[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 25]
[House]
[Pages 34022-34036]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 1585, NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR 
                            FISCAL YEAR 2008

  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 860, I call up 
the conference report on the bill (H.R. 1585) to authorize 
appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the 
Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense 
activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel 
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to rule XXII, the conference report 
is considered read.
  (For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of 
December 6, 2007, at page 32514.)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) 
and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) each will control 30 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
on this conference report.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Missouri?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise today in strong support of the conference report on H.R. 1585, 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.
  I must tell you, Mr. Speaker, that I'm so extremely proud of the 
members of the Armed Services Committee, of all of those who worked 
hard in and out of the Armed Services Committee

[[Page 34023]]

to make this happen. And a special thanks to the fantastic staff that 
we have supporting us, Erin Conaton, Bob Simmons, who is the leader of 
those on the other side of the aisle regarding the staff, and everyone 
just pitched in so very, very well.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. As a matter of fact, I think it's 
the best bill in decades that this Congress has put forward. It's good 
for our troops, good for our families, it will help improve readiness 
of our Armed Forces, and it will bring new significant oversight to the 
Department of Defense in areas where oversight was sorely needed in the 
past.
  Let me begin by saying that the Armed Services Committee has remained 
committed to a tradition of bipartisanship, and we appreciate that, and 
we have all throughout the year.
  Special thanks to our ranking member, the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Hunter) and today to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) 
who's been such a great help through the years.
  When the 110th Congress began, we laid out, from the Armed Services 
Committee, six strategic priorities, and we have met them in this 
legislation. The bill before us is the culmination of our efforts. It 
addresses strategic priorities in important ways. It includes a 3.5 
percent across-the-board pay raise, it protects the troops and their 
families from escalating health care fees, and includes well over 100 
other measures, both large and small, regarding quality of life. It is 
especially important because it adopts the elements of the Wounded 
Warrior Act which passed this House earlier in the year 426-0. And I 
think that that, in and of itself, is a major victory for those in 
uniform.
  It addresses readiness. It establishes a new, high level board of 
military officers, the Defense Materiel Readiness Board, to grapple 
with the growing shortfalls confronting the Armed Forces. The bill 
allocates $1 billion to a Strategic Readiness Fund.
  The bill will bring much needed oversight to the wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. It does so by instituting new reporting requirements 
developed on a bipartisan basis.
  The bill builds on the successful passage of H.R. 1, which fully 
implemented the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. H.R. 1585 
authorizes the funding required to carry forward that act by 
continuing, and this is important, and expanding the Department of 
Defense's cooperative threat reduction program and the Department of 
Energy's nuclear nonproliferation programs. Mr. Speaker, these programs 
address perhaps the single largest threat to the American homeland, the 
threat of nuclear terrorism and other weapons of mass destruction, and 
we address that very carefully in this bill.
  We also include $17.6 billion for the mine resistant ambush vehicle, 
which is known as MRAP, to protect our troops in Iraq and in future 
conflicts. It does a great deal in the area of funding for our various 
ships, including production of two Virginia-class submarines per year 
by 2010, and adds eight C-17s to meet the needs of the demands of 
global power projection.
  One of the most important elements of this bill, in addition to the 
money and the hardware, is a requirement that the Department of Defense 
perform a quadrennial review of its roles and missions. The first time 
this was addressed, and the last time it was addressed thoroughly, was 
back in 1948 at the behest of President Harry Truman and his then 
Secretary of Defense, James Forestal. The review we require in this 
bill causes a full examination as to whether the Department of Defense 
is truly developing the core competencies and capabilities to perform 
the missions assigned to it and whether those capabilities are being 
developed in the most joint and efficient way by the military services. 
Much has changed since 1948. Technology has changed and has blossomed 
and mushroomed, and that's why it's important that we update, by way of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense, the Key West 
agreement that was met back in that year of 1948.
  I am very, very pleased with this bill, Mr. Speaker. I think that 
history will say that this one was a comprehensive, if not the most 
comprehensive, Defense authorization bill that our Congress has passed 
in decades.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record, regarding the Key West 
agreement of 1948, a statement by Sam Rushie, who is the supervisory 
archivist of the Truman Library in Independence, Missouri.

       On December 19, 1945--3 months after the end of the Second 
     World War--President Truman recommended to Congress that the 
     War and Navy Departments be unified in a new Department of 
     National Defense. In his statement to Congress, Truman 
     declared, ``One of the lessons which have most clearly come 
     from the costly and dangerous experience of this war is that 
     there must be unified direction of land, sea and air forces 
     at home as well as in all other parts of the world where our 
     Armed Forces are serving. ``We did not have that kind of 
     direction when we were attacked four years ago--and we 
     certainly paid a high price for not having it.''
       On May 13, 1946, Truman met with Secretary of War Patterson 
     and Secretary of the Navy Forrestal, and he urged that the 
     Army and the Navy reach a compromise on the problem of 
     unification.
       The President's proposals were finally enacted on July 26, 
     1947, as the National Security Act, the main feature of which 
     was the establishment of a unified Department of Defense. 
     That same day, the President issued Executive Order 9877, an 
     attempt to define the functions of the Army, the Navy, and 
     the newly created Air Force within the unified National 
     Military Establishment. However, bickering between the 
     services continued, especially over issues that the Executive 
     Order had failed to address specifically. Many of these 
     issues concerned the functions of the Navy. The Army regarded 
     the Navy's Marine Corps as a rival for control of combat 
     operations on land; similarly, the Air Force viewed Naval 
     Aviation as an infringement on its jurisdiction over air 
     operations.
       In an effort to resolve these conflicts, Secretary of 
     Defense James Forrestal summoned the Joint Chiefs of Staff to 
     a meeting at Key West, Florida in March 1948. Following 
     suggestions made by Forrestal, the Joint Chiefs drafted a 
     directive entitled ``Functions of the Armed Forces and the 
     Joint Chiefs of Staff,'' popularly known as the ``Key West 
     Agreement.'' Forrestal submitted this proposal to the 
     President in late March. On April 21, 1948, the President 
     issued Executive Order 9950, revoking his earlier executive 
     order. This cleared the way for the Secretary of Defense to 
     issue the new directive that same day.
       With modifications, the Key West Agreement continues to 
     govern responsibilities within the armed forces to this day. 
     In contrast to the broad language of the earlier executive 
     order, Forrestal's directive specified the primary and 
     secondary responsibilities of each branch of the service. In 
     a tenuous compromise, it was agreed that the Navy would not 
     establish a strategic air component, but would be permitted 
     to have aircraft carriers and use its aircraft against inland 
     targets. (This was interpreted by the Navy as an endorsement 
     of the projected new supercarrier, the USS United States.) 
     The Air Force would retain primary responsibility for 
     strategic air operations and air defense. At the same time, 
     it was agreed that the Marine Corps would be preserved, but 
     would be limited in size to four divisions, and would 
     cooperate with the Army in planning amphibious operations.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by very, very sincerely thanking my good 
friend from Missouri, Chairman Skelton, for the great leadership that 
he has provided in the months past in writing the original version and 
then shaping the bill and then using his steady hand to guide us 
through the conference, of course with the help of my good friend, 
Ranking Member Duncan Hunter. Both of these leaders provided great 
direction for us, and I might say that the product of their work is 
here today. I agree with the chairman, that this is a very, very good 
bill, and I am very fortunate to be able to stand here today to say how 
important I think it is that we all support it.

                              {time}  1345

  Unfortunately, Ranking Member Hunter could not be here today, but I 
know he is very proud of this conference report as well. I'd like to 
thank all of the subcommittee chairmen and their ranking members for 
their hard work and leadership. It is responsible for almost 1,500 
pages that this bill contains. And the staff that helped make this a 
reality, obviously Members would not have been able to be here today if 
it were not for them either.

[[Page 34024]]

  This is a good, bipartisan bill. Last Thursday, the House Armed 
Services Committee filed this conference report after an overwhelming 
majority of conferees signed the report. Seldom in my career here have 
I seen this kind of agreement among Members on the bill. Our 
subcommittee chairmen and their ranking members will provide a detailed 
summary of the bill, so I will only highlight a few key areas.
  Most importantly, this bipartisan bill takes care of the brave men 
and women serving our country at home and abroad. It authorizes $506.9 
billion in budgetary authority for the Department of Defense and the 
national security programs of the Department of Energy. Additionally, 
it supports current operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in 
the global war on terrorism by authorizing $189.4 billion in 
supplemental funding for operational costs, personnel expenses and 
procurement of new equipment for fiscal year 2008.
  This amount provides for end-strength growth in both the Army and the 
Marine Corps, continuing initiatives started several years ago by the 
Armed Services Committee, by authorizing increases of 13,000 Army and 
9,000 Marine Corps active duty personnel to sustain our required 
missions.
  Additionally, this conference report authorizes a 3.5 percent pay 
increase, as the chairman remarked earlier. These pay raises for all 
members of the Armed Forces for 2008 are extremely important.
  We talk a lot about quality of life and here we're doing something 
about it. Some of the initiatives in this legislation continue 
successful, practical programs such as the Commander's Emergency 
Response Program, which is working well in battlefields in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. Other initiatives reinforce good legislation that the 
House has already passed, such as the Wounded Warrior legislation to 
address the challenges that face our recovering servicemembers and 
their families. Still others modify existing authorities or establish 
promising new programs and new policies.
  Some of the new programs and policies include these:
  Providing $17.6 billion for the mine resistant ambush protected 
vehicle, an armored vehicle which will save lives going forward; 
setting guidelines for all private security contractors operating in 
Iraq and Afghanistan and other areas where we have combat operations. 
And we know from recent news reports how important this provision is.
  We also authorize eight additional C-17s to support the intratheater 
lift requirements and meet the airlift needs for the increased end 
strength in the Army and Marine Corps.
  We added major acquisition reform initiatives, such as establishing 
new responsibilities for the Joint Requirements Oversight Council and 
mandating that new acquisition programs be aligned with the missions of 
the Department and the competency and capability of the service 
proposing the program.
  And finally, we acted to elevate the chief of the National Guard 
bureau to a four-star general and adopted many of the recommendations 
of the Commission on National Guard and Reserve Corps.
  Just as importantly, this legislation avoids contentious language, 
such as the hate crimes provision, which would have put our bill at 
risk of a Presidential veto. I want to acknowledge the leadership of 
Chairman Ike Skelton, whose hard work in shepherding this vital 
legislation through the conference has guaranteed that our servicemen 
and women will get what they need, and they will get it when they need 
it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and 
colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), who is the chairman of 
the Subcommittee on Readiness.
  Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report 
on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, and I 
want to thank Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter and the 
members of the full committee and the staff for doing a great job.
  The bill before us begins to address our growing concerns about the 
readiness posture of our Armed Forces; yet the breadth and the scope of 
our readiness has been deeply damaged by virtue of operations and many 
years of ignoring this problem. Our troops and their equipment have 
been stretched by extended combat operations, and the strain is evident 
in declining readiness, shortfalls in training and difficulties in 
equipping our forces.
  These problems have grown to immense proportions, and this bill is a 
significant step to reverse the decline and to rebuild our military. 
Included in the bill are some significant readiness policy initiatives 
and investments that will help restore the readiness posture of our 
military.
  First, this bill establishes a Defense Readiness Production Board to 
identify critical readiness requirements and to mobilize the defense 
industrial base to speed up the production of military equipment. This 
board will bridge the gap between readiness needs and resources to help 
repair our worn-out equipment.
  The bill also creates a $1 billion Strategic Readiness Fund to give 
the board and the Department of Defense the ability to rapidly attend 
to pressing readiness needs.
  This bill begins to address other shortfalls in maintenance and 
training by providing $250 million for unfunded training requirements 
and an additional $150 million to restore aviation maintenance 
shortfalls.
  And we're very concerned about the readiness of our National Guard. 
Our bill requires the Department of Defense to begin measuring the 
readiness of National Guard units to support emergencies in their home 
States, such as the recent tragic tornadoes in Kansas. These readiness 
reports will allow the Congress and each State's Governor to evaluate 
the needs of each State and address problems before a disaster occurs. 
To help restore the shortfalls, the bill includes a $1 billion 
investment in National Guard equipment.
  We also include provisions that require plans and reports to Congress 
on reconstituting our prepositioned war stocks. We also authorized more 
than $21 billion for military construction, family housing and to 
implement base realignment and closure. These funds include money to 
support grow-the-force initiatives for the Army and Marine Corps and to 
provide facilities to accommodate new recruits and missions.
  Other significant provisions include proposed changes to the National 
Security Personnel System, depot initiatives and numerous important 
policy initiatives by the Department of Defense.
  This is a good bill, and I am pleased to have helped in some way in 
shaping this bill. It reflects our bipartisan desire to improve 
readiness and to provide for the men and women in uniform.
  I ask my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Chesapeake, Virginia (Mr. Forbes), the ranking member of the Readiness 
Subcommittee.
  Mr. FORBES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for 
yielding and for his leadership on the Armed Services Committee 
throughout the years.
  I rise today in strong support of the conference agreement for the 
2008 National Defense Authorization Act. I also want to take a moment 
to thank Chairman Skelton and Mr. Hunter for their leadership and hard 
work in getting us to this point.
  This conference report is the culmination of 102 House Armed Services 
Committee hearings, a comparable number of informational briefings and 
untold hours of debate and discussion with our friends in the Senate. 
This bill reflects our strong and continued support for the brave men 
and women of the United States armed services, and I thank both of 
these gentlemen for moving forward a robust, bipartisan Defense 
authorization bill.
  I also want to thank Mr. Ortiz, my subcommittee chairman and good

