[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 12075-12141]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014


                             General Leave

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on the consideration of H.R. 
2397, and that I may include tabular material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 312 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2397.
  The Chair appoints the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) to 
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1418


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2397) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for other purposes, with 
Mrs. Miller in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.

[[Page 12076]]

  The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Indiana 
(Mr. Visclosky) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Madam Chairman, the subcommittee has produced this bill after months 
of bipartisan cooperation, months of hearings, and months of classified 
briefings. We present a bill today that includes a base funding of 
$512.5 billion--$3.4 billion below the CBO estimate of the President's 
request and approximately $28.1 billion above the estimated fiscal year 
2013 sequestration level. For Overseas Contingencies Operations, OCO, 
the bill includes $85.8 billion, which is $1.5 billion below last 
year's level.
  We have worked closely with all parties. Mr. Visclosky has been 
involved in every step of the way on producing this legislation. Our 
committee staff is unrivaled anywhere in this Congress, and they have 
done a tremendous job for the subcommittee.
  These are some highlights of the bill:
  There is $580 million to fully fund the authorized military pay 
raise; $536 million to fully fund the anticipated fuel costs; $950 
million to fully fund the 2nd Virginia class submarine; $922 million to 
restore Facility Sustainment, Modernization and Restoration funding; 
and $692 million for military medical research, including $246 million 
for cancer research and $125 million for traumatic brain injury 
research.
  During the next couple of days we are going to consider 100 
amendments. So everybody be prepared: it's going to be a long day and a 
long night. And Madam Chair, to get us started off on the right track, 
I'm going to reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 12077]]





[[Page 12078]]



[[Page 12079]]



[[Page 12080]]



[[Page 12081]]



[[Page 12082]]



[[Page 12083]]



[[Page 12084]]



[[Page 12085]]


  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I would like to begin by expressing my appreciation to Chairman 
Young, and to congratulate him on the bipartisan and transparent manner 
in which he has crafted the fiscal year 2014 Defense bill.
  I also want to express my gratitude to Chairman Rogers, Ranking 
Member Lowey, and all of the members of the Defense Subcommittee for 
their efforts. We would not be here today but for their outstanding 
effort.
  I would also note that this will be the last Defense appropriations 
bill we bring to the floor with the membership of Mr. Bonner from 
Alabama. With his leaving this institution, we are losing a very 
serious and thoughtful Member who has worked assiduously every day to 
leave the world better, and I certainly want to recognize his 
individual contribution.
  The bill also could not have been written without the dedication, 
hard work, and sound judgment of the staff that Mr. Young has already 
referenced. I do want to thank Tom McLemore, Sherry Young, Tim Prince, 
Jennifer Miller, Walter Hearne, Paul Terry, BG Wright, Brooke Boyer, 
Ann Reese, Adrienne Ramsey, Megan Rosenbusch, Maureen Holohan, Paul 
Juola, Rebecca Leggieri, Kent Clark, Michael Rigney, and Joe DeVooght.
  The bill at hand is fundamentally aimed at restoring readiness and 
training for the services to areas that have suffered greatly in the 
budgetary upset of the current year.
  While Chairman Young has noted that the bill's $212 billion in 
funding is approximately $28 billion more than the fiscal year 2013 
post-sequestration level, it does contain a number of significant 
reductions. The bill cuts $617.8 million from the Joint Strike Fighter 
program to address unjustified cost growth and unjustified concurrency 
estimates for the program. It cuts another $112 million due to an 
overstatement of Army travel requirements. The bill rescinds $443 
million for C-27-J aircraft.
  The bill and report contain a significant amount of language and 
robust funding for initiatives to respond to sexual assault in the 
armed services. Sexual assault in any circumstance is unacceptable and 
maddening. The fact that it is prevalent within the military is even 
more so because of the standard to which our men and women in uniform 
hold themselves. These are individuals who are committed to give their 
``last full measure of devotion'' to our Nation, who, in order to be 
effective, need to unconditionally trust each other. Sexual assault 
undermines all of this.
  Though I strongly support the efforts contained in this bill, they 
are aimed mainly at offender accountability and caring for victims. 
Even though the comprehensive solution to this issue lies outside the 
services, it is imperative that the proper attitudes and training start 
during the recruitment process for the officers and enlisted and 
continue throughout each servicemembers' career.
  I would also note that the bill includes $20 million above the 
request for suicide prevention and outreach, consistent with the 
funding level of the past 2 years. Suicides are another disheartening 
problem within the services, especially given the emphasis that the 
Department and Congress have placed on the issue over the past few 
years. But money is not the only solution. We need to spend the 
appropriated dollars as wisely and as effectively as possible.
  I was taken aback in a hearing earlier this year to learn that the 
Navy has a collection of 123 programs aimed at addressing suicide and 
resiliency. While I am sure that each one of these programs is well-
intentioned, the sheer number spreads resources too thin and creates 
confusion. To their credit, the Navy is in the process of implementing 
task force recommendations to dedicate more resources to the programs 
that truly work.
  Additionally, I would like to express my support for a solution that 
benefits all future users of the Integrated Electronic Health Record 
program. I am proud of the efforts of our subcommittee and of the 
Military Construction-Veterans Affairs Subcommittee to effectuate this 
long-awaited improvement to medical care for our still-serving military 
members and our veterans. Additionally, the cooperation between our 
subcommittees and with our corresponding authorization committees 
demonstrates the importance Congress places on the issue.
  I am pleased that the bill report contains provisions that enhance 
oversight at the Department. The Office of the Inspector General is 
funded at $347 million, which is nearly $35 million above the 
administration's request. This office plays a vital role in moving the 
Department towards auditable financial statements, which are long 
overdue and which I attach great importance to.
  Also, while the committee increased funding relative to the budget 
request for environmental cleanup at Formerly Used Defense Sites, this 
increase is accompanied by additional reporting requirements. In the 
same vein as my prior comments, the money in this program must be spent 
more effectively going forward to ensure that we complete cleanup 
projects, not just continue them.
  Regarding missile defense, the bill increases advance procurement 
funding for additional Ground-Based Interceptors. This funding is 
accompanied by a requirement to document the adequacy of the testing 
plan for the Ground-Based Interceptors.
  In light of the program's recent test failure, I continue to be very 
concerned about the concurrency of this program. I believe it is 
essential to maintain rigorous standards to ensure that the weapons we 
pursue are fully developed before we begin fielding them, and once 
fielded, that these weapons effectively perform their missions.
  Further, should the review to determine the cause of the latest test 
failure reveal significant problems, and if we understand that this 
program needs to be changed, we should reevaluate our position in 
conference.
  While I support the bill, there are a few provisions that I have 
concerns with, in particular, the three general provisions regarding 
detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
  I believe that the continued operation of Guantanamo Bay reduces our 
Nation's credibility and weakens our national security by providing 
terrorist organizations with recruitment material. I do regret that 
this bill and other relevant appropriations bills continue to thwart 
any attempts to close Guantanamo by prohibiting viable alternatives.
  Further, I am concerned that the bill essentially prohibits a pay 
raise for civilian employees at the Department of Defense. We rely on 
the Department of Defense civilians working side by side with our 
military personnel to provide medical care for our troops, to perform 
vital logistics, maintenance and acquisition services, and to provide 
many other essential services within the Department. Even a modest 
raise that maintains pay equity between civilian and military personnel 
sends a critical message of support to these employees.
  Looking ahead, I am concerned that if the shadows of the future 
remain unaltered, we will experience serious problems ensuring the 
continued defense of our Nation.

                              {time}  1430

  As Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary 
Assessments has noted:

       Rather than getting larger and more expensive over the past 
     decade, the military just grew more expensive.

  This reality makes our future choices even more difficult, and it is 
imperative that Congress join with the Department in working through 
these decisions at arm's length and also as a partner.
  The Department of Defense did recommend some very difficult 
reductions in the budget submitted to us earlier this year, as they 
have done in previous years. We, as legislators, can no longer afford 
to reflexively reject those recommendations because they affect a 
specific company, a specific region of the country, or are simply not 
the most politic of choices to be made.

[[Page 12086]]

  Our military is at a familiar crossroad, one they have been at before 
as the end of combat operations nears. The additions and subtractions 
to Defense funding made today must be carried out with an eye to the 
future, with a sense of the strategic impact on America's future 
ability to muster a force of successfully defending and protecting our 
country.
  In closing, I again want to reiterate my appreciation to Chairman 
Young for his cooperation and assistance in addressing the interests we 
have expressed. He and his staff have ensured that the subcommittee 
continues its long tradition of operating collaboratively and 
effectively and transparently. I am pleased that we are finally 
considering this bill on the floor and look forward to the debate.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, first, I would like to thank 
Mr. Visclosky for his much more detailed description of this 
legislation.
  I would now yield 5 minutes to the chairman of the full Committee on 
Appropriations, who has strongly committed to making sure that we pass 
all of our appropriations bills, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. 
Rogers).
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding this 
time.
  Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this, the DOD appropriations 
bill.
  This bill provides more than $512 billion in base funding for our 
national security and military efforts, and $85.8 billion in Overseas 
Contingency Operations war funding. This is a base funding decrease of 
$5.1 billion below fiscal 2013, but is about $28.1 billion above the 
current level caused by automatic sequestration spending cuts.
  This total reflects an appropriate, thorough analysis of what is 
needed to keep this country safe. Freedom isn't free. Our liberties, 
our rights, our property are preserved by our national defense, but at 
a cost.
  Sufficient funding for the Pentagon and our military is of the utmost 
importance to the continued prosperity of the United States of America. 
It is, and should be, our top priority.
  We have already seen the distressing toll that the heavy-handed, 
indiscriminate cuts of sequestration have taken on our military--from 
grounded planes, to reduced training time, to postponed maintenance--
all of which contribute to the loss of readiness of our troops.
  As we saw all this month as Department of Defense civilian furloughs 
began, our economy is also taking a significant hit.
  The funding level in this bill strikes a balance between fiscal 
responsibility and sufficient support for our military. Within this 
total, we prioritize funding to advance our missions abroad, to prepare 
and equip our troops, and to ensure the readiness and effectiveness of 
our military. This includes adequate funding to purchase the equipment, 
weapons, and vehicles needed to keep our military protected, at the 
ready, and able to conduct successful operations.
  The bill also provides funding for ongoing operations and maintenance 
of military facilities, equipment, and bases--fundamental to the 
successful missions of our Armed Forces. Essential funding is proposed 
to develop new defense technologies, to advance the success of current 
military operations, and to plan for whatever new threats may arise in 
the future.
  A well-equipped military is not as effective without strong and well-
prepared troops. This funding supports readiness programs that prepare 
our troops for both combat and peacetime missions, giving them flight 
time and battle training.
  In addition, the bill funds the authorized 1.8 percent pay raise for 
the military--above the 1 percent the President requested. To keep our 
troops healthy before and after battle, the Defense Health Program 
receives an increase above last year's level, funding medical facility 
upgrades, traumatic brain injury and psychological health research, and 
suicide prevention outreach.
  The bill also addresses what has been a black mark on our military, 
Madam Chairman--the problem with sexual assault. The legislation fully 
funds Sexual Assault Prevention and Response programs and adds $25 
million in funding for sexual assault victim assistance to preserve 
trust in our military and ensure that members of our Armed Forces are 
not sacrificing more than they already have to serve this Nation.
  But a balanced budget--one that does not put us into massive debt to 
other governments or threaten our economic stability--is also paramount 
to our national security. Even these critical national security 
programs cannot spend precious tax dollars unchecked.
  The bill has implemented commonsense reductions wherever possible, 
including rescinding unused, prior-year funding, nixing a proposed 
civilian pay raise, and saving $1 billion in anticipated excess 
funding. We have also prohibited funding to modify facilities in the 
U.S. to house Guantanamo detainees or to allow their transfer into the 
U.S. or its territories.
  When all is said and done, this bill cuts more than $5 billion below 
last year's enacted level; but I must emphasize that these reductions 
will in no way harm or negatively affect our national defense or the 
troops that fight to protect this great country.
  Madam Chairman, some will complain that the bill breaks the cap 
placed on Defense spending under the sequester level for fiscal year 
2014 put into place by the Budget Control Act. To this I say, of course 
it does.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield the gentleman an additional 2 minutes.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. The massive, irresponsible, dangerous 
reductions to Defense spending under the sequestration cap is 
completely beyond the pale.
  For example, if nothing is done to cancel the next round of 
sequestration cuts that are scheduled to take effect when this Congress 
adjourns, this bill would be cut to a total of $468 billion.
  Before I close, Madam Chairman, I would like to take this time to 
thank the venerable chairman of the subcommittee, Bill Young. He is a 
national asset. He has shown again the skill that he has in putting 
together a great bill.
  To Mr. Visclosky, thank you for being a great partner to our chairman 
throughout this process.
  To the staff and the entire subcommittee members, without your hard 
work we would not have this bill on the floor. I salute you and endorse 
this bill wholeheartedly.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, I would yield such time as she may 
consume to the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).
  Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Chair, I thank Chairman Young, Ranking Member 
Visclosky, and Chairman Rogers for working across the aisle on the bill 
before us today in keeping with the Defense Subcommittee's long 
bipartisan tradition. I also want to recognize and thank the Defense 
Subcommittee staff for working tirelessly on the nuts and bolts of this 
bill.
  Sadly, however, the appropriations process has become a quandary that 
could easily have been avoided with good old-fashioned compromise. 
Instead, we have disparate House and Senate allocations. House bills 
follow the Ryan budget, which endorses sequestration and is 
unrealistic, unworkable, and economically misguided, while the Senate 
and White House budgets are based on the higher level agreed upon in 
the Budget Control Act. With only 18 days of session left in the House 
before the end of the fiscal year, we are racing toward a government 
shutdown that is irresponsible.
  Assuming the sequester is turned off, this is a good bill. It 
includes additional funding and tougher penalties to address the 
epidemic of sexual assault plaguing our military, an increase for 
Active Duty pay by 1.8 percent, enhancements to embassy security by 
increasing the presence of Marine Corps security guards, substantial 
investments in health services and suicide prevention, maintenance of 
all the National Guard weapons of mass destruction/civil support teams, 
and continued support for the Israeli Cooperative Program.
  However, the bill also contains serious shortcomings. On July 8, I 
was at

[[Page 12087]]

Camp Smith in my district in New York where 48 of the more than 600,000 
Defense civilian employees nationwide are being furloughed. Each will 
lose $2,706, a 20 percent reduction to their fourth-quarter earnings, 
on top of 3 years without a pay increase. Yet this bill does nothing to 
fix the pay freeze or furloughs resulting from the sequester.
  In fact, the majority simply ignores sequestration when it suits 
their purpose, including in the spending allocations for MilCon-VA, 
Homeland Security, and Defense bills. While the Republicans are 
steadfast in sticking to the post-sequester overall discretionary 
allocation they included in the Ryan budget, they are comfortable 
breaking the Budget Control Act's cap on Defense spending by $47.7 
billion.
  Of course, they may not tell you that, unless we end the sequester, 
on January 15 those funds will be lost, creating a gaping hole in the 
Defense budget. They don't have the courage of their convictions to 
admit that breaking the Defense cap further shortchanges vital domestic 
priorities like medical research, Head Start, teachers for military 
families, energy efficiency, disaster preparedness, and other vital 
investments, all of which create jobs.
  We have already achieved $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction since 
2011, including $1.5 trillion in discretionary cuts. It is time for 
Congress to buckle down to reach a bipartisan agreement to replace 
sequestration with a balanced approach that protects critical services 
and investments.
  As I did for MilCon-VA and Homeland Security, I support the overall 
funding level in Defense because it was written as though Congress will 
turn off sequestration, as we should.
  But on the remaining bills, as with the Energy and Water bill, I will 
not support slashing investments in our families and workforce. If we 
are to remain a global leader, we need a strong national defense and a 
strong economy.
  I thank you again to the chairman and the ranking member, who have 
worked so hard in a bipartisan way, maintaining the tradition of this 
committee. As we move forward, I do hope that we can go to conference 
and work together with the Senate to come up with a bill that can 
really pass and sequestration be eliminated.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 4 
minutes to an important member of our subcommittee, the very 
distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for yielding me the time.
  Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of our Defense appropriations 
bill. Under Chairman Young's leadership and collaboration and strong 
support from Mr. Visclosky, our committee held a lengthy series of 
hearings examining varied topics: our operations in Afghanistan, the 
so-called pivot to the Asia-Pacific, the Army and Air Force's need for 
modernization, Navy shipbuilding, marine end strength, military health 
care, acquisition reform, sexual assaults, among other important 
issues, and, of course, the impact of the sequester, the negative 
impact.

                              {time}  1445

  Most of our hearings related to reducing risk in the defense budget 
and the new strategic guidance from the Department of Defense--
protecting our gains as well as preparing for current and future 
threats--China's growing military capability; continued uncertainty in 
North Korea and that peninsula; the destabilizing civil war in Syria; 
Iran's race to develop a nuclear weapons capability and their threat to 
close the Straits of Hormuz, among others.
  Our goal throughout this bill is to provide the resources to support 
our warfighters now and in the future, whenever the next crisis arises.
  Madam Chairman, our subcommittee, like other Appropriations 
subcommittees, clearly recognizes the Nation's debt and deficit and 
found areas and programs where reductions are possible without 
adversely impacting our Armed Forces and our modernization efforts. 
Frankly, it is important that we find savings without harming readiness 
or increasing the risks incurred by our warfighters.
  Under Chairman Young's leadership, our committee has had a close 
examination of military needs and very necessary oversight, so our 
legislation before us includes funding for critical national security 
and intelligence needs based on a very strong hearing process. In 
addition, the bill provides essential funding for health and quality of 
life programs for all of our men and women in uniform--all volunteers--
and their families. They deserve nothing less.
  I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their 
leadership, and I strongly support the bill.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume, and I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) for 
the purpose of entering into a colloquy.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Chairman, I wish to engage in a colloquy with the 
chairman and the gentleman from Indiana on an issue regarding 
timeliness, accuracy, and the review of security clearance processing.
  As the chairman is aware, security clearances are necessary to 
protect our national security and are required for thousands of jobs. 
However, the length of time it takes to conduct the investigations, the 
quality of the investigations, and the continuous review of approved 
security clearances are three areas that could be improved. I believe 
that there is a solution to all three of these concerns, and it 
involves the leveraging of automated investigation tools already in 
existence.
  The Defense Department has within its subordinate activities the 
Defense Personnel Security Research Center, known as PERSEREC. It has 
researched and developed a number of automated toolsets that can reduce 
the time it takes to adjudicate investigations, to grade the quality of 
the investigations, to measure human error, and to provide a way to 
monitor and reaffirm granted clearances based on an analysis of human 
behavior.
  These computer programs could dramatically increase the quality of 
the investigations while at the same time saving money and shortening 
the time it takes to both approve and reinvestigate security 
clearances. These tools are already available today, but they have not 
been leveraged. Instead, the majority of security clearances is being 
investigated by an antiquated analog adjudication process that just 
doesn't reflect the best research and development readily available to 
the Department of Defense by PERSEREC.
  I greatly appreciate that the chairman and ranking member of the 
Defense Subcommittee have included report language encouraging the 
Department of Defense and the Office of Personnel Management to use 
these automated tools and systems readily available for the security 
clearance process.
  Would my colleagues agree that the security clearance process should 
incorporate proven tools that ensure increased efficiency and quality?
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I would note to the gentleman from California that, 
with the recent concerns regarding security clearance processes for the 
Department of Defense and intelligence communities, I appreciate his 
bringing to our attention that the Department can increase the 
timeliness and quality of investigations and reinvestigations by using 
the Defense Personnel Security Research Center tools.
  Mr. FARR. I thank the gentleman for his response.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman from Indiana yield?
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I am aware of the gentleman from 
California's deep interest, and I appreciate his proposed solution in 
finding ways to address this issue.
  Like my good friend from Indiana, I agree that we should work with 
our friend Mr. Farr to ensure that the Department of Defense and the 
Director of National Intelligence leverage the security clearance 
research at PERSEREC in order to improve the precision and speed of 
investigations, and that is exactly why we included it in our report.
  Mr. FARR. Will the gentleman yield?

[[Page 12088]]


  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. FARR. I thank both of you for your friendship, your leadership, 
and your cooperation.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner) for the purpose of engaging in a 
colloquy.
  Mr. TURNER. I appreciate the gentleman's commitment to enter into a 
colloquy.
  Madam Chair, I rise to speak about the Abrams tank. The 
Appropriations Committee has wisely included funding in the last 2 
years for continuing to upgrade the Abrams tank. That action kept the 
Abrams production line warm and preserved a critical industrial 
capability. However, there is no funding, as I understand it, in the FY 
2014 Defense appropriations bill for additional tank upgrades.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TURNER. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, the gentleman is correct. The 
administration's budget request for fiscal year 2014 includes no funds 
for the production of Abrams tanks, and the committee bill provides 
none. The Army is only now addressing the funds added for fiscal year 
'13, and production of the M1A2s will actually continue until December 
of 2014.
  Mr. TURNER. Madam Chair, in reclaiming my time, I understand that, 
earlier in the year, both the administration and others believed that 
foreign military sales alone may be sufficient to keep this production 
line running. Those sales have not yet materialized, and I remain 
concerned that we are risking a critical national asset based solely on 
the anticipation of foreign sales.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TURNER. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Foreign military sales have helped sustain a 
warm tank production line. Despite the delays and uncertainties in the 
FMS process, it is very likely that FMS sales will continue to play an 
important part in sustaining the tank line.
  Mr. TURNER. In reclaiming my time, I understand that the committee 
intends to wait until the Army announces its force structure changes 
and then will assess the need for additional upgraded tanks. While I 
respect that position, I think that, with whatever changes the Army 
makes, we will still need to keep that smaller force as effective as 
possible. The way to ensure that is to provide all remaining Armored 
Brigade Combat Teams with M1A2 SEP tanks.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TURNER. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I appreciate the points raised 
by my colleague.
  We will continue to monitor the overall requirement for tanks in both 
the active Army and the Army National Guard. We intend to relook at the 
issue of additional Abrams upgrades as we move forward in the 
appropriations process. We will have the benefit of more complete 
information on foreign military sales and of the Army's force structure 
analysis. Protecting the industrial base will remain a critical issue.
  Mr. TURNER. In reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman 
for his continued interest and for his support in this matter.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, I know my friend from Florida 
shares my concerns regarding our Nation's nuclear deterrents and 
specifically in preserving the sea-based leg of the Nuclear Triad in 
the Trident II D5 submarine launched ballistic missiles, which are 
carried on the Ohio-class submarine.
  The current fleet of ballistic missile submarines is planned for 
service through the year 2042, and the D5 missile they carry is 
expected to remain viable much longer and will see service on the 
replacement platform. I hope the chairman agrees.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I do agree and the gentleman is correct.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. In reclaiming my time, the original design life 
of the D5 missile rocket motors was 25 years. Some of the currently 
deployed motors are reaching that age, and the missiles require a life 
extension to maintain viability.
  Does the chairman agree that the life extension program for the D5 
missile is critical to ensure the missile will remain the highest level 
of reliability for as long as our Nation requires it?
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I will tell the gentleman that I do agree. I 
would add that the ending of the Space Shuttle Program has also 
exacerbated the hardships of the industrial base, and I agree that the 
Navy's D5 program is now the cornerstone of the Nation's solid rocket 
motor production.
  I feel that it is essential that the Navy sustain a steady production 
rate of 12 rocket motors per year as the minimum level to ensure that 
replacement motors are available to replace aged-out motors as well as 
to keep this unique and highly skilled engineering and workforce viable 
into the future. The industrial base has done a Herculean effort in 
downsizing and in becoming more efficient in the face of the declining 
workload as enhanced by the attractive pricing they provided the Navy 
on a recent motor contract.
  I will work to ensure that the Navy has sufficient funding to 
maintain at least the minimum production required to sustain this 
critical industrial base.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. In reclaiming my time, I thank the chairman and 
compliment him on his great work on this issue.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. As we have no further speakers, Madam Chair, I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I am happy to yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Madam Chair, I'd like to use my time to say thank you to the House 
and all of the Members who participated in some vigorous debate, for 
having conducted the affairs of the House in a most professional way, 
proving to our constituents that we can work things out and that we can 
work together.
  I just want to say thank you to my colleague from Indiana Mr. 
Visclosky, who is handling the minority leadership on this bill for the 
first time. I think he deserves a lot of credit and a lot of applause 
for the good job that he did in keeping this schedule on track.
  Peter, thank you very much.
  While it seems a long time ago, it was only Monday night that we 
finally received the 100 amendments that would be filed and considered 
during the debate. We had to analyze those amendments by Tuesday--
yesterday--so that we could begin the debate on this bill. Our staff 
did an outstanding job in working late into the night Monday night 
analyzing these amendments so that we could consider where we would be 
on those amendments.
  Our staff is led by Tom McLemore as staff director and Paul Juola in 
a similar position for Mr. Visclosky. The other members of the staff 
are Becky Leggieri, Brooke Boyer, Ann Reese, Megan Rosenbusch, Tim 
Prince, Walter Hearne, B.G. Wright, Paul Terry, Maureen Holohan, 
Jennifer Miller, Adrienne Ramsay, and Sherry Young. They are a most 
professional staff and it is hard to find any better team of staff 
members than those that I just mentioned.
  Finally, I want to thank my good friend and strong supporter, the 
gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Frelinghuysen, for all his help during 
the process of managing our bill this week. His dedication to the 
subcommittee is invaluable, and I sincerely appreciate his friendship 
and his assistance in managing the bill. Similarly, I would like to 
thank the gentleman from California, Mr. Calvert, and the gentleman 
from Arkansas, Mr. Womack, for their assistance in this process. I have 
said on more than one occasion that we have a great group of members on 
our subcommittee who are dedicated to providing for the needs of our

