Joint Region Marianas.....  Water Well Field.........       $56,088,000
                                         Joint Region Marianas.....  Navy-Commercial Tie-In          $37,180,000
                                                                      Hardening...............
                                         Joint Region Marianas.....  Machine Gun Range........       $50,000,000
                                         Joint Region Marianas.....  APR - Munitions Storage         $35,300,000
                                                                      Igloos, Ph 2............
                                         Joint Region Marianas.....  Hayman Munitions Storage         $9,800,000
                                                                      Igloos MSA 2............
                                         Joint Region Marianas.....  APR - SATCOM C4I Facility       $14,200,000
Puerto Rico............................  Arroyo....................  Readiness Center.........       $30,000,000
                                         Camp Santiago.............  Company Headquarters Bldg/      $47,000,000
                                                                      -Transient Training.....

[[Page H7739]]

 
                                         Camp Santiago.............  Dining Facility,                $13,000,000
                                                                      Transient Training......
                                         Camp Santiago.............  Engineering-Housing             $11,000,000
                                                                      Maintenance Shops (DPW).
                                         Camp Santiago.............  Maneuver Area Training          $80,000,000
                                                                      Equipment Site..........
                                         Camp Santiago.............  National Guard Readiness        $50,000,000
                                                                      Center..................
                                         Camp Santiago.............  Power Substation-               $18,500,000
                                                                      Switching Station
                                                                      Building................
                                         Gurabo....................  Vehicle Maintenance Shop.       $28,000,000
                                         Punta Borinquen...........  Ramey Unit School               $61,071,000
                                                                      Replacement.............
                                         San Juan..................  Aircraft Maintenance            $64,000,000
                                                                      Hangar (AASF)...........
Virgin Islands.........................  St. Croix.................  Vehicle Maintenance Shop.       $20,000,000
                                         St. Croix.................  Power Substation-                $3,500,000
                                                                      Switching Station
                                                                      Building................
                                         St. Thomas................  National Guard Vehicle           $3,875,000
                                                                      Maintenance Shop Add-Alt
Overseas...............................  Various Locations.........  Various Projects.........    $1,836,755,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Mr. THORNBERRY (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that the remainder of the motion be considered as read.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Smith) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this motion to instruct conferees instructs the House 
conferees to agree to the Senate position to replace money transferred 
from out of the military construction projects under title X, section 
2808.
  Just to clarify, when the Senate passed its bill, we didn't know 
which specific projects we were talking about. The Senate has, in its 
bill, a provision to replace the full $3.6 billion that was then 
expected to be transferred out of military construction and used for 
border security.
  Well, now we know what specific projects those are, so the only 
difference in the motion and this underlying Senate provision is to 
list the specific projects.
  It is important to remember, Mr. Speaker, that the Senate passed its 
bill replacing the full $3.6 billion by a vote of 86-8. Three 
Republicans and five Democrats voted ``no'' on the whole measure, but, 
overwhelmingly, they supported the bill that includes a provision to 
replace this money.
  Each of the projects that is listed in the motion to instruct has 
been specifically authorized and appropriated by the House and the 
Senate and signed into law by the President.
  Now, it is true that the Secretary of Defense, Secretary Esper, has 
tried to minimize the effects on our military when this transfer was 
made. But it is still true, even with his efforts, that there was $544 
million taken away from dependent schools, $13 million taken away from 
child dependent centers, $15.3 million from medical clinics, more money 
from fire stations, dining facilities, et cetera.
  Despite his best efforts, our troops are affected by the transfer of 
this money.
  Mr. Speaker, we are really good at fighting, arguing, and pointing 
fingers of blame about how this came to be, and I am sure we all have 
different opinions about that. But voting ``yes'' or ``no'' on this 
motion to instruct will not change that at all, will not change the 
transfer, will not change any of those underlying facts.
  The only thing that we have an ability to influence with this motion 
to instruct is whether or not the troops have to suffer as a result of 
Washington dysfunction. It will make a difference to them.
  I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that the right thing to do for national 
security and, certainly, the right thing to do for our troops is for 
the House to instruct our conferees to agree with the Senate provision, 
the only difference being we would list the specific projects rather 
than the total amount. That way, we can ensure that, as we continue to 
argue about border security and a whole variety of other issues, our 
troops do not suffer as a result of that argument.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to make sure everyone understands: 
This provision is actually completely irrelevant. It will impact 
nothing, from a substantive standpoint.
  There is no way our troops are going to be harmed whether we pass 
this instruction or whether we follow this instruction or not. That is 
important to understand.
  We authorize military construction projects, when we authorize them, 
for 5 years. Every single project that the President has listed as the 
ones that he has stolen the money from to build the border wall that 
Congress expressly said they did not want to spend this money on is 
already authorized.
  Whether or not we put an additional authorization into the fiscal 
year 2020 defense bill is, literally, irrelevant.