[[Page 34025]]

friend, for his outstanding leadership of the Readiness Subcommittee.
  This conference report provides funding authorization and support for 
our military and civilian personnel serving in the global war on 
terrorism while at the same time seeking to reverse declining trends in 
readiness.
  Major highlights include: It provides $18.4 billion for the Army and 
$8.6 billion for the Marine Corps to address equipment reset 
requirements. It provides $980 million for critical National Guard 
equipment. It authorizes $1 billion for the Strategic Readiness Fund. 
It establishes the Defense Materiel Readiness Board. It requires 
quarterly rating and reporting of National Guard readiness for homeland 
defense missions. It provides a 3.5 percent pay increase to our men and 
women in uniform. It increases the end strength in the Army and the 
Marine Corps to improve readiness and meet the threats of the 21st 
century. It authorizes $2.8 billion in military construction funding to 
support these end-strength increases. And it authorizes funding to 
examine the national security interagency process. As many of you know, 
this is an issue that is overdue for reform, and many of us are pleased 
to see this begin to be examined more closely.
  Mr. Speaker, we are all very aware that our continued global presence 
and ongoing combat operations are taxing current readiness levels. We 
also know that all of the military services are facing aging equipment 
inventories and are in need of recapitalization and modernization 
funding. Striking the balance between sustaining readiness today and 
ensuring a healthy, ready force tomorrow is a vast and complex 
challenge. This conference report strikes a good balance between 
sustaining what we've got while ensuring a well-trained, all-volunteer 
force with modern equipment will be available in the future.
  This conference report deserves your support.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to yield 4 minutes to 
the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), my friend who is the 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces.
  Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking our chairman, 
Ike Skelton, for the phenomenal job he's done for looking out for the 
men and women in uniform this year.
  I want to thank my ranking member, Roscoe Bartlett, for his 
incredible cooperation, and I want to thank all the members of the 
Seapower Subcommittee.
  I also want to thank the other committee chairmen who, to a man or a 
woman, transferred funds from their jurisdiction to try to help in our 
efforts to rebuild America's fleet.
  Of all the services, I think it is fair to say that the Bush 
administration has been the least favorable to the United States Navy. 
It has shrunk by about 50 ships on George Bush's watch. We're trying to 
turn that around.
  With this year's bill, we're very proud of several things we've done. 
We've funded one Virginia class submarine and advanced funding for a 
second. We've funded one Littoral combat ship, one amphibious assault 
ship, a dry cargo vessel, a high speed vessel. We've completed funding 
for two Arleigh Burke destroyers, one amphibious assault ship, and we 
have started the full funding of an additional carrier.
  We have long lead funding for three TAKE cargo ships, and Mr. 
Speaker, again with the great help of Roscoe Bartlett, we have in here 
language that says the next generation of warships, surface combatants, 
will be nuclear-powered to lessen our Nation's dependence on foreign 
oil.
  I would encourage every American to read a great book on the New York 
Times best sellers list called ``Halseys Typhoon,'' and it talks about 
the Christmas typhoon that hit the fleet off of the Philippines in 
1944, the needless loss of vessels. But the event that triggered the 
fleet's sailing into that typhoon was the need for the fleet to refuel 
their destroyers when the destroyers were caught low on fuel. The 
destroyers got caught in this storm. Three of them foundered 
needlessly, and had those vessels been nuclear-powered with a 30-year 
supply of fuel on board, that never would have happened.
  To this day, we have only five oilers in the Pacific. Any clever, 
future foe of the United States, the first thing they're going to do is 
try to sink those oilers. And the Department of Defense strategy of 
wishful thinking that this isn't going to happen isn't good enough.
  So because of future combat needs, things like rail guns, the growth 
in power, demand for things like electronics, and above all, to have 
the ships that guard our carriers to have the capacity to stay with the 
carriers for 30 years, as far as their fuel needs, we're very, very 
proud of that.
  We're very happy that the Guard Empowerment Act will become law, and 
I want to thank my colleague Tom Davis for encouraging me to sponsor 
that, and I want to thank him for cosponsoring it. It will raise the 
chief of the National Guard bureau to four stars. It will see to it 
that either the commander or the deputy commander of the northern 
command will be either a Guardsman or Reservist.
  And I can tell you, having worked with General Steven Blom in the 
aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, I cannot think of a finer human being 
to be the first person as a National Guardsman to wear four stars.

                              {time}  1400

  I want to thank the subcommittee for their work on the fielding of 
mine resistant ambush protected vehicles. A year ago right now, the 
administration had only asked for 400 of those vehicles. Because of the 
work of the subcommittee, because of the case that was made to the 
American people, there will now be 15,000 of them built, and it will 
from the day it's fielded save lives and save limbs. There are young 
people in Mississippi graveyards who would be alive today if we had 
fielded them sooner, but at least it's getting done now.
  So, Mr. Chairman, thank you for the great work you've done. I want to 
thank my fellow subcommittee chairman. And above all, I want to 
encourage the House to support this very important measure.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Hagerstown, Maryland (Mr. Bartlett), who is the ranking member of the 
Seapower Subcommittee.
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. As ranking 
member of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces, I 
would like to thank the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), 
chairman of our subcommittee, for his wisdom and profound concern for 
the safety of our servicemembers and the security of the United States.
  Further, I would like to recognize our chairman, Ike Skelton, and our 
ranking member, Duncan Hunter, for their continued leadership and 
support. This bill contains farsighted provisions which I believe are 
critical to this Nation's future security, none of which would have 
been possible without the steadfast advocacy of these visionary 
leaders. Thank you.
  I also want to recognize the superb staff without whom this bill 
would not be possible.
  There are a handful of provisions in every annual defense policy bill 
that stand apart in terms of their impact. This conference report is no 
different. This year the Congress has clearly established that it is 
the policy of the United States to utilize nuclear propulsion for all 
future major naval combatants. It is a vital step to secure our 
Nation's national and energy security.
  Nuclear propulsion for naval ships is the right thing to do from 
economic, combat effectiveness, homeland defense, and energy policy 
perspectives. Without congressional action, budgetary pressures would 
forever prevent the Navy from making this farsighted commitment to its 
future.
  Studies have consistently shown that life-cycle and operational costs 
are lower for nuclear propulsion in large combat vessels, such as 
cruisers. The most recent naval study shows that the

[[Page 34026]]