[[Page 12089]]

national security and for the men and women who wear the uniform in 
defense of our freedom. The special efforts this week of the members of 
our subcommittee, and in particular the members I mentioned are clear 
proof of that.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 2397, the 
Department of Defense Appropriations Bill, for Fiscal Year 2014 and to 
recognize the important role played by management companies in the 
successful operation of the Department of Defense's Defense Personal 
Property Program, or DP3.
   I would like to thank Chairman Young and Ranking Member Visclosky 
for including report language I submitted to the Subcommittee on 
Defense regarding the DP3 program. I am proud to note that one of the 
management companies that helps make this program successful is located 
in my congressional district.
   Both the Chairman and the Ranking Member have long standing 
commitments to improving the quality of life of military members and 
their families. Our members of the military are required to make 
countless moves during their military service. Providing high-quality 
moves that provide satisfaction to the service member and his/her 
family is important to morale, well-being and retention.
   The Department of Defense also understands the tremendous challenges 
associated with completing the countless number of defense personal 
property moves. Because of dissatisfaction and nightmares associated 
with previous military personal property movement programs, the 
Department of Defense adopted the Defense Personal Property Program 
with the goal of achieving efficient, satisfactory, and seamless 
military moves.
   My purpose in speaking today is to note the significant 
contributions that management companies are making to DP3 by assisting 
transportation service providers to reduce costs and improve the 
quality of each military move. While improving these critical moves, 
DP3 has improved the quality of life enabling higher levels of 
personnel readiness.
  Madam Chair, again, I offer my thanks to the Chairman and Ranking 
Member of the Subcommittee on Defense for their inclusion of this 
important language on the DP3 and for allowing me the opportunity to 
comment on the important role that management companies play in the 
success of this program.
  Mr. NUNES. Madam Chair, I rise today to address the crucial need for 
retaining the U.S. military's force structure at Lajes Field.
  Due to Air Force planners' short-sighted decision to draw down at 
Lajes, the United States is poised to surrender a military asset of 
unparalleled strategic value. Located on the Azores island chain 
between Europe and the United States, Lajes is like the Hawaii of the 
Atlantic Ocean--only closer to the American mainland. The islands 
belong to Portugal, a strong U.S. ally since World War II that has 
never prevented us from conducting operational missions.
  The base at this crucial location has bolstered the United States' 
control of the Atlantic since World War II, proving critical to our 
tracking of Soviet submarines during the Cold War. It allows for U.S. 
access to Europe, the Middle East, and western and sub-Saharan Africa, 
and enables the expeditionary movement of warfighters, aircraft, ships, 
and global communications to AFRICOM and CENTCOM's joint, coalition, 
and NATO operations.
  It is also a vital site for countering a major regional threat, al-
Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, which has known ties to al-Qaeda in the 
Arabian Peninsula and other violent groups. In fact, from Lajes, ten of 
the eighteen African countries that hold State Department Travel 
Warnings can be reached within six hours. Further, Lajes is well-
positioned to act as a logistical hub not only for the Defense 
Department, but also for USAID, the State Department, and other 
agencies.
  Having engaged with Portuguese officials for years on this issue, I 
know that the consequences of drawing down the base will be dire. Our 
strategic planners may believe we can leave a mere skeletal operation 
at Lajes and retain access there, but in reality, the Air Force's 
decision to draw down at the base means a total end to the U.S. 
presence at Lajes. This will severely impact the Azorean economy, 
forcing Portugal to find a new tenant for the site. In light of the 
weak Portuguese economy, we do not want to make Azoreans choose between 
their alliance with the United States and their ability to feed their 
families.
  While our strategic planners may not want to be in the Azores 
anymore, leaders of other nations feel differently. Several high 
ranking Chinese officials have visited the islands in recent years, 
including a sojourn by China's Ambassador to Portugal just a few weeks 
ago, as well as a June 2012 visit to Terceira by then-Premier Wen 
Jiabao. The Chinese did not divulge what all these delegates were doing 
there, but I assure you they weren't sipping port and enjoying the 
pleasant climate.
  In the wake of the decision to wind down Lajes, we cannot assume the 
Portuguese will exclude China or other bad actors from the site simply 
out of allegiance to the U.S.; the recent decision to send a rapid 
reaction force of 500 U.S. Marines to Moron, Spain--a contingent that 
would have much more flexibility at the logistics hub of Lajes--could 
easily be interpreted as a calculated insult to our Portuguese friends.
  These Marines could easily be located in Lajes, which is a safe 
environment that allows for forward basing at Rota, Spain, or 
Sigonella, Italy, or if necessary, for the deployment of troops in 
Western and sub-Saharan Africa. This amendment would give Defense 
Department planners the opportunity to think outside the box. If they 
did, they would realize this solution would allow the Air Force to 
scale-down at Lajes, provide maximum strategic flexibility for the 
Marines, and fully utilize the Lajes facility.
  The retention of Lajes was not an issue for seventy years because 
prior planners never contemplated giving up something so crucial to 
U.S. interests. Because this Congress does not assume that Chinese and 
Russian subs will voluntarily stop sailing beneath the Atlantic Ocean 
or that jihadists will stop training in sub-Saharan Africa, we need the 
flexibility that Lajes' unique location provides.
  As we reduce our European footprint--comprising 110,000 personnel and 
dozens of military installations--we need to base our decisions on each 
site's global strategic value and tactical and strategic flexibility. 
It would cost billions to build a base like Lajes today, and we must 
understand that the decision by Air Force planners to draw down at 
Lajes means closing the site and losing our access there.
  Therefore, Madam Chair, I encourage my colleagues to vote for this 
amendment to retain the current force structure at Lajes Field, and to 
keep this crucial military asset fully staffed and fully operational.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Chair, it has been over 10 years since the start 
of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and it is extremely important that 
we continue to focus on addressing traumatic brain injury, TBI, and 
psychological health, PH, issues. Congress must properly allocate funds 
to care for wounded warriors and to improve research in these critical 
areas.
  As you know, TBI continues to be the signature wound of the wars in 
Iraq and Afghanistan with some 100,000 troops diagnosed since 2003 with 
mild TBI. This number will only increase as detection becomes more 
accurate. The Department of Defense has made significant strides in 
improving assessment and diagnosis, but more needs to be done to 
evaluate troops' ability to return to duty and to follow them after 
exposure to blasts. Intensive and innovative rehabilitative care is 
also needed for those sustaining severe TBIs and left with varying 
levels of disorders of consciousness.
  This year's Defense Health Program receives an increase above last 
year's level. Specifically, the bill contains $33.6 billion--$858 
million above the fiscal year 2013 enacted level--for the Defense 
Health Program to provide for the health of our troops and retirees. 
Increases above the request importantly include $125 million for 
traumatic brain injury and psychological health research, and $20 
million for suicide prevention outreach programs.
  Our men and women serving in uniform must be given every possible 
opportunity for the best medical care, rehabilitation and community 
reentry assistance that we as a nation can provide. It is important 
these funds be used wisely to ensure that our men and women in uniform 
are getting timely and proper care. Pre and post deployment testing, as 
well as long term care and family services are integral parts of 
preventing and treating TBI and PH. As a Congress, we must live up to 
our commitment to our troops when they leave the battlefield and in my 
capacity as co-Chair of the Congressional Brain Injury Task Force. I 
look forward to working with the DoD to make sure these funds are used 
effectively to address these invisible wounds.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Chair, I rise today to express my support for 
H.R. 2397, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for FY2014. I 
commend Chairmen Rogers and Young and Ranking Members Lowey and 
Visclosky for crafting a bipartisan bill that both strengthens the 
security of our nation and provides for vital programs that benefit our 
men and women in uniform and their civilian colleagues.
  I am particularly encouraged that the bipartisan amendment I offered 
with Rep.

[[Page 12090]]

Mulvaney, Rep. Coffman, and Rep. Murphy was adopted and included in 
final passage. Our amendment ensures that the account to fund our 
operations in Afghanistan and overseas contingency operations will not 
become a slush fund for unrequested defense spending. The FY2014 
funding for the war in Afghanistan and other overseas contingencies is 
at the level the DoD and military leaders say is necessary for the 
mission, and the underlying bill had originally provided $5 billion 
more than our military leaders say is needed for overseas contingency 
operations (OCO). Our amendment eliminates $3.5 billion of the excess 
funds. It provides sufficient funds to fully meet the President's FY 
2014 request for the war in Afghanistan and other overseas 
contingencies, as well as an additional $1.5 billion to address any 
shortfalls in Guard and Reserve Equipment Modernization.
  I am also pleased that this legislation fully funds the Sexual 
Assault and Prevention Office (SAPRO) at $156.5 million and includes a 
new provision establishing dismissal or dishonorable discharge as a 
minimum mandatory sentence for individuals subject to a Uniformed Code 
of Military Justice court-martial. In addition, I strongly support an 
amendment that Rep. Speier introduced--and which was adopted--that 
provides increased funding to train investigators to properly 
investigate sexual assault related offenses.
  I also support Rep. Bonamici's amendment in support of preserving the 
34 C-23 Sherpa aircraft operated by the Army National Guard. These 
aircraft are vital to the Maryland National Guard and I am pleased that 
this amendment was adopted. I also strongly support the provision that 
fully funds the request of $220.3 million for Iron Dome and includes 
$173 million above the request of $95.8 million for the Israeli 
Cooperative Missile Defense Programs.
  Lastly, I support the amendment which would require the Executive 
Branch to receive Congressional approval before taking any military 
action in Syria. This reinforces the role of Congress in making 
decisions that would put our men and women in the Armed Forces at risk.
  With regards to Congressman Amash's amendment, I have submitted a 
separate statement for the Record to address that vote.
  While I voted for this defense bill, I do so with reservations. This 
bill deprives deserving employees of the Department of Defense of a 
modest cost-of-living adjustment by denying them of a 1 percent COLA 
proposed by the Administration. It is unreasonable to ask federal 
employees, who have already disproportionately sacrificed for deficit 
reduction, to bear the burden again.
  This legislation also includes a misguided provision which would 
continue funding restrictions that prohibit the construction or 
modification of a detention facility in the United States to house 
Guantanamo detainees, and would constrain DoD's ability to transfer 
Guantanamo detainees, including those who have already been designated 
for transfer to other countries. Unfortunately, Representative Moran's 
amendment to lift the prohibition on using funds to transfer or release 
any individual detained at Guantanamo Bay was rejected. This 
legislation also contains provisions which ignore DoD recommendations 
and blocks the Administration's ability to retire aging and unnecessary 
military aircraft, including the C-130 AMP, when less expensive options 
are readily available.
  While I support the funding level contained in the Defense 
Appropriations bill, I strongly oppose the overall House Republican 
Budget. That budget would dramatically cut our investments in 
education, scientific research, infrastructure, Head Start, Meals on 
Wheels, and programs to provide and supply for the most vulnerable. I 
strongly support President Obama's position that we will not boost 
defense spending at the expense of the other investments needed to 
support economic growth. After all, our national security is directly 
tied to the strength of our economy and putting Americans back to work.
  For these reasons, I support President Obama's threat to veto final 
passage of this legislation unless it ``passes the Congress in the 
context of an overall budget framework that supports our recovery and 
enables sufficient investments in education, infrastructure, innovation 
and national security for our economy to compete in the future.'' 
However, it is my hope that these issues will be resolved in conference 
with the Senate and that I will be able to support its final passage.

  Statement of Representative Chris Van Hollen Regarding Congressman 
   Amash's Amendment H. Amdt. 413 to the FY14 Department of Defense 
                     Appropriations Act (H.R. 2397)

       We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all 
     Americans. While we must ensure that our nation has the 
     necessary and appropriate tools to protect itself, we must 
     also ensure that those tools do not undermine the very 
     liberties we seek to protect. I have always been a staunch 
     defender of the 4th Amendment, and have long opposed the 
     broad language in Section 215 of the so-called PATRIOT Act 
     (along with the similarly broad language in Section 702 of 
     the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). In fact, I voted 
     against the reauthorization of Section 215 in 2011 and 
     Section 702 in 2012. I am pleased that others are now joining 
     the conversation in seeking to amend and improve these 
     sections.
       I voted against the Amash amendment because I did not 
     believe that it was the most comprehensive and effective way 
     to address this important issue. I have opposed Section 215 
     because the ``tangible items'' authority and the 
     ``relevance'' standard are overly broad and subject to 
     potential abuse. These definitions need to be narrowed. Also 
     problematic is the fact that recipients of Section 215 orders 
     are required to wait a year before challenging a 
     nondisclosure order. Additionally, I oppose the provision 
     that allows the government to use secret evidence to oppose 
     judicial challenges to a Section 215 order. Finally, when 
     Congress reauthorized this section in 2005, it made permanent 
     the authorization for the use of National Security Letters 
     (NSLs), which are surveillance tools used to obtain certain 
     types of communications and financial records. I opposed this 
     measure, and have advocated for amendments that would 
     reintroduce sunsets (i.e. established dates upon which these 
     authorities expire so we can hold agencies accountable) for 
     NSLs and require Inspector General audits on the use of NSLs 
     and other ``tangible item'' orders. The use of these orders 
     should also be publically reported to increase transparency 
     and oversight.
       I am interested in reforming Section 215 and its 
     legislative language in a manner that addresses all of these 
     issues, creating a workable solution that can serve as a 
     foundation for our national security efforts while upholding 
     the 4th Amendment protections in the Constitution for this 
     and future administrations. Unfortunately, the Amash 
     amendment did not address any of these important issues. 
     Rather, it focused on a narrow issue that has been the 
     subject of much misinformation. I worry that this piecemeal 
     approach to amending this law could both hamper our national 
     security efforts in the near-term while creating inconsistent 
     policies in the long-term because of laws enacted at 
     different periods of time on different legislative vehicles 
     (such as an appropriations bill). I am also concerned about 
     unintended consequences; for example, under the Amash 
     amendment, the FBI would have been unable to obtain an 
     individual order for records from an associate of someone 
     under investigation for terrorism activities. This is an 
     example of the policy implications that can arise when 
     complex issues are addressed in a hasty, non-deliberative 
     process.
       My biggest concern since the disclosure of particular 
     aspects of these programs by Edward Snowden has been with 
     respect to the standards in place that control how and when 
     the government can request access to the content of 
     Americans' communications. I asked pointed questions on this 
     issue at recent intelligence briefings on these programs and 
     I am confident that any access to the content of 
     communications within a program authorized under Section 215 
     does require an individualized warrant from a judge. These 
     warrants are not issued unless the government has shown 
     probable cause that the identified individual is an agent of 
     a foreign power or a potential terrorist.
       I will continue my efforts to improve Section 215 (along 
     with the other problematic sections of the PATRIOT Act and 
     FISA). We must introduce more accountability, transparency, 
     and checks and balances into these laws. That is why I am a 
     co-sponsor of the Ending Secret Law Act (H.R. 2475) and the 
     Presidential Appointment of FISA Court Judges Act (H.R. 
     2671). These bills would make important reforms to the FISA 
     Court by shining a light on the secretive rulings it issues 
     that significantly construct or interpret the law, along with 
     ensuring that the judges who sit on that court are appointed 
     by the President and subject to a public confirmation process 
     in the Senate (currently, they are only chosen by the Chief 
     Justice of the Supreme Court). There should be no institution 
     in our country with the power to create secret laws.
       Finally, I am pleased that the Privacy and Civil Liberties 
     Oversight Board finally has a confirmed Chairman (David 
     Medine) and has announced plans to release a report on the 
     legality of the NSA FISA programs and their impact on civil 
     liberties. We pushed for the creation of this Board to serve 
     as a crucial check to the government's authority with respect 
     to these activities. I had been discouraged by the lack of 
     operational progress of this Board since its establishment by 
     Congress in 2004, and it is my hope that this Board will now 
     begin to more forcefully exercise its oversight role (through 
     its access to classified documents and FISA Court opinions).
       As a Member of Congress who opposed the reauthorization of 
     Section 215 of the so-called PATRIOT Act, I will continue to 
     press

[[Page 12091]]

     for comprehensive changes to this and other provisions. 
     However, we must do so in a way that addresses the real 
     problems with these programs, and in a manner that doesn't 
     have unintended consequences that could unnecessarily 
     compromise our abilities to prevent terrorist attacks on 
     Americans.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I rise to speak in favor of adoption of 
the Defense Appropriations Act of 2014.
  I thank Chairman C.W. Bill Young and Ranking Member Pete Visclosky, 
Ranking Member of the House Committee on Appropriations' Subcommittee 
on Defense for their work to provide for our nation's national defense.
  I also want to extend thanks and appreciation to the men and women in 
and out of uniform to defend our nation. You serve your nation with 
honor and distinction. In each generation our nation must remember that 
the freedoms that we enjoy come at a price, which you have paid without 
hesitation or complaint.
  Each year the Congress takes on the tasks of providing appropriations 
for the nation's defense. The Appropriations subcommittee that focuses 
exclusively on the work of the Department of Defense is the subject 
matter experts who manage the long process that resulted in the bill 
before us for consideration. As members of the House of Representatives 
we are each subject matter experts on the committees that we serve, but 
we are also experts on the constituencies we seek to represent.
  My work in the 18th Congressional District has allowed me the 
privilege of working with men and women in the military, the workers in 
aeronautics and space industries that contribute to our nation's 
defense as well as those in the Department of Defense who work in and 
around our nation's capitol.
  Through my work as a member of Congress I know those who have served 
and returned home to a tough economy, struggles with physical 
disabilities and life changing injuries associated with their service 
to our nation. I do not know the military as a mass of statistics, but 
individuals with names and faces--real people who depend on each of us 
to pursue their best interest.
  I know you know that none of our offices received calls from lobbyist 
on behalf of the men and women who serve in defense of our nation in 
and out of uniform. That is why we must rely upon our own experience 
and that of the Appropriations' Subcommittee on Defense to reach the 
best result in a very long and arduous legislative process.
  Military families make sacrifices with long separations of parents 
from spouses and children that last for over a year. Many miss some of 
the important moments in their children's lives when they are deployed 
when they have young children. The Defense Appropriations bill includes 
$580 million for a military pay raise consistent with the raise 
included in the House Armed Services bill for a 1.8 percent increase.
  I am pleased to say that this Defense Appropriations bill does a 
great deal more for the men and women serving in the military and 
places more focus on the needs of their families. This bill maintains 
the objective of previous Congresses to assure that our nation's 
military is the best trained, best prepared, best equipped, and best 
cared for fighting force in the history of the world. That is the least 
we can do for those who willingly risk their lives to keep us safe.
  The bill also recognizes that the military is changing due to the 
expanded roles for women who pursue careers in the armed services. I 
strongly believe that this choice should not mean a diminution of 
rights or opportunities from what they would enjoy had these women 
pursued a different career path.
  For this reason, I sought and the Appropriations Subcommittee on 
Defense provided $150 million for a Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer 
Research Program. The program fills a unique niche among private and 
public funding sources for cancer research and presents an opportunity 
to forging new ideas and scientific breakthroughs in the nation's fight 
against breast cancer.
  My work to expand the Department of Defense ability to provide 
assistance and support for medical research related to breast cancer 
included Jackson Lee Amendment #1 which provided $500,000 in increased 
funding for breast cancer research, which was adopted by the Full 
House. This additional funding raised the amount in the bill to $130 
million and will be made available for Triple Negative Breast Cancer 
research. Triple Negative Breast Cancer is one of the most deadly forms 
of the disease that is extremely difficult to detect, and has an 
extremely high mortality rate.
  The threat of sexual assault of both women and men serving in the 
armed services is a real threat to unit cohesion and professional 
conduct among the ranks. The troubling aspects of the stories we have 
heard is the lack of comprehension of the traumatic nature of this 
crime among superior officers in a position to help. The Defense 
Department Appropriations bill offers an additional $25 million for a 
new Sexual Assault Special Victims Program in addition to fully funding 
request of $156.5 million for a Defense-Wide and the Military Service 
Program which I strongly support.
  I sought and the Appropriations Committee provided $80 million in 
funding for a Prostate cancer program to be included in the final bill 
at 100 percent of the requested amount. The most prevalent type cancer 
in men, and second most diagnosed cancer in the nation, kills over 
thirty thousand people per year.
  Veterans, especially those exposed to defoliants have been identified 
as being more prone to this disease. Research on prostate cancer will 
lead to better early diagnostic tools as well as better treatments and 
improvements to quality of life for prostate cancer survivors.
  The unique nature of combat can produce illnesses that threaten 
health and life expectancy. This is why I requested $25 million and the 
Committee provided $20 million or 80 percent of my request to fund a 
Gulf War Illness Research Program, GWIRP. The bill provides $20 million 
in funding to support the identification of treatments and diagnostic 
markers for Gulf War Illness, a chronic multi-symptom illness with no 
effective treatment affecting 250,000 Gulf War veterans. Treatments 
will benefit military personnel at risk of similar neurotoxic 
exposures. The FY14 program funded by this bill will fund studies of 
promising treatments and larger clinical trials of treatments 
previously shown to be effective.
  Jackson Lee Amendment #2 that was adopted by the full House under 
debate of the bill offered additional funds from $10 million provided 
by a transfer to an account that could be used to support work to 
assist military persons suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorders, 
PTSD. As we look to PTSD, some of a soldier's wounds are invisible to 
the naked eye, for these are wounds that should be properly treated. 
One of the best ways to increase access to treatment is to increase the 
number of medical facilities and mental health professionals who are 
available to serve the needs of men and women currently serving and 
those who have become veterans.
  Post traumatic stress disorder, one of the most prevalent and 
devastating psychological wounds suffered by the brave men and women 
fighting in far off lands to defend the values and freedom we hold 
dear. A suicide bomber, an IED, or an insurgent can obliterate their 
close friend instantaneously and right in front of their face.
  Yet, as American soldiers, they are trained to suppress the agonizing 
grief associated with those horrible experiences and are expected to 
continue on with the mission. And carry on they do, with courage and 
with patriotism.
  The bill also provides $125 million in funding for Traumatic Brain 
Injury (TBI), and Psychological Health research, and $4 million for 
alcohol and substance abuse research. In addition, $20 million is 
provided for suicide prevention and outreach.
  My focus is also the military of the future and the overwhelming need 
for people who have strong science, technology, engineering and 
mathematics, STEM, educations to fill the positions required for the 
successful defense of our nation's cyber networks.
  I sought $30 million for Historically Black Colleges and Universities 
and Minority-Serving Institutions, HBCU/MI. The Funding requested was 
approved by the Appropriations committee at the level at over $35 
million or a 116 percent over the amount I requested. The funds 
appropriated will reinvigorate the relationship between the Department 
of Defense and the HBCU/MIs and to ensure that minorities are 
represented in the long-term development of the STEM workforce 
pipeline. The funding will support undergraduate and graduate STEM 
programs to increase the participation and success of minority students 
through engaged mentoring, enriching research experiences, and 
opportunities to publish, present, and network. Consistent with the 
report of the National Academy of Sciences ``Expanding Underrepresented 
Minority Participation: America's Science and Technology Talent at the 
Crossroads,'' the funding is intended to enhance the Department's 
efforts to emphasize STEM education improvement within the Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions program. The 
Committee should encourage the Secretary of Defense to consider these 
factors when awarding competitive funding under this program, as well 
as ensuring that selected programs have a sufficiently large cohort of 
students to allow for effective peer-to-peer mentoring.
  I offered language to create a report that the Secretary of Defense 
must present to Congress on the topic of hazing in the military,

[[Page 12092]]

harassment and mistreatment of service members across the Armed Forces. 
The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to 
the congressional defense committees not later than 180 days after 
enactment of this act on the prevalence and consequences of hazing, 
harassment and mistreatment of service members and the policies in 
place to address cultural sensitivity and hazing and harassment 
prevention and intervention. Further, the report shall include 
recommendations for the services to accurately record and prevent 
incidences of hazing, harassment and mistreatment of service members 
and to adopt a more intentional diversity and inclusion effort. 
Finally, the report shall propose a plan to implement and monitor these 
recommendations.
  On balance this Department of Defense Appropriations bill overall is 
a good thing for the men and women of the armed services especially 
with the addition of an amendment to prohibit the use of funds to deny 
Department of Defense civilian employees security clearance because of 
financial difficulties caused by ``furloughs'' due to sequestration.
  I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule, and the bill shall be considered read through 
page 157, line 2.
  The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 2397

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2014, for military functions 
     administered by the Department of Defense and for other 
     purposes, namely:

                                TITLE I

                           MILITARY PERSONNEL

                        Military Personnel, Army

       For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence, 
     interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station 
     travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational 
     movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between 
     permanent duty stations, for members of the Army on active 
     duty, (except members of reserve components provided for 
     elsewhere), cadets, and aviation cadets; for members of the 
     Reserve Officers' Training Corps; and for payments pursuant 
     to section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
     402 note), and to the Department of Defense Military 
     Retirement Fund, $40,908,919,000.

                        Military Personnel, Navy

       For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence, 
     interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station 
     travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational 
     movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between 
     permanent duty stations, for members of the Navy on active 
     duty (except members of the Reserve provided for elsewhere), 
     midshipmen, and aviation cadets; for members of the Reserve 
     Officers' Training Corps; and for payments pursuant to 
     section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 402 
     note), and to the Department of Defense Military Retirement 
     Fund, $27,671,555,000.

                    Military Personnel, Marine Corps

       For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence, 
     interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station 
     travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational 
     movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between 
     permanent duty stations, for members of the Marine Corps on 
     active duty (except members of the Reserve provided for 
     elsewhere); and for payments pursuant to section 156 of 
     Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 402 note), and to 
     the Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund, 
     $12,826,857,000.

                     Military Personnel, Air Force

       For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence, 
     interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station 
     travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational 
     movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between 
     permanent duty stations, for members of the Air Force on 
     active duty (except members of reserve components provided 
     for elsewhere), cadets, and aviation cadets; for members of 
     the Reserve Officers' Training Corps; and for payments 
     pursuant to section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 
     U.S.C. 402 note), and to the Department of Defense Military 
     Retirement Fund, $28,382,963,000.

                        Reserve Personnel, Army

       For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities, 
     travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Army 
     Reserve on active duty under sections 10211, 10302, and 3038 
     of title 10, United States Code, or while serving on active 
     duty under section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, 
     in connection with performing duty specified in section 
     12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing 
     reserve training, or while performing drills or equivalent 
     duty or other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 
     of title 10, United States Code; and for payments to the 
     Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund, 
     $4,483,343,000.

                        Reserve Personnel, Navy

       For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities, 
     travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Navy 
     Reserve on active duty under section 10211 of title 10, 
     United States Code, or while serving on active duty under 
     section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, in 
     connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a) 
     of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing reserve 
     training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty, and 
     expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United 
     States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense 
     Military Retirement Fund, $1,875,536,000.

                    Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps

       For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities, 
     travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Marine 
     Corps Reserve on active duty under section 10211 of title 10, 
     United States Code, or while serving on active duty under 
     section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, in 
     connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a) 
     of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing reserve 
     training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty, and 
     for members of the Marine Corps platoon leaders class, and 
     expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United 
     States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense 
     Military Retirement Fund, $665,499,000.

                      Reserve Personnel, Air Force

       For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities, 
     travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Air Force 
     Reserve on active duty under sections 10211, 10305, and 8038 
     of title 10, United States Code, or while serving on active 
     duty under section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, 
     in connection with performing duty specified in section 
     12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing 
     reserve training, or while performing drills or equivalent 
     duty or other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 
     of title 10, United States Code; and for payments to the 
     Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund, 
     $1,745,579,000.

                     National Guard Personnel, Army

       For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities, 
     travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Army 
     National Guard while on duty under section 10211, 10302, or 
     12402 of title 10 or section 708 of title 32, United States 
     Code, or while serving on duty under section 12301(d) of 
     title 10 or section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code, 
     in connection with performing duty specified in section 
     12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing 
     training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty or 
     other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 
     10, United States Code; and for payments to the Department of 
     Defense Military Retirement Fund, $7,958,568,000.

                  National Guard Personnel, Air Force

       For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities, 
     travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Air 
     National Guard on duty under section 10211, 10305, or 12402 
     of title 10 or section 708 of title 32, United States Code, 
     or while serving on duty under section 12301(d) of title 10 
     or section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code, in 
     connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a) 
     of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing 
     training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty or 
     other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 
     10, United States Code; and for payments to the Department of 
     Defense Military Retirement Fund, $3,130,361,000.

                                TITLE II

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                    Operation and Maintenance, Army

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance of the Army, as authorized by law; 
     and not to exceed $12,478,000 can be used for emergencies and 
     extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval or 
     authority of the Secretary of the Army, and payments may be 
     made on his certificate of necessity for confidential 
     military purposes, $35,183,796,000.

                    Operation and Maintenance, Navy

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance of the Navy and the Marine Corps, 
     as authorized by law; and not to exceed $15,055,000 can be 
     used for emergencies and extraordinary expenses, to be 
     expended on the approval or authority of the Secretary of the 
     Navy, and payments may be made on his certificate of 
     necessity for confidential military purposes, 
     $40,127,402,000.

                Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance of the Marine Corps, as authorized 
     by law, $6,298,757,000.