                              {time}  1745

  It has no impact whatsoever on whether or not the troops, their 
families, whatever the construction projects are, get funded or not. 
That will be a DOD decision. They have the authority to do it. How do 
they wish to spend their money?
  So please don't let anyone say on this motion to instruct that if you 
don't vote for it, you are voting to not fund these projects. You are 
not. All of them are authorized for 5 years. There are a couple of 
projects that were first authorized in 2016, but we are in that 5-year 
window for every single project in question, so this has nothing to do 
with that.
  What this amounts to is a sense of Congress on whether or not we 
ought to allow a President to effectively steal $3.6 billion out of the 
Pentagon's budget for his own personal policy desire that Congress has 
already said they shouldn't.
  And in a bipartisan way, I am quite certain, but for the politics 
surrounding this issue, that Congress would emphatically say ``no.'' If 
we pass a defense budget that says this is where you ought to spend the 
money, we are not saying, Mr. President, here's a piggy bank. Have fun 
with it. Okay? If you find something, and it is $3.6 billion out of the 
military construction fund--it is actually a little over $6 billion 
total that the President took out of the FY19 defense budget to build a 
wall that Congress said they did not want.
  I think this has huge implications and, as members of the Armed 
Services Committee, we ought to be alarmed about this. And I can 
guarantee you that if President Obama had done this to the defense 
budget, for any reason, there would have been no end to the fury about 
it, and rightly so. Because if we are going to say, Look, the defense 
budget is crucially important--in fact, particularly the members of the 
minority party in this body have frequently

[[Page H7740]]