break-even cost for a nuclear fueled cruiser is $60 per barrel of oil. 
It's now about $90. What's more, the National Petroleum Council 
projects future shortfalls in the supply of oil clear through 2030.
  Last spring, a DOD Office of Force Transformation and Resources 
commissioned report found that the risks associated with oil will make 
the U.S. military's ability to rapidly deploy on demand ``unsustainable 
in the long run.'' It said it is ``imperative'' that DOD ``apply new 
energy technologies that address alternative supply sources and 
efficient consumption across all aspects of military operations.''
  Congress has responded. As recently as last year's Defense bill, 
Congress found that the Nation's dependence upon foreign oil is a 
threat to national security and that other energy sources must be 
seriously considered. It noted the advantages of nuclear power, such as 
virtually unlimited high-speed endurance, elimination of vulnerable 
refueling, and a reduction in the requirement for replenishment vessels 
and the need to protect those vessels. Congress directed the Secretary 
of the Navy to evaluate integrated power systems, fuel cells, and 
nuclear power as propulsion alternatives within the analysis of 
alternatives for future major surface combatants.
  The Navy is conducting such an analysis for the next generation 
cruiser. However, in hearings this year, our subcommittee saw no 
evidence that the Department of Defense was seriously willing to 
consider making the investments required to enable that future. Quite 
simply, the conferees decided that we could waste no further time 
because these investments must begin to be made next year for the CG(X) 
next generation cruiser. Therefore, this conference report requires 
integrated nuclear propulsion for future major combatants.
  This conference report reflects a fair and balanced treatment of the 
remaining issues facing the United States Navy and Marine Corps, and I 
respectfully ask full support for this very important bill.
  Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask unanimous consent to 
thank Captain Will Ebbs and Ms. Jenness Simler for the outstanding job 
they did in helping the Seapower Subcommittee this year and have them 
reflected in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Mississippi?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, first let me thank my friend from 
Mississippi for the historical reference back to 1944 regarding the 
fuel situation, and I think that the subcommittee is making a 
substantial contribution in requiring the nuclear ships that it does.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, the 
gentleman from Arkansas, Dr. Snyder. 
  Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, prayers and praise for our men and women in 
uniform do not fulfill our responsibilities to provide for the common 
defense. Every military family deserves the support of every American, 
and we act today in this Defense bill to provide that support.
  No Defense bill is perfect. No Defense bill finishes the work. But 
this Congress comes together today in a bipartisan manner with a good 
bill.
  Three quick points. First of all, I want to thank Mr. Skelton and Mr. 
Hunter for their leadership and the work that they have done on this 
year's Defense bill. I also want to acknowledge the presence of Mr. 
Saxton, who has announced his retirement and is in his last term and is 
providing leadership today, as he often does, of this committee.
  Second, I am very pleased to see the improvements in the GI Bill for 
our Reserve component members. It has been grossly unfair that some of 
our Reserve component members have not been able to get GI Bill 
benefits when they have left the service.
  And, third, thanks to Mr. McHugh and Mrs. Davis and others, we have 
very good provisions in this bill, the so-called Wounded Warrior 
provisions, that will make life easier for those of our men and women 
in uniform who are hurt or become ill overseas.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  Mr. THORNBERRY. I appreciate the gentleman's yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report. It is one 
of the few examples of bipartisan work that has been produced so far in 
this Congress, and I think it is worthy of every Member's support.
  I want to specifically mention some of the provisions within the 
jurisdiction of the Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare Subcommittee, 
which has been very ably led by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith), following in the tradition of the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Saxton). Both of them ask tough questions, but they always put the 
interests of the country first.
  The cutting edge of our battle against terrorists are the folks of 
the Special Operations Command, and this bill fully authorizes the 
requested funding for those assigned to our toughest missions. The bill 
also improves SOCOM's acquisition and contracting authority.
  SOCOM is a unique entity set up specifically by Congress with unique 
authorities, including the ability to buy its own equipment. Now, that 
is resented by some, and this provision in this bill is intended to 
make that explicitly clear. But I think all of us on the subcommittee 
agree that if it is not made clear by this provision, then we will come 
back and do more next year.
  This bill continues the authority to fund projects in our work with 
others. It is an important part of this war against terrorists to work 
with and through other forces, other individuals, and the funding 
authority that allows that to happen is continued here.
  I especially want to express my appreciation to the subcommittee 
chairman, Mr. Smith, that this subcommittee has again continued in Mr. 
Saxton's work to develop a deep understanding of the ideology that 
drives radical Islamic terrorism and how best we can counter it. As 
much money, time, and effort has been put into that issue since 9/11/
2001, I don't think we're to the bottom of it yet.
  In addition, this portion of the bill provides more strategic 
direction and efficiency to our research and development efforts. For 
example, it adopts the Defense Science Board recommendation that 
requires Strategic Plan for Manufacturing Technology program to try to 
make sure that equipment goes from the laboratory to the field where 
the soldiers can use it in an efficient and effective way. And in IT, 
it makes acquisition more responsive to the pace of technological 
change. I believe we have a lot more work yet to go in that area, but 
we have also worked in that most unconventional of warfare areas, and 
that is through cyberwarfare where this country is being attacked every 
day by folks over the Internet. Our military and the rest of our 
government, I think, is just beginning to come to grips with the 
significance of that issue and how best to deal with it.
  Mr. Speaker, this is not a perfect bill, but I think it is a good 
bill and it should be supported by all Members.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), who is also the chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Terrorism and Unconventional Threats and Capabilities.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by echoing the comments of my colleague 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and also thanking him for his outstanding 
leadership on our subcommittee. It's been great to work in a bipartisan 
fashion with Mr. Thornberry; with Mr. Saxton, the former chairman; and 
the other members of the committee. And I will not repeat all that Mr. 
Thornberry just said because I agree with it completely. The priorities 
that he laid out of our subcommittee, focusing on supporting the 
Special Operations Command in their lead in the fight against al Qaeda 
and terrorism; focusing on science, technology, and all the

[[Page 34027]]

issues that he raised are exactly what we are trying to confront. I 
have enjoyed working with him on those issues and look forward to 
continuing to do so because, as he mentioned, we have certainly made 
progress but there is a lot more work to do. Our Special Operations 
Command needs all the support we can give it in its effort to fight al 
Qaeda, to understand that enemy and then use its forces to the best of 
its ability to combat it. And I think understanding those issues is 
enormously important. It has been a huge priority of our subcommittee.
  I also want to thank the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Skelton. 
It is a great honor to have worked with him during my 11 years in 
Congress and certainly a great honor to work with him as the Chair, and 
I think he has produced an outstanding bill, in particular the focus on 
the troops. I have traveled with the chairman before, and I know that 
this is always at the top of his priority list, how we are taking care 
of the troops and their families. This bill does that. It protects 
them, active duty, Guard and Reserve. It makes it a priority to make 
sure that we are meeting their needs, and I know that is primarily 
because of his leadership, and I thank him for that. I also thank the 
other subcommittees who were directly involved in that.
  Lastly, I want to point out how important it is that this bill also 
recognizes the fight we are currently engaged in in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. It goes to the issues that are most important to those 
troops. Funding the MRAPs, trying to come up with ways to combat IEDs, 
making sure they have the body armor and the up-armored Humvees they 
need to confront those threats. It has been a huge priority of this 
committee, and particularly Mr. Taylor and Mr. Abercrombie, to make 
sure that we fund our troops that are in the field right now with the 
priorities that they most need because they are the ones facing the 
most direct threat right now.
  I have always been proud to be a member of this committee, and I'm 
very proud of the bill that we have created. I urge every Member in 
this body to support it. I think it's an excellent piece of 
legislation.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Rehoboth, Alabama (Mr. Everett), the ranking member of the Strategic 
Forces Subcommittee.
  Mr. EVERETT. Mr. Speaker, I want to start by recognizing the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and my great friend from 
California (Mr. Hunter) for their work on this bill. I also want to 
recognize the fact that the gentleman from Missouri, this is not his 
first bill but it's his first Defense bill as chairman of the 
committee, and I congratulate him.
  I rise in support of this conference report to accompany the Fiscal 
Year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act.
  The bill includes funds for European missile defense interceptors and 
radars and encourages the administration to seek a reprogramming 
request once agreements with host countries are reached.
  The bill establishes policy to defend against Iranian ballistic 
missile threats and seeks greater missile defense cooperation with 
Israel. It also authorizes an increase of $65 million for the Aegis 
Ballistic Missile Defense. The bill authorizes GMD, THAAD, and KEI at 
the budget request, and airborne laser funding is increased to just $35 
million below the budget request.

                              {time}  1415

  In the area of military space, the bill requires the Secretary of 
Defense and the Director of National Intelligence to develop a space 
protection strategy. The importance of space to the economy and to 
modern-day warfighting is often overlooked. In light of the Chinese 
antisatellite test last January and other threats to space, we must 
place a greater priority on the protection of our Nation's space 
capabilities.
  Within the area of atomic energy defense activities, the bill 
reflects general bipartisan agreement, particularly in its 
authorization of the Reliable Replacement Warhead Program cost and 
design activities.
  And finally, Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I didn't recognize the 
gentlelady from California, who chairs the Strategic Forces 
Subcommittee. She demonstrates skillful leadership in her first year as 
chairman, and I want to congratulate her. This bill would not be what 
it is without her leadership.
  I also must recognize my fellow subcommittee chairmen, Members on 
both sides of the aisle, and their staffs. I think this subcommittee 
handles some of the most difficult policy decisions in the House Armed 
Services Committee, and I want to express my appreciation for their 
hard work in protecting our Nation's security.
  At this time, Mr. Speaker, I would like to have a colloquy between 
myself and Chairman Skelton.
  Mr. Speaker, as you know, the government has eliminated the use of 
non-GSA-approved lock bar file cabinets and outdated mechanical locks 
for storage of classified information in accordance with national 
security policy. However, under current Federal regulations, 
contractors are not required to phase out this old equipment until 
2012. This results in less robust security and more government spending 
to protect classified information handled by contractors.
  Although the Department of Defense has taken measures to meet these 
requirements internally, it is evident that the defense contractor 
community is behind the implementation of the required locks and safes. 
The committee has taken an interest in this matter of securing 
classified information now for several years. Rather than wait another 
5 years, I believe DOD should have a plan in place to ensure that 
contractors are in full compliance with the regulations.
  Mr. SKELTON. Will the gentleman from Alabama yield, please?
  Mr. EVERETT. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. SKELTON. I thank the gentleman, and I do appreciate his concern 
on this issue. Protecting classified material of course is the utmost 
importance, and the standards for protecting this material should be 
consistent across government as well as industry. In that regard, I 
intend to work very closely with my friend, the gentleman from Alabama, 
on the issue, starting with the request of the Department of Defense to 
obtain their plans for meeting the 2012 deadline for phasing out 
containers used by defense contractors that have not been approved by 
the GSA.
  Mr. EVERETT. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield further, I 
thank him for his commitment to work with me on the matter.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend, the 
gentlelady from California, who is also the chairwoman of the 
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, Mrs. Tauscher.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the 
conference report on H.R. 1585, the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2008.
  I want to thank Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter. I 
especially want to thank the Strategic Forces Subcommittee ranking 
member, Mr. Everett, the distinguished gentleman from Alabama. Many of 
the very fine initiatives that we produced in this bill were started by 
Mr. Everett when he was chairman, and I thank him for his cooperation 
and for his leadership.
  I want to especially thank our excellent staff for all of their hard 
work for what is, I think, one of the finest Defense bills that we have 
been able to produce.
  Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, I have 
worked with my colleagues over the course of this year to incorporate 
four priorities into the conference agreement before the House today.
  First, this bill aims to foster and frame a crucial discussion about 
nuclear weapons by establishing a congressionally appointed bipartisan 
commission designed to reevaluate the United States' strategic posture. 
The commission will provide valuable recommendations to Congress 
regarding the proper mix of conventional and nuclear weapons needed to 
meet new and emerging threats.