                  Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance of the Air Force, as authorized by 
     law; and not to exceed $7,699,000 can be used for emergencies 
     and extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval or 
     authority of the

[[Page 12093]]

     Secretary of the Air Force, and payments may be made on his 
     certificate of necessity for confidential military purposes, 
     $37,438,701,000.

                Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance of activities and agencies of the 
     Department of Defense (other than the military departments), 
     as authorized by law, $32,301,685,000: Provided, That not 
     more than $25,000,000 may be used for the Combatant Commander 
     Initiative Fund authorized under section 166a of title 10, 
     United States Code: Provided further, That not to exceed 
     $36,000,000 can be used for emergencies and extraordinary 
     expenses, to be expended on the approval or authority of the 
     Secretary of Defense, and payments may be made on his 
     certificate of necessity for confidential military purposes:  
     Provided further, That of the funds provided under this 
     heading, not less than $36,262,000 shall be made available 
     for the Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative 
     Agreement Program, of which not less than $3,600,000 shall be 
     available for centers defined in 10 U.S.C. 2411(1)(D):  
     Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated or 
     otherwise made available by this Act may be used to plan or 
     implement the consolidation of a budget or appropriations 
     liaison office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the 
     office of the Secretary of a military department, or the 
     service headquarters of one of the Armed Forces into a 
     legislative affairs or legislative liaison office: Provided 
     further, That $8,721,000, to remain available until expended, 
     is available only for expenses relating to certain classified 
     activities, and may be transferred as necessary by the 
     Secretary of Defense to operation and maintenance 
     appropriations or research, development, test and evaluation 
     appropriations, to be merged with and to be available for the 
     same time period as the appropriations to which transferred: 
     Provided further, That any ceiling on the investment item 
     unit cost of items that may be purchased with operation and 
     maintenance funds shall not apply to the funds described in 
     the preceding proviso: Provided further, That the transfer 
     authority provided under this heading is in addition to any 
     other transfer authority provided elsewhere in this Act.

                Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance, including training, organization, 
     and administration, of the Army Reserve; repair of facilities 
     and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel and 
     transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; procurement of 
     services, supplies, and equipment; and communications, 
     $3,199,151,000.

                Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance, including training, organization, 
     and administration, of the Navy Reserve; repair of facilities 
     and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel and 
     transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; procurement of 
     services, supplies, and equipment; and communications, 
     $1,200,283,000.

            Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance, including training, organization, 
     and administration, of the Marine Corps Reserve; repair of 
     facilities and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; 
     travel and transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; 
     procurement of services, supplies, and equipment; and 
     communications, $266,561,000.

              Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance, including training, organization, 
     and administration, of the Air Force Reserve; repair of 
     facilities and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; 
     travel and transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; 
     procurement of services, supplies, and equipment; and 
     communications, $3,149,046,000.

             Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard

       For expenses of training, organizing, and administering the 
     Army National Guard, including medical and hospital treatment 
     and related expenses in non-Federal hospitals; maintenance, 
     operation, and repairs to structures and facilities; hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles; personnel services in the National 
     Guard Bureau; travel expenses (other than mileage), as 
     authorized by law for Army personnel on active duty, for Army 
     National Guard division, regimental, and battalion commanders 
     while inspecting units in compliance with National Guard 
     Bureau regulations when specifically authorized by the Chief, 
     National Guard Bureau; supplying and equipping the Army 
     National Guard as authorized by law; and expenses of repair, 
     modification, maintenance, and issue of supplies and 
     equipment (including aircraft), $7,102,113,000.

             Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard

       For expenses of training, organizing, and administering the 
     Air National Guard, including medical and hospital treatment 
     and related expenses in non-Federal hospitals; maintenance, 
     operation, and repairs to structures and facilities; 
     transportation of things, hire of passenger motor vehicles; 
     supplying and equipping the Air National Guard, as authorized 
     by law; expenses for repair, modification, maintenance, and 
     issue of supplies and equipment, including those furnished 
     from stocks under the control of agencies of the Department 
     of Defense; travel expenses (other than mileage) on the same 
     basis as authorized by law for Air National Guard personnel 
     on active Federal duty, for Air National Guard commanders 
     while inspecting units in compliance with National Guard 
     Bureau regulations when specifically authorized by the Chief, 
     National Guard Bureau, $6,675,999,000.

          United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

       For salaries and expenses necessary for the United States 
     Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, $13,606,000, of which 
     not to exceed $5,000 may be used for official representation 
     purposes.

                    Environmental Restoration, Army

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the Department of the Army, $298,815,000, to remain 
     available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of 
     the Army shall, upon determining that such funds are required 
     for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of 
     hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of 
     the Department of the Army, or for similar purposes, transfer 
     the funds made available by this appropriation to other 
     appropriations made available to the Department of the Army, 
     to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes 
     and for the same time period as the appropriations to which 
     transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that 
     all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation 
     are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such 
     amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation: 
     Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under 
     this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority 
     provided elsewhere in this Act.

                    Environmental Restoration, Navy

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the Department of the Navy, $316,103,000, to remain 
     available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of 
     the Navy shall, upon determining that such funds are required 
     for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of 
     hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of 
     the Department of the Navy, or for similar purposes, transfer 
     the funds made available by this appropriation to other 
     appropriations made available to the Department of the Navy, 
     to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes 
     and for the same time period as the appropriations to which 
     transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that 
     all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation 
     are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such 
     amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation: 
     Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under 
     this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority 
     provided elsewhere in this Act.

                  Environmental Restoration, Air Force

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the Department of the Air Force, $439,820,000, to 
     remain available until transferred: Provided, That the 
     Secretary of the Air Force shall, upon determining that such 
     funds are required for environmental restoration, reduction 
     and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings 
     and debris of the Department of the Air Force, or for similar 
     purposes, transfer the funds made available by this 
     appropriation to other appropriations made available to the 
     Department of the Air Force, to be merged with and to be 
     available for the same purposes and for the same time period 
     as the appropriations to which transferred: Provided further, 
     That upon a determination that all or part of the funds 
     transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the 
     purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred 
     back to this appropriation: Provided further, That the 
     transfer authority provided under this heading is in addition 
     to any other transfer authority provided elsewhere in this 
     Act.

                Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the Department of Defense, $10,757,000, to remain 
     available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of 
     Defense shall, upon determining that such funds are required 
     for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of 
     hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of 
     the Department of Defense, or for similar purposes, transfer 
     the funds made available by this appropriation to other 
     appropriations made available to the Department of Defense, 
     to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes 
     and for the same time period as the appropriations to which 
     transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that 
     all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation 
     are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such

[[Page 12094]]

     amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation: 
     Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under 
     this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority 
     provided elsewhere in this Act.

         Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the Department of the Army, $262,443,000, to remain 
     available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of 
     the Army shall, upon determining that such funds are required 
     for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of 
     hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris at 
     sites formerly used by the Department of Defense, transfer 
     the funds made available by this appropriation to other 
     appropriations made available to the Department of the Army, 
     to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes 
     and for the same time period as the appropriations to which 
     transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that 
     all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation 
     are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such 
     amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation: 
     Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under 
     this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority 
     provided elsewhere in this Act.

             Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid

       For expenses relating to the Overseas Humanitarian, 
     Disaster, and Civic Aid programs of the Department of Defense 
     (consisting of the programs provided under sections 401, 402, 
     404, 407, 2557, and 2561 of title 10, United States Code), 
     $109,500,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015.

                  Cooperative Threat Reduction Account

       For assistance to the republics of the former Soviet Union 
     and, with appropriate authorization by the Department of 
     Defense and Department of State, to countries outside of the 
     former Soviet Union, including assistance provided by 
     contract or by grants, for facilitating the elimination and 
     the safe and secure transportation and storage of nuclear, 
     chemical and other weapons; for establishing programs to 
     prevent the proliferation of weapons, weapons components, and 
     weapon-related technology and expertise; for programs 
     relating to the training and support of defense and military 
     personnel for demilitarization and protection of weapons, 
     weapons components and weapons technology and expertise, and 
     for defense and military contacts, $528,455,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2016.

      department of defense acquisition workforce development fund

       For the Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce 
     Development Fund, $51,031,000.

                               TITLE III

                              PROCUREMENT

                       Aircraft Procurement, Army

       For construction, procurement, production, modification, 
     and modernization of aircraft, equipment, including ordnance, 
     ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories 
     therefor; specialized equipment and training devices; 
     expansion of public and private plants, including the land 
     necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such 
     lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, 
     and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant 
     and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and 
     other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes, 
     $5,236,653,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                       Missile Procurement, Army

       For construction, procurement, production, modification, 
     and modernization of missiles, equipment, including ordnance, 
     ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories 
     therefor; specialized equipment and training devices; 
     expansion of public and private plants, including the land 
     necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such 
     lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, 
     and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant 
     and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and 
     other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes, 
     $1,628,083,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

        Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army

       For construction, procurement, production, and modification 
     of weapons and tracked combat vehicles, equipment, including 
     ordnance, spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized 
     equipment and training devices; expansion of public and 
     private plants, including the land necessary therefor, for 
     the foregoing purposes, and such lands and interests therein, 
     may be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to 
     approval of title; and procurement and installation of 
     equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and 
     private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
     owned equipment layaway; and other expenses necessary for the 
     foregoing purposes, $1,545,560,000, to remain available for 
     obligation until September 30, 2016.

                    Procurement of Ammunition, Army

       For construction, procurement, production, and modification 
     of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized 
     equipment and training devices; expansion of public and 
     private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by 
     section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land 
     necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such 
     lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, 
     and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant 
     and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and 
     other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes, 
     $1,465,937,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                        Other Procurement, Army

       For construction, procurement, production, and modification 
     of vehicles, including tactical, support, and non-tracked 
     combat vehicles; the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
     replacement only; communications and electronic equipment; 
     other support equipment; spare parts, ordnance, and 
     accessories therefor; specialized equipment and training 
     devices; expansion of public and private plants, including 
     the land necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and 
     such lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, 
     and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant 
     and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and 
     other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes, 
     $6,467,751,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                       Aircraft Procurement, Navy

       For construction, procurement, production, modification, 
     and modernization of aircraft, equipment, including ordnance, 
     spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized equipment; 
     expansion of public and private plants, including the land 
     necessary therefor, and such lands and interests therein, may 
     be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to 
     approval of title; and procurement and installation of 
     equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and 
     private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
     owned equipment layaway, $17,092,784,000, to remain available 
     for obligation until September 30, 2016.

                       Weapons Procurement, Navy

       For construction, procurement, production, modification, 
     and modernization of missiles, torpedoes, other weapons, and 
     related support equipment including spare parts, and 
     accessories therefor; expansion of public and private plants, 
     including the land necessary therefor, and such lands and 
     interests therein, may be acquired, and construction 
     prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; and 
     procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, and 
     machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant and 
     Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway, 
     $3,017,646,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

            Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps

       For construction, procurement, production, and modification 
     of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized 
     equipment and training devices; expansion of public and 
     private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by 
     section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land 
     necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such 
     lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, 
     and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant 
     and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and 
     other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes, 
     $544,116,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                   Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy

       For expenses necessary for the construction, acquisition, 
     or conversion of vessels as authorized by law, including 
     armor and armament thereof, plant equipment, appliances, and 
     machine tools and installation thereof in public and private 
     plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned 
     equipment layaway; procurement of critical, long lead time 
     components and designs for vessels to be constructed or 
     converted in the future; and expansion of public and private 
     plants, including land necessary therefor, and such lands and 
     interests therein, may be acquired, and construction 
     prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title, as follows:
       Carrier Replacement Program (AP), $944,866,000;
       Virginia Class Submarine, $3,880,704,000;
       Virginia Class Submarine (AP), $2,354,612,000;
       CVN Refuelings, $1,609,324,000;
       CVN Refuelings (AP), $245,793,000;
       DDG-1000 Program, $231,694,000;
       DDG-51 Destroyer, $1,615,564,000;
       DDG-51 Destroyer (AP), $388,551,000;
       Littoral Combat Ship, $1,793,014,000;
       Afloat Forward Staging Base (AP), $562,000,000;

[[Page 12095]]

       Joint High Speed Vessel, $10,332,000;
       Moored Training Ship, $207,300,000;
       LCAC Service Life Extension Program, $80,987,000;
       For Outfitting, post delivery, conversions, and first 
     destination transportation, $450,163,000; and
       For Completion of Prior Year Shipbuilding Programs, 
     $625,800,000.
       In all: $15,000,704,000, to remain available for obligation 
     until September 30, 2018:  Provided, That additional 
     obligations may be incurred after September 30, 2018, for 
     engineering services, tests, evaluations, and other such 
     budgeted work that must be performed in the final stage of 
     ship construction:  Provided further, That none of the funds 
     provided under this heading for the construction or 
     conversion of any naval vessel to be constructed in shipyards 
     in the United States shall be expended in foreign facilities 
     for the construction of major components of such vessel:  
     Provided further, That none of the funds provided under this 
     heading shall be used for the construction of any naval 
     vessel in foreign shipyards.

                        Other Procurement, Navy

       For procurement, production, and modernization of support 
     equipment and materials not otherwise provided for, Navy 
     ordnance (except ordnance for new aircraft, new ships, and 
     ships authorized for conversion); the purchase of passenger 
     motor vehicles for replacement only; expansion of public and 
     private plants, including the land necessary therefor, and 
     such lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, 
     and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant 
     and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway, 
     $6,824,824,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                       Procurement, Marine Corps

       For expenses necessary for the procurement, manufacture, 
     and modification of missiles, armament, military equipment, 
     spare parts, and accessories therefor; plant equipment, 
     appliances, and machine tools, and installation thereof in 
     public and private plants; reserve plant and Government and 
     contractor-owned equipment layaway; vehicles for the Marine 
     Corps, including the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
     replacement only; and expansion of public and private plants, 
     including land necessary therefor, and such lands and 
     interests therein, may be acquired, and construction 
     prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title, 
     $1,271,311,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

       For construction, procurement, and modification of aircraft 
     and equipment, including armor and armament, specialized 
     ground handling equipment, and training devices, spare parts, 
     and accessories therefor; specialized equipment; expansion of 
     public and private plants, Government-owned equipment and 
     installation thereof in such plants, erection of structures, 
     and acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such 
     lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment 
     layaway; and other expenses necessary for the foregoing 
     purposes including rents and transportation of things, 
     $10,860,606,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                     Missile Procurement, Air Force

       For construction, procurement, and modification of 
     missiles, spacecraft, rockets, and related equipment, 
     including spare parts and accessories therefor, ground 
     handling equipment, and training devices; expansion of public 
     and private plants, Government-owned equipment and 
     installation thereof in such plants, erection of structures, 
     and acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such 
     lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment 
     layaway; and other expenses necessary for the foregoing 
     purposes including rents and transportation of things, 
     $5,267,119,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                  Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force

       For construction, procurement, production, and modification 
     of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized 
     equipment and training devices; expansion of public and 
     private plants, including ammunition facilities, authorized 
     by section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land 
     necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such 
     lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; 
     and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, 
     and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant 
     and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and 
     other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes, 
     $743,442,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2016.

                      Other Procurement, Air Force

       For procurement and modification of equipment (including 
     ground guidance and electronic control equipment, and ground 
     electronic and communication equipment), and supplies, 
     materials, and spare parts therefor, not otherwise provided 
     for; the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for replacement 
     only; lease of passenger motor vehicles; and expansion of 
     public and private plants, Government-owned equipment and 
     installation thereof in such plants, erection of structures, 
     and acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such 
     lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and 
     construction prosecuted thereon, prior to approval of title; 
     reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment 
     layaway, $16,791,497,000, to remain available for obligation 
     until September 30, 2016.

                       Procurement, Defense-wide

       For expenses of activities and agencies of the Department 
     of Defense (other than the military departments) necessary 
     for procurement, production, and modification of equipment, 
     supplies, materials, and spare parts therefor, not otherwise 
     provided for; the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
     replacement only; expansion of public and private plants, 
     equipment, and installation thereof in such plants, erection 
     of structures, and acquisition of land for the foregoing 
     purposes, and such lands and interests therein, may be 
     acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to 
     approval of title; reserve plant and Government and 
     contractor-owned equipment layaway, $4,522,990,000, to remain 
     available for obligation until September 30, 2016.

                    Defense Production Act Purchases

       For activities by the Department of Defense pursuant to 
     sections 108, 301, 302, and 303 of the Defense Production Act 
     of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2078, 2091, 2092, and 2093), 
     $75,135,000, to remain available until expended.

                                TITLE IV

               RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

            Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army

       For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific 
     research, development, test and evaluation, including 
     maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of 
     facilities and equipment, $7,961,486,000, to remain available 
     for obligation until September 30, 2015.

            Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy

       For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific 
     research, development, test and evaluation, including 
     maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of 
     facilities and equipment, $15,368,352,000, to remain 
     available for obligation until September 30, 2015: Provided, 
     That funds appropriated in this paragraph which are available 
     for the V-22 may be used to meet unique operational 
     requirements of the Special Operations Forces: Provided 
     further, That funds appropriated in this paragraph shall be 
     available for the Cobra Judy program.

         Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force

       For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific 
     research, development, test and evaluation, including 
     maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of 
     facilities and equipment, $24,947,354,000, to remain 
     available for obligation until September 30, 2015.

        Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-wide

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses of activities and agencies of the Department 
     of Defense (other than the military departments), necessary 
     for basic and applied scientific research, development, test 
     and evaluation; advanced research projects as may be 
     designated and determined by the Secretary of Defense, 
     pursuant to law; maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and 
     operation of facilities and equipment, $17,885,538,000, to 
     remain available for obligation until September 30, 2015:  
     Provided, That of the funds made available in this paragraph, 
     $250,000,000 for the Defense Rapid Innovation Program shall 
     only be available for expenses, not otherwise provided for, 
     to include program management and oversight, to conduct 
     research, development, test and evaluation to include proof 
     of concept demonstration; engineering, testing, and 
     validation; and transition to full-scale production:  
     Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense may transfer 
     funds provided herein for the Defense Rapid Innovation 
     Program to appropriations for research, development, test and 
     evaluation to accomplish the purpose provided herein:  
     Provided further, That this transfer authority is in addition 
     to any other transfer authority available to the Department 
     of Defense:  Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense 
     shall, not fewer than 30 days prior to making transfers from 
     this appropriation, notify the congressional defense 
     committees in writing of the details of any such transfer.

                Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     independent activities of the Director, Operational Test and 
     Evaluation, in the direction and supervision of

[[Page 12096]]

     operational test and evaluation, including initial 
     operational test and evaluation which is conducted prior to, 
     and in support of, production decisions; joint operational 
     testing and evaluation; and administrative expenses in 
     connection therewith, $246,800,000, to remain available for 
     obligation until September 30, 2015.

                                TITLE V

                     REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

                     Defense Working Capital Funds

       For the Defense Working Capital Funds, $1,545,827,000.

                     National Defense Sealift Fund

       For National Defense Sealift Fund programs, projects, and 
     activities, and for expenses of the National Defense Reserve 
     Fleet, as established by section 11 of the Merchant Ship 
     Sales Act of 1946 (50 U.S.C. App. 1744), and for the 
     necessary expenses to maintain and preserve a U.S.-flag 
     merchant fleet to serve the national security needs of the 
     United States, $595,700,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That none of the funds provided in this 
     paragraph shall be used to award a new contract that provides 
     for the acquisition of any of the following major components 
     unless such components are manufactured in the United States: 
     auxiliary equipment, including pumps, for all shipboard 
     services; propulsion system components (engines, reduction 
     gears, and propellers); shipboard cranes; and spreaders for 
     shipboard cranes: Provided further, That the exercise of an 
     option in a contract awarded through the obligation of 
     previously appropriated funds shall not be considered to be 
     the award of a new contract: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of the military department responsible for such 
     procurement may waive the restrictions in the first proviso 
     on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate that adequate domestic supplies are not 
     available to meet Department of Defense requirements on a 
     timely basis and that such an acquisition must be made in 
     order to acquire capability for national security purposes.

                                TITLE VI

                  OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

                         Defense Health Program

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, for medical and 
     health care programs of the Department of Defense as 
     authorized by law, $33,573,582,000; of which $31,566,688,000 
     shall be for operation and maintenance, of which not to 
     exceed one percent shall remain available for obligation 
     until September 30, 2015 and of which up to $15,969,816,000 
     may be available for contracts entered into under the TRICARE 
     program; of which $671,181,000, to remain available for 
     obligation until September 30, 2016, shall be for 
     procurement; and of which $1,335,713,000, to remain available 
     for obligation until September 30, 2015, shall be for 
     research, development, test and evaluation:  Provided, That, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the amount 
     made available under this heading for research, development, 
     test and evaluation, not less than $8,000,000 shall be 
     available for HIV prevention educational activities 
     undertaken in connection with United States military 
     training, exercises, and humanitarian assistance activities 
     conducted primarily in African nations:  Provided further, 
     That of the funds made available under this Act for research, 
     development, test and evaluation, procurement, or operation 
     and maintenance for the Defense Health Agency, not more than 
     25 percent may be used until the date on which the program 
     plan for the oversight and execution of the integrated 
     electronic health record program required by subtitle C of 
     title VII of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2014 is submitted to Congress.

           Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     destruction of the United States stockpile of lethal chemical 
     agents and munitions in accordance with the provisions of 
     section 1412 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act, 
     1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521), and for the destruction of other 
     chemical warfare materials that are not in the chemical 
     weapon stockpile, $1,057,123,000, of which $451,572,000 shall 
     be for operation and maintenance, of which no less than 
     $51,217,000 shall be for the Chemical Stockpile Emergency 
     Preparedness Program, consisting of $21,489,000 for 
     activities on military installations and $29,728,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2015, to assist State 
     and local governments; $1,368,000 shall be for procurement, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2016, of which 
     $1,368,000 shall be for the Chemical Stockpile Emergency 
     Preparedness Program to assist State and local governments; 
     and $604,183,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2015, shall be for research, development, test and 
     evaluation, of which $584,238,000 shall only be for the 
     Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program.

         Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For drug interdiction and counter-drug activities of the 
     Department of Defense, for transfer to appropriations 
     available to the Department of Defense for military personnel 
     of the reserve components serving under the provisions of 
     title 10 and title 32, United States Code; for operation and 
     maintenance; for procurement; and for research, development, 
     test and evaluation, $1,007,762,000: Provided, That the funds 
     appropriated under this heading shall be available for 
     obligation for the same time period and for the same purpose 
     as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further, 
     That upon a determination that all or part of the funds 
     transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the 
     purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred 
     back to this appropriation: Provided further, That the 
     transfer authority provided under this heading is in addition 
     to any other transfer authority contained elsewhere in this 
     Act.

                    Office of the Inspector General

       For expenses and activities of the Office of the Inspector 
     General in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector 
     General Act of 1978, as amended, $347,000,000, of which 
     $346,000,000 shall be for operation and maintenance, of which 
     not to exceed $700,000 is available for emergencies and 
     extraordinary expenses to be expended on the approval or 
     authority of the Inspector General, and payments may be made 
     on the Inspector General's certificate of necessity for 
     confidential military purposes; and of which $1,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2016, shall be for 
     procurement.

                               TITLE VII

                            RELATED AGENCIES

   Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System Fund

       For payment to the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement 
     and Disability System Fund, to maintain the proper funding 
     level for continuing the operation of the Central 
     Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System, 
     $514,000,000.

               Intelligence Community Management Account

       For necessary expenses of the Intelligence Community 
     Management Account, $552,535,000.

                               TITLE VIII

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 8001.  No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not 
     authorized by the Congress.
       Sec. 8002.  During the current fiscal year, provisions of 
     law prohibiting the payment of compensation to, or employment 
     of, any person not a citizen of the United States shall not 
     apply to personnel of the Department of Defense: Provided, 
     That salary increases granted to direct and indirect hire 
     foreign national employees of the Department of Defense 
     funded by this Act shall not be at a rate in excess of the 
     percentage increase authorized by law for civilian employees 
     of the Department of Defense whose pay is computed under the 
     provisions of section 5332 of title 5, United States Code, or 
     at a rate in excess of the percentage increase provided by 
     the appropriate host nation to its own employees, whichever 
     is higher: Provided further, That this section shall not 
     apply to Department of Defense foreign service national 
     employees serving at United States diplomatic missions whose 
     pay is set by the Department of State under the Foreign 
     Service Act of 1980: Provided further, That the limitations 
     of this provision shall not apply to foreign national 
     employees of the Department of Defense in the Republic of 
     Turkey.
       Sec. 8003.  No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year, unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 8004.  No more than 20 percent of the appropriations 
     in this Act which are limited for obligation during the 
     current fiscal year shall be obligated during the last 2 
     months of the fiscal year:  Provided, That this section shall 
     not apply to obligations for support of active duty training 
     of reserve components or summer camp training of the Reserve 
     Officers' Training Corps.

                          (transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8005.  Upon determination by the Secretary of Defense 
     that such action is necessary in the national interest, he 
     may, with the approval of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, transfer not to exceed $4,000,000,000 of working 
     capital funds of the Department of Defense or funds made 
     available in this Act to the Department of Defense for 
     military functions (except military construction) between 
     such appropriations or funds or any subdivision thereof, to 
     be merged with and to be available for the same purposes, and 
     for the same time period, as the appropriation or fund to 
     which transferred: Provided, That such authority to transfer 
     may not be used unless for higher priority items, based on 
     unforeseen military requirements, than those for which 
     originally appropriated and in no case where the item for 
     which funds are requested has been denied by the Congress: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall notify 
     the Congress promptly of all transfers made pursuant to this 
     authority or any other authority in this Act:  Provided 
     further, That no part of the funds in this Act shall be 
     available to prepare or present a request to the

[[Page 12097]]

     Committees on Appropriations for reprogramming of funds, 
     unless for higher priority items, based on unforeseen 
     military requirements, than those for which originally 
     appropriated and in no case where the item for which 
     reprogramming is requested has been denied by the Congress:  
     Provided further, That a request for multiple reprogrammings 
     of funds using authority provided in this section shall be 
     made prior to June 30, 2014: Provided further, That transfers 
     among military personnel appropriations shall not be taken 
     into account for purposes of the limitation on the amount of 
     funds that may be transferred under this section.
       Sec. 8006. (a) With regard to the list of specific 
     programs, projects, and activities (and the dollar amounts 
     and adjustments to budget activities corresponding to such 
     programs, projects, and activities) contained in the tables 
     titled ``Explanation of Project Level Adjustments'' in the 
     explanatory statement regarding this Act the obligation and 
     expenditure of amounts appropriated or otherwise made 
     available in this Act for those programs, projects, and 
     activities for which the amounts appropriated exceed the 
     amounts requested are hereby required by law to be carried 
     out in the manner provided by such tables to the same extent 
     as if the tables were included in the text of this Act.
       (b) Amounts specified in the referenced tables described in 
     subsection (a) shall not be treated as subdivisions of 
     appropriations for purposes of section 8005 of this Act:  
     Provided, That section 8005 shall apply when transfers of the 
     amounts described in subsection (a) occur between 
     appropriation accounts.
       Sec. 8007. (a) Not later than 60 days after enactment of 
     this Act, the Department of Defense shall submit a report to 
     the congressional defense committees to establish the 
     baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 
     authorities for fiscal year 2014:  Provided, That the report 
     shall include--
       (1) a table for each appropriation with a separate column 
     to display the President's budget request, adjustments made 
     by Congress, adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if 
     appropriate, and the fiscal year enacted level;
       (2) a delineation in the table for each appropriation both 
     by budget activity and program, project, and activity as 
     detailed in the Budget Appendix; and
       (3) an identification of items of special congressional 
     interest.
       (b) Notwithstanding section 8005 of this Act, none of the 
     funds provided in this Act shall be available for 
     reprogramming or transfer until the report identified in 
     subsection (a) is submitted to the congressional defense 
     committees, unless the Secretary of Defense certifies in 
     writing to the congressional defense committees that such 
     reprogramming or transfer is necessary as an emergency 
     requirement.