argued that the defense budget is underfunded. They will give you 
chapter and verse and, in fact, did just a couple of months ago, about 
all the areas in our defense budget that don't have enough money.
  Now they are standing up and saying, as short as the defense budget 
is, as much as we have claimed that there is not enough money in the 
defense budget, we are perfectly okay with the President taking $6 
billion out of it for something that has nothing to do with the 
Department of Defense. That is an appalling position for any member of 
the Armed Services Committee to take.
  This motion to instruct, while irrelevant substantially, does give us 
the opportunity to express the sense of Congress that this should not 
be done for any purpose.
  It is worth noting that we had a big fight about 6, 7 months ago when 
we shut down the government. The President said he wanted to have his 
wall funding, and we entered into a negotiation and, at the end of it, 
I think we came up with about $1.5 billion that we allowed the 
President for his wall. So we had that fight.
  And after that fight, he decided that the Pentagon was just one big 
piggy bank; that what we do over here is all kinds of irrelevant. We 
are throwing money out there and the President can grab it for any 
purpose.
  I will just close by saying, I disagree with one statement that the 
distinguished ranking member of the Armed Services Committee said, and 
that is, you know, We can all argue about who is responsible for this.
  Seriously?
  It is pretty clear who is responsible for this. The President of the 
United States decided to take this $3.6 billion out of existing 
Pentagon projects and spend it on his wall after Congress said they 
didn't want it to be done.
  Now you want to argue that he should have, because for whatever 
reason, that is fine. But there is no question why we are here. And 
there is no question that if Congress endorses this, if Congress says 
it is okay for the President of the United States to use the Pentagon 
as his own personal piggy bank--personal is a bit of an overstatement; 
I understand this is policy--but basically to decide to spend money 
wherever he wants to spend it, irrespective of what we say, why are we 
even here?
  Why do we even bother to authorize what the Pentagon is doing?
  So, again, these projects are already authorized. If the Pentagon 
wants to go find the money in the $738 billion that we have now all 
agreed that we are going to spend, they can go find it. But there is no 
way that the United States Congress ought to even irrelevantly endorse 
this particular action by the President.
  I would strongly urge every Member to reject this motion to instruct.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the distinguished ranking member of the Homeland 
Security Committee.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for 
yielding time and for his leadership on our committee.
  I rise in support of Ranking Member Thornberry's motion to instruct 
conferees. It is vital that Congress fund all of the projects that have 
been listed today as we vote later. The Senate did the right thing, and 
now the House should follow suit.
  Securing our border is a vital component to national security. If we 
can't control our borders, then we cannot tell the American people they 
are secure at home.
  Even President Obama's former Attorney General, Eric Holder, said 
just this week: ``Democrats have to understand that borders mean 
something.''
  This motion to instruct conferees supports the President's task of 
keeping America safe. It also supports our military by funding 
construction projects, including the weapons maintenance shop at 
Anniston Army Depot in my district. This project would consolidate 
maintenance operations that currently happen in different buildings in 
different States under one roof. This facility is in preparation for 
future modernizations in support of our force readiness.
  This is a simple vote today for securing our borders and building 
projects for the military. I urge support of this motion.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I want to quickly point out, again, this doesn't make any difference 
in terms of whether or not these projects get funded.
  Then, second, I think the gentleman is correct. This is a debate 
about whether or not it makes sense to spend money on the wall. But I 
just want to emphasize two points about that:
  One, regardless how you feel about the wall, you should not be in 
favor of being able to simply take the money out of the Pentagon to pay 
for it.
  Second, the border crisis that we have is not going to be even 
remotely alleviated by a wall. The border crisis that we have right now 
is asylum seekers pouring up to the border and turning themselves in. 
Now, there are all kinds of challenges associated with that, no 
question, and all kinds of policies that have led to that happening.
  I think it is absolutely shameful right now the way the United States 
of America is handling this. So many people are seeking refuge from 
violence and horrific conditions, and we are treating them horribly; 
and there is a lot that we need to do to change that.
  But building a wall will not stop asylum seekers. It is a billion-
dollar waste of money focusing on a campaign promise instead of 
focusing on the actual problem that we have. But, again, that is a 
debate that Congress should have. They should not have it out of the 
Pentagon budget. This is the wrong place for it.
  I urge Members to reject this Presidential grab of money out of the 
Pentagon that would set a very dangerous precedent.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time 
other than myself to close.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Earlier, the term was used that the President had stolen, or would 
steal this money. Actually, section 2808 authorizes any President, when 
a national emergency is declared, to transfer military construction 
funds to deal with that situation.
  Now, again, we will debate about whether this was a true national 
emergency, and whether he should or should not have done it here. But 
the President did exactly what he has the authority to do. The only 
question is, what are--who is going to suffer because of that.
  As the gentleman from Alabama pointed out, no President and no Member 
of Congress ought to have to choose between border security and 
supporting our troops. And yet, that is, unfortunately, the situation 
that, without adopting this motion to instruct, Members are put into.
  The administration requested specifically, in the fiscal year 2020 
budget request, that this $3.6 billion which was transferred out of 
military construction be put back into military construction so that 
these projects could be funded.
  Now, you can have a 5-year authorization, but you have got to have 
the money that year in order to actually build them. And so that is 
what the Senate did in their provision. That is what this motion to 
instruct would instruct the House conferees to do, with more 
specificity.
  Mr. Speaker, just so Members have a general idea, we are talking 
about a weapons maintenance shop in Alabama, central heat and power in 
the State of Alaska. Arizona has a ground transport equipment building. 
California has a C-130 simulator. Colorado, a space control facility; 
Florida, fire crash rescue station; Hawaii, security improvements for a 
gate; Indiana, construct a small arms range; Kentucky, Fort Campbell 
Middle School. Those are some of the specific projects, and I could go 
on. Louisiana has NORTHCOM, various air facility improvements; 
Maryland, a child development center at Joint Base Andrews; New Mexico, 
an MQ-9 ops facility.
  Specific projects are listed in this motion to instruct, specific 
projects

[[Page H7741]]

which FY20 money would then fund, if the conferees would agree to what 
the Senate has already agreed to and what the motion seeks to get the 
House to endorse.
  Again, Mr. Speaker, bottom line, there is a lot of argument on border 
issues. There is a lot of dysfunction in Washington these days. But our 
troops and their families should not suffer the consequences of those 
arguments and that dysfunction.
  This motion to instruct offers a path forward to at least ensure that 
they have some insulation from those differences, and I urge Members to 
adopt it.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________