[[Page 34028]]

  Second, the bill takes a prudent step to slow key Department of 
Energy nuclear weapons initiatives, including the development of the 
Reliable Replacement Warhead. The conference agreement limits RRW 
activity in fiscal year 2008 to a design and cost study and reduces RRW 
funding by $38 million out of a total request of $119 million, more 
than a 30 percent reduction.
  The conference agreement also rejects the proposal for a new 
plutonium pit production facility, or consolidated plutonium center, in 
the President's budget request. None of the $24.9 million proposed for 
the CPC is authorized.
  Third, the bill funds ballistic missile defense systems that will 
protect the American people, our deployed troops and allies against 
real threats while shifting resources away from longer term, high-risk 
efforts. The bill authorizes $8.4 billion for ballistic missile defense 
programs of the Missile Defense Agency, a reduction of $450 million 
from the President's request.
  The conference agreement reduces funding for the proposed European 
missile defense site by $85 million, and requires final approval by the 
Governments of Poland and the Czech Republic and an independent study 
on alternative missile defense options for Europe before construction 
may begin.
  The conference agreement also charts a path forward to provide the 
President with options for a conventional prompt global strike, 
consolidating funds requested for the Conventional Trident Modification 
into a new, defense-wide research line for prompt global strike.
  Finally, we are boosting funding for space capabilities that deliver 
near-term benefits to the warfighter and improves space situational 
awareness and survivability.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill strikes a balance between near-term needs and 
long-term investment, and it creates the means to help bring our 
nuclear weapons policy into the 21st century.
  I urge my colleagues' strong support on this legislation.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will note that the gentleman from 
New Jersey has 10\1/2\ minutes remaining, the gentleman from Missouri 
has 9\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York, the ranking member of the Military Personnel Subcommittee, Mr. 
McHugh.
  Mr. McHUGH. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I've said on occasions in the past in similar situations 
that it's always a source of great pride for those of us who have the 
honor and the opportunity to serve on the Personnel Subcommittee that 
when many Members come to the floor in support of both this and past 
authorization bills, one of the things that they cite most often are 
those initiatives emanating out of the Personnel Subcommittee, and I 
think that's for a very good reason. Because all of us, certainly in 
this Congress, but particularly in the House Armed Services Committee, 
recognize that for all of the things that make this Nation great, 
particularly for all of those things that make our military the 
greatest that has ever walked the face of the Earth, the one 
irreplaceable component is those who wear the uniform and those who, of 
course, love and support them, their spouses, their children, their 
families. And in that regard, I want to add my words of thanks to, of 
course, the distinguished chairman, the gentleman from Missouri, our 
ranking member, Congressman Hunter, but also to Dr. Snyder, who started 
the year off as the chairman of the Personnel Subcommittee, who went on 
to other challenges and, fortunately for all of us, turned the reins 
over to the very able hands of the gentlelady from California (Mrs. 
Davis).
  As in years past, Mr. Speaker, this bill is rich in provisions that 
recognize the value of our military men and women in service and the 
need to support them, and to enrich the quality of lives of both those 
individuals and, of course, their families. And I suspect you have 
heard today, and rightfully will continue to hear, Mr. Speaker, of all 
of those good things; 3.5 percent pay raise, one-half percent above 
what the President requested, and more importantly, over the past 9 
years, the continuation of our effort to reduce that gap between 
civilian pay and military that started at 13.5 percent. And with this 
3.5 percent, it will move it down to 3.4 percent. More needs to be 
done, but good progress.
  It critically increases end strength, which is such an important 
component in the high pace of operations and personnel tempos. It 
increases the Army by 13,000, the Marine Corps by 9,000; again, work 
that needs to be continued, but a good step on such an important 
problem.
  The report also contains important provisions of the bill that Dr. 
Snyder and I had the honor of helping to initiate, that was later 
picked up by the committee and so many others to round it into a great 
provision to respond to the disgraceful conditions that we all learned 
about at Walter Reed and end the frustration that exists between the 
DOD and veterans retirement and disabilities systems. And it includes 
as well several recommendations from the President's Commission on Care 
of America's Returning Wounded Warriors, better known as the Dole-
Shalala Commission.
  From active to Reserve, this is a great bill and it deserves all of 
our support.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend and 
colleague from California, who is the chairwoman on the Subcommittee on 
Personnel, Mrs. Davis.
  Mrs. DAVIS of California. I want to thank my distinguished chairman 
for his leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, while the holiday season is a time of joy for most 
Americans, it can be a very difficult period for our servicemembers and 
their families. When I sit down with members of our all-volunteer 
force, whether it's in my district or in the mess halls in Iraq, I'm 
very aware of the stress military service can have on our 
servicemembers and, of course quite specifically, on all of their 
family members as well. The stress of being deployed over the holidays 
can only be more difficult.
  Mr. Speaker, a vital component of our strong national defense is the 
ability to care for members of our force, as well as recruit and retain 
men and women to serve in the military. To quote the first Commander in 
Chief, ``The willingness with which our young people are likely to 
serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly 
proportional to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were 
treated and appreciated by their Nation.'' With this bill, current and 
future generations of servicemembers will know that their Nation cares 
for their sacrifice.
  Mr. Speaker, why is this bill important to men and women in uniform? 
It provides a 3 percent across-the-board pay raise for our troops. The 
compensation we provide our servicemembers must remain competitive with 
the private sector.
  We were also successful in making major improvements to the Reserve 
Montgomery GI Bill. For the first time there is a 10-year portability 
in benefits for Reservists so they can continue to receive educational 
assistance after they separate.
  Additionally, this bill will help services recruit and retain 
desperately needed health care professionals by prohibiting any further 
conversion of military medical professionals to civilian positions.
  Mr. Speaker, most importantly, the mental health needs of our troops 
continue to grow, and this bill includes a number of provisions that 
will improve access to quality care for members and their families. The 
creation of Centers of Excellence on TBI and PTSD is just one example.
  This report also includes a number of the recommendations from the 
Dole-Shalala Commission, including an expansion of the Family and 
Medical Leave Act to cover family members of those on active duty so 
they can care for wounded servicemembers on extended leave for up to 26 
workweeks. Family members will no longer have to

[[Page 34029]]

choose between keeping their jobs and caring for a wounded loved one.
  This bill addresses one of the concerns Members have heard from their 
constituent Reservists, early retirement. The bill would reduce the age 
at which a member of the Ready Reserve can draw retired pay below the 
age of 60 by 3 months for every aggregate 90 days of active duty 
performed under specified circumstances.
  Mr. Speaker, there is so much more I wish we could do for our men and 
women who serve, but I feel that this bill represents the best efforts 
of this body to provide for our Nation's Armed Forces and their 
families.
  I would like to thank my predecessor, Representative Snyder, and 
ranking member, Representative McHugh, and the Personnel Subcommittee 
staff for all of their hard work on this conference report.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Minnesota, a retired U.S. Marine Corps colonel, Mr. Kline.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. KLINE of Minnesota. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today along with my colleagues in strong support 
of this legislation. At a time when our Nation is at war on multiple 
fronts, we must maintain a strong commitment to these brave men and 
women in uniform who stand in defense of our Nation. This legislation 
takes a responsible, forward-looking approach to the funding of our 
current operations and provides for the needs of our American heroes.
  In addition to the things already mentioned by my colleagues, such as 
an increase in end strength and the very important pay raise, I am 
particularly pleased at the inclusion of two important legislative 
provisions that I introduced earlier this year, the Yellow Ribbon 
Reintegration Program and authorization for assignment incentive pay 
for National Guardsmen unfairly denied this benefit.
  The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program nationalizes a program 
created by the Minnesota National Guard. Through experiences drawn from 
the deployments of smaller units to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Minnesota 
Guard developed a unique combat veteran reintegration program with a 
focus on supporting servicemembers and their families throughout the 
entire deployment cycle.
  With this focus, the Minnesota Yellow Ribbon program has proven an 
effective means to prepare every combat veteran and their family for a 
safe, healthy and successful reintegration. This multifaceted program 
includes workshops and training events at 30-day, 60-day and 90-day 
intervals for servicemembers following their demobilization.
  This bill also moves us toward fixing a major disparity among 
Minnesota National Guardsmen. Congress created assignment incentive pay 
to recognize the hardship of prolonged mobilization periods for 
Reservists and Guardsmen called up under partial mobilization 
authority. The military services, however, deploy Guardsmen and 
Reservists under other mobilization authorities.
  Through no fault of their own, many Minnesota National Guardsmen who 
served in Bosnia and Kosovo were mobilized using different authorities. 
When these same soldiers, many of them senior non-commissioned 
officers, were asked to deploy with their fellow Guardsmen to Iraq in 
2006, those who had served in Kosovo were given $1,000 a month in 
assignment incentive pay while those who had served in Bosnia were not. 
Clearly this is not fair. I am very pleased that this legislation 
recognizes that and rectifies this disparity.
  Mr. Speaker, I would encourage all of my colleagues to join me today 
in voting for this important legislation that supports our troops.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1 minute to my friend 
and colleague the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), a 
particularly articulate and thoughtful member of the Armed Services 
Committee.
  Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend for yielding, and I congratulate our 
Chairman Skelton on his great job in getting this bill done and our 
ranking member, Mr. Hunter.
  People criticize the Congress, I think justifiably, because they 
think we don't get anything done and we can't ever agree with each 
other. Well, this bill shows that we can get things done and we can 
agree with each other. There are many strongly held opinions about the 
war in Iraq, pro and con. But I think there is unanimity. We should 
show the people who wear the uniform of this country our appreciation 
by raising their pay. And this bill does that 3.5 percent across the 
board. I think there is unanimity that when we send our young men and 
women into harm's way, they should have the best protection. And this 
bill puts $17.6 billion, the highest ever, into up-armored vehicles and 
protective gear for the troops in the field. I think there is unanimity 
that says that when someone is wounded in the service of this country, 
he or she should never be forgotten, ever, when they are in the VA 
health care system. So there is unanimity here for the Wounded Warrior 
Act.
  This bill is well worth supporting because it shows the broad support 
in this Congress for the men and women who serve this country, and I 
urge a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. SAXTON. I yield 1 minute to my friend, the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Turner).
  Mr. TURNER. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  I would like to thank Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter for 
their leadership in completing the conference report for FY08 National 
Defense Authorization Act.
  On December 6, Chairman Skelton announced that an agreement had been 
reached on the conference report stating that ``this bill supports the 
troops, restores readiness, and improves accountability.''
  I would like to point out that this bill includes a key policy 
provision that directly supports our troops. This bill will amend the 
Service Members Civil Relief Act to protect the children and custody 
arrangements of servicemembers deployed in a contingency operation. 
This provision is important because it protects our deployed troops 
from courts that have been overturning established custody arrangements 
while a servicemember is serving our country in a contingency operation 
such as Iraq or Afghanistan.
  Today, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill because it 
provides the child custody protection that our deployed troops deserve. 
Much is asked of our servicemembers, and mobilization can disrupt and 
strain relationships at home. This additional protection is needed to 
provide them peace of mind that the courts will not undertake judicial 
proceedings considering their established custody rights without them. 
This amendment protects them, and it protects their children.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my friend and 
colleague the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords), a member of the 
Armed Services Committee and a conferee on this bill from the Committee 
on Small Business.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the 
Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act. As a member of the 
Armed Services Committee, led by Chairman Skelton, I am pleased to vote 
for a comprehensive bill that bolsters military readiness, supports our 
military families, and makes sure that we have strong national 
security.
  In southern Arizona, I represent two major military installations and 
thousands of military personnel. Having visited with troops both at 
home and abroad, I am well aware of the challenges our men and women in 
uniform face. New recruits at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base and Fort 
Huachuca currently earn just $18,000 a year. Many of them have 
families. This bill recognizes their commitment and gives them a 3.5 
percent pay increase.
  Our military is facing a retention crisis. In this time of war, our 
armed services must have the best and brightest. We must retain those 
men and women by providing them the best training, equipment, and 
support possible. From southern Arizona to Afghanistan, we have to 
ensure that our men and women are ready to face any challenge.