                          (transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8008.  During the current fiscal year, cash balances 
     in working capital funds of the Department of Defense 
     established pursuant to section 2208 of title 10, United 
     States Code, may be maintained in only such amounts as are 
     necessary at any time for cash disbursements to be made from 
     such funds:  Provided, That transfers may be made between 
     such funds:  Provided further, That transfers may be made 
     between working capital funds and the ``Foreign Currency 
     Fluctuations, Defense'' appropriation and the ``Operation and 
     Maintenance'' appropriation accounts in such amounts as may 
     be determined by the Secretary of Defense, with the approval 
     of the Office of Management and Budget, except that such 
     transfers may not be made unless the Secretary of Defense has 
     notified the Congress of the proposed transfer. Except in 
     amounts equal to the amounts appropriated to working capital 
     funds in this Act, no obligations may be made against a 
     working capital fund to procure or increase the value of war 
     reserve material inventory, unless the Secretary of Defense 
     has notified the Congress prior to any such obligation.
       Sec. 8009.  Funds appropriated by this Act may not be used 
     to initiate a special access program without prior 
     notification 30 calendar days in advance to the congressional 
     defense committees.
       Sec. 8010.  None of the funds provided in this Act shall be 
     available to initiate: (1) a multiyear contract that employs 
     economic order quantity procurement in excess of $20,000,000 
     in any one year of the contract or that includes an unfunded 
     contingent liability in excess of $20,000,000; or (2) a 
     contract for advance procurement leading to a multiyear 
     contract that employs economic order quantity procurement in 
     excess of $20,000,000 in any one year, unless the 
     congressional defense committees have been notified at least 
     30 days in advance of the proposed contract award:  Provided, 
     That no part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall 
     be available to initiate a multiyear contract for which the 
     economic order quantity advance procurement is not funded at 
     least to the limits of the Government's liability:  Provided 
     further, That no part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be available to initiate multiyear procurement 
     contracts for any systems or component thereof if the value 
     of the multiyear contract would exceed $500,000,000 unless 
     specifically provided in this Act:  Provided further, That no 
     multiyear procurement contract can be terminated without 10-
     day prior notification to the congressional defense 
     committees:  Provided further, That the execution of 
     multiyear authority shall require the use of a present value 
     analysis to determine lowest cost compared to an annual 
     procurement:  Provided further, That none of the funds 
     provided in this Act may be used for a multiyear contract 
     executed after the date of the enactment of this Act unless 
     in the case of any such contract--
       (1) the Secretary of Defense has submitted to Congress a 
     budget request for full funding of units to be procured 
     through the contract and, in the case of a contract for 
     procurement of aircraft, that includes, for any aircraft unit 
     to be procured through the contract for which procurement 
     funds are requested in that budget request for production 
     beyond advance procurement activities in the fiscal year 
     covered by the budget, full funding of procurement of such 
     unit in that fiscal year;
       (2) cancellation provisions in the contract do not include 
     consideration of recurring manufacturing costs of the 
     contractor associated with the production of unfunded units 
     to be delivered under the contract;
       (3) the contract provides that payments to the contractor 
     under the contract shall not be made in advance of incurred 
     costs on funded units; and
       (4) the contract does not provide for a price adjustment 
     based on a failure to award a follow-on contract.
       Funds appropriated in title III of this Act may be used for 
     a multiyear procurement contract as follows:
       E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, SSN 774 Virginia class submarine, 
     KC-130J, C-130J, HC-130J, MC-130J, AC-130J aircraft, Ground-
     Based Midcourse Defense System Ground-Based Interceptors, and 
     government furnished equipment.
       Sec. 8011.  Within the funds appropriated for the operation 
     and maintenance of the Armed Forces, funds are hereby 
     appropriated pursuant to section 401 of title 10, United 
     States Code, for humanitarian and civic assistance costs 
     under chapter 20 of title 10, United States Code. Such funds 
     may also be obligated for humanitarian and civic assistance 
     costs incidental to authorized operations and pursuant to 
     authority granted in section 401 of chapter 20 of title 10, 
     United States Code, and these obligations shall be reported 
     as required by section 401(d) of title 10, United States 
     Code: Provided, That funds available for operation and 
     maintenance shall be available for providing humanitarian and 
     similar assistance by using Civic Action Teams in the Trust 
     Territories of the Pacific Islands and freely associated 
     states of Micronesia, pursuant to the Compact of Free 
     Association as authorized by Public Law 99-239: Provided 
     further, That upon a determination by the Secretary of the 
     Army that such action is beneficial for graduate medical 
     education programs conducted at Army medical facilities 
     located in Hawaii, the Secretary of the Army may authorize 
     the provision of medical services at such facilities and 
     transportation to such facilities, on a nonreimbursable 
     basis, for civilian patients from American Samoa, the 
     Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Marshall 
     Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, and Guam.
       Sec. 8012. (a) During fiscal year 2014, the civilian 
     personnel of the Department of Defense may not be managed on 
     the basis of any end-strength, and the management of such 
     personnel during that fiscal year shall not be subject to any 
     constraint or limitation (known as an end-strength) on the 
     number of such personnel who may be employed on the last day 
     of such fiscal year.
       (b) The fiscal year 2015 budget request for the Department 
     of Defense as well as all justification material and other 
     documentation supporting the fiscal year 2015 Department of 
     Defense budget request shall be prepared and submitted to the 
     Congress as if subsections (a) and (c) of this provision were 
     effective with regard to fiscal year 2015.
       (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply to 
     military (civilian) technicians.
       Sec. 8013.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     shall be used in any way, directly or indirectly, to 
     influence congressional action on any legislation or 
     appropriation matters pending before the Congress.
       Sec. 8014.  None of the funds appropriated by this Act 
     shall be available for the basic pay and allowances of any 
     member of the Army participating as a full-time student and 
     receiving benefits paid by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     from the Department of Defense Education Benefits Fund when 
     time spent as a full-time student is credited toward 
     completion of a service commitment: Provided, That this 
     section shall not apply to those members who have reenlisted 
     with this option prior to October 1, 1987: Provided further, 
     That this section applies only to active components of the 
     Army.

                          (transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8015.  Funds appropriated in title III of this Act for 
     the Department of Defense Pilot Mentor-Protege Program may be 
     transferred to any other appropriation contained in this Act 
     solely for the purpose of implementing a Mentor-Protege 
     Program developmental assistance agreement pursuant to 
     section 831

[[Page 12098]]

     of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1991 (Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2302 note), as amended, 
     under the authority of this provision or any other transfer 
     authority contained in this Act.
       Sec. 8016.  None of the funds in this Act may be available 
     for the purchase by the Department of Defense (and its 
     departments and agencies) of welded shipboard anchor and 
     mooring chain 4 inches in diameter and under unless the 
     anchor and mooring chain are manufactured in the United 
     States from components which are substantially manufactured 
     in the United States:  Provided, That for the purpose of this 
     section, the term ``manufactured'' shall include cutting, 
     heat treating, quality control, testing of chain and welding 
     (including the forging and shot blasting process):  Provided 
     further, That for the purpose of this section substantially 
     all of the components of anchor and mooring chain shall be 
     considered to be produced or manufactured in the United 
     States if the aggregate cost of the components produced or 
     manufactured in the United States exceeds the aggregate cost 
     of the components produced or manufactured outside the United 
     States:  Provided further, That when adequate domestic 
     supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense 
     requirements on a timely basis, the Secretary of the Service 
     responsible for the procurement may waive this restriction on 
     a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the 
     Committees on Appropriations that such an acquisition must be 
     made in order to acquire capability for national security 
     purposes.
       Sec. 8017.  None of the funds available to the Department 
     of Defense in the current fiscal year and any fiscal year 
     thereafter may be used to demilitarize or dispose of M-1 
     Carbines, M-1 Garand rifles, M-14 rifles, .22 caliber rifles, 
     .30 caliber rifles, or M-1911 pistols, or to demilitarize or 
     destroy small arms ammunition or ammunition components that 
     are not otherwise prohibited from commercial sale under 
     Federal law, unless the small arms ammunition or ammunition 
     components are certified by the Secretary of the Army or 
     designee as unserviceable or unsafe for further use.
       Sec. 8018.  No more than $500,000 of the funds appropriated 
     or made available in this Act shall be used during a single 
     fiscal year for any single relocation of an organization, 
     unit, activity or function of the Department of Defense into 
     or within the National Capital Region:  Provided, That the 
     Secretary of Defense may waive this restriction on a case-by-
     case basis by certifying in writing to the congressional 
     defense committees that such a relocation is required in the 
     best interest of the Government.
       Sec. 8019.  In addition to the funds provided elsewhere in 
     this Act, $15,000,000 is appropriated only for incentive 
     payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing 
     Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544):  Provided, That a prime 
     contractor or a subcontractor at any tier that makes a 
     subcontract award to any subcontractor or supplier as defined 
     in section 1544 of title 25, United States Code, or a small 
     business owned and controlled by an individual or individuals 
     defined under section 4221(9) of title 25, United States 
     Code, shall be considered a contractor for the purposes of 
     being allowed additional compensation under section 504 of 
     the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544) whenever 
     the prime contract or subcontract amount is over $500,000 and 
     involves the expenditure of funds appropriated by an Act 
     making Appropriations for the Department of Defense with 
     respect to any fiscal year:  Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding section 1906 of title 41, United States Code, 
     this section shall be applicable to any Department of Defense 
     acquisition of supplies or services, including any contract 
     and any subcontract at any tier for acquisition of commercial 
     items produced or manufactured, in whole or in part, by any 
     subcontractor or supplier defined in section 1544 of title 
     25, United States Code, or a small business owned and 
     controlled by an individual or individuals defined under 
     section 4221(9) of title 25, United States Code.
       Sec. 8020.  Funds appropriated by this Act for the Defense 
     Media Activity shall not be used for any national or 
     international political or psychological activities.
       Sec. 8021.  During the current fiscal year, the Department 
     of Defense is authorized to incur obligations of not to 
     exceed $350,000,000 for purposes specified in section 
     2350j(c) of title 10, United States Code, in anticipation of 
     receipt of contributions, only from the Government of Kuwait, 
     under that section: Provided, That upon receipt, such 
     contributions from the Government of Kuwait shall be credited 
     to the appropriations or fund which incurred such 
     obligations.
       Sec. 8022. (a) Of the funds made available in this Act, not 
     less than $39,532,000 shall be available for the Civil Air 
     Patrol Corporation, of which--
       (1) $28,400,000 shall be available from ``Operation and 
     Maintenance, Air Force'' to support Civil Air Patrol 
     Corporation operation and maintenance, readiness, counterdrug 
     activities, and drug demand reduction activities involving 
     youth programs;
       (2) $10,200,000 shall be available from ``Aircraft 
     Procurement, Air Force''; and
       (3) $932,000 shall be available from ``Other Procurement, 
     Air Force'' for vehicle procurement.
       (b) The Secretary of the Air Force should waive 
     reimbursement for any funds used by the Civil Air Patrol for 
     counter-drug activities in support of Federal, State, and 
     local government agencies.
       Sec. 8023. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act 
     are available to establish a new Department of Defense 
     (department) federally funded research and development center 
     (FFRDC), either as a new entity, or as a separate entity 
     administrated by an organization managing another FFRDC, or 
     as a nonprofit membership corporation consisting of a 
     consortium of other FFRDCs and other nonprofit entities.
       (b) No member of a Board of Directors, Trustees, Overseers, 
     Advisory Group, Special Issues Panel, Visiting Committee, or 
     any similar entity of a defense FFRDC, and no paid consultant 
     to any defense FFRDC, except when acting in a technical 
     advisory capacity, may be compensated for his or her services 
     as a member of such entity, or as a paid consultant by more 
     than one FFRDC in a fiscal year: Provided, That a member of 
     any such entity referred to previously in this subsection 
     shall be allowed travel expenses and per diem as authorized 
     under the Federal Joint Travel Regulations, when engaged in 
     the performance of membership duties.
       (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the 
     funds available to the department from any source during 
     fiscal year 2014 may be used by a defense FFRDC, through a 
     fee or other payment mechanism, for construction of new 
     buildings, for payment of cost sharing for projects funded by 
     Government grants, for absorption of contract overruns, or 
     for certain charitable contributions, not to include employee 
     participation in community service and/or development.
       (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the 
     funds available to the department during fiscal year 2014, 
     not more than 5,750 staff years of technical effort (staff 
     years) may be funded for defense FFRDCs:  Provided, That of 
     the specific amount referred to previously in this 
     subsection, not more than 1,125 staff years may be funded for 
     the defense studies and analysis FFRDCs:  Provided further, 
     That this subsection shall not apply to staff years funded in 
     the National Intelligence Program (NIP) and the Military 
     Intelligence Program (MIP).
       (e) The Secretary of Defense shall, with the submission of 
     the department's fiscal year 2015 budget request, submit a 
     report presenting the specific amounts of staff years of 
     technical effort to be allocated for each defense FFRDC 
     during that fiscal year and the associated budget estimates.
       (f) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the 
     total amount appropriated in this Act for FFRDCs is hereby 
     reduced by $40,000,000.
       Sec. 8024.  None of the funds appropriated or made 
     available in this Act shall be used to procure carbon, alloy, 
     or armor steel plate for use in any Government-owned facility 
     or property under the control of the Department of Defense 
     which were not melted and rolled in the United States or 
     Canada:  Provided, That these procurement restrictions shall 
     apply to any and all Federal Supply Class 9515, American 
     Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) or American Iron and 
     Steel Institute (AISI) specifications of carbon, alloy, or 
     armor steel plate:  Provided further, That the Secretary of 
     the military department responsible for the procurement may 
     waive this restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying 
     in writing to the Committees on Appropriations of the House 
     of Representatives and the Senate that adequate domestic 
     supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense 
     requirements on a timely basis and that such an acquisition 
     must be made in order to acquire capability for national 
     security purposes:  Provided further, That these restrictions 
     shall not apply to contracts which are in being as of the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
       Sec. 8025.  For the purposes of this Act, the term 
     ``congressional defense committees'' means the Armed Services 
     Committee of the House of Representatives, the Armed Services 
     Committee of the Senate, the Subcommittee on Defense of the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the 
     Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations of 
     the House of Representatives.
       Sec. 8026.  During the current fiscal year, the Department 
     of Defense may acquire the modification, depot maintenance 
     and repair of aircraft, vehicles and vessels as well as the 
     production of components and other Defense-related articles, 
     through competition between Department of Defense depot 
     maintenance activities and private firms:  Provided, That the 
     Senior Acquisition Executive of the military department or 
     Defense Agency concerned, with power of delegation, shall 
     certify that successful bids include comparable estimates of 
     all direct and indirect costs for both public and private 
     bids:  Provided further, That Office of Management and Budget 
     Circular A-76 shall not apply to competitions conducted under 
     this section.
       Sec. 8027. (a)(1) If the Secretary of Defense, after 
     consultation with the United States Trade Representative, 
     determines that a foreign country which is party to an 
     agreement described in paragraph (2) has violated the terms 
     of the agreement by discriminating

[[Page 12099]]

     against certain types of products produced in the United 
     States that are covered by the agreement, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall rescind the Secretary's blanket waiver of the 
     Buy American Act with respect to such types of products 
     produced in that foreign country.
       (2) An agreement referred to in paragraph (1) is any 
     reciprocal defense procurement memorandum of understanding, 
     between the United States and a foreign country pursuant to 
     which the Secretary of Defense has prospectively waived the 
     Buy American Act for certain products in that country.
       (b) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Congress a 
     report on the amount of Department of Defense purchases from 
     foreign entities in fiscal year 2014. Such report shall 
     separately indicate the dollar value of items for which the 
     Buy American Act was waived pursuant to any agreement 
     described in subsection (a)(2), the Trade Agreement Act of 
     1979 (19 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.), or any international agreement 
     to which the United States is a party.
       (c) For purposes of this section, the term ``Buy American 
     Act'' means chapter 83 of title 41, United States Code.
       Sec. 8028.  During the current fiscal year, amounts 
     contained in the Department of Defense Overseas Military 
     Facility Investment Recovery Account established by section 
     2921(c)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1991 
     (Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) shall be available 
     until expended for the payments specified by section 
     2921(c)(2) of that Act.
       Sec. 8029. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Secretary of the Air Force may convey at no cost to the 
     Air Force, without consideration, to Indian tribes located in 
     the States of Nevada, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, 
     Montana, Oregon, Minnesota, and Washington relocatable 
     military housing units located at Grand Forks Air Force Base, 
     Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mountain Home Air Force Base, 
     Ellsworth Air Force Base, and Minot Air Force Base that are 
     excess to the needs of the Air Force.
       (b) The Secretary of the Air Force shall convey, at no cost 
     to the Air Force, military housing units under subsection (a) 
     in accordance with the request for such units that are 
     submitted to the Secretary by the Operation Walking Shield 
     Program on behalf of Indian tribes located in the States of 
     Nevada, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Oregon, 
     Minnesota, and Washington. Any such conveyance shall be 
     subject to the condition that the housing units shall be 
     removed within a reasonable period of time, as determined by 
     the Secretary.
       (c) The Operation Walking Shield Program shall resolve any 
     conflicts among requests of Indian tribes for housing units 
     under subsection (a) before submitting requests to the 
     Secretary of the Air Force under subsection (b).
       (d) In this section, the term ``Indian tribe'' means any 
     recognized Indian tribe included on the current list 
     published by the Secretary of the Interior under section 104 
     of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe Act of 1994 (Public 
     Law 103-454; 108 Stat. 4792; 25 U.S.C. 479a-1).
       Sec. 8030.  During the current fiscal year, appropriations 
     which are available to the Department of Defense for 
     operation and maintenance may be used to purchase items 
     having an investment item unit cost of not more than 
     $250,000.
       Sec. 8031. (a) During the current fiscal year, none of the 
     appropriations or funds available to the Department of 
     Defense Working Capital Funds shall be used for the purchase 
     of an investment item for the purpose of acquiring a new 
     inventory item for sale or anticipated sale during the 
     current fiscal year or a subsequent fiscal year to customers 
     of the Department of Defense Working Capital Funds if such an 
     item would not have been chargeable to the Department of 
     Defense Business Operations Fund during fiscal year 1994 and 
     if the purchase of such an investment item would be 
     chargeable during the current fiscal year to appropriations 
     made to the Department of Defense for procurement.
       (b) The fiscal year 2015 budget request for the Department 
     of Defense, as well as all justification material and other 
     documentation supporting the fiscal year 2015 Department of 
     Defense budget, shall be prepared and submitted to the 
     Congress on the basis that any equipment which was classified 
     as an end item and funded in a procurement appropriation 
     contained in this Act shall be budgeted for in a proposed 
     fiscal year 2015 procurement appropriation and not in the 
     supply management business area or any other area or category 
     of the Department of Defense Working Capital Funds.
       Sec. 8032.  None of the funds appropriated by this Act for 
     programs of the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain 
     available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year, 
     except for funds appropriated for the Reserve for 
     Contingencies, which shall remain available until September 
     30, 2015: Provided, That funds appropriated, transferred, or 
     otherwise credited to the Central Intelligence Agency Central 
     Services Working Capital Fund during this or any prior or 
     subsequent fiscal year shall remain available until expended: 
     Provided further, That any funds appropriated or transferred 
     to the Central Intelligence Agency for advanced research and 
     development acquisition, for agent operations, and for covert 
     action programs authorized by the President under section 503 
     of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3093) shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2015.
       Sec. 8033.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     funds made available in this Act for the Defense Intelligence 
     Agency may be used for the design, development, and 
     deployment of General Defense Intelligence Program 
     intelligence communications and intelligence information 
     systems for the Services, the Unified and Specified Commands, 
     and the component commands.
       Sec. 8034.  Of the funds appropriated to the Department of 
     Defense under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Defense-Wide'', not less than $12,000,000 shall be made 
     available only for the mitigation of environmental impacts, 
     including training and technical assistance to tribes, 
     related administrative support, the gathering of information, 
     documenting of environmental damage, and developing a system 
     for prioritization of mitigation and cost to complete 
     estimates for mitigation, on Indian lands resulting from 
     Department of Defense activities.
       Sec. 8035. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act 
     may be expended by an entity of the Department of Defense 
     unless the entity, in expending the funds, complies with the 
     Buy American Act. For purposes of this subsection, the term 
     ``Buy American Act'' means chapter 83 of title 41, United 
     States Code.
       (b) If the Secretary of Defense determines that a person 
     has been convicted of intentionally affixing a label bearing 
     a ``Made in America'' inscription to any product sold in or 
     shipped to the United States that is not made in America, the 
     Secretary shall determine, in accordance with section 2410f 
     of title 10, United States Code, whether the person should be 
     debarred from contracting with the Department of Defense.
       (c) In the case of any equipment or products purchased with 
     appropriations provided under this Act, it is the sense of 
     the Congress that any entity of the Department of Defense, in 
     expending the appropriation, purchase only American-made 
     equipment and products, provided that American-made equipment 
     and products are cost-competitive, quality competitive, and 
     available in a timely fashion.
       Sec. 8036.  None of the funds appropriated by this Act 
     shall be available for a contract for studies, analysis, or 
     consulting services entered into without competition on the 
     basis of an unsolicited proposal unless the head of the 
     activity responsible for the procurement determines--
       (1) as a result of thorough technical evaluation, only one 
     source is found fully qualified to perform the proposed work;
       (2) the purpose of the contract is to explore an 
     unsolicited proposal which offers significant scientific or 
     technological promise, represents the product of original 
     thinking, and was submitted in confidence by one source; or
       (3) the purpose of the contract is to take advantage of 
     unique and significant industrial accomplishment by a 
     specific concern, or to insure that a new product or idea of 
     a specific concern is given financial support: Provided, That 
     this limitation shall not apply to contracts in an amount of 
     less than $25,000, contracts related to improvements of 
     equipment that is in development or production, or contracts 
     as to which a civilian official of the Department of Defense, 
     who has been confirmed by the Senate, determines that the 
     award of such contract is in the interest of the national 
     defense.
       Sec. 8037. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and 
     (c), none of the funds made available by this Act may be 
     used--
       (1) to establish a field operating agency; or
       (2) to pay the basic pay of a member of the Armed Forces or 
     civilian employee of the department who is transferred or 
     reassigned from a headquarters activity if the member or 
     employee's place of duty remains at the location of that 
     headquarters.
       (b) The Secretary of Defense or Secretary of a military 
     department may waive the limitations in subsection (a), on a 
     case-by-case basis, if the Secretary determines, and 
     certifies to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate that the granting of the 
     waiver will reduce the personnel requirements or the 
     financial requirements of the department.
       (c) This section does not apply to--
       (1) field operating agencies funded within the National 
     Intelligence Program;
       (2) an Army field operating agency established to 
     eliminate, mitigate, or counter the effects of improvised 
     explosive devices, and, as determined by the Secretary of the 
     Army, other similar threats; or
       (3) an Army field operating agency established to improve 
     the effectiveness and efficiencies of biometric activities 
     and to integrate common biometric technologies throughout the 
     Department of Defense.
       Sec. 8038.  The Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, acting through the Office of Economic 
     Adjustment of the Department of Defense, may use funds made 
     available in this Act under the heading ``Operation and 
     Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' to make grants and supplement

[[Page 12100]]

     other Federal funds in accordance with the guidance provided 
     in the explanatory statement accompanying this Act.
       Sec. 8039. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act 
     shall be available to convert to contractor performance an 
     activity or function of the Department of Defense that, on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, is performed by 
     Department of Defense civilian employees unless--
       (1) the conversion is based on the result of a public-
     private competition that includes a most efficient and cost 
     effective organization plan developed by such activity or 
     function;
       (2) the Competitive Sourcing Official determines that, over 
     all performance periods stated in the solicitation of offers 
     for performance of the activity or function, the cost of 
     performance of the activity or function by a contractor would 
     be less costly to the Department of Defense by an amount that 
     equals or exceeds the lesser of--
       (A) 10 percent of the most efficient organization's 
     personnel-related costs for performance of that activity or 
     function by Federal employees; or
       (B) $10,000,000; and
       (3) the contractor does not receive an advantage for a 
     proposal that would reduce costs for the Department of 
     Defense by--
       (A) not making an employer-sponsored health insurance plan 
     available to the workers who are to be employed in the 
     performance of that activity or function under the contract; 
     or
       (B) offering to such workers an employer-sponsored health 
     benefits plan that requires the employer to contribute less 
     towards the premium or subscription share than the amount 
     that is paid by the Department of Defense for health benefits 
     for civilian employees under chapter 89 of title 5, United 
     States Code.
       (b)(1) The Department of Defense, without regard to 
     subsection (a) of this section or subsection (a), (b), or (c) 
     of section 2461 of title 10, United States Code, and 
     notwithstanding any administrative regulation, requirement, 
     or policy to the contrary shall have full authority to enter 
     into a contract for the performance of any commercial or 
     industrial type function of the Department of Defense that--
       (A) is included on the procurement list established 
     pursuant to section 2 of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (section 
     8503 of title 41, United States Code);
       (B) is planned to be converted to performance by a 
     qualified nonprofit agency for the blind or by a qualified 
     nonprofit agency for other severely handicapped individuals 
     in accordance with that Act; or
       (C) is planned to be converted to performance by a 
     qualified firm under at least 51 percent ownership by an 
     Indian tribe, as defined in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 
     450b(e)), or a Native Hawaiian Organization, as defined in 
     section 8(a)(15) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     637(a)(15)).
       (2) This section shall not apply to depot contracts or 
     contracts for depot maintenance as provided in sections 2469 
     and 2474 of title 10, United States Code.
       (c) The conversion of any activity or function of the 
     Department of Defense under the authority provided by this 
     section shall be credited toward any competitive or 
     outsourcing goal, target, or measurement that may be 
     established by statute, regulation, or policy and is deemed 
     to be awarded under the authority of, and in compliance with, 
     subsection (h) of section 2304 of title 10, United States 
     Code, for the competition or outsourcing of commercial 
     activities.