[[Page 34030]]

  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support our troops 
and our national security by voting for this essential legislation.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  I want to say a word on behalf of the Air Land Subcommittee. I want 
to first thank our great subcommittee chairman, Mr. Abercrombie, the 
gentleman from Hawaii, for his outstanding work and for his great 
cooperation on our subcommittee.
  The major highlights of the Air Land Subcommittee's portion of this 
bill provide aircraft providing multiyear procurement authority for the 
CH-47 helicopter program; ensures continued development of two options 
for the propulsion system for the Joint Strike Fighter; authorizes $2.3 
billion for eight badly needed C-17 aircraft; and allows the Air Force 
to proceed with their request to divest 24 C-130E and 85 KC-135E 
aircraft. These retirements will greatly help the Air Force. The 
aircraft are grounded or are unable to be used in combat operations.
  The land forces under our subcommittee benefited from several areas 
of upgraded armor: the mine resistant ambush protected MRAP vehicles; 
the up-armored Humvees; the body armor that we provide in the IED 
fragment armor kits are very important elements of the bill. We also 
authorized $3.4 billion for the Army's future combat systems.
  Mr. Speaker, the Department of Defense continues to have acquisition 
directives that are rarely followed. This is not a good thing. 
Requirements for advancement through research and development to 
procurement, these provisions are routinely waived by the Department of 
Defense. It is hard to know if acquisition policies actually work if we 
rarely follow them.
  Mr. Speaker, the conference report takes steps to address some of 
these issues, and I am encouraged by some of the things that I have 
recently seen and heard coming from the Office of the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics.
  Mr. Speaker, this conference report supports our military men and 
women and provides them with the equipment they need while at the same 
time taking steps to redress acquisition concerns of Congress. This 
conference report certainly in this regard deserves all of our support.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1 minute to my friend 
and colleague the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Carney), a conferee 
on this bill from the Committee on Homeland Security.
  Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Speaker, I do rise today in support of the 2008 
Defense authorization bill, H.R. 1585. This bill addresses many of the 
problems facing our military, as we have seen today.
  As we know, the bill has many strong provisions. I would like to take 
a moment to address one in particular, increasing education benefits to 
our National Guard and Reservists. The GI Bill has provided education 
to many of our Nation's fine and honorable men and women. Indeed, in my 
own family, I grew up knowing what a difference it could make. 
Unfortunately, the GI Bill has a provision which excludes our National 
Guard and Reservists from receiving their GI Bill benefits after they 
have left the military.
  One of my first actions in Congress was to introduce bipartisan 
legislation to give the National Guard and Reserve members up to 10 
years to take advantage of their GI education benefits. This proposal 
is similar to the benefits extended to active duty members of the 
military.
  Under current law, a Guardsman or Reservist loses their benefit when 
they decide to leave the service or shortly thereafter. The National 
Guard and Reserve are becoming indistinguishable from active duty now, 
and these men and women serve their country only to return to realize 
their education benefits are set to expire. This legislation fixes 
that, and I am proud to be a sponsor.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the Chair as to how much 
time is remaining on each side.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ross). The gentleman from New Jersey has 
2\1/2\ minutes remaining and the gentlewoman from California has 3\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Akin).
  Mr. AKIN. Mr. Speaker, the authorization bill that is in front of us 
here today stands in some contrast to other pieces of work of this last 
year. It stands in contrast because it isn't dolled up with all kinds 
of partisan and very controversial kinds of things. It's a bill that is 
just quietly getting the job done.
  I think the Members of the House, both Republican and Democrat, 
should be pleased with the quality of what has been put together. It 
does the job. It funds our troops. It lays out the proper kinds of 
equipment and spending priorities that are absolutely necessary for the 
defense of our country. I'm thankful that we were able to reject the 
hate crimes legislation that had no part on this bill, that was done 
also by this House for standing strong, and what was just the simple 
accomplishment of the job of funding Defense and providing for the 
defense of our country, so hats off to the staff, and hats off to the 
different people that were able to put this together.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to yield 1 minute to my 
friend and colleague the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Walz).
  Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Skelton and 
Ranking Member Hunter for bringing this good piece of legislation to 
the floor.
  This bill, H.R. 1585, fulfills our basic duty in this Congress to 
provide for the national defense. There are several important pieces of 
this legislation that are particularly meaningful to me as a 24-year 
veteran of our Army National Guard. There is an amendment in here to 
address the issue of the Federal tuition assistance program that too 
many of our returning servicemembers are unable to use. It also 
includes an important provision that we worked on in the VA Committee 
on making sure the electronic medical records between DOD and VA truly 
do become seamless. Finally, there is a very important repeal of 
changes that were made to a 200-year-old piece of legislation, the 
Insurrection Act, that Mr. Davis from Virginia and I worked on with our 
Nation's Governors that will restore individual State control over 
their National Guard units.
  These provisions are only a small part of this bill. There's a needed 
pay raise and expanded care and research into TBI for our returning 
warriors. This legislation is packed with provisions to make good on 
this Congress' promise that we will keep every single promise to our 
veterans and make them a priority.
  Our most precious resource in our national defense are those service-
members who are willing to risk everything to defend this Nation.
  I urge my colleagues to support this.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1 minute to my friend 
and colleague the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire), a conferee 
on this bill from the Committee on Small Business.
  Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I want to highlight two specific provisions 
that are included in this landmark legislation that we are discussing 
today.
  This bill contains legislation that I, along with Congressman Tom 
Udall, offered as an amendment during initial House consideration of 
this bill. It will allow military families to use family and medical 
leave time to manage issues such as child care and financial planning 
that arise as a result of the deployment of an immediate family member.
  This bill also contains the language from my bill, H.R. 1944, that 
requires the VA to operate a comprehensive program of long-term care 
for rehabilitation of traumatic brain injury, which has become the 
signature injury of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It also creates 
and maintains a TBI veterans health registry.
  These provisions will directly impact and improve the lives of our 
brave men and women in uniform and their families. I am proud that they 
have been included in this bill.

[[Page 34031]]


  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the chairman as to how many 
additional speakers he has.
  Mr. SKELTON. It appears we have no additional speakers except myself.
  Mr. SAXTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. First let me, 
again, sincerely thank Chairman Skelton for the great job that he has 
done here bringing us to the floor with this bill today.
  Mr. Speaker, President Ronald Reagan used to say that all of the 
things that Congress does are important and all the programs that we 
fund are great programs and important programs. But then he would say, 
``But none of that really matters much if we don't have a good system 
to protect the American people and our national security.'' I have kept 
that in mind ever since I was a freshman here, because that was when I 
heard him say that.

                              {time}  1445

  I believe that this bill today carries on that same kind of 
tradition, because we work together as Republicans and Democrats, 
understanding that we have a finite amount of money and resources to 
put toward our national security, and therefore it's incumbent upon us 
to do it the best way we can.
  We do face a multitude of threats to our way of life and our national 
security interests, and as legislators, we therefore must accept that 
it is our responsibility to ensure that our brave men and women in 
uniform have the best available tools at their disposal to combat those 
threats and protect those interests.
  The provisions of this bill go a considerable way in demonstrating 
that kind of support. And so I urge all Members to support this bill, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, before I make my closing remarks, I would 
yield 1 minute to my friend from Iowa, a member of the Armed Services 
Committee, Mr. Loebsack.
  Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank especially Chairman 
Skelton for yielding 1 minute. I want to thank Chairman Skelton and 
Ranking Member Hunter for their bipartisan leadership on this bill. I 
am proud to work with them to restore the readiness of our military, 
support our deployed troops and their families, and increase the 
oversight of our ongoing presence in Iraq.
  Our National Guard and active duty forces are stretched to the 
breaking point. This bill takes great strides to address this critical 
issue to ensure our Guard are properly trained and equipped to respond 
to threats both home and abroad. Moreover, this legislation includes an 
amendment that I offered with Representative Cummings of Maryland which 
requires General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker to report to Congress 
every three months on the status of military operations and political 
reconciliation in Iraq. Such oversight is crucial to our ability to 
find a new way forward in Iraq.
  I urge my colleagues to support this vital legislation, and I thank 
Chairman Skelton once again for allowing me to speak for 1 minute.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missouri is recognized 
for 30 seconds.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, we have a good number of provisions that 
have not been fully discussed today, including contracting reform and 
acquisition reform. We did speak of roles and missions. But I wish to 
stress, Mr. Speaker, of the years I have had the privilege of serving 
in this body, this has to be the best, most comprehensive, troop-
friendly, family-friendly and readiness-friendly bill that we have ever 
had.
  When it first came to the House before we had our conference, it had 
a very, very strong vote here, and, Mr. Speaker, I hope we have as 
strong a vote when we seek the final passage on this bill today.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. 
Skelton, chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, for his 
leadership in bringing the Conference Report on H.R. 1585, the 
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008,'' 
expeditiously to the House floor. This legislation includes critical 
program and funding authorizations for the men and women in our 
Nation's armed forces.
  This Conference Report contains several provisions that fall under 
the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
including provisions that affect the Federal Aviation Administration, 
the United States Coast Guard, the Environmental Protection Agency, and 
the General Services Administration. I have no objection to the 
inclusion of most of these provisions.
  I rise today in opposition to one provision in the final Conference 
Report that significantly affects the responsibility of the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers, ``Corps.'' Section 2875 rewards the city of 
Woonsocket, RI, for failing its statutory obligation to operate and 
maintain its local levee by shifting responsibility for this now-
failing levee to the Federal government. Current law provides that 
operation and maintenance responsibility for flood control projects is 
a non-Federal responsibility. However, this section requires the Corps 
to conduct any repairs or rehabilitation of the existing structure, 
including its replacement.
  This provision is bad policy, because it establishes the precedent 
that the Federal government will assume responsibility for failing 
flood control systems, which according to the Corps, may include an 
inventory of roughly 15,000 miles of levees and other flood control 
structures, nationwide.
  This provision also creates the false impression that communities 
that sign contractual obligations with the United States, through the 
Corps, can have these contracts overturned by congressional action if 
the community can convince one Member of Congress that the community 
lacks sufficient resources to meet their operation and maintenance 
responsibilities.
  The Corps is often called upon to construct flood control projects, 
in partnership with a non-Federal interest under a normal cost-sharing 
agreement. Once the project is completed, the responsibility for long-
term operation and maintenance is transferred to the non-Federal 
interest. With the exception of the projects along the Mississippi 
River that are part of the Mississippi River and Tributaries project 
(MRT), the Corps is typically not responsible for operation and 
maintenance of flood control projects.
  The Corps currently has responsibility for operation and maintenance 
of navigation projects. For these projects, the backlog for operation 
and maintenance of existing Federal responsibilities is roughly $4 
billion annually, but appropriations for operation and maintenance have 
hovered around $2 billion. The result is that roughly 50 percent of 
vitally needed operation and maintenance responsibilities of the Corps 
are not being met, and are deferred to future appropriations. To shift 
additional operation and maintenance responsibilities to the Corps is 
unwise and is likely to impair the ability of the Corps to carry out 
its existing obligations for operation and maintenance.
  During pre-conference negotiations, I proposed to provide the city of 
Woonsocket with some flexibility related to the cost of operation and 
maintenance of this project, but not a permanent blanket waiver of 
operation and maintenance.
  I proposed two solutions, which I believe would have addressed the 
concerns of the city of Woonsocket. Unfortunately, the Senate was 
unwilling to compromise, and both proposals were rejected.
  Both proposals would have authorized the Corps of Engineers to assume 
greater responsibility for the reconstruction of the failing levee 
system, but would have continued the long-term operation and 
maintenance responsibilities for the city of Woonsocket. I believe that 
both offers were made in the spirit of compromise without violating 
fundamental statutory and contractual responsibilities of the non-
Federal sponsor. Both offers would have allowed the city of Woonsocket 
to start fresh with a structurally sound flood control system, provided 
that the city retained its obligation to operate and maintain the levee 
system.
  I continue to believe that this shift of operation and maintenance 
responsibility is bad policy that will worsen the backlog of deferred 
operation and maintenance responsibility for the Corps and set a poor 
precedent of shifting responsibilities for other projects in the 
future.
  I opposed a similar provision in last year's Defense Authorization 
bill that changed operation and maintenance responsibility from the 
local sponsor to the Federal government for another project in Rhode 
Island.
  As chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I 
will continue to explore the implications of these changes in operation 
and maintenance responsibilities in the formulation of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2008.