                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 8040.  Of the funds appropriated in Department of 
     Defense Appropriations Acts, the following funds are hereby 
     rescinded from the following accounts and programs in the 
     specified amounts:
       ``National Defense Sealift Fund, 2011/XXXX'', $28,000,000;
       ``National Defense Sealift Fund, 2012/XXXX'', $14,000,000;
       ``Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2012/2014'', $30,000,000;
       ``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2012/2014'', 
     $443,000,000;
       ``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2012/2014'', $10,000,000;
       ``Aircraft Procurement, Navy, 2013/2015'', $85,000,000;
       ``Weapons Procurement, Navy, 2013/2015'', $5,000,000;
       ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 2013/ 2017'': CVN-71, 
     $68,000,000;
       ``Other Procurement, Navy, 2013/2015'', $3,553,000;
       ``Procurement, Marine Corps, 2013/2015'', $12,650,000;
       ``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2013/2015'', $60,000,000;
       ``Other Procurement, Air Force, 2013/2015'', $38,900,000;
       ``Procurement, Defense-Wide, 2013/2015'', $72,776,000;
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2013/
     2014'', $380,861,000;
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2013/
     2014'', $49,331,000;
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force, 
     2013/2014'', $115,000,000;
       ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide, 
     2013/2014'', $213,000,000;
       ``Ship Modernization Operations and Sustainment Fund, 2013/
     2014'', $1,414,500,000.
       Sec. 8041.  None of the funds available in this Act may be 
     used to reduce the authorized positions for military 
     technicians (dual status) of the Army National Guard, Air 
     National Guard, Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve for the 
     purpose of applying any administratively imposed civilian 
     personnel ceiling, freeze, or reduction on military 
     technicians (dual status), unless such reductions are a 
     direct result of a reduction in military force structure.
       Sec. 8042.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available in this Act may be obligated or expended for 
     assistance to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea 
     unless specifically appropriated for that purpose.
       Sec. 8043.  Funds appropriated in this Act for operation 
     and maintenance of the Military Departments, Combatant 
     Commands and Defense Agencies shall be available for 
     reimbursement of pay, allowances and other expenses which 
     would otherwise be incurred against appropriations for the 
     National Guard and Reserve when members of the National Guard 
     and Reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence 
     support to Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint 
     Intelligence Activities, including the activities and 
     programs included within the National Intelligence Program 
     and the Military Intelligence Program: Provided, That nothing 
     in this section authorizes deviation from established Reserve 
     and National Guard personnel and training procedures.
       Sec. 8044.  During the current fiscal year, none of the 
     funds appropriated in this Act may be used to reduce the 
     civilian medical and medical support personnel assigned to 
     military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2003, 
     level:  Provided, That the Service Surgeons General may waive 
     this section by certifying to the congressional defense 
     committees that the beneficiary population is declining in 
     some catchment areas and civilian strength reductions may be 
     consistent with responsible resource stewardship and 
     capitation-based budgeting.
       Sec. 8045. (a) None of the funds available to the 
     Department of Defense for any fiscal year for drug 
     interdiction or counter-drug activities may be transferred to 
     any other department or agency of the United States except as 
     specifically provided in an appropriations law.
       (b) None of the funds available to the Central Intelligence 
     Agency for any fiscal year for drug interdiction and counter-
     drug activities may be transferred to any other department or 
     agency of the United States except as specifically provided 
     in an appropriations law.
       Sec. 8046.  None of the funds appropriated by this Act may 
     be used for the procurement of ball and roller bearings other 
     than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic 
     origin:  Provided, That the Secretary of the military 
     department responsible for such procurement may waive this 
     restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing 
     to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, that adequate domestic 
     supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense 
     requirements on a timely basis and that such an acquisition 
     must be made in order to acquire capability for national 
     security purposes:  Provided further, That this restriction 
     shall not apply to the purchase of ``commercial items'', as 
     defined by section 4(12) of the Office of Federal Procurement 
     Policy Act, except that the restriction shall apply to ball 
     or roller bearings purchased as end items.
       Sec. 8047.  None of the funds in this Act may be used to 
     purchase any supercomputer which is not manufactured in the 
     United States, unless the Secretary of Defense certifies to 
     the congressional defense committees that such an acquisition 
     must be made in order to acquire capability for national 
     security purposes that is not available from United States 
     manufacturers.
       Sec. 8048.  None of the funds made available in this or any 
     other Act may be used to pay the salary of any officer or 
     employee of the Department of Defense who approves or 
     implements the transfer of administrative responsibilities or 
     budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity 
     financed by this Act to the jurisdiction of another Federal 
     agency not financed by this Act without the express 
     authorization of Congress:  Provided, That this limitation 
     shall not apply to transfers of funds expressly provided for 
     in Defense Appropriations Acts, or provisions of Acts 
     providing supplemental appropriations for the Department of 
     Defense.
       Sec. 8049. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     none of the funds available to the Department of Defense for 
     the current fiscal year may be obligated or expended to 
     transfer to another nation or an international organization 
     any defense articles or services (other than intelligence 
     services) for use in the activities described in subsection 
     (b) unless the congressional defense committees, the 
     Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, 
     and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate are 
     notified 15 days in advance of such transfer.
       (b) This section applies to--
       (1) any international peacekeeping or peace-enforcement 
     operation under the authority of chapter VI or chapter VII of 
     the

[[Page 12101]]

     United Nations Charter under the authority of a United 
     Nations Security Council resolution; and
       (2) any other international peacekeeping, peace-
     enforcement, or humanitarian assistance operation.
       (c) A notice under subsection (a) shall include the 
     following:
       (1) A description of the equipment, supplies, or services 
     to be transferred.
       (2) A statement of the value of the equipment, supplies, or 
     services to be transferred.
       (3) In the case of a proposed transfer of equipment or 
     supplies--
       (A) a statement of whether the inventory requirements of 
     all elements of the Armed Forces (including the reserve 
     components) for the type of equipment or supplies to be 
     transferred have been met; and
       (B) a statement of whether the items proposed to be 
     transferred will have to be replaced and, if so, how the 
     President proposes to provide funds for such replacement.
       Sec. 8050.  None of the funds available to the Department 
     of Defense under this Act shall be obligated or expended to 
     pay a contractor under a contract with the Department of 
     Defense for costs of any amount paid by the contractor to an 
     employee when--
       (1) such costs are for a bonus or otherwise in excess of 
     the normal salary paid by the contractor to the employee; and
       (2) such bonus is part of restructuring costs associated 
     with a business combination.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8051.  During the current fiscal year, no more than 
     $30,000,000 of appropriations made in this Act under the 
     heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' may be 
     transferred to appropriations available for the pay of 
     military personnel, to be merged with, and to be available 
     for the same time period as the appropriations to which 
     transferred, to be used in support of such personnel in 
     connection with support and services for eligible 
     organizations and activities outside the Department of 
     Defense pursuant to section 2012 of title 10, United States 
     Code.
       Sec. 8052.  During the current fiscal year, in the case of 
     an appropriation account of the Department of Defense for 
     which the period of availability for obligation has expired 
     or which has closed under the provisions of section 1552 of 
     title 31, United States Code, and which has a negative 
     unliquidated or unexpended balance, an obligation or an 
     adjustment of an obligation may be charged to any current 
     appropriation account for the same purpose as the expired or 
     closed account if--
       (1) the obligation would have been properly chargeable 
     (except as to amount) to the expired or closed account before 
     the end of the period of availability or closing of that 
     account;
       (2) the obligation is not otherwise properly chargeable to 
     any current appropriation account of the Department of 
     Defense; and
       (3) in the case of an expired account, the obligation is 
     not chargeable to a current appropriation of the Department 
     of Defense under the provisions of section 1405(b)(8) of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991, 
     Public Law 101-510, as amended (31 U.S.C. 1551 note):  
     Provided, That in the case of an expired account, if 
     subsequent review or investigation discloses that there was 
     not in fact a negative unliquidated or unexpended balance in 
     the account, any charge to a current account under the 
     authority of this section shall be reversed and recorded 
     against the expired account:  Provided further, That the 
     total amount charged to a current appropriation under this 
     section may not exceed an amount equal to 1 percent of the 
     total appropriation for that account.
       Sec. 8053. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Chief of the National Guard Bureau may permit the use of 
     equipment of the National Guard Distance Learning Project by 
     any person or entity on a space-available, reimbursable 
     basis. The Chief of the National Guard Bureau shall establish 
     the amount of reimbursement for such use on a case-by-case 
     basis.
       (b) Amounts collected under subsection (a) shall be 
     credited to funds available for the National Guard Distance 
     Learning Project and be available to defray the costs 
     associated with the use of equipment of the project under 
     that subsection. Such funds shall be available for such 
     purposes without fiscal year limitation.
       Sec. 8054.  Using funds made available by this Act or any 
     other Act, the Secretary of the Air Force, pursuant to a 
     determination under section 2690 of title 10, United States 
     Code, may implement cost-effective agreements for required 
     heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military 
     Community in the Federal Republic of Germany:  Provided, That 
     in the City of Kaiserslautern and at the Rhine Ordnance 
     Barracks area, such agreements will include the use of United 
     States anthracite as the base load energy for municipal 
     district heat to the United States Defense installations:  
     Provided further, That at Landstuhl Army Regional Medical 
     Center and Ramstein Air Base, furnished heat may be obtained 
     from private, regional or municipal services, if provisions 
     are included for the consideration of United States coal as 
     an energy source.
       Sec. 8055.  None of the funds appropriated in title IV of 
     this Act may be used to procure end-items for delivery to 
     military forces for operational training, operational use or 
     inventory requirements: Provided, That this restriction does 
     not apply to end-items used in development, prototyping, and 
     test activities preceding and leading to acceptance for 
     operational use: Provided further, That this restriction does 
     not apply to programs funded within the National Intelligence 
     Program: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense may 
     waive this restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying 
     in writing to the Committees on Appropriations of the House 
     of Representatives and the Senate that it is in the national 
     security interest to do so.
       Sec. 8056. (a) The Secretary of Defense may, on a case-by-
     case basis, waive with respect to a foreign country each 
     limitation on the procurement of defense items from foreign 
     sources provided in law if the Secretary determines that the 
     application of the limitation with respect to that country 
     would invalidate cooperative programs entered into between 
     the Department of Defense and the foreign country, or would 
     invalidate reciprocal trade agreements for the procurement of 
     defense items entered into under section 2531 of title 10, 
     United States Code, and the country does not discriminate 
     against the same or similar defense items produced in the 
     United States for that country.
       (b) Subsection (a) applies with respect to--
       (1) contracts and subcontracts entered into on or after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act; and
       (2) options for the procurement of items that are exercised 
     after such date under contracts that are entered into before 
     such date if the option prices are adjusted for any reason 
     other than the application of a waiver granted under 
     subsection (a).
       (c) Subsection (a) does not apply to a limitation regarding 
     construction of public vessels, ball and roller bearings, 
     food, and clothing or textile materials as defined by section 
     11 (chapters 50-65) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule and 
     products classified under headings 4010, 4202, 4203, 6401 
     through 6406, 6505, 7019, 7218 through 7229, 7304.41 through 
     7304.49, 7306.40, 7502 through 7508, 8105, 8108, 8109, 8211, 
     8215, and 9404.
       Sec. 8057. (a) None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used to support any training program involving a unit 
     of the security forces or police of a foreign country if the 
     Secretary of Defense has received credible information from 
     the Department of State that the unit has committed a gross 
     violation of human rights, unless all necessary corrective 
     steps have been taken.
       (b) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of State, shall ensure that prior to a decision to 
     conduct any training program referred to in subsection (a), 
     full consideration is given to all credible information 
     available to the Department of State relating to human rights 
     violations by foreign security forces.
       (c) The Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the 
     Secretary of State, may waive the prohibition in subsection 
     (a) if he determines that such waiver is required by 
     extraordinary circumstances.
       (d) Not more than 15 days after the exercise of any waiver 
     under subsection (c), the Secretary of Defense shall submit a 
     report to the congressional defense committees describing the 
     extraordinary circumstances, the purpose and duration of the 
     training program, the United States forces and the foreign 
     security forces involved in the training program, and the 
     information relating to human rights violations that 
     necessitates the waiver.
       Sec. 8058.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this or other Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Acts may be obligated or expended for the 
     purpose of performing repairs or maintenance to military 
     family housing units of the Department of Defense, including 
     areas in such military family housing units that may be used 
     for the purpose of conducting official Department of Defense 
     business.
       Sec. 8059.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     funds appropriated in this Act under the heading ``Research, 
     Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' for any new 
     start advanced concept technology demonstration project or 
     joint capability demonstration project may only be obligated 
     45 days after a report, including a description of the 
     project, the planned acquisition and transition strategy and 
     its estimated annual and total cost, has been provided in 
     writing to the congressional defense committees: Provided, 
     That the Secretary of Defense may waive this restriction on a 
     case-by-case basis by certifying to the congressional defense 
     committees that it is in the national interest to do so.
       Sec. 8060.  The Secretary of Defense shall provide a 
     classified quarterly report beginning 30 days after enactment 
     of this Act, to the House and Senate Appropriations 
     Committees, Subcommittees on Defense on certain matters as 
     directed in the classified annex accompanying this Act.
       Sec. 8061.  During the current fiscal year, none of the 
     funds available to the Department of Defense may be used to 
     provide support to another department or agency of the United 
     States if such department or agency is more than 90 days in 
     arrears in making payment to the Department of Defense for 
     goods or services previously provided to such department or 
     agency on a reimbursable

[[Page 12102]]

     basis:  Provided, That this restriction shall not apply if 
     the department is authorized by law to provide support to 
     such department or agency on a nonreimbursable basis, and is 
     providing the requested support pursuant to such authority:  
     Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense may waive 
     this restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying in 
     writing to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate that it is in the national 
     security interest to do so.
       Sec. 8062.  Notwithstanding section 12310(b) of title 10, 
     United States Code, a Reserve who is a member of the National 
     Guard serving on full-time National Guard duty under section 
     502(f) of title 32, United States Code, may perform duties in 
     support of the ground-based elements of the National 
     Ballistic Missile Defense System.
       Sec. 8063.  None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     used to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition 
     held by the Department of Defense that has a center-fire 
     cartridge and a United States military nomenclature 
     designation of ``armor penetrator'', ``armor piercing (AP)'', 
     ``armor piercing incendiary (API)'', or ``armor-piercing 
     incendiary tracer (API-T)'', except to an entity performing 
     demilitarization services for the Department of Defense under 
     a contract that requires the entity to demonstrate to the 
     satisfaction of the Department of Defense that armor piercing 
     projectiles are either: (1) rendered incapable of reuse by 
     the demilitarization process; or (2) used to manufacture 
     ammunition pursuant to a contract with the Department of 
     Defense or the manufacture of ammunition for export pursuant 
     to a License for Permanent Export of Unclassified Military 
     Articles issued by the Department of State.
       Sec. 8064.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Chief of the National Guard Bureau, or his designee, may 
     waive payment of all or part of the consideration that 
     otherwise would be required under section 2667 of title 10, 
     United States Code, in the case of a lease of personal 
     property for a period not in excess of 1 year to any 
     organization specified in section 508(d) of title 32, United 
     States Code, or any other youth, social, or fraternal 
     nonprofit organization as may be approved by the Chief of the 
     National Guard Bureau, or his designee, on a case-by-case 
     basis.
       Sec. 8065.  None of the funds appropriated by this Act 
     shall be used for the support of any nonappropriated funds 
     activity of the Department of Defense that procures malt 
     beverages and wine with nonappropriated funds for resale 
     (including such alcoholic beverages sold by the drink) on a 
     military installation located in the United States unless 
     such malt beverages and wine are procured within that State, 
     or in the case of the District of Columbia, within the 
     District of Columbia, in which the military installation is 
     located:  Provided, That in a case in which the military 
     installation is located in more than one State, purchases may 
     be made in any State in which the installation is located:  
     Provided further, That such local procurement requirements 
     for malt beverages and wine shall apply to all alcoholic 
     beverages only for military installations in States which are 
     not contiguous with another State:  Provided further, That 
     alcoholic beverages other than wine and malt beverages, in 
     contiguous States and the District of Columbia shall be 
     procured from the most competitive source, price and other 
     factors considered.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8066.  Of the amounts appropriated in this Act under 
     the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', $108,725,800 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of 
     Defense is authorized to transfer such funds to other 
     activities of the Federal Government: Provided further, That 
     the Secretary of Defense is authorized to enter into and 
     carry out contracts for the acquisition of real property, 
     construction, personal services, and operations related to 
     projects carrying out the purposes of this section: Provided 
     further, That contracts entered into under the authority of 
     this section may provide for such indemnification as the 
     Secretary determines to be necessary: Provided further, That 
     projects authorized by this section shall comply with 
     applicable Federal, State, and local law to the maximum 
     extent consistent with the national security, as determined 
     by the Secretary of Defense.
       Sec. 8067.  Section 8106 of the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 1997 (titles I through VIII of the matter 
     under subsection 101(b) of Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat. 
     3009-111; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) shall continue in effect to 
     apply to disbursements that are made by the Department of 
     Defense in fiscal year 2014.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8068.  During the current fiscal year, not to exceed 
     $200,000,000 from funds available under ``Operation and 
     Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' may be transferred to the 
     Department of State ``Global Security Contingency Fund'':  
     Provided, That this transfer authority is in addition to any 
     other transfer authority available to the Department of 
     Defense:  Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense 
     shall, not fewer than 30 days prior to making transfers to 
     the Department of State ``Global Security Contingency Fund'', 
     notify the congressional defense committees in writing with 
     the source of funds and a detailed justification, execution 
     plan, and timeline for each proposed project.
       Sec. 8069.  In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in 
     this Act, $4,000,000 is hereby appropriated to the Department 
     of Defense, to remain available for obligation until 
     expended: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, that upon the determination of the Secretary of 
     Defense that it shall serve the national interest, these 
     funds shall be available only for a grant to the Fisher House 
     Foundation, Inc., only for the construction and furnishing of 
     additional Fisher Houses to meet the needs of military family 
     members when confronted with the illness or hospitalization 
     of an eligible military beneficiary.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8070.  Of the amounts appropriated in this Act under 
     the headings ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'' and ``Research, 
     Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', 
     $489,091,000 shall be for the Israeli Cooperative Programs: 
     Provided, That of this amount, $220,309,000 shall be for the 
     Secretary of Defense to provide to the Government of Israel 
     for the procurement of the Iron Dome defense system to 
     counter short-range rocket threats; $149,712,000 shall be for 
     the Short Range Ballistic Missile Defense (SRBMD) program, 
     including cruise missile defense research and development 
     under the SRBMD program, of which $15,000,000 shall be for 
     production activities of SRBMD missiles in the United States 
     and in Israel to meet Israel's defense requirements 
     consistent with each nation's laws, regulations, and 
     procedures; $74,707,000 shall be available for an upper-tier 
     component to the Israeli Missile Defense Architecture, and 
     $44,363,000 shall be available for the Arrow System 
     Improvement Program including development of a long range, 
     ground and airborne, detection suite: Provided further, That 
     funds made available under this provision for production of 
     missiles and missile components may be transferred to 
     appropriations available for the procurement of weapons and 
     equipment, to be merged with and to be available for the same 
     time period and the same purposes as the appropriation to 
     which transferred: Provided further, That the transfer 
     authority provided under this provision is in addition to any 
     other transfer authority provided in this Act.
       Sec. 8071. (a) None of the funds available to the 
     Department of Defense may be obligated to modify command and 
     control relationships to give Fleet Forces Command 
     operational and administrative control of U.S. Navy forces 
     assigned to the Pacific fleet.
       (b) None of the funds available to the Department of 
     Defense may be obligated to modify command and control 
     relationships to give United States Transportation Command 
     operational and administrative control of C-130 and KC-135 
     forces assigned to the Pacific and European Air Force 
     Commands.
       (c) The command and control relationships in subsections 
     (a) and (b) which existed on March 13, 2011, shall remain in 
     force unless changes are specifically authorized in a 
     subsequent Act.
       (d) This subsection does not apply to administrative 
     control of Navy Air and Missile Defense Command.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8072.  Of the amounts appropriated in this Act under 
     the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'', 
     $625,800,000 shall be available until September 30, 2014, to 
     fund prior year shipbuilding cost increases:  Provided, That 
     upon enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall 
     transfer funds to the following appropriations in the amounts 
     specified:  Provided further, That the amounts transferred 
     shall be merged with and be available for the same purposes 
     as the appropriations to which transferred to:
       (1) Under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 
     2007/2014'': LHA Replacement Program $37,700,000; and
       (2) Under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, 
     2008/2014'': Carrier Replacement Program $588,100,000.
       Sec. 8073.  Funds appropriated by this Act, or made 
     available by the transfer of funds in this Act, for 
     intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically 
     authorized by the Congress for purposes of section 504 of the 
     National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3094) during fiscal 
     year 2014 until the enactment of the Intelligence 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014.
       Sec. 8074.  None of the funds provided in this Act shall be 
     available for obligation or expenditure through a 
     reprogramming of funds that creates or initiates a new 
     program, project, or activity unless such program, project, 
     or activity must be undertaken immediately in the interest of 
     national security and only after written prior notification 
     to the congressional defense committees.
       Sec. 8075.  The budget of the President for fiscal year 
     2015 submitted to the Congress pursuant to section 1105 of 
     title 31, United States Code, shall include separate budget 
     justification documents for costs of United States Armed 
     Forces' participation in contingency operations for the 
     Military Personnel accounts, the Operation and Maintenance 
     accounts, and the Procurement accounts:  Provided, That these 
     documents shall

[[Page 12103]]

     include a description of the funding requested for each 
     contingency operation, for each military service, to include 
     all Active and Reserve components, and for each 
     appropriations account:  Provided further, That these 
     documents shall include estimated costs for each element of 
     expense or object class, a reconciliation of increases and 
     decreases for each contingency operation, and programmatic 
     data including, but not limited to, troop strength for each 
     Active and Reserve component, and estimates of the major 
     weapons systems deployed in support of each contingency:  
     Provided further, That these documents shall include budget 
     exhibits OP-5 and OP-32 (as defined in the Department of 
     Defense Financial Management Regulation) for all contingency 
     operations for the budget year and the two preceding fiscal 
     years.
       Sec. 8076.  None of the funds in this Act may be used for 
     research, development, test, evaluation, procurement, or 
     deployment of nuclear armed interceptors of a missile defense 
     system.
       Sec. 8077.  In addition to the amounts appropriated or 
     otherwise made available elsewhere in this Act, $44,000,000 
     is hereby appropriated to the Department of Defense:  
     Provided, That upon the determination of the Secretary of 
     Defense that it shall serve the national interest, he shall 
     make grants in the amounts specified as follows: $20,000,000 
     to the United Service Organizations and $24,000,000 to the 
     Red Cross.
       Sec. 8078.  None of the funds appropriated or made 
     available in this Act shall be used to reduce or disestablish 
     the operation of the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of 
     the Air Force Reserve, if such action would reduce the WC-130 
     Weather Reconnaissance mission below the levels funded in 
     this Act:  Provided, That the Air Force shall allow the 53rd 
     Weather Reconnaissance Squadron to perform other missions in 
     support of national defense requirements during the non-
     hurricane season.
       Sec. 8079.  None of the funds provided in this Act shall be 
     available for integration of foreign intelligence information 
     unless the information has been lawfully collected and 
     processed during the conduct of authorized foreign 
     intelligence activities:  Provided, That information 
     pertaining to United States persons shall only be handled in 
     accordance with protections provided in the Fourth Amendment 
     of the United States Constitution as implemented through 
     Executive Order No. 12333.
       Sec. 8080. (a) At the time members of reserve components of 
     the Armed Forces are called or ordered to active duty under 
     section 12302(a) of title 10, United States Code, each member 
     shall be notified in writing of the expected period during 
     which the member will be mobilized.
       (b) The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirements of 
     subsection (a) in any case in which the Secretary determines 
     that it is necessary to do so to respond to a national 
     security emergency or to meet dire operational requirements 
     of the Armed Forces.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8081.  The Secretary of Defense may transfer funds 
     from any available Department of the Navy appropriation to 
     any available Navy ship construction appropriation for the 
     purpose of liquidating necessary changes resulting from 
     inflation, market fluctuations, or rate adjustments for any 
     ship construction program appropriated in law:  Provided, 
     That the Secretary may transfer not to exceed $100,000,000 
     under the authority provided by this section:  Provided 
     further, That the Secretary may not transfer any funds until 
     30 days after the proposed transfer has been reported to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate, unless a response from the Committees is 
     received sooner:  Provided further, That any funds 
     transferred pursuant to this section shall retain the same 
     period of availability as when originally appropriated:  
     Provided further, That the transfer authority provided by 
     this section is in addition to any other transfer authority 
     provided elsewhere in this Act.
       Sec. 8082.  For purposes of section 7108 of title 41, 
     United States Code, any subdivision of appropriations made 
     under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'' that 
     is not closed at the time reimbursement is made shall be 
     available to reimburse the Judgment Fund and shall be 
     considered for the same purposes as any subdivision under the 
     heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'' appropriations 
     in the current fiscal year or any prior fiscal year.
       Sec. 8083. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act 
     may be used to transfer research and development, 
     acquisition, or other program authority relating to current 
     tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (TUAVs) from the Army.
       (b) The Army shall retain responsibility for and 
     operational control of the MQ-1C Gray Eagle Unmanned Aerial 
     Vehicle (UAV) in order to support the Secretary of Defense in 
     matters relating to the employment of unmanned aerial 
     vehicles.
       Sec. 8084.  Up to $15,000,000 of the funds appropriated 
     under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'' may be 
     made available for the Asia Pacific Regional Initiative 
     Program for the purpose of enabling the Pacific Command to 
     execute Theater Security Cooperation activities such as 
     humanitarian assistance, and payment of incremental and 
     personnel costs of training and exercising with foreign 
     security forces:  Provided, That funds made available for 
     this purpose may be used, notwithstanding any other funding 
     authorities for humanitarian assistance, security assistance 
     or combined exercise expenses:  Provided further, That funds 
     may not be obligated to provide assistance to any foreign 
     country that is otherwise prohibited from receiving such type 
     of assistance under any other provision of law.
       Sec. 8085.  None of the funds appropriated by this Act for 
     programs of the Office of the Director of National 
     Intelligence shall remain available for obligation beyond the 
     current fiscal year, except for funds appropriated for 
     research and technology, which shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2015.
       Sec. 8086.  For purposes of section 1553(b) of title 31, 
     United States Code, any subdivision of appropriations made in 
     this Act under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, 
     Navy'' shall be considered to be for the same purpose as any 
     subdivision under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, 
     Navy'' appropriations in any prior fiscal year, and the 1 
     percent limitation shall apply to the total amount of the 
     appropriation.
       Sec. 8087. (a) Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence 
     shall submit a report to the congressional intelligence 
     committees to establish the baseline for application of 
     reprogramming and transfer authorities for fiscal year 2014:  
     Provided, That the report shall include--
       (1) a table for each appropriation with a separate column 
     to display the President's budget request, adjustments made 
     by Congress, adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if 
     appropriate, and the fiscal year enacted level;
       (2) a delineation in the table for each appropriation by 
     Expenditure Center and project; and
       (3) an identification of items of special congressional 
     interest.
       (b) None of the funds provided for the National 
     Intelligence Program in this Act shall be available for 
     reprogramming or transfer until the report identified in 
     subsection (a) is submitted to the congressional intelligence 
     committees, unless the Director of National Intelligence 
     certifies in writing to the congressional intelligence 
     committees that such reprogramming or transfer is necessary 
     as an emergency requirement.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8088.  Of the funds appropriated in the Intelligence 
     Community Management Account for the Program Manager for the 
     Information Sharing Environment, $20,000,000 is available for 
     transfer by the Director of National Intelligence to other 
     departments and agencies for purposes of Government-wide 
     information sharing activities: Provided, That funds 
     transferred under this provision are to be merged with and 
     available for the same purposes and time period as the 
     appropriation to which transferred: Provided further, That 
     the Office of Management and Budget must approve any 
     transfers made under this provision.
       Sec. 8089. (a) None of the funds provided for the National 
     Intelligence Program in this or any prior appropriations Act 
     shall be available for obligation or expenditure through a 
     reprogramming or transfer of funds in accordance with section 
     102A(d) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 
     3024(d)) that--
       (1) creates a new start effort;
       (2) terminates a program with appropriated funding of 
     $10,000,000 or more;
       (3) transfers funding into or out of the National 
     Intelligence Program; or
       (4) transfers funding between appropriations,
     unless the congressional intelligence committees are notified 
     30 days in advance of such reprogramming of funds; this 
     notification period may be reduced for urgent national 
     security requirements.
       (b) None of the funds provided for the National 
     Intelligence Program in this or any prior appropriations Act 
     shall be available for obligation or expenditure through a 
     reprogramming or transfer of funds in accordance with section 
     102A(d) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 
     3024(d)) that results in a cumulative increase or decrease of 
     the levels specified in the classified annex accompanying 
     this Act unless the congressional intelligence committees are 
     notified 30 days in advance of such reprogramming of funds; 
     this notification period may be reduced for urgent national 
     security requirements.
       Sec. 8090.  The Director of National Intelligence shall 
     submit to Congress each year, at or about the time that the 
     President's budget is submitted to Congress that year under 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, a future-
     years intelligence program (including associated annexes) 
     reflecting the estimated expenditures and proposed 
     appropriations included in that budget. Any such future-years 
     intelligence program shall cover the fiscal year with respect 
     to which the budget is submitted and at least the four 
     succeeding fiscal years.

[[Page 12104]]

       Sec. 8091.  For the purposes of this Act, the term 
     ``congressional intelligence committees'' means the Permanent 
     Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of 
     Representatives, the Select Committee on Intelligence of the 
     Senate, the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations of 
     the Senate.
       Sec. 8092.  The Department of Defense shall continue to 
     report incremental contingency operations costs for Operation 
     Enduring Freedom, or any other named operations in the U.S. 
     Central Command area of operation on a monthly basis in the 
     Cost of War Execution Report as prescribed in the Department 
     of Defense Financial Management Regulation Department of 
     Defense Instruction 7000.14, Volume 12, Chapter 23 
     ``Contingency Operations'', Annex 1, dated September 2005.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8093.  During the current fiscal year, not to exceed 
     $11,000,000 from each of the appropriations made in title II 
     of this Act for ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', 
     ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', and ``Operation and 
     Maintenance, Air Force'' may be transferred by the military 
     department concerned to its central fund established for 
     Fisher Houses and Suites pursuant to section 2493(d) of title 
     10, United States Code.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8094.  Funds appropriated by this Act may be available 
     for the purpose of making remittances and transfers to the 
     Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund in accordance 
     with the requirements of section 1705 of title 10, United 
     States Code.
       Sec. 8095. (a) Any agency receiving funds made available in 
     this Act, shall, subject to subsections (b) and (c), post on 
     the public website of that agency any report required to be 
     submitted by the Congress in this or any other Act, upon the 
     determination by the head of the agency that it shall serve 
     the national interest.
       (b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to a report if--
       (1) the public posting of the report compromises national 
     security; or
       (2) the report contains proprietary information.
       (c) The head of the agency posting such report shall do so 
     only after such report has been made available to the 
     requesting Committee or Committees of Congress for no less 
     than 45 days.
       Sec. 8096. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this Act may be expended for any Federal 
     contract for an amount in excess of $1,000,000, unless the 
     contractor agrees not to--
       (1) enter into any agreement with any of its employees or 
     independent contractors that requires, as a condition of 
     employment, that the employee or independent contractor agree 
     to resolve through arbitration any claim under title VII of 
     the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or 
     arising out of sexual assault or harassment, including 
     assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional 
     distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring, 
     supervision, or retention; or
       (2) take any action to enforce any provision of an existing 
     agreement with an employee or independent contractor that 
     mandates that the employee or independent contractor resolve 
     through arbitration any claim under title VII of the Civil 
     Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or arising out of 
     sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery, 
     intentional infliction of emotional distress, false 
     imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.
       (b) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be expended for any Federal 
     contract unless the contractor certifies that it requires 
     each covered subcontractor to agree not to enter into, and 
     not to take any action to enforce any provision of, any 
     agreement as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
     subsection (a), with respect to any employee or independent 
     contractor performing work related to such subcontract. For 
     purposes of this subsection, a ``covered subcontractor'' is 
     an entity that has a subcontract in excess of $1,000,000 on a 
     contract subject to subsection (a).
       (c) The prohibitions in this section do not apply with 
     respect to a contractor's or subcontractor's agreements with 
     employees or independent contractors that may not be enforced 
     in a court of the United States.
       (d) The Secretary of Defense may waive the application of 
     subsection (a) or (b) to a particular contractor or 
     subcontractor for the purposes of a particular contract or 
     subcontract if the Secretary or the Deputy Secretary 
     personally determines that the waiver is necessary to avoid 
     harm to national security interests of the United States, and 
     that the term of the contract or subcontract is not longer 
     than necessary to avoid such harm. The determination shall 
     set forth with specificity the grounds for the waiver and for 
     the contract or subcontract term selected, and shall state 
     any alternatives considered in lieu of a waiver and the 
     reasons each such alternative would not avoid harm to 
     national security interests of the United States. The 
     Secretary of Defense shall transmit to Congress, and 
     simultaneously make public, any determination under this 
     subsection not less than 15 business days before the contract 
     or subcontract addressed in the determination may be awarded.
       Sec. 8097.  None of the funds made available under this Act 
     may be distributed to the Association of Community 
     Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8098.  From within the funds appropriated for 
     operation and maintenance for the Defense Health Program in 
     this Act, up to $143,087,000, shall be available for transfer 
     to the Joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans 
     Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund in accordance 
     with the provisions of section 1704 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Public Law 111-84: 
     Provided, That for purposes of section 1704(b), the facility 
     operations funded are operations of the integrated Captain 
     James A. Lovell Federal Health Care Center, consisting of the 
     North Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center, the Navy 
     Ambulatory Care Center, and supporting facilities designated 
     as a combined Federal medical facility as described by 
     section 706 of Public Law 110-417: Provided further, That 
     additional funds may be transferred from funds appropriated 
     for operation and maintenance for the Defense Health Program 
     to the Joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans 
     Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund upon written 
     notification by the Secretary of Defense to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate.
       Sec. 8099.  The Office of the Director of National 
     Intelligence shall not employ more Senior Executive employees 
     than are specified in the classified annex.
       Sec. 8100.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this Act may be obligated or expended to 
     pay a retired general or flag officer to serve as a senior 
     mentor advising the Department of Defense unless such retired 
     officer files a Standard Form 278 (or successor form 
     concerning public financial disclosure under part 2634 of 
     title 5, Code of Federal Regulations) to the Office of 
     Government Ethics.
       Sec. 8101.  Appropriations available to the Department of 
     Defense may be used for the purchase of heavy and light 
     armored vehicles for the physical security of personnel or 
     for force protection purposes up to a limit of $250,000 per 
     vehicle, notwithstanding price or other limitations 
     applicable to the purchase of passenger carrying vehicles.
       Sec. 8102.  Of the amounts appropriated for ``Operation and 
     Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' the following amounts shall be 
     available to the Secretary of Defense, for the following 
     authorized purposes, notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, acting through the Office of Economic Adjustment of the 
     Department of Defense, to make grants, concluded cooperative 
     agreements, and supplement other Federal funds, to remain 
     available until expended, to support critical existing and 
     enduring military installation and missions on Guam, as well 
     as any potential Department of Defense growth: (1) 
     $133,700,000 for addressing the need for civilian water and 
     wastewater improvements, and (2) $12,868,000 for construction 
     of a regional public health laboratory: Provided, That the 
     Secretary of Defense shall, not fewer than 15 days prior to 
     obligating funds for either of the forgoing purposes, notify 
     the congressional defense committees in writing of the 
     details of any such obligation.
       Sec. 8103.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used by the Secretary of Defense to take beneficial 
     occupancy of more than 2,500 parking spaces (other than 
     handicap-reserved spaces) to be provided by the BRAC 133 
     project:  Provided, That this limitation may be waived in 
     part if: (1) the Secretary of Defense certifies to Congress 
     that levels of service at existing intersections in the 
     vicinity of the project have not experienced failing levels 
     of service as defined by the Transportation Research Board 
     Highway Capacity Manual over a consecutive 90-day period; (2) 
     the Department of Defense and the Virginia Department of 
     Transportation agree on the number of additional parking 
     spaces that may be made available to employees of the 
     facility subject to continued 90-day traffic monitoring; and 
     (3) the Secretary of Defense notifies the congressional 
     defense committees in writing at least 14 days prior to 
     exercising this waiver of the number of additional parking 
     spaces to be made available.
       Sec. 8104.  The Secretary of Defense shall report quarterly 
     the numbers of civilian personnel end strength by 
     appropriation account for each and every appropriation 
     account used to finance Federal civilian personnel salaries 
     to the congressional defense committees within 15 days after 
     the end of each fiscal quarter.
       Sec. 8105. (a) None of the funds made available in this or 
     any other Act may be used to study alternatives, plan, 
     prepare, or otherwise take any action to--
       (1) separate the budget, accounts, or disbursement system 
     for the National Intelligence Program from the budget, 
     accounts, or disbursement system for the Department of 
     Defense; or
       (2) consolidate the budget, accounts, or disbursement 
     system for the National Intelligence Program within the 
     budget, accounts, or disbursement system for the Department 
     of Defense.

[[Page 12105]]

       (b) The activities prohibited under subsection (a) 
     include--
       (1) the study, planning, preparation, or submission of a 
     budget request that modifies the appropriations account 
     structures as in effect on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act for any Department of Defense account containing funds 
     for the National Intelligence Program;
       (2) the establishment of a new appropriations account for 
     part or all of the National Intelligence Program;
       (3) the study or implementation of a funds disbursement 
     system for the Office of the Director of National 
     Intelligence; and
       (4) any other action to study, prepare, or submit a budget 
     request to Congress that includes any modifications 
     prohibited by this section.
       (c) In this section:
       (1) The term ``account'' includes an appropriations 
     account.
       (2) The term ``disbursement system'' includes any system 
     with accounting, cost accrual, fund distribution, or 
     disbursement functions.
       (3) The term ``National Intelligence Program'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 3 of the National Security 
     Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003).

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8106.  Upon a determination by the Director of 
     National Intelligence that such action is necessary and in 
     the national interest, the Director may, with the approval of 
     the Office of Management and Budget, transfer not to exceed 
     $2,000,000,000 of the funds made available in this Act for 
     the National Intelligence Program:  Provided, That such 
     authority to transfer may not be used unless for higher 
     priority items, based on unforeseen intelligence 
     requirements, than those for which originally appropriated 
     and in no case where the item for which funds are requested 
     has been denied by the Congress:  Provided further, That a 
     request for multiple reprogrammings of funds using authority 
     provided in this section shall be made prior to June 30, 
     2014.
       Sec. 8107.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available in this or any other Act may be used to 
     transfer, release, or assist in the transfer or release to or 
     within the United States, its territories, or possessions 
     Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or any other detainee who--
       (1) is not a United States citizen or a member of the Armed 
     Forces of the United States; and
       (2) is or was held on or after June 24, 2009, at the United 
     States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department 
     of Defense.
       Sec. 8108. (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) and 
     subsection (d), none of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available in this or any other Act may be used to 
     transfer any individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody 
     or control of the individual's country of origin, any other 
     foreign country, or any other foreign entity unless the 
     Secretary of Defense submits to Congress the certification 
     described in subsection (b) not later than 30 days before the 
     transfer of the individual.
       (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any action taken by 
     the Secretary to transfer any individual detained at 
     Guantanamo to effectuate an order affecting the disposition 
     of the individual that is issued by a court or competent 
     tribunal of the United States having lawful jurisdiction 
     (which the Secretary shall notify Congress of promptly after 
     issuance).
       (b) A certification described in this subsection is a 
     written certification made by the Secretary of Defense, with 
     the concurrence of the Secretary of State, and in 
     consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, 
     that--
       (1) the government of the foreign country or the recognized 
     leadership of the foreign entity to which the individual 
     detained at Guantanamo is to be transferred--
       (A) is not a designated state sponsor of terrorism or a 
     designated foreign terrorist organization;
       (B) maintains control over each detention facility in which 
     the individual is to be detained if the individual is to be 
     housed in a detention facility;
       (C) is not, as of the date of the certification, facing a 
     threat that is likely to substantially affect its ability to 
     exercise control over the individual;
       (D) has taken or agreed to take effective actions to ensure 
     that the individual cannot take action to threaten the United 
     States, its citizens, or its allies in the future;
       (E) has taken or agreed to take such actions as the 
     Secretary of Defense determines are necessary to ensure that 
     the individual cannot engage or re-engage in any terrorist 
     activity; and
       (F) has agreed to share with the United States any 
     information that--
       (i) is related to the individual or any associates of the 
     individual; and
       (ii) could affect the security of the United States, its 
     citizens, or its allies; and
       (2) includes an assessment, in classified or unclassified 
     form, of the capacity, willingness, and past practices (if 
     applicable) of the foreign country or entity in relation to 
     the Secretary's certifications.
       (c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) and subsection 
     (d), none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available in this or any other Act may be used to transfer 
     any individual detained at Guantanamo to the custody or 
     control of the individual's country of origin, any other 
     foreign country, or any other foreign entity if there is a 
     confirmed case of any individual who was detained at United 
     States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, at any time after 
     September 11, 2001, who was transferred to such foreign 
     country or entity and subsequently engaged in any terrorist 
     activity.
       (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any action taken by 
     the Secretary to transfer any individual detained at 
     Guantanamo to effectuate an order affecting the disposition 
     of the individual that is issued by a court or competent 
     tribunal of the United States having lawful jurisdiction 
     (which the Secretary shall notify Congress of promptly after 
     issuance).
       (d)(1) The Secretary of Defense may waive the applicability 
     to a detainee transfer of a certification requirement 
     specified in subparagraph (D) or (E) of subsection (b)(1) or 
     the prohibition in subsection (c), if the Secretary certifies 
     the rest of the criteria required by subsection (b) for 
     transfers prohibited by (c) and, with the concurrence of the 
     Secretary of State and in consultation with the Director of 
     National Intelligence, determines that--
       (A) alternative actions will be taken to address the 
     underlying purpose of the requirement or requirements to be 
     waived;
       (B) in the case of a waiver of subparagraph (D) or (E) of 
     subsection (b)(1), it is not possible to certify that the 
     risks addressed in the paragraph to be waived have been 
     completely eliminated, but the actions to be taken under 
     subparagraph (A) will substantially mitigate such risks with 
     regard to the individual to be transferred;
       (C) in the case of a waiver of subsection (c), the 
     Secretary has considered any confirmed case in which an 
     individual who was transferred to the country subsequently 
     engaged in terrorist activity, and the actions to be taken 
     under subparagraph (A) will substantially mitigate the risk 
     of recidivism with regard to the individual to be 
     transferred; and
       (D) the transfer is in the national security interests of 
     the United States.
       (2) Whenever the Secretary makes a determination under 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate 
     committees of Congress, not later than 30 days before the 
     transfer of the individual concerned, the following:
       (A) A copy of the determination and the waiver concerned.
       (B) A statement of the basis for the determination, 
     including--
       (i) an explanation why the transfer is in the national 
     security interests of the United States; and
       (ii) in the case of a waiver of subparagraph (D) or (E) of 
     subsection (b)(1), an explanation why it is not possible to 
     certify that the risks addressed in the paragraph to be 
     waived have been completely eliminated.
       (C) A summary of the alternative actions to be taken to 
     address the underlying purpose of, and to mitigate the risks 
     addressed in, the paragraph or subsection to be waived.
       (D) The assessment required by subsection (b)(2).
       (e) In assessing the risk that an individual detained at 
     Guantanamo will engage in terrorist activity or other actions 
     that could affect the security of the United States if 
     released for the purpose of making a certification under 
     subsection (b) or a waiver under subsection (d), the 
     Secretary of Defense may give favorable consideration to any 
     such individual--
       (1) who has substantially cooperated with United States 
     intelligence and law enforcement authorities, pursuant to a 
     pre- trial agreement, while in the custody of or under the 
     effective control of the Department of Defense; and
       (2) for whom agreements and effective mechanisms are in 
     place, to the extent relevant and necessary, to provide for 
     continued cooperation with United States intelligence and law 
     enforcement authorities.
       (f) In this section:
       (1) The term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' means--
       (A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on 
     Appropriations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of 
     the Senate; and
       (B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on 
     Appropriations, and the Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the House of Representatives.
       (2) The term ``individual detained at Guantanamo'' means 
     any individual located at United States Naval Station, 
     Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as of October 1, 2009, who--
       (A) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of 
     the Armed Forces of the United States; and
       (B) is--
       (i) in the custody or under the control of the Department 
     of Defense; or
       (ii) otherwise under detention at United States Naval 
     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
       (3) The term ``foreign terrorist organization'' means any 
     organization so designated by the Secretary of State under 
     section 219

[[Page 12106]]

     of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189).
       Sec. 8109. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available in this or any other Act may be used to 
     construct, acquire, or modify any facility in the United 
     States, its territories, or possessions to house any 
     individual described in subsection (c) for the purposes of 
     detention or imprisonment in the custody or under the 
     effective control of the Department of Defense.
       (b) The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to 
     any modification of facilities at United States Naval 
     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
       (c) An individual described in this subsection is any 
     individual who, as of June 24, 2009, is located at United 
     States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and who--
       (1) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of 
     the Armed Forces of the United States; and
       (2) is--
       (A) in the custody or under the effective control of the 
     Department of Defense; or
       (B) otherwise under detention at United States Naval 
     Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
       Sec. 8110.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of 
     understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant 
     to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation 
     that any unpaid Federal tax liability has been assessed, for 
     which all judicial and administrative remedies have been 
     exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a 
     timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority 
     responsible for collecting the tax liability, where the 
     awarding agency is aware of the unpaid tax liability, unless 
     the agency has considered suspension or debarment of the 
     corporation and made a determination that this further action 
     is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government.
       Sec. 8111.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of 
     understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant 
     to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation 
     that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any 
     Federal law within the preceding 24 months, where the 
     awarding agency is aware of the conviction, unless the agency 
     has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and 
     made a determination that this further action is not 
     necessary to protect the interests of the Government.
       Sec. 8112.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used in contravention of section 1590 or 1591 of title 
     18, United States Code, or in contravention of the 
     requirements of section 106(g) or (h) of the Trafficking 
     Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7104(g) or (h)).
       Sec. 8113.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     for International Military education and training, foreign 
     military financing, excess defense article, assistance under 
     section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109-163; 119 Stat. 3456), 
     issuance for direct commercial sales of military equipment, 
     or peacekeeping operations for the countries of Chad, Yemen, 
     Somalia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and 
     Burma may be used to support any military training or 
     operation that include child soldiers, as defined by the 
     Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-457; 22 
     U.S.C. 2370c-1), and except if such assistance is otherwise 
     permitted under section 404 of the Child Soldiers Prevention 
     Act of 2008.
       Sec. 8114.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used in contravention of the War Powers Resolution (50 
     U.S.C. 1541 et seq.).
       Sec. 8115.  The Secretary of the Air Force shall obligate 
     and expend funds previously appropriated for the procurement 
     of RQ-4B Global Hawk aircraft for the purposes for which such 
     funds were originally appropriated.
       Sec. 8116.  The total amount available in the Act for pay 
     for civilian personnel of the Department of Defense for 
     fiscal year 2014 shall be the amount otherwise appropriated 
     or made available by this Act for such pay reduced by 
     $437,000,000.
       Sec. 8117.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used by the Department of Defense or any other Federal 
     agency to lease or purchase new light duty vehicles, for any 
     executive fleet, or for an agency's fleet inventory, except 
     in accordance with Presidential Memorandum-Federal Fleet 
     Performance, dated May 24, 2011.
       Sec. 8118.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used to enter into a contract with any person or other 
     entity listed in the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS)/
     System for Award Management (SAM) as having been convicted of 
     fraud against the Federal Government.
       Sec. 8119. (a) Limitation.--None of the funds made 
     available by this Act for the Department of Defense may be 
     used for the purchase of any equipment from Rosoboronexport 
     until the Secretary of Defense certifies in writing to the 
     congressional defense committees that, to the best of the 
     Secretary's knowledge--
       (1) Rosoboronexport is cooperating fully with the Defense 
     Contract Audit Agency;
       (2) Rosoboronexport has not delivered S-300 advanced anti-
     aircraft missiles to Syria; and
       (3) no new contracts have been signed between the Bashar al 
     Assad regime in Syria and Rosoboronexport since January 1, 
     2013.
       (b) National Security Waiver.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the 
     limitation in subsection (a) if the Secretary certifies that 
     the waiver in order to purchase equipment from 
     Rosoboronexport is in national security interest of the 
     United States.
       (2) Report.--If the Secretary waives the limitation in 
     subsection (a) pursuant to paragraph (1), the Secretary shall 
     submit to the congressional defense committees, not later 
     than 30 days before purchasing equipment from Rosoboronexport 
     pursuant to the waiver, a report on the waiver. The report 
     shall be submitted in classified or unclassified form, at the 
     election of the Secretary. The report shall include the 
     following:
       (A) An explanation why it is in the national security 
     interest of the United States to purchase equipment from 
     Rosoboronexport.
       (B) An explanation why comparable equipment cannot be 
     purchased from another corporation.
       (C) An assessment of the cooperation of Rosoboronexport 
     with the Defense Contract Audit Agency.
       (D) An assessment of whether and how many S-300 advanced 
     anti-aircraft missiles have been delivered to the Assad 
     regime by Rosoboronexport.
       (E) A list of the contracts that Rosoboronexport has signed 
     with the Assad regime since January 1, 2013.
       (c) Requirement for Competitively Bid Contracts.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall award any contract that will use 
     United States funds for the procurement of helicopters for 
     the Afghan Security Forces using competitive procedures based 
     on requirements developed by the Secretary of Defense.
       Sec. 8120.  Section 8159(c) of the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 2002 (division A of Public Law 107-117, 
     10 U.S.. 2401a note) is amended by striking paragraph (7).
       Sec. 8121.  None of the funds made available in this Act 
     may be used for the purchase or manufacture of a flag of the 
     United States unless such flags are treated as covered items 
     under section 2533a(b) of title 10, United States Code.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8122.  In addition to amounts appropriated or 
     otherwise made available elsewhere in this Act, $25,000,000 
     is hereby appropriated to the Department of Defense and made 
     available for transfer to the Army, Air Force, Navy, and 
     Marine Corps, for purposes of implementation of a Sexual 
     Assault Special Victims Program: Provided, That funds 
     transferred under this provision are to be merged with and 
     available for the same purposes and time period as the 
     appropriation to which transferred: Provided further, That 
     the transfer authority provided under this heading is in 
     addition to any other transfer authority provided elsewhere 
     in this Act.
       Sec. 8123.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used in contravention of the amendments made to the 
     Uniform Code of Military Justice in subtitle D of title V of 
     the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 
     regarding the discharge or dismissal of a member of the Armed 
     Forces convicted of certain sex-related offenses, the 
     required trial of such offenses by general courts-martial, 
     and the limitations imposed on convening authority discretion 
     regarding court-martial findings and sentence.
       Sec. 8124.  None of the funds appropriated in this, or any 
     other Act, may be obligated or expended by the United States 
     Government for the direct personal benefit of the President 
     of Afghanistan.
       Sec. 8125.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used to eliminate or reduce funding for a program, 
     project or activity as proposed in the President's budget 
     request for fiscal year 2015 until such proposed change is 
     subsequently enacted in an appropriation Act, or unless such 
     change is made pursuant to the reprogramming or transfer 
     provisions of this Act.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 8126.  In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in 
     this Act for pay for military personnel, including Reserve 
     and National Guard personnel, $580,000,000 is hereby 
     appropriated to the Department of Defense and made available 
     for transfer only to military personnel accounts.