[[Page 34032]]


  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
conference report.
  I applaud Chairman Skelton for his leadership in guiding this 
conference report to the floor today. He and Ranking Member Hunter have 
done a tremendous Job, and they have been ably supported by the expert 
staff of our committee.
  I'm particularly grateful to Chairman Skelton for working with me to 
include things important for Colorado, including: a provision to keep 
the cleanup of the Pueblo Chemical Depot on track and fully funded; a 
review of DOD's training requirements for helicopter operations in 
high-altitude conditions, a provision that will help the High-Altitude 
Army National Guard Training Site in my district to establish its need 
for additional training helicopters; language requiring the Army to 
make its case for expansion at the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site; an 
agreement between the Air Force and the city of Pueblo about flight 
operations at the Pueblo airport; a report on opportunities for 
leveraging Defense Department funds with States' funds to prevent 
disruption in the event of electric grid or pipeline failures; and 
restrictions on the move of key NORAD functions from Cheyenne Mountain 
to Peterson Air Force Base until security implications and promised 
cost savings are analyzed.
  I am also pleased that the final bill includes two amendments I 
offered in committee, including one to repeal a provision adopted last 
year that makes it easier for the president to federalize the National 
Guard for domestic law enforcement purposes during emergencies. By 
repealing this, my amendment restores the role of the Governors with 
regard to this subject. My other amendment extends for 5 years the 
Office of the Ombudsman that assists people claiming benefits under the 
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, 
EEOICPA, which is so important for affected workers from the Rocky 
Flats site in my district.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill rightly focuses on our military's readiness 
needs.
  After 5 years at war, both the active duty and reserve forces are 
stretched to their limits. The bill will provide what's needed to 
respond, including a substantial Strategic Readiness Fund, adding funds 
for National Guard equipment and training, requiring a plan for 
rebuilding our prepositioned stocks, and establishing a Defense 
Readiness Production Board to mobilize the industrial base to address 
equipment shortfalls.
  It also provides important funds for the Base Realignment and Closure 
process, including additional funds to assist communities expected to 
absorb large numbers of personnel as a result of the BRAC decision. 
This funding is especially important to Colorado, given that Fort 
Carson in Colorado Springs will add 10,000 soldiers and will be home to 
25,000 troops by 2009.
  The bill provides substantial resources to improve protection of our 
troops, including additional funds for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected 
Vehicles, body armor, lED jammers, and up-armored Humvees for our 
troops in the field. Consistent with the Tauscher-Udall Army expansion 
bill in the last Congress, the bill enlarges the Army and Marine Corps 
to help ease the strain on our troops and provides for an increase in 
National Guard personnel. And it will provide for a 3.5 percent across-
the-board pay raise for servicemembers, boost funding for the Defense 
Health Program, and prohibit increasing TRICARE and pharmacy user fee 
increases.
  The bill incorporates provisions from the Wounded Warrior Assistance 
Act, which passed the House earlier this year and was driven by the 
revelations of mistreatment and mismanagement at Walter Reed Army 
Medical Center. These provisions establish new requirements to provide 
the people, training, and oversight needed to ensure high-quality care 
and efficient administrative processing at Walter Reed and throughout 
the active duty military services. The bill also establishes a Military 
Mental Health Initiative to coordinate all mental health research and 
development within the Defense Department, and establishes a Traumatic 
Brain Injury Initiative to allow emerging technologies and treatments 
to compete for funding.
  Given the increased use of the National Guard and Reserves in recent 
years, the bill gives important new authorities to the National Guard 
to fulfill its expanded role, including authorizing a fourth star for 
the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, making the National Guard 
Bureau a joint activity of the Department of Defense, and requiring 
that at least one deputy of Northern Command be a National Guard 
officer.
  The final bill also addresses ongoing problems of contracting fraud 
by tightening controls on managing contracts and improving 
whistleblower protections, as well as improving accountability in 
contracting by requiring public justification of the use of procedures 
that prevent full and open competition.
  I'm pleased that the conference report fully supports the goals of 
the Department of Energy nonproliferation programs and the Department 
of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction program, consistent with the 9-
11 Commission recommendations. The bill also slows development of a 
Reliable Replacement Warhead and establishes a bipartisan commission to 
evaluate U.S. strategic posture for the future, including the role that 
nuclear weapons should play in our national security strategy.
  Mr. Speaker, the conference report we are considering today does an 
excellent job of balancing the need to sustain our current warfighting 
abilities with the need to prepare for the next threat to our national 
security. It is critical that we are able to meet the operational 
demands of today even as we continue to prepare our men and women in 
uniform to be the best trained and equipped force in the world.
  This is a good bill, a carefully drafted and bipartisan bill, and I 
urge its passage.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference 
agreement on H.R. 1585 and would like to thank my distinguished 
colleague, Chairman Ike Skelton, for his hard work and leadership on 
this important legislation. I am grateful for his partnership on 
critical matters of national security.
  The struggle against terrorism requires a global campaign centered on 
engagement with the Muslim world. It also requires us to strengthen our 
partners' capabilities to fight terror and to maintain our own military 
capabilities in this area.
  I welcome the efforts by the Committee on Armed Services to adjust 
the Department of Defense's legal authorities to meet this challenge. 
To its credit, the Department recognizes that ``soft'' power makes the 
use of military force more effective by fostering stability among 
vulnerable populations. To that end, the Pentagon has sought a variety 
of foreign assistance-related authorities traditionally implemented by 
the State Department.
  I particularly welcome the Defense Department's efforts to address 
shortcomings in our national security bureaucracy. In the arena of 
stability operations, I, more than anyone, am aware of the budget 
shortfalls confronting the State Department, and I am fully aware that 
the men and women in uniform do not at times receive the expanded 
support that they need during stabilization operations.
  I am also pleased that the Defense authorization bill follows the 
lead of H.R. 885, the Lantos-Hobson ``International Nuclear Fuel for 
Peace and Nonproliferation Act, passed by the House in June, to 
designate $50 million to support the establishment of an international 
nuclear fuel bank, under multilateral control and direction, to remove 
any rational incentive for countries to build their own uranium 
enrichment plants--facilities that can make fuel for both civil power 
reactors and nuclear weapons. It also supports international efforts to 
build international pressure on Iran by addressing Tehran's claims that 
it must build a massive enrichment facility because there is no 
international assurance of supply of reactor fuel.
  Notwithstanding these gains, there are a few aspects of this 
legislation which require continued vigilant oversight by the Foreign 
Affairs and Defense committees. First, we must ensure that the 
administration and the Congress work together to develop appropriate 
nonproliferation safeguards for implementation of the fuel bank. In 
particular, I look forward to working with the executive branch on 
criteria for access by foreign countries to any fuel bank established 
by the IAEA with materials or funds provided by the United States.
  Second, to the extent that core functions of the State Department are 
being duplicated by the Department of Defense, both the Defense and 
Foreign Relations committees must ensure that the national instruments 
of soft power remain coherent, coordinated and sufficiently authorized 
and funded. In the words of Secretary Robert Gates:

       If we are to meet the myriad challenges around the world in 
     the coming decades, this country must strengthen other 
     important elements of national power both institutionally and 
     financially, and create the capability to integrate and apply 
     all of the elements of national power to problems and 
     challenges abroad.

  We must ensure that the State Department in particular is adequately 
resourced to maximize its role in the fight against terror. Our 
oversight must also ensure that assistance is carried out both by the 
Defense and State departments in a coordinated, unified fashion. In 
that spirit, I look forward to reviewing the report required by Section 
1209 of this bill, which will require the Department of Defense to 
provide a global snapshot of the foreign assistance activities it 
currently undertakes.

[[Page 34033]]

  I again applaud the work of my colleagues in producing a bill that is 
a tribute to our men and women in uniform and advances American 
security.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1585, the 
National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA, for Fiscal Year 2008. This 
legislation is vital to preventing terrorism and suppressing potential 
rogue states by updating our defense systems, which will in turn 
protect the future of our Nation and our men and women at home.
  The ill-advised war in Iraq has put historic strains on our armed 
services.
  Our readiness is at an all-time low not witnessed since the 1970s. 
The Army National Guard is operating with only 56 percent of its 
overall equipment needs.
  Therefore, Mr. Speaker, the funding and enactment of this bill is 
crucial. By authorizing $692.3 billion for defense and energy-defense 
related initiatives in 2008, this bill will strengthen our military. It 
will also honor our veterans with the efficient and cutting edge health 
care they more than deserve.
  I am proud to say that an amendment that I introduced during the 
consideration of the NDAA before the House Committee on Armed Services 
makes certain that the voices of veterans are heard by vesting the 
Secretary of Veterans' Affairs with the power to appoint two members to 
the oversight board that will evaluate the current system and care 
provided to our veterans and active servicemembers.
  Working diligently with the House Armed Services Committee, many of 
my recommendations to the NDAA bill regarding Operation Iraqi Freedom 
are included in the baseline text of this bill.
  Namely, these recommendations address the need for proper oversight 
of the reconstruction efforts, putting an end to slanted no-bid 
contracts, along with the sharing and distribution of oil revenue 
resources to the Iraqi people so as to foster adequate reconstruction 
and facilitate national reconciliation.
  Moreover, I am proud to have worked with my friend and colleague on 
the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Loebsack, in the 
adoption of our joint amendment at full committee, which requires 
Secretary Gates, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker to provide 
perpetual reports to Congress on the status and implementation of the 
Joint Campaign Plan, JCP, and the Iraqi Government's efforts to 
implement political reform until the end of U.S. combat operations in 
Iraq.
  As such this amendment ensures that Congress is supplied with (1) the 
information necessary to provide proper and constructive oversight of 
our progress in Iraq, (2) sheds light on the conditions faced by our 
troops on the ground, and (3) supplies Congress with the crucial 
information needed to determine a responsible and timely troop 
redeployment.
  While violence has dropped in Iraq, there is a window of opportunity 
for the Iraqi Government to make serious strides to achieve political 
reform and in doing so strategically bring our troops home. Therefore, 
while we continue to urge this administration to shift policy in Iraq 
to one that is driven by multilateral and bilateral diplomatic 
initiatives, we must also ensure that our remaining troops in Iraq are 
supplied with the support that they need. This bill provides over $17.6 
billion for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles and $8 billion to 
buy medium and heavy tactical trucks fast enough to replace battle 
losses and to meet National Guard requirements, which are currently at 
dangerously low levels.
  Mr. Speaker, while we may be divided on the war in Iraq, we, must be 
united in guaranteeing that our brave men and women in uniform are well 
rested, well trained and well equipped--and that our veterans receive 
the services they deserve. We must also be united in ensuring that 
taxpayer dollars are spent as effectively and efficiently as possible. 
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this critical 
defense bill.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I oppose the provisions in this 
conference report, unilaterally added by the Senate, that provide 
immigration benefits to certain Iraqi refugees. As Ranking Member of 
the House ``Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border 
Security and International Law,'' these provisions should have been 
discussed in their proper place, the House Judiciary Committee. 
However, I along with Ranking Member Smith, were basically excluded 
from negotiations. There is no bipartisan support for these provisions 
in the House Judiciary Committee.
  This bill grants special immigrant visas each year for the next 5 
years to 5,000 Iraqi nationals and their families. The State Department 
has estimated that for every Iraqi national granted a visa, they will 
bring over at least four family members. Therefore, the number of 
special immigrant visas granted under this bill will reach 25,000 per 
year, or 125,000 total after 5 years.
  Mr. Speaker, 125,000 Iraqis that support the United States would be a 
tremendous asset to Iraq and the United States in the Middle East. 
These Iraqis should remain in their home country to rebuild it and 
encourage the spread of liberty. If we remove every Iraqi that is 
supportive of the U.S. from Iraq, terrorists will have the upper hand. 
Iraq and the United States need these patriotic Iraqis to remain in 
Iraq and rebuild.
  While I sympathize with the Iraqi nationals who have been victims of 
this War on Terror, conditions within the country are improving. I 
encourage the Iraqis to stay and fight for their homeland and freedom 
alongside American troops. That's how we win this War on Terror.
  For these reasons I oppose the provisions in the Conference Report to 
H.R. 1585 that provide U.S. immigration benefits to certain Iraqi 
refugees, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Vote ``no'' on the 
Rule.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, while I cannot support H.R. 1585, this 
legislation does contain the provisions of H.R. 3481, the ``Support for 
Injured Servicemembers Act,'' a bill that I introduced in the House and 
which amends the Family and Medical Leave Act to provide 6 months of 
leave for spouses, children, parents and other ``next of kin'' to care 
for injured service members. H.R. 3481 implements one of the 
recommendations of the President's Commission on Care for America's 
Returning Wounded Warriors, chaired by Secretary Shalala and Senator 
Dole.
  The Family and Medical Leave Act is intended to help individuals 
balance their family and work obligations. Ninety million working 
people are now eligible for unpaid job protected leave for up to 12 
weeks a year. When the Act was passed in 1993, it was a giant step and 
is of great importance to working families.
  Since a majority of military spouses work, they too must balance work 
and family. They work to put food on the table and support their 
families, just like the rest of us. But they face additional challenges 
because their lives are disrupted by multiple deployments, involving 
not only active service members but those in the National Guard and 
reserves as well.
  The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have resulted in over 30,000 
casualties with many servicemembers being seriously wounded. These 
injured warriors need substantial support and care from their families, 
often for long periods of time, and some permanently.
  The Workforce Protections Subcommittee, which I chair, held a hearing 
in September on H.R. 3481. We heard from several witnesses about the 
need for extended family and medical leave in these instances.
  Unfortunately, this Administration has let down our returning service 
members and their families. Therefore, I introduced H.R. 3481, so no 
matter where we come down on the merits of these conflicts, we can help 
families who support loved ones who put their lives on the line in Iraq 
and Afghanistan. The provisions of H.R. 3481 will certainly help.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of language 
in this conference report that includes several critical provisions to 
aid the resettlement of Iraqi refugees and internally displaced 
persons.
  First, I offer my sincere thanks to Chairman Skelton and Senator 
Kennedy for working to include this language in the conference report 
before us today.
  Since our invasion, well over 4 million Iraqis have fled their homes 
as a result of political instability, economic catastrophe, and ethnic 
and sectarian strife.
  Unable to legally find employment in their host countries, living in 
substandard housing with inadequate medical and educational facilities, 
many refugees simply have no place to turn.
  While neighboring countries have struggled to cope with the strain of 
hosting millions of these refugees, our track record on refugee 
resettlement has been nothing short of an embarrassment.
  As the refugee crisis unfolded in Iraq and its neighboring countries 
in the aftermath of our invasion, the Departments of State and Homeland 
Security stood by while a backlog of refugees referred by the United 
Nations for resettlement languished in the slums of Amman and other 
cities in the region.
  This legislation will help make up for the administration's 
inexcusably lethargic pace by setting out clear refugee processing 
priorities, mandating the centralization of Iraq refugee efforts in the 
State Department, requiring greater cooperation with those allies in 
the region who are hosting many of these refugees, and increasing 
congressional oversight of refugee assistance and resettlement 
programs.
  In addition, the language which we have worked together in great 
bipartisan fashion to include in this conference report also 
strengthens the Special Immigrant Visa program, for

[[Page 34034]]

Iraqis who have worked for our Government and military in Iraq.
  Many of these Iraqis who served bravely besides our troops and 
diplomats need our immediate assistance. Singled out as collaborators, 
they have been targeted by death squads, militias, and al-Qaeda.
  Clearly, we owe them more than just a debt of gratitude. We owe them 
a safe haven and a fresh start.
  While this legislation represents an important step forward in our 
commitment to these refugees, it cannot be the last word on the matter.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues in the future to help us 
live up to our commitments to these refugees.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
1585, the National Defense Authorization Act for the Fiscal Year 2008. 
I urge my colleagues to pass the conference report because the bill 
improves the readiness of our men and women in uniform and takes 
necessary steps toward ensuring that our wounded warriors get the care 
they deserve. I want to applaud the leadership of Chairman Ike Skelton 
for working closely with Members on both sides of the aisle and across 
the Capitol to ensure that the legislation before the House of 
Representatives today will truly help our servicemembers in the field.
  I am especially pleased with section 374 of the bill, which provides 
for priority transportation on Department of Defense aircraft for 
military retirees residing in the United States territories who require 
specialty care that is not available in that territory. Specifically, a 
military retiree who requires specialty care and is under the age of 65 
will be considered under category 4 priority instead of the current 
category 6 for space-available seats aboard Department of Defense 
aircraft. Section 374 also requires the Department of Defense to submit 
a report to Congress indicating how it will internally address the 
issue of improved TRICARE coverage in the territories. I worked with 
the Department of Defense over the past several years to address the 
specialty care travel dilemma but no satisfactory resolution ever 
emerged. The provision that I sponsored that is contained in this bill 
begins to address the concerns that have been raised by military 
retirees on Guam regarding their access to space-available seats on 
Department of Defense aircraft. This provision represents an 
improvement over the current situation but more work remains to 
strengthen TRICARE benefits for retirees in the territories. I thank 
the professional staff of the House Armed Services Committee who worked 
diligently with me and my staff to include this provision in the final 
version of the legislation.
  The bill also includes language that allows the U.S. Army to remain 
as the program management executive for the joint cargo aircraft 
program. The provision requires several reports to be submitted to 
Congress before appropriated funds can be expended by the U.S. Army or 
the U.S. Air Force for procurement of additional aircraft. The joint 
cargo aircraft program is critical to replacing aging C-23 Sherpa 
aircraft that are operated by the Army National Guard. It is also 
critical so that certain Air National Guard units do not lose their 
flying missions. The joint cargo aircraft program provides critical 
intra-theater lift capabilities delivering supplies to servicemembers 
in the field. I thank my colleagues, Mr. Courtney of Connecticut and 
Mr. Hayes of North Carolina, for their support and leadership on this 
matter.
  As I stated earlier, this piece of legislation helps to improve the 
readiness of our forces. In particular for Guam, the bill authorizes 
just over $290 million for military construction on our island. This 
funding will provide continued economic opportunities for businesses on 
Guam and begin to fund improvements to critical infrastructure that is 
needed before the realignment of military personnel begins. In 
particular, I requested a project be added to the bill to build a 
technical training facility at Northwest Field on Andersen Air Force 
Base. This project is a needed training facility for emerging missions 
at Andersen Air Force Base. As the 607th Training Flight ``Commando 
Warrior'' Unit moves from Osan Air Base, Korea they will need this 
facility to ensure optimal readiness for missions at Andersen Air Force 
Base.
  Finally, I am encouraged to see portions of the National Guard 
Empowerment Act included within H.R. 1585. We will finally give the 
National Guard the recognition and tools that they need to continue 
operating as a dual-hatted force responding to crises at home and 
abroad. As a former lieutenant governor, I know first-hand, how brave, 
valiant and essential the National Guard is to the safety and security 
of our Nation. Elevating the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to a 
four-star general helps to give the Guard the priority in 
decisionmaking that it deserves. The provision making the National 
Guard Bureau become a joint activity within the Department of Defense 
is even more important. Now that the National Guard Bureau is a joint 
activity I hope that the Department of Defense will give very serious 
consideration to giving State Adjutants General joint credit for their 
service to the State or territory. The National Guard is truly a joint 
force and the work of their general officers should be recognized as 
such.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to adopt H.R. 1585.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, for years I have spoken out and voted 
against wasteful Defense spending that often serves to make us less 
safe and takes money from more useful programs. I am concerned that 
there is still too much money in this legislation for unnecessary 
weapons systems and other outdated holdovers from the cold war and too 
little to deal with the challenges of today. However, I am pleased that 
this bill takes some steps in the direction of reform, and I hope that 
it provides a platform for further progress.
  I support this bill because it includes provisions from the 
``Responsibility to Iraqi Refugees Act,'' which I introduced in May and 
which were added in the Senate as an amendment by Senator Kennedy. This 
bill will provide 5,000 special immigrant visas for each of the next 5 
years to Iraqis at risk because they helped the United States, require 
the Secretary of State to establish refugee processing in Iraq and 
other countries in the region, and direct the Secretary of State to 
designate a special coordinator at the Embassy in Baghdad.
  We need a wholesale change in attitude that puts the needs of Iraqis 
at the forefront of our Iraq policy, rather than using them as pawns in 
political games. It is ironic, to be generous, to hear President Bush 
repeatedly talk about the humanitarian crisis and massive out-flows 
that would follow what he called a ``precipitous'' withdrawal. This 
only illustrates the state of denial over the humanitarian crisis 
currently happening.
  This is one area where our moral responsibility to these unfortunate 
people can be used to bring together those of disparate viewpoints in a 
cooperative effort that might serve as a template for how we solve 
greater problems associated with the war. One of the burdens of those 
who would be world leaders and the responsibility of those who make war 
is to deal with the consequences of their decisions. Innocent victims 
of war and civil strife are too often the invisible and forgotten 
casualties.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
important legislation, and I commend my friend, Chairman Ike Skelton 
for his leadership in crafting this bipartisan product.
  I support this conference report because it focuses on the readiness 
crisis of the United States military and puts our men and women in 
uniform first and foremost. It will provide our soldiers in harm's way 
with the best gear and force protection possible. As a veteran of the 
U.S. Army and as the Representative for Fort Bragg, I support this bill 
that will provide our troops better health care, better pay, and the 
benefits they have earned.
  America has the finest military in the world. Unfortunately, the 
current Administration's policies in Iraq have depleted our great 
military and put tremendous strain on our troops. Army readiness has 
dropped to unprecedented levels, and Army National Guard units have, on 
average, only 40 percent of the required equipment. And many stateside 
units are not fully equipped and would not be considered ready if 
called upon to respond during an emergency such as a hurricane.
  This conference report helps restore our nation's military readiness 
by creating a $1 billion Strategic Readiness Fund to address equipment 
shortfalls, fully funding the Army's and Marine Corps' equipment reset 
requirements and authorizing $980 million to provide the National Guard 
and Reserve critically needed equipment.
  This bill protects our troops in harm's way by authorizing $17.6 
billion, an increase of $865 million, for additional MRAPs vehicle 
armor, $4.8 billion for anti-IED road-side bomb efforts, $3.3 billion 
for up-armored Humvees, $1.5 billion for add-on armor for other 
vehicles and $1.2 billion for body armor.
  The measure supports our troops and their families, by giving the 
military a pay raise larger than requested by the President, 
prohibiting fee increases in TRICARE and the TRICARE pharmacy program, 
and strengthening benefits for the troops and their families, as 
promised in the GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century.
  It includes the Wounded Warrior Act, which responds to the Walter 
Reed Army Medical Center scandal by improving the care of injured 
soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan--addressing many of the 
issues raised by the Dole-Shalala Commission and implementing several 
of its recommendations.