                                TITLE IX

               OVERSEAS DEPLOYMENTS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES

                           MILITARY PERSONNEL

                        Military Personnel, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Army'', 
     $6,703,006,000: Provided, That such amount is designated by 
     the Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War 
     on Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                        Military Personnel, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Navy'', 
     $558,344,000:  Provided, That such amount is designated by 
     the Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global

[[Page 12107]]

     War on Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                    Military Personnel, Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Marine 
     Corps'', $1,019,322,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                     Military Personnel, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Air 
     Force'', $867,087,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                        Reserve Personnel, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Army'', 
     $40,952,000: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                        Reserve Personnel, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Navy'', 
     $20,238,000: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                    Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Marine 
     Corps'', $15,134,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                      Reserve Personnel, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Reserve Personnel, Air 
     Force'', $20,432,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                     National Guard Personnel, Army

       For an additional amount for ``National Guard Personnel, 
     Army'', $393,364,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                  National Guard Personnel, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``National Guard Personnel, 
     Air Force'', $6,919,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                    Operation and Maintenance, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Army'', $30,929,633,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                     (including transfer of funds)

                    Operation and Maintenance, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Navy'', $6,255,993,000, of which up to $227,033,000 may be 
     transferred to the Coast Guard ``Operating Expenses'' account 
     notwithstanding section 2215 of title 10, United States Code: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Marine Corps'', $2,669,815,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                  Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Air Force'', $10,605,224,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Defense-Wide'', $6,240,437,000: Provided, That of the funds 
     provided under this heading, not to exceed $1,500,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2015, shall be for 
     payments to reimburse key cooperating nations for logistical, 
     military, and other support, including access, provided to 
     United States military operations in support of Operation 
     Enduring Freedom, and post-operation Iraq border security 
     related to the activities of the Office of Security 
     Cooperation in Iraq, notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law: Provided further, That such reimbursement payments may 
     be made in such amounts as the Secretary of Defense, with the 
     concurrence of the Secretary of State, and in consultation 
     with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, may 
     determine, in his discretion, based on documentation 
     determined by the Secretary of Defense to adequately account 
     for the support provided, and such determination is final and 
     conclusive upon the accounting officers of the United States, 
     and 15 days following notification to the appropriate 
     congressional committees: Provided further, That the 
     requirement under this heading to provide notification to the 
     appropriate congressional committees shall not apply with 
     respect to a reimbursement for access based on an 
     international agreement: Provided further, That these funds 
     may be used for the purpose of providing specialized training 
     and procuring supplies and specialized equipment and 
     providing such supplies and loaning such equipment on a non-
     reimbursable basis to coalition forces supporting United 
     States military operations in Afghanistan, and 15 days 
     following notification to the appropriate congressional 
     committees: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense 
     shall provide quarterly reports to the congressional defense 
     committees on the use of funds provided in this paragraph: 
     Provided further, That of the funds provided under this 
     heading, $35,000,000 shall be made available for support for 
     foreign forces participating in operations to counter the 
     Lord's Resistance Army efforts: Provided further, That such 
     amount in this section is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Army Reserve'', $42,935,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Navy Reserve'', $55,700,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

            Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Marine Corps Reserve'', $12,534,000: Provided, That such 
     amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

              Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Air Force Reserve'', $32,849,000: Provided, That such amount 
     is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

             Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Army National Guard'', $199,371,000: Provided, That such 
     amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

             Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard

       For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance, 
     Air National Guard'', $22,200,000: Provided, That such amount 
     is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

             Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in this Act, 
     there is appropriated $1,073,800,000 for the ``Overseas 
     Contingency Operations Transfer Fund'' for expenses directly 
     relating to overseas contingency operations by United States 
     military forces, to be available until expended: Provided, 
     That of the funds made available in this section, the 
     Secretary of Defense may transfer these funds only to 
     military personnel accounts, operation and maintenance 
     accounts, procurement accounts, and working capital fund

[[Page 12108]]

     accounts: Provided further, That the funds made available in 
     this paragraph may only be used for programs, projects, or 
     activities categorized as Overseas Contingency Operations in 
     the fiscal year 2014 budget request for the Department of 
     Defense and the justification material and other 
     documentation supporting such request:  Provided further, 
     That the funds transferred shall be merged with and shall be 
     available for the same purposes and for the same time period, 
     as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further, 
     That the Secretary shall notify the congressional defense 
     committees 15 days prior to such transfer: Provided further, 
     That the transfer authority provided under this heading is in 
     addition to any other transfer authority available to the 
     Department of Defense: Provided further, That upon a 
     determination that all or part of the funds transferred from 
     this appropriation are not necessary for the purposes 
     provided herein, such amounts may be transferred back to this 
     appropriation and shall be available for the same purposes 
     and for the same time period as originally appropriated: 
     Provided further, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                    Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the ``Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund'', $279,000,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That 
     such funds shall be available to the Secretary of Defense for 
     infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, which shall be undertaken by the 
     Secretary of State, unless the Secretary of State and the 
     Secretary of Defense jointly decide that a specific project 
     will be undertaken by the Department of Defense: Provided 
     further, That the infrastructure referred to in the preceding 
     proviso is in support of the counterinsurgency strategy, 
     which may require funding for facility and infrastructure 
     projects, including, but not limited to, water, power, and 
     transportation projects and related maintenance and 
     sustainment costs: Provided further, That the authority to 
     undertake such infrastructure projects is in addition to any 
     other authority to provide assistance to foreign nations: 
     Provided further, That any projects funded under this heading 
     shall be jointly formulated and concurred in by the Secretary 
     of State and Secretary of Defense: Provided further, That 
     funds may be transferred to the Department of State for 
     purposes of undertaking projects, which funds shall be 
     considered to be economic assistance under the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 for purposes of making available the 
     administrative authorities contained in that Act: Provided 
     further, That the transfer authority in the preceding proviso 
     is in addition to any other authority available to the 
     Department of Defense to transfer funds: Provided further, 
     That any unexpended funds transferred to the Secretary of 
     State under this authority shall be returned to the 
     Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund if the Secretary of State, in 
     coordination with the Secretary of Defense, determines that 
     the project cannot be implemented for any reason, or that the 
     project no longer supports the counterinsurgency strategy in 
     Afghanistan: Provided further, That any funds returned to the 
     Secretary of Defense under the previous proviso shall be 
     available for use under this appropriation and shall be 
     treated in the same manner as funds not transferred to the 
     Secretary of State: Provided further, That contributions of 
     funds for the purposes provided herein to the Secretary of 
     State in accordance with section 635(d) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act from any person, foreign government, or 
     international organization may be credited to this Fund, to 
     remain available until expended, and used for such purposes: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall, not 
     fewer than 15 days prior to making transfers to or from, or 
     obligations from the Fund, notify the appropriate committees 
     of Congress in writing of the details of any such transfer: 
     Provided further, That the ``appropriate committees of 
     Congress'' are the Committees on Armed Services, Foreign 
     Relations, and Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     Committees on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives: Provided 
     further, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                    Afghanistan Security Forces Fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the ``Afghanistan Security Forces Fund'', 
     $7,726,720,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015: 
     Provided, That such funds shall be available to the Secretary 
     of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for 
     the purpose of allowing the Commander, Combined Security 
     Transition Command--Afghanistan, or the Secretary's designee, 
     to provide assistance, with the concurrence of the Secretary 
     of State, to the security forces of Afghanistan, including 
     the provision of equipment, supplies, services, training, 
     facility and infrastructure repair, renovation, and 
     construction, and funding: Provided further, That the 
     authority to provide assistance under this heading is in 
     addition to any other authority to provide assistance to 
     foreign nations: Provided further, That contributions of 
     funds for the purposes provided herein from any person, 
     foreign government, or international organization may be 
     credited to this Fund, to remain available until expended, 
     and used for such purposes: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional defense 
     committees in writing upon the receipt and upon the 
     obligation of any contribution, delineating the sources and 
     amounts of the funds received and the specific use of such 
     contributions: Provided further, That the Secretary of 
     Defense shall, not fewer than 15 days prior to obligating 
     from this appropriation account, notify the congressional 
     defense committees in writing of the details of any such 
     obligations: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense 
     shall notify the congressional defense committees of any 
     proposed new projects or transfer of funds between budget 
     sub-activity groups in excess of $20,000,000: Provided 
     further, That the United States may accept equipment procured 
     using funds provided under this heading in this or prior Acts 
     that was transferred to the security forces of Afghanistan 
     and returned by such forces to the United States: Provided 
     further, That the equipment described in the previous 
     proviso, as well as equipment not yet transferred to the 
     security forces of Afghanistan when determined by the 
     Commander, Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan, 
     or the Secretary's designee, to no longer be required for 
     transfer to such forces, may be treated as stocks of the 
     Department of Defense upon written notification to the 
     congressional defense committees: Provided further, That of 
     the funds provided under this heading, not less than 
     $47,300,000 shall be for recruitment and retention of women 
     in the Afghanistan National Security Forces: Provided 
     further, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                              PROCUREMENT

                       Aircraft Procurement, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, 
     Army'', $771,788,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                       Missile Procurement, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Missile Procurement, Army'', 
     $154,532,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

        Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Weapons and 
     Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'', $15,422,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such 
     amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                    Procurement of Ammunition, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition, 
     Army'', $190,382,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                        Other Procurement, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Army'', 
     $909,825,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                       Aircraft Procurement, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, 
     Navy'', $240,696,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                       Weapons Procurement, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Weapons Procurement, Navy'', 
     $86,500,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

            Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition, 
     Navy and Marine

[[Page 12109]]

     Corps'', $169,362,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                        Other Procurement, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Navy'', 
     $17,968,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                       Procurement, Marine Corps

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Marine Corps'', 
     $125,984,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, Air 
     Force'', $188,868,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                     Missile Procurement, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Missile Procurement, Air 
     Force'', $24,200,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                  Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition, 
     Air Force'', $137,826,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2016: Provided, That such amount is designated 
     by the Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global 
     War on Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                      Other Procurement, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Air 
     Force'', $2,524,846,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2016: Provided, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                       Procurement, Defense-Wide

       For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'', 
     $128,947,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                  National Guard and Reserve Equipment

       For procurement of aircraft, missiles, tracked combat 
     vehicles, ammunition, other weapons and other procurement for 
     the reserve components of the Armed Forces, $1,500,000,000, 
     to remain available for obligation until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That the Chiefs of National Guard and Reserve 
     components shall, not later than 30 days after the enactment 
     of this Act, individually submit to the congressional defense 
     committees the modernization priority assessment for their 
     respective National Guard or Reserve component: Provided 
     further, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

              RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

            Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army

       For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test 
     and Evaluation, Army'', $7,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2015: Provided, That such amount is designated 
     by the Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global 
     War on Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

            Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy

       For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test 
     and Evaluation, Navy'', $34,426,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

         Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force

       For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test 
     and Evaluation, Air Force'', $9,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

        Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide

       For an additional amount for ``Research, Development, Test 
     and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', $66,208,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such 
     amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                     REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

                     Defense Working Capital Funds

       For an additional amount for ``Defense Working Capital 
     Funds'', $264,910,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                  OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

                         Defense Health Program

       For an additional amount for ``Defense Health Program'', 
     $904,201,000, which shall be for operation and maintenance: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress for 
     Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

         Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense

       For an additional amount for ``Drug Interdiction and 
     Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'', $376,305,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That such 
     amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

             Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the ``Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund'', 
     $1,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016: 
     Provided, That such funds shall be available to the Secretary 
     of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for 
     the purpose of allowing the Director of the Joint Improvised 
     Explosive Device Defeat Organization to investigate, develop 
     and provide equipment, supplies, services, training, 
     facilities, personnel and funds to assist United States 
     forces in the defeat of improvised explosive devices: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense may transfer 
     funds provided herein to appropriations for military 
     personnel; operation and maintenance; procurement; research, 
     development, test and evaluation; and defense working capital 
     funds to accomplish the purpose provided herein: Provided 
     further, That this transfer authority is in addition to any 
     other transfer authority available to the Department of 
     Defense: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense 
     shall, not fewer than 15 days prior to making transfers from 
     this appropriation, notify the congressional defense 
     committees in writing of the details of any such transfer: 
     Provided further, That such amount is designated by the 
     Congress for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.

                    Office of the Inspector General

       For an additional amount for the ``Office of the Inspector 
     General'', $10,766,000: Provided, That such amount is 
     designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.

                     GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS TITLE

       Sec. 9001.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     funds made available in this title are in addition to amounts 
     appropriated or otherwise made available for the Department 
     of Defense for fiscal year 2014.

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 9002.  Upon the determination of the Secretary of 
     Defense that such action is necessary in the national 
     interest, the Secretary may, with the approval of the Office 
     of Management and Budget, transfer up to $4,000,000,000 
     between the appropriations or funds made available to the 
     Department of Defense in this title: Provided, That the 
     Secretary shall notify the Congress promptly of each transfer 
     made pursuant to the authority in this section: Provided 
     further, That the authority provided in this section is in 
     addition to any other transfer authority available to the 
     Department of Defense and is subject to the same terms and 
     conditions as the authority provided in the Department of 
     Defense Appropriations Act, 2014.
       Sec. 9003.  Supervision and administration costs and costs 
     for design during construction associated with a construction 
     project

[[Page 12110]]

     funded with appropriations available for operation and 
     maintenance, ``Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund'', or the 
     ``Afghanistan Security Forces Fund'' provided in this Act and 
     executed in direct support of overseas contingency operations 
     in Afghanistan, may be obligated at the time a construction 
     contract is awarded: Provided, That for the purpose of this 
     section, supervision and administration costs and costs for 
     design during construction include all in-house Government 
     costs.
       Sec. 9004.  From funds made available in this title, the 
     Secretary of Defense may purchase for use by military and 
     civilian employees of the Department of Defense in the U.S. 
     Central Command area of responsibility: (a) passenger motor 
     vehicles up to a limit of $75,000 per vehicle; and (b) heavy 
     and light armored vehicles for the physical security of 
     personnel or for force protection purposes up to a limit of 
     $250,000 per vehicle, notwithstanding price or other 
     limitations applicable to the purchase of passenger carrying 
     vehicles.
       Sec. 9005.  Not to exceed $60,000,000 of the amount 
     appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Operation and 
     Maintenance, Army'' may be used, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, to fund the Commander's Emergency Response 
     Program (CERP), for the purpose of enabling military 
     commanders in Afghanistan to respond to urgent, small-scale, 
     humanitarian relief and reconstruction requirements within 
     their areas of responsibility: Provided, That each project 
     (including any ancillary or related elements in connection 
     with such project) executed under this authority shall not 
     exceed $20,000,000: Provided further, That not later than 45 
     days after the end of each fiscal year quarter, the Secretary 
     of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense 
     committees a report regarding the source of funds and the 
     allocation and use of funds during that quarter that were 
     made available pursuant to the authority provided in this 
     section or under any other provision of law for the purposes 
     described herein: Provided further, That, not later than 30 
     days after the end of each month, the Army shall submit to 
     the congressional defense committees monthly commitment, 
     obligation, and expenditure data for the Commander's 
     Emergency Response Program in Afghanistan: Provided further, 
     That not less than 15 days before making funds available 
     pursuant to the authority provided in this section or under 
     any other provision of law for the purposes described herein 
     for a project with a total anticipated cost for completion of 
     $5,000,000 or more, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees a written notice containing 
     each of the following:
       (1) The location, nature and purpose of the proposed 
     project, including how the project is intended to advance the 
     military campaign plan for the country in which it is to be 
     carried out.
       (2) The budget, implementation timeline with milestones, 
     and completion date for the proposed project, including any 
     other CERP funding that has been or is anticipated to be 
     contributed to the completion of the project.
       (3) A plan for the sustainment of the proposed project, 
     including the agreement with either the host nation, a non-
     Department of Defense agency of the United States Government 
     or a third-party contributor to finance the sustainment of 
     the activities and maintenance of any equipment or facilities 
     to be provided through the proposed project.
       Sec. 9006.  Funds available to the Department of Defense 
     for operation and maintenance may be used, notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, to provide supplies, services, 
     transportation, including airlift and sealift, and other 
     logistical support to coalition forces supporting military 
     and stability operations in Afghanistan: Provided, That the 
     Secretary of Defense shall provide quarterly reports to the 
     congressional defense committees regarding support provided 
     under this section.
       Sec. 9007.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this or any other Act shall be obligated or 
     expended by the United States Government for a purpose as 
     follows:
       (1) To establish any military installation or base for the 
     purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United 
     States Armed Forces in Iraq.
       (2) To exercise United States control over any oil resource 
     of Iraq.
       (3) To establish any military installation or base for the 
     purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United 
     States Armed Forces in Afghanistan.
       Sec. 9008.  None of the funds made available in this Act 
     may be used in contravention of the following laws enacted or 
     regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations 
     Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or 
     Degrading Treatment or Punishment (done at New York on 
     December 10, 1984):
       (1) Section 2340A of title 18, United States Code.
       (2) Section 2242 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and 
     Restructuring Act of 1998 (division G of Public Law 105-277; 
     112 Stat. 2681-822; 8 U.S.C. 1231 note) and regulations 
     prescribed thereto, including regulations under part 208 of 
     title 8, Code of Federal Regulations, and part 95 of title 
     22, Code of Federal Regulations.
       (3) Sections 1002 and 1003 of the Department of Defense, 
     Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes 
     in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006 
     (Public Law 109-148).
       Sec. 9009.  None of the funds provided for the 
     ``Afghanistan Security Forces Fund'' (ASFF) may be obligated 
     prior to the approval of a financial and activity plan by the 
     Afghanistan Resources Oversight Council (AROC) of the 
     Department of Defense: Provided, That the AROC must approve 
     the requirement and acquisition plan for any service 
     requirements in excess of $50,000,000 annually and any non-
     standard equipment requirements in excess of $100,000,000 
     using ASFF: Provided further, That the AROC must approve all 
     projects and the execution plan under the ``Afghanistan 
     Infrastructure Fund'' (AIF) and any project in excess of 
     $5,000,000 from the Commanders Emergency Response Program 
     (CERP): Provided further, That the Department of Defense must 
     certify to the congressional defense committees that the AROC 
     has convened and approved a process for ensuring compliance 
     with the requirements in the preceding provisos and 
     accompanying report language for the ASFF, AIF, and CERP.
       Sec. 9010.  Funds made available in this title to the 
     Department of Defense for operation and maintenance may be 
     used to purchase items having an investment unit cost of not 
     more than $250,000: Provided, That, upon determination by the 
     Secretary of Defense that such action is necessary to meet 
     the operational requirements of a Commander of a Combatant 
     Command engaged in contingency operations overseas, such 
     funds may be used to purchase items having an investment item 
     unit cost of not more than $500,000.
       Sec. 9011.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, up 
     to $63,800,000 of funds made available in this title under 
     the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'' may be 
     obligated and expended for purposes of the Task Force for 
     Business and Stability Operations, subject to the direction 
     and control of the Secretary of Defense, with concurrence of 
     the Secretary of State, to carry out strategic business and 
     economic assistance activities in Afghanistan in support of 
     Operation Enduring Freedom: Provided, That not less than 15 
     days before making funds available pursuant to the authority 
     provided in this section for any project with a total 
     anticipated cost of $5,000,000 or more, the Secretary shall 
     submit to the congressional defense committees a written 
     notice containing a detailed justification and timeline for 
     each proposed project.
       Sec. 9012.  From funds made available to the Department of 
     Defense by this Act under the heading ``Operation and 
     Maintenance, Air Force'' up to $209,000,000 may be used by 
     the Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, to support United States Government transition 
     activities in Iraq by funding the operations and activities 
     of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq and security 
     assistance teams, including life support, transportation and 
     personal security, and facilities renovation and 
     construction, and site closeout activities prior to returning 
     sites to the Government of Iraq: Provided, That to the extent 
     authorized under the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2014, the operations and activities that may be 
     carried out by the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq 
     may, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, include 
     non-operational training activities in support of Iraqi 
     Ministry of Defense and Counter Terrorism Service personnel 
     in an institutional environment to address capability gaps, 
     integrate processes relating to intelligence, air 
     sovereignty, combined arms, logistics and maintenance, and to 
     manage and integrate defense-related institutions: Provided 
     further, That not later than 30 days following the enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of 
     State shall submit to the congressional defense committees a 
     plan for transitioning any such training activities that they 
     determine are needed after the end of fiscal year 2013, to 
     existing or new contracts for the sale of defense articles or 
     defense services consistent with the provisions of the Arms 
     Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.): Provided 
     further, That not less than 15 days before making funds 
     available pursuant to the authority provided in this section, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional 
     defense committees a written notification containing a 
     detailed justification and timeline for the operations and 
     activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq at 
     each site where such operations and activities will be 
     conducted during fiscal year 2013.

                             (rescissions)

       Sec. 9013. 
       Of the funds appropriated in Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Acts, the following funds are hereby rescinded 
     from the following account in the specified amount: Provided, 
     That such amount is designated by the Congress for Overseas 
     Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism pursuant to 
     section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985:
       ``General Provisions, 2009/XXXX'', $46,022,000.
       Sec. 9014. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this

[[Page 12111]]

     Act under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-
     Wide'' for payments under section 1233 of Public Law 110-181 
     for reimbursement to the Government of Pakistan may be made 
     available unless the Secretary of Defense, in coordination 
     with the Secretary of State, certifies to the Committees on 
     Appropriations that the Government of Pakistan is--
       (1) cooperating with the United States in counterterrorism 
     efforts against the Haqqani Network, the Quetta Shura 
     Taliban, Lashkar e-Tayyiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Al Qaeda, and 
     other domestic and foreign terrorist organizations, including 
     taking steps to end support for such groups and prevent them 
     from basing and operating in Pakistan and carrying out cross 
     border attacks into neighboring countries;
       (2) not supporting terrorist activities against United 
     States or coalition forces in Afghanistan, and Pakistan's 
     military and intelligence agencies are not intervening extra-
     judicially into political and judicial processes in Pakistan;
       (3) dismantling improvised explosive device (IED) networks 
     and interdicting precursor chemicals used in the manufacture 
     of IEDs;
       (4) preventing the proliferation of nuclear-related 
     material and expertise;
       (5) implementing policies to protect judicial independence 
     and due process of law;
       (6) issuing visas in a timely manner for United States 
     visitors engaged in counterterrorism efforts and assistance 
     programs in Pakistan; and
       (7) providing humanitarian organizations access to 
     detainees, internally displaced persons, and other Pakistani 
     civilians affected by the conflict.
       (b) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 
     Secretary of State, may waive the restriction in paragraph 
     (a) on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate that it is in the national security interest 
     to do so: Provided, That if the Secretary of Defense, in 
     coordination with the Secretary of State, exercises the 
     authority of the previous proviso, the Secretaries shall 
     report to the Committees on Appropriations on both the 
     justification for the waiver and on the requirements of this 
     section that the Government of Pakistan was not able to meet: 
     Provided further, That such report may be submitted in 
     classified form if necessary.

                 TITLE X--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS

                       spending reduction account

       Sec. 10001.  The amount by which the applicable allocation 
     of new budget authority made by the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives under section 
     302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 exceeds the 
     amount of proposed new budget authority is $0.

  The CHAIR. No amendment to the bill shall be in order except those 
printed in House Report 113-170, the amendment described in section 2 
of House Resolution 312, and amendments en bloc described in section 3 
of that resolution.
  Each amendment printed in House Report 113-170 may be offered only in 
the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be 
debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and 
controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the 
proponent at any time before action thereon, shall not be subject to 
amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question.
  After disposition of amendments printed in House Report 113-170 and 
amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House Resolution 312, it 
shall be in order for the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or 
his designee to offer an amendment reducing funding levels in the bill.
  It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on 
Appropriations or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting 
of amendments printed in House Report 113-170 not earlier disposed of. 
Amendments en bloc shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 
20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective 
designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
to a demand for division of the question. The original proponent of an 
amendment included in such amendments en bloc may insert a statement in 
the Congressional Record immediately before the disposition of the 
amendments en bloc.
  After the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment, 
there shall be in order a final period of general debate, which shall 
not exceed 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.


                 Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Walberg

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Mr. WALBERG. I have an amendment at the desk, Madam Chairman.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 8, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $11,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Walberg) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chairman, in light of recent events in Benghazi 
and North Africa, the Pentagon approved the development of the Special 
Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force for Crisis Response to function 
under United States African Command. This task force is specifically 
tailored for crisis response in Africa, and in April deployed to Spain 
and Italy.
  The unit is capable of responding to a wide range of military 
operations and will provide limited defense crisis response in support 
of embassies, support non-combatant evacuation operations, provide 
humanitarian assistance, and assist with disaster relief operations, 
search and rescue, and other missions as directed.
  As this force is ramping up, I believe we need to ensure that this 
valid and important mission is completely and adequately funded.
  With the rise of Islamic militant groups in Mali, Nigeria and 
Somalia, and continued unrest in Egypt, Libya and Algeria, the threat 
is real and growing.
  The committee has added funds for sustainment and follow-up 
deployments in fiscal year 2014, but there are substantial concerns 
that the need may be higher. Funding for this force was not requested 
in the President's budget, but was included in the House-passed NDAA. 
I'm hopeful that in establishing a funding source and signaling 
congressional willingness to support this mission, the Marine Corps 
will be better able to assess their needs and provide us with a more 
exact funding request.
  To work towards a sure state of readiness, I'm offering this budget-
neutral amendment to increase this funding by $10 million while 
reducing funding to the Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide account 
by $11 million. During consideration of the NDAA last month, an 
amendment was adopted by voice vote that would increase authorization 
for the crisis response force by a similar amount.
  To provide an additional military response in case of another 
Benghazi-type situation, we must ensure that the special purpose Marine 
Air-Ground Task Force, Crisis Response can properly respond to threats 
to our diplomatic posts in an expeditious manner.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairwoman, I claim the time.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairwoman, for the reasons that the 
gentleman has already outlined, the committee had already added $30 
million for the special purpose MAGTF, Crisis Response teams, as well 
as an additional $35 million for the new Marine Corps Embassy Security 
program.
  The gentleman is exactly right that we're not doing enough on this 
issue, and we are certainly in support of his amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Delaney

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

[[Page 12112]]

  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $25,000,000)''.
       Page 86, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $16,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Delaney) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chairman, my amendment responds to a common 
dilemma facing our military families, a dilemma that is deeply 
unfortunate, but easily solvable.
  When our warfighters and veterans head to the hospital, their 
families often face a choice between being there or paying their bills. 
This means that too often our military heroes are in the hospital alone 
without the support of their family. They deserve better.
  This amendment will increase funding for Fisher Houses, which 
provides free housing for the families of patients receiving care at 
military and VA hospitals. This additional funding is offset by a 
corresponding reduction to the defense-wide operation and maintenance 
account.
  Thanks to Fisher Houses, when our heroes are in the hospital, their 
families have a place to stay. Thanks to Fisher Houses, when our 
military families need our support, we lend them a helping hand, a home 
away from home.
  This program is not only compassionate, but it's cost effective. 
Since 1990, over 180,000 families have been served by Fisher Houses, 
saving military families over $200 million. However, you can't put a 
price tag on the emotional, psychological, and spiritual value these 
homes provide.
  After 2 years, we have seen resources strained and backlogs develop. 
We can't expect better results without improving our support structure. 
This amendment would lead to the construction of at least four new 
Fisher Houses next year. Four new homes means lodging for 2,000 
military family members. That's 2,000 sons, daughters, wives, husbands, 
brothers, and sisters that can be by the side of our military heroes 
during their most significant time of need.
  No veteran, no servicemember should head to the hospital alone. I 
encourage my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I claim the time.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, the Fisher Houses program is a 
real success story. It was initially started by Mr. Zach Fisher. After 
his death, the family continued.
  The need was so great at the military hospitals; but also at the VA 
hospitals, there were no Fisher Houses. So the program was expanded, 
and we increased our involvement. The Congress had not been involved up 
to this point. The Congress appropriated money, and we've been 
appropriating $4 million a year to add to the Fisher House Foundation 
for the purpose of the Fisher Houses. We also allow for $11 million for 
transfers to the Fisher House operations.
  I say, again, it's a real success story; and while it's additional 
money, we're happy to support the gentleman's amendment and make sure 
that the Fisher Houses continue.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  I do not rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment, but to cast a 
caution over the expenditure of the proposed funds. The bill contains 
$4 million, and this is a phenomenal program. I am not in any way 
suggesting otherwise.
  But the gentleman's amendment is quadrupling funding in 1 year for 
this project from $4 million to $20 million. So I would hope that the 
people that are running this program understand that in a time of great 
fiscal constraint, they better very carefully, effectively, and wisely 
spend this additional money that I'm not objecting to, but I am very 
concerned about quadrupling $4 million that is already in a bill for a 
very good program.
  I appreciate the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Reclaiming my time, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. DELANEY. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Nevada (Ms. 
Titus).
  Ms. TITUS. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the Delaney 
amendment.
  As a member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, I understand 
the important role that Fisher Houses play in supporting members of our 
armed services, our Nation's veterans, and their families.
  In southern Nevada, a brand new VA hospital opened recently to serve 
the 154,000 veterans who live in our area. Just north of the hospital, 
there is land that has already been dedicated to a brand new Fisher 
House. I support this amendment because it will allow Fisher House 
Foundation to build an extra four houses this year, including the one 
in Las Vegas, helping an extra 2,000 families.
  The Fisher House Foundation received an A-plus rating from the 
American Institute of Philanthropy, so we know that our money is being 
used efficiently and effectively to make a meaningful difference in the 
lives of our heroes and their families.
  I look forward to a day when members of the armed services and our 
veterans will all have their families close to them as they receive 
medical care at these facilities, including the new hospital in Las 
Vegas.
  Mr. DELANEY. I appreciate the comments of my colleagues and the 
support of my colleagues.
  As I have no other comments, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Delaney).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Gabbard

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Ms. GABBARD. Madam Chairwoman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $104,000,000)''.
       Page 30, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $104,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman from 
Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Hawaii.
  Ms. GABBARD. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  The U.S. Navy has acknowledged a growing problem that threatens its 
dominance at sea. It's strike reach is shrinking and aging, while 
potential enemies' attack reach is growing and modernizing. We 
recognize this most specifically within the Asia-Pacific region. It's 
because of this growing recognition that the Navy is exploring new 
weapons in order to successfully execute our strategic rebalance of 
military assets to the Asia-Pacific region.
  A longstanding Navy urgent operational needs statement and related 
intelligence estimates detail a troubling capability and readiness gap 
that have compelled the Secretary of Defense to direct accelerated 
development of an over-the-horizon surface warfare missile that can be 
launched from aircraft or surface vessels and strike well-defended 
moving maritime targets.
  Currently, surface-launched anti-ship missiles face the growing 
challenge of penetrating sophisticated enemy air defense systems from 
long range and present the potential for large no-go zones, which deny 
the Navy access in key conflict areas.
  The military expects our adversaries will continue their development 
of increasingly sophisticated anti-access area denial capabilities that 
are able to jam or destroy GPS systems which guide our missiles. This 
clearly highlights the need for the offensive anti-

[[Page 12113]]

surface warfare weapon, as well as the long-range anti-ship missile, 
which has a requirement of independently detecting and validating the 
target that it was shot at.
  In authorizing the full request in the President's budget, the House 
Armed Services Committee noted the need for a new generation of anti-
ship weapons capable of penetrating sophisticated enemy air defense 
systems from long range and said such a capability is even more 
relevant today and is critical to meeting national security objectives 
and rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region. By providing these new 
capabilities, we allow our Navy to safely engage and destroy high-value 
targets well beyond the potential counterfire range of the adversaries 
that they may face.
  I recently received a letter from Admiral Locklear, commander of the 
U.S. Pacific Command, who's at the forefront of this rebalance to the 
Asia-Pacific region, noting the importance of these two weapons. He 
expressed deep concern about the reductions proposed by the Defense 
Appropriation Subcommittee and said that such reductions will derail 
the efforts of Pacific Command to outpace an expanding threat, 
increasingly degrade our regional response options, and potentially 
erode regional confidence in our commitment to the rebalance. We can 
and must do all that we can to correct the significant strategic and 
operational risks that these budget cuts present at this critical 
juncture.
  I urge you to support the President's budget request, as well as the 
authorization that the House Armed Services Committee approved, in 
order to keep this essential element of our Asia-Pacific rebalance on 
track for fielding.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues and ask for their 
support as I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairwoman, I would like a clarification 
on the time issues.
  Since the time is structured, is it possible for the person offering 
the amendment to reserve that time when they have completed their 
statement?
  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman may reserve.

                              {time}  1515

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I claim the time.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, very simply, most of this money 
would be taken from the Special Operations Command funding. It's not a 
good idea. We're using the Special Operators more and more, all the 
time. We are finding them involved in places where you might be 
surprised, and I just don't think it is wise for us to be taking this 
funding from Special Operations. Special Operations are the Navy SEALs 
and the Special teams that go into difficult places. We prefer not to 
put limitations that this amendment would cause.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield to Mr. Visclosky.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. My understanding as well during subcommittee 
consideration is that the new START proposed--and this is a new START 
proposed for 2014--provide very little explanation or rationale, and 
that's from the Department of Defense. The committee recommendation was 
for a reduction because of the poor justification by the Department 
itself. I think I am correct in my understanding.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I thank the gentleman for his comment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. GABBARD. Madam Chair, a couple of points I would like to clarify. 
This amendment proposes that the offset come from the O&M Defense-wide 
account, but makes up less than one-half of 1 percent of the entire 
amount requested in funding for that.
  With regards to the justification for the timing of this issue, the 
letter from Admiral Locklear--the contents of that letter recognize the 
effectiveness and the necessity of these programs, and are looking 
really to bypass normal acquisition processes due to the urgent need 
that they have identified there within the region, which is why I am 
strongly asking my colleagues to consider supporting this amendment.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

                                                        Commander,


                                         U.S. Pacific Command,

                               Camp H.M. Smith, HI, July 18, 2013.
     Hon. Richard Durbin,
     Chairman, Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, U.S. Senate, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: As you know, U.S. Pacific Command 
     (USPACOM) is at the forefront of executing key aspects of our 
     strategic rebalance to the Asia-Pacific. The complexity of 
     the operational environment and the pace of emerging 
     potential threats in this theater demand a responsive and 
     credible joint force to reassure our friends, dissuade 
     adversaries, and defend our national interests. To that end, 
     I want to ensure you are aware that proposed reductions in 
     the Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 budget for Offensive Anti-Surface 
     Warfare (OASuW) capability (PE 0604786N) introduces 
     significant strategic and operational risk at a time-critical 
     juncture in our rebalance.
       Specifically, my FY 2015-2019 Integrated Priority List 
     (IPL), a long-standing Navy OASuW Urgent Operational Needs 
     Statement, and related intelligence estimates detail a 
     particularly troubling capability and readiness gap that 
     compelled the Deputy Secretary of Defense to direct 
     accelerated (2018) fielding of the Long Range Anti-Ship 
     Missile (LRASM). If enacted, the reductions proposed in the 
     FY 2014 budget for OASuW/LRASM will derail our efforts to 
     outpace an expanding threat, increasingly constrain our 
     regional response options, and potentially erode regional 
     confidence in our commitment to the rebalance.
       I urge you to support the President's Budget request and 
     reconsider the proposed OASuW/LRASM reductions in order to 
     keep this vital program on track for FY 2018 fielding. Thank 
     you for your continued support of USPACOM and this essential 
     element of our Asia-Pacific rebalance.
           Sincerely,
                                               S.J. Locklear, III.

  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard).
  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. GABBARD. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on 
the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Hawaii will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Grayson

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Grayson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Madam Chair, this amendment would increase the Defense 
health program account by $10 million in order to fund a cure for Gulf 
War illness. Currently, there is no cure for Gulf War illness, and it 
affects over a third of the veterans who served in the first Gulf War.
  This amendment is identical to an amendment offered last year that 
passed this body by a voice vote, and according to the Congressional 
Budget Office, this amendment actually will reduce total outlays by $1 
million.
  Veterans of the first Gulf War suffer from persistent symptoms, 
including chronic headaches, widespread pain, cognitive difficulties, 
debilitating fatigue, gastrointestinal problems, respiratory symptoms, 
and other abnormalities that are not explained by traditional medicine 
or psychiatric diagnoses.
  Research shows that as veterans from the first Gulf War age, they are 
twice as likely to develop Lou Gehrig's disease as their nondeployed 
peers. There also may be connections to multiple sclerosis and 
Parkinson's disease. Sadly, there are no known treatments for the 
lifelong pain and affliction that these veterans must endure through 
this disease.
  For decades, the Veterans Administration has downplayed any 
neurological basis for this disease, but recent

[[Page 12114]]

research just this year has shown unequivocally that this disease is 
biological in nature. The time has come to right the wrong that our 
servicemen and -women have had to live with for over 20 years.
  In this Department of Defense appropriations bill, we allocate more 
money for breast cancer, orthopedic, and prostate cancer research than 
we do for finding a cure for Gulf War illness. Equivalent funds are 
appropriated for ovarian cancer research.
  Personally, I think if we are going to spend money on medical 
research within the Department of Defense, the Department must 
adequately fund research on those diseases that originate in war and 
wholly affect our servicemen and -women. Over a quarter of a million 
veterans display symptoms of this disease, and the time has come to 
find and fund a cure for it.
  The offset for my amendment today comes from the $32 million 
Operation and Maintenance Defense-wide account, and that account is 
funded $500 million above the amount in last year's DOD appropriations 
bill.
  Congress has responsibility to ensure that the Gulf War veterans, who 
put it all on the line and are paying for that with a lifetime of pain, 
are not left behind.
  I urge my colleagues, including my esteemed colleague from Florida, 
to support this amendment and help to find a cure for Gulf War illness.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I claim the time.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, although we're going to support 
this amendment from my colleague from Florida, I take this time to 
point out that we've already included an additional $20 million for the 
program, the same amount that was included in fiscal year 2013. Prior 
to 2013, the subcommittee typically included $8 million to $10 million 
annually for this program. But this bill, this year for 2014, has an 
additional $20 million, but it is a serious issue, and it is one that 
we can't take lightly, and so we do support the gentleman's amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRAYSON. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida for 
accelerating the efforts to find a cure for this disease. I am very 
grateful to him, and so are thousands of veterans.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Israel

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Israel) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Madam Chair, I will be very brief. This is a bipartisan 
amendment offered by my colleague from New York, the gentleman from the 
Second Congressional District, Congressman Peter King, and myself, to 
transfer $10 million to mental health programs within the Department of 
Defense. It is fully offset.
  Madam Chair, 22 veterans every day are committing suicide; 273,000 
veterans have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injury since 2000; 
and the pace of post-traumatic stress disorder is going to require new 
thinking, new innovations, new technologies, new partnerships, and 
collaborations. That's exactly what this bipartisan amendment crafted 
by Congressman King and myself does.
  This amendment creates new public-private partnerships between the 
Department of Defense and teaching hospitals and research institutions 
for the research, the treatment, and outreach on military mental health 
matters. This is not a matter of partisanship, this is a matter of 
doing the right thing for our veterans. It was my honor to work 
together on a bipartisan basis with the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
King), and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I claim the time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, actually, this amendment moves 
money around within the Defense health program for something the 
committee has worked a long and hard time over the years dealing with: 
the subject of traumatic brain injury and psychological health 
research. In fact, we included an additional $125 million in the bill 
above the President's request because of the importance of the issue 
that we're facing. We are seeing more and more cases of TBI, traumatic 
brain injuries, than we had expected, I believe. So we added the 
additional money that the gentleman's amendment would move around in 
the DHP, so we have absolutely no problem with this amendment.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from 
Indiana.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman's remarks, and I also 
appreciate having the time to associate myself with the remarks you 
have made on behalf of the gentleman's amendment.
  Secondly, I note, as you point out, the subcommittee itself has done 
significant work and recognizes the problems that we face in the 
commitment we need to make to the individuals that the gentleman is 
trying to help with his amendment. So again, I very much appreciate the 
gentleman's remarks, as well as support for the issue in this 
particular amendment.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Madam Chair, I would just close by thanking the gentleman 
from Florida, the chair, and the ranking member for their cooperation. 
This amendment is so vitally important to those who are fighting for 
our freedom.
  In this amendment, we defend the defenders and we protect the 
protectors, and I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for 
their support for this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Israel).
  The amendment was agreed to.


        Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. Young of Florida

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 
312, I offer amendments en bloc.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 6, 32, 76, 77, 
78, 79, 80, 81, and 82 printed in House Report 113-170, offered by Mr. 
Young of Florida:


            amendment no. 6 offered by mr. young of florida

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.


          amendment no. 32 offered by Ms. Esty of connecticut

         Page 134, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $38,000,000)''.
         Page 143, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.


           amendment no. 76 offered by Mr. Sessions of Texas

         Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
         Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
         Page 34, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.


        amendment no. 77 offered by mr. bridenstine of oklahoma

         Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $11,000,000)''.
         Page 12, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
         Page 13, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.


       amendment no. 78 offered by mr. mckinley of west virginia

         Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.

[[Page 12115]]




           amendment no. 79 offered by ms. bass of california

         Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000) (increased by $3,000,000)''.


         amendment no. 80 offered by ms. velazquez of new york

         Page 134, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $19,000,000)''.
         Page 143, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.


           amendment no. 81 offered by mr. grayson of florida

         Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
         Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.


          amendment no. 82 offered by ms. esty of connecticut

         Page 126, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
         Page 134, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $27,500,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) each 
will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, the en bloc amendment has been 
agreed to by the minority and the majority. They are noncontroversial 
amendments that cover topics such as suicide prevention, traumatic 
brain injury, and National Guard issues. The sponsors of the amendments 
have agreed to the amendments being considered en bloc, and I would ask 
for the adoption of this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1530

  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
  Mr. KILMER. Madam Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
  Within this en bloc includes an amendment that highlights a very 
troubling breakdown within the Department of Defense, how they collect 
and process their personnel data.
  Our brave men and women who are deployed overseas rely on the 
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to give them assurance that they won't 
need to worry about a foreclosure on their house, a lease being 
terminated, or outstanding credit card debt. We ask significant 
sacrifices from our troops, and this is a needed helping hand at a time 
when they are rightfully focused on serving their Nation.
  In order to provide these protections, financial institutions are 
required by law to consult the Department of Defense's data system to 
validate servicemembers' deployment. This system is called the Defense 
Manpower Data Center, or DMDC.
  I've heard from a number of stakeholders that the DMDC is riddled 
with inaccuracies because each service feeds their own data into the 
database, with no standardization between services, and much of it was 
originally entered by hand, with little-to-no quality assurance.
  Obviously this creates a significant problem. We need our financial 
institutions to have accurate data so that troops can get the benefits 
provided by law.
  I'm extremely concerned about the reliability of this data for the 
purposes of SCRA compliance and, for that matter, any other personnel 
process affected by the DOD. Going forward, I hope we can work together 
to address this serious data problem within the DOD.
  My amendment would cut $1 million to the Defense Human Resources 
Activity Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide account, and reinsert 
that funding into the exact same place, with the intent of encouraging 
a study on how the Defense Human Resources Activity components and the 
CIO identify, catalog, process, communicate and rectify mistakes or 
inconsistencies found when data is uploaded to the DMDC.
  I want to thank Chairman Young and Ranking Member Visclosky for 
working with me on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Bass).
  Ms. BASS. Madam Chair, this amendment considered en bloc would 
provide the Department of Defense the flexibility to train and equip 
wildlife reserve rangers to help combat illicit poaching across the 
African continent. Poaching and wildlife trafficking are not only a 
matter of conservation but a matter of international security.
  As the ranking member of the Africa Subcommittee, I'm deeply troubled 
by the damaging impact poaching has on the economic stability of 
African nations. During my travels, African heads of state and 
ambassadors have expressed that poaching erodes the tourism industry, 
public safety, and regional security.
  Various newspapers have reported that poaching and wildlife 
traffickers are more dangerous and militarized than ever before, with 
armed militias like Kony's Lord's Resistance Army and al Qaeda 
affiliates fueling conflicts with the profits from poached ivory and 
other animal products.
  The Department of Defense can play a leading role in helping to 
provide the training required to protect wildlife and put an end to 
regional conflicts and instability fueled by poaching. Training in 
reconnaissance, apprehension, and effective field communication will 
better prepare park rangers.
  I look forward to working with the chairman and ranking member.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Chair, it does not appear that we have any other 
speakers on our side, so I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Chair, today I rise in support for amendment #127 
offered by Congressman Jim Bridenstine of Oklahoma; Congressman Joe 
Wilson of South Carolina and myself to H.R. 2397, the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2014. Our amendment would 
provide an additional $10 million to the National Guard State 
Partnership Program. It would be offset by a reduction of $11 million 
to the Defense Media Activity in the Defense-wide operations and 
maintenance account.
  The amendment builds on the progress made in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 that strengthened and expanded 
the National Guard State Partnership Program. The National Guard 
provides unique capacity building capabilities to Combatant Commanders 
and U.S. Ambassadors via 65 comprehensive partnerships between National 
Guard units across the United States and partner nations. The State 
Partnership Program directly supports the broad national interests and 
security cooperation goals of the United States by engaging partner 
nations via military, socio-political, and economic conduits at the 
local, state, and national levels and these additional funds will 
further strengthen existing relationships as well as foster new 
partnerships. In particular, as we rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region 
the State Partnership Program offers a very visible and tangible 
component of that rebalance that meets both our military and diplomatic 
objectives in the region.
  Several Combatant Commanders have testified before Congress about the 
importance of the State Partnership Program to meeting their strategic 
objectives. The program has developed from assistance and partnership 
with primarily Eastern European nations to a program that supports all 
the non-CONUS combatant commanders. Again, I believe the SPP brings 
unique capabilities to U.S. Pacific Command in expanding and 
strengthening bilateral relations with many Asian and Pacific nations. 
The program can help to demonstrate the U.S. commitment to the region 
and our allies.
  The amendment provides critical resources to this cost effective and 
beneficial program. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, my amendment would add five million dollars 
for support services for members of the National Guard and Reserve to 
the Defense-Wide Operations and Maintenance account in Title IX of the 
bill.
  To prevent an increase in spending, the funding for suicide 
prevention is offset by reducing the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund 
by thirty-eight million dollars. This amendment is not only fiscally 
responsible, but urgent and timely.
  The cover of Time Magazine from exactly one year ago today described 
the tragedy of military suicide with the simple headline: ``One a 
Day.'' It drew attention to the grim reality that military suicide 
rates were at record levels. By year's end, a record three-hundred-

[[Page 12116]]

and-fifty active duty troops committed suicide in 2012, amounting to 
almost one suicide per day. We lost more troops to suicide than we did 
to combat.
  One year later, these rates have barely budged. The Department of 
Defense reported one-hundred-and-sixty-one potential suicides among 
active-duty service members, reservists and National Guard members 
through April. This is a pace of one suicide every eighteen hours.
  We owe far better to those who wear the uniform and serve this 
nation.
  I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for their leadership on this 
issue. Your tireless, bipartisan commitment to suicide prevention is 
reflected in the additional twenty-million dollars for the Suicide 
Prevention Office provided in this bill.
  My amendment seeks only to bolster your efforts by strengthening 
outreach and awareness programs to combat stigma and improve access to 
resources. As the chairman has often reminded us, we should focus our 
efforts on prevention. This amendment gives our outreach and prevention 
programs greater support to assist service members in need. It is our 
job to serve our troops as well as they serve us. We cannot--we must 
not--wait; it's up to us to act.
  I urge Members to support this amendment.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
  The CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 7 will not be 
offered.


                Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Langevin

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $22,000,000)''.
       Page 30, line 21, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $22,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from Rhode 
Island (Mr. Langevin) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, before I begin, I want to first 
congratulate the chairman, the gentleman from Florida, and the ranking 
member for their important work on this legislation before us today.
  Madam Chair, it's no surprise to any of us that the United States 
Navy, with its critical role in our national defense, faces ever-
increasing global threats and a significant resource-constrained 
environment. To maintain undersea dominance in maritime regions of 
economic and military importance to the United States, the Navy 
requires disruptive technologies that can be rapidly developed, 
demonstrated, evaluated, and fielded to counter other nations' 
expanding undersea capabilities, and to extend the Navy's reach and 
persistence.
  The Advanced Submarine Systems Development program supports 
innovative and promising undersea technologies, including Unmanned 
Undersea Vehicles, or UUVs, as we know them, for the delivery of new 
and needed capability to the undersea domain.
  However, under the current acquisition plan, the Navy may not have 
the new technologies it needs to meet requirements in this domain until 
after 2020. So my amendment reduces the appropriation for Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide, Office of Secretary of Defense by $22 
million and transfers this amendment to RDT&E, Navy, for the purpose of 
supporting Advanced Submarine Systems Development.
  This represents a funding increase to the level authorized by the 
Armed Services Committee and this House in the Fiscal Year 2014 
National Defense Authorization Act. It has been scored as reducing 
outlays by $3 million by CBO.
  Unmanned systems, such as the Predator in the Air Force, provide 
increased performance for many missions and have truly revolutionized 
modern warfare. Autonomous undersea vehicles can add significant 
capabilities to the Navy's systems and platforms and act as a force 
multiplier for long-endurance, hazardous, or high-threat missions where 
humans are limited in mission success.
  In response to a question I asked at a hearing earlier this year 
before the Armed Services Committee, Navy Secretary Lehman stated that, 
and I quote:

       These underwater systems, UUVs and USVs, can be relatively 
     more useful in undersea warfare than their airborne 
     counterparts are to surface and air forces.
       While the Navy recognizes the promise of these 
     technologies, at a time of shrinking budgets, new 
     technologies, without existing bureaucratic and industry 
     supporters, tend to suffer disproportionate cuts and 
     cancellations, compared to programs with political and 
     bureaucratic constituencies and must be actively protected by 
     Congress.

  So with this, Madam Chair, support of this program will help 
accelerate the integration of UUVs and other autonomous undersea 
technologies and payloads into the Navy for the full spectrum of 
military needs and potentially speed the eventual availability of these 
capabilities to civilian purposes such as energy exploration and 
environmental monitoring, just as happened with aerial vehicles.
  My amendment accomplishes this in a fully competitive way 
accelerating, rather than disrupting, the existing development process 
and enabling earlier support of COCOM-defined operational needs.
  With that, I urge support of this amendment, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, as much as I want to support my 
friend's amendment, I can't, so I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, the money that he would use for 
a large part comes from the Special Operations Command, and I just 
don't think that we can restrict them, like some of the amendments that 
we're seeing, in their ability to move about the world as they have to 
move about the world and do the exciting things that they do.
  But the gentleman's amendment adds $22 million to the $32 million 
that we already included for this program. Now, that is a 63 percent 
spike in funding for fiscal year 2014. That makes it very difficult for 
the program managers or anybody involved with the program.
  To assume a 63 percent increase means there may be a lot of new jobs 
this year, but then the next year they'd all be fired and laid off 
because the money is not there. This is not a consistent program, 
except for the $32 million that we have included in this bill.
  And so as much as I would like to support his bill, his amendment, I 
really can't. I just don't think the program managers can handle a 63 
percent increase in this or, frankly, any program.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I appreciate the comments that the 
chairman has just made. I'd just point out that in the Defense 
authorization bill this was authorized at the higher level. And the 
information I have from program managers is that they could, in fact, 
absorb and make important use of these funds in speeding these 
technologies to the warfighter and enhancing our undersea capabilities.
  With that, I would urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
  The amendment was rejected.


               Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Page 13, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $500,000)''.
       Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $500,000)''.

[[Page 12117]]

       Page 34, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $500,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I'm hoping to convince my colleagues 
that, albeit what numbers you may have in this increasing and emerging 
epidemic of post-traumatic stress disorder, let me give a personal 
story that comes by way of my interaction often with veterans and, 
particularly, a post-traumatic stress disorder center that we were able 
to fund in a hospital that previously had not had the ability to serve 
Active Duty soldiers and veterans.
  It's a small hospital off the campus of our main Veterans Hospital in 
Houston, Texas, but we established a post-traumatic stress disorder 
center there that allowed veterans who may not have traditionally been 
at the Veterans Hospital, not because they did not have benefits, but 
for a variety of reasons, to find a comfort place to be treated for 
their post-traumatic stress disorder.
  And they were not just veterans of the Afghan and Iraq wars, but 
these were ones from the Persian Gulf, from Vietnam. And they could not 
thank the staff and could not thank the work that we had done to secure 
just a small amount of dollars, which this amendment does.
  This takes a small amount of dollars from a very large funding for, 
certainly, a commendable challenge, but it is one that I believe would 
benefit, as we seek to create a better quality of life for our 
soldiers, wherever they might be, and our veterans.
  This is a $500,000 deposit, if you will, on the high numbers of post-
traumatic stress disorder. I have seen it in our returning soldiers, I 
have seen it in our veterans, and it is clearly something that is not 
going away.
  I think the poignant story that I want to share is how grateful this 
particular veteran was, who said he had never been to treatment and his 
whole life had been turned around. His wife was there with him. She 
said their lives have been turned around.
  So I ask my colleagues to consider the responsible approach that we 
have taken for just this amount of money to reinvest in our needy, but 
deserving, men and women who are both Active Duty. In the instance of 
the story that I gave, because this facility was able to utilize 
TRICARE, they could serve Active Duty, and they could serve those who 
were veterans as well.

                              {time}  1545

  So I thank the chairman and ranking member and urge support of the 
amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I'm not exactly sure how this is targeted or 
how it would support the $125 million increase already in this bill. 
PTSD is a serious issue. It's becoming more serious as time goes on and 
as our men and women return from the battlefield. And so we understand 
the importance of the program. We did increase it by $125 million.
  This amendment, I think, is positive, and I'm not going to oppose it.
  I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  Again, I would not be opposed to the gentlewoman's amendment but 
would want to make the observation, given the observation I made in my 
opening comments, that I do wish she had chosen a different account for 
the offset.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, PTSD is going to be with us for 
a long time because there are men and women returning from the 
battlefield who believe they don't have PTSD or don't want to admit to 
the fact that they have it. I can certainly understand why they do not 
want that on their record. But, nevertheless, it is going to show up; 
and when it shows up, we need to be prepared to care for those who have 
fought this battle.
  And so I support the gentlelady's amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I'm overwhelmed and very grateful to 
Chairman Young, my dear friend who has done so much, as well as the 
ranking member, likewise, for his great service. He's done so much.
  Let me just conclude by saying that PTSD, as both the chairman and 
the ranking member have agreed, is an invisible wound that you don't 
often see. One of the best ways to increase access to treatment is to 
increase the medical facilities and also the medical professionals. 
These additional dollars, as I understand the intent of both the 
ranking member and chairman, will be used effectively.
  Post-traumatic stress disorder is one of the most prevalent, 
devastating psychological wounds suffered by the brave men and women. I 
ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 16, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $25,100,000)''.
       Page 30, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $25,100,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and a Member opposed each will control 10 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment that I'm introducing 
with my colleague, Ms. Gabbard from Hawaii, that would simply restore 
funding to the fiscal year '13 levels for cleanup and safety in public 
areas.
  We take great pride in the United States in our military being the 
best trained and most powerful fighting force in the world, but decades 
of military operations and training have left a toxic legacy of 
dangerous explosives and harmful chemicals on millions of acres in this 
country. The Department of Defense has an obligation to remediate these 
dangerous areas, often in public or residential areas, in a timely 
fashion. This contaminated real estate contains housing, schools, 
parks, and playgrounds in every State and almost every congressional 
district in our country.
  To help the Department of Defense become a better partner for our 
communities and our constituents, I urge you to join me in supporting 
funding for a program that will employ skilled, high-tech companies to 
clean up these dangerous liabilities and create opportunities for 
economic development on land that is currently a danger.
  Just last month, at the height of the tourist season, Maryland 
officials were forced to shut down Assateague Island after a visitor 
noticed unexploded ordnance, or UXO, had washed ashore. Upon further 
investigation, they found hundreds of pieces of UXO that were 
discovered and had to be detonated onsite.
  Our constituents demand that the United States lead by example. 
Keeping our families safe requires us to return the land to productive 
uses by paying for and cleaning up the mess we make. The Department of 
Defense agrees. Before the House Budget Committee last year, Secretary 
of Defense Leon Panetta, when asked if there were a way to create a 
partnership between local communities and the Department of Defense, 
said:

       I'd be more than happy to engage you in that process. The 
     only way to ultimately achieve savings is to be able to have 
     the cleanup and do it expeditiously. There are lots of things 
     I think we can do to improve the process.


[[Page 12118]]


  I appreciated Chairman Young's reply on the House floor last July. 
When asked if the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee could commit to 
helping increase funding for environmental remediation on Formerly Used 
Defense Sites, Chairman Young said:

       I say absolutely yes. I would very much like to do this, 
     because I believe we need to do it. We hope to have an 
     opportunity this year to do it right.

  The funding levels would restore the DERP-FUDS account to fiscal year 
'13 levels by redirecting $25.1 million from the Ground Combat Vehicle, 
a program whose utility has been called into question by the CBO and 
CRS. It would take a modest reduction in funding by less than one-half 
of 1 percent. But restoring funding to this program would still mean 
that funding for this vital cleanup would be less than one-twentieth of 
1 percent of defense spending.
  At the current rate, the estimate is that it will take 250 years to 
clean up these sites. I find this embarrassing, frankly. I would hope 
that this would be the least we could do to keep faith with people who 
are at risk because the military has not cleaned up after itself. It's 
Congress that needs to step up and provide the funding so that the 
Department of Defense can do what it wants to do.
  I yield the balance of my time to the coauthor of this amendment, the 
gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard).
  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Hawaii is recognized for 2 minutes.
  Ms. GABBARD. Madam Chair, due to its strategic location in the 
Pacific, my home of Hawaii has long been at the forefront of our 
Nation's conflicts. We have more than 100 Formerly Used Defense Sites 
just as a result of a defensive buildup pre-World War I and, later, in 
the massive rush to mobilize in World War II. These sites, often also 
referred to as FUDS, can be littered with dangerous unexploded bombs 
and shells, in addition to harmful chemicals.
  As in Hawaii, Formerly Used Sites across the country--in every State 
and congressional district--can serve as housing developments, schools, 
parks, and playgrounds, areas that can be used productively. The Army 
Corps of Engineers has been working diligently to clean up unexploded 
ordnance from many sites in Hawaii, many of which I visited myself, 
including 135,000-acre Waikoloa Maneuver Area on the Big Island of 
Hawaii. During World War II, this area was home to some 50,000 U.S. 
servicemembers who trained and