[[Page 34035]]

  It improves accountability and cracks down on waste, fraud and abuse 
in contracting including requiring new steps to manage and oversee 
contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan and requiring detailed new 
regulations for private security contractors, such as Blackwater 
employees, mandating the appropriate use of force.
  The bill also includes new bipartisan reporting requirements under 
which DOD will regularly brief Congress on the planning taking place to 
responsibly redeploy U.S. forces from Iraq. It incorporates the 
National Guard Empowerment Act, which gives the National Guard enhanced 
authorities to fulfill its expanded role in the Nation's defense, 
including authorizing a fourth star for the Chief of the National Guard 
Bureau, requiring at least one deputy of the Northern Command to be a 
National Guard Officer, and making the National Guard Bureau a joint 
activity of the DOD. And it requires the Pentagon to include in its 
quarterly readiness reports the state-by-state capability of the 
National Guard to achieve its homeland and civil support missions, such 
as disaster response. The bill increases end strength by authorizing 
13,000 additional soldiers for the Army and 9,000 additional Marines in 
FY 2008.
  Significantly, this legislation provides all service members a pay 
raise of 3.5 percent, which is 0.5 percent more than the President's 
budget request, and increases monthly hardship duty pay to a maximum of 
$1,500 (up from $150 per month), and provides special pays and bonuses.
  The bill will also upgrade military health care for our troops, 
veterans and military retirees. It preserves health benefits by 
prohibiting fee increases in TRICARE and the TRICARE pharmacy services 
for military personnel and retirees. It prohibits cuts in military 
medical personnel and fully funds the Defense Health program facility 
maintenance, particularly at Walter Reed. It extends VA health 
insurance for service members who served in combat in the Persian Gulf 
War or future hostilities for five years instead of two years. And the 
conference report enhances benefits specifically for reservists.
  I commend my North Carolina colleague Congressman David Price for his 
work on contractor accountability, and I support the inclusion in this 
conference report of his legislation to crack down on waste, fraud and 
abuse in contracting.
  Mr. Speaker, there are many more provisions of this important 
legislation worthy of support, and I urge my colleagues to join me in 
voting to pass it.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this final, 
bipartisan Defense Authorization agreement for the critical investments 
it makes in our military readiness, troop protection and wounded 
warrior care. I am also proud that this conference report cracks down 
on contractor fraud, provides a 3.5 percent pay increase and improves 
health care benefits for our military families and restores workplace 
fairness for the Defense Department's hardworking civilian employees. 
Finally, consistent with this Congress' commitment to chart a new 
direction on the war in Iraq, this legislation requires the DOD to 
regularly brief Congress on its planning to responsibly redeploy our 
forces out of that misguided conflict.
  To help restore our nation's military readiness, this bill creates a 
$1 billion Strategic Readiness Fund to address equipment shortfalls and 
provides an additional $980 million to properly equip our National 
Guard and Reserve.
  We authorize $17.6 billion--an increase of $865 million--for the Mine 
Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles that have been so successful 
protecting our men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. We commit 
$4.8 billion for anti-IED efforts. And we allocate a total of $6 
billion to up-armor our Humvees, add armor to other combat vehicles and 
provide body armor for our troops.
  Because we must never force those who have been wounded abroad to 
battle bureaucratic red tape in order to get the care they need when 
they come home, this legislation includes the Wounded Warrior Act, 
designed to correct the disgraceful conditions uncovered at the Walter 
Reed Army Medical Center and ensure seamless, high-quality care that 
our returning veterans have earned and deserve.
  Improving accountability through more regular and vigorous oversight 
is a consistent and recurring theme of the new Congress. Consistent 
with that commitment, this bill requires the DoD and Department of 
State to issue detailed regulations governing the conduct of private 
security contractors employed by the federal government. Additionally, 
to enhance our accountability efforts, we strengthen whistleblower 
protections for those willing to bring waste, fraud and abuse to the 
public's attention.
  I am particularly pleased that this legislation prohibits fee 
increases in the TRICARE program, and the 3.5 percent pay increase 
provided to our military families--while larger than the President's 
request--is really the least we can do. Moreover, I am gratified that 
the NDAA conferees saw fit to include important contracting out and 
workplace protections for DoD's civilian employees in this final 
report. They go to work every day to serve their country, and it is 
only appropriate that the nation treat them with the dignity and 
respect they deserve.
  Finally, having worked for several years to reconstitute the core 
functions of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, AFIP, in the 
aftermath of the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure, BRAC, Commission, I 
am delighted by the establishment of a Joint Pathology Center mandated 
by this report. Furthermore, I believe the expanded nursing program 
housed at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 
USUHS, will be a valuable resource to military medicine, and I welcome 
the program to my district.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1585, the 
National Defense Authorization Act. Although this bill includes some 
very important provisions, like the private security contracting 
language I fought so hard to include, I am unable to support this 
legislation because it authorizes $41.8 billion to continue the war in 
Iraq. It is unfortunate that this funding was part of this bill because 
otherwise I would have been proud to vote for this legislation. 
Nevertheless, I am very proud of the provisions to increase oversight 
and transparency over private security contractors, which 
Representative Price, Senator Obama and I worked so hard to include in 
this bill.
  This bill contains important provisions to regulate private security 
contractors, including nearly all of the provisions from H.R. 897, the 
Iraq and Afghanistan Contractor Sunshine Act, which I introduced in 
February to give Congress access to the basic information necessary for 
us to do our job of providing gravely needed oversight of private 
contractors. The Defense Authorization Act would give Congress access 
to information about contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan including a 
description of each contract, the value of each contract, the total 
number of personnel employed on contracts and the total number of 
contractors killed or wounded. I am happy to see these provisions from 
my legislation included in today's bill.
  The series of lethal incidents involving private security contractors 
in Iraq over the past 2 months have made it crystal clear that we must 
provide oversight of private contractors. This National Defense 
Authorization Act would increase oversight by the Department of Defense 
and the Department of State by mandating that they create clear 
regulations to govern contractor conduct, investigate any violent 
incidents like the September 16th Blackwater shooting, and clarify 
contractors' use of force.
  Further, any new contract signed 180 days after the bill is enacted 
would have to contain a clause saying that contractors must comply with 
the new regulations and that all contract personnel performing private 
security contracts understand that they must comply with U.S. laws and 
the laws of the host country, orders issued by the combatant command, 
rules on the use of force, and any investigation into violent incidents 
conducted by DOD. If they do not comply, their contract could be 
terminated. This will create a powerful tool that the United States 
could use to ensure that private security contractors follow the law 
and are held responsible for their actions.
  The National Defense Authorization bill also goes a long way toward 
restoring troop readiness. It includes a badly needed 3.5 percent pay 
raise for servicemembers and prohibits increases in TRICARE and 
pharmacy user fees. The bill also includes the Wounded Warrior Act to 
address the problems experienced by wounded and injured servicemembers 
that became apparent earlier this year at Walter Reed.
  I also support the increase in the number of visas for the brave 
Iraqis who have worked with the United States and have been targeted 
for their efforts.
  While I cannot vote for the bill because it includes $41.8 billion 
for the war in Iraq without a withdrawal deadline, I would like to 
thank Chairman Skelton for addressing so many of my concerns about 
bringing accountability to private contracting and to the wars in Iraq 
and Afghanistan.
  Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1585, the 
Conference Report on Defense Authorization Bill.
  As we approach the Holiday Season and we go back to our families, we 
cannot forget that not everyone is so fortunate.
  Our loyal soldiers are serving proudly and not all will be with their 
loved ones.
  I want to speak directly to them and to their families in my District 
because these are the true faces of the war.

[[Page 34036]]

  This bill supports our service members by increasing military pay 
across the board, because the empty stomachs of a family hurt no matter 
where you are.
  This bill protects our soldiers by providing the equipment needed, 
because today--our soldiers deserve the best there is.
  This bill includes the Wounded Warrior Act which reinforces the fact 
that the tragic conditions at Walter Reed must end.
  I ask my colleagues to not ignore the realities of the war and review 
their priorities--we must give our troops on the frontline what they 
need and rightfully deserve.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the conference report.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the conference report.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. SKELTON. 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.

                          ____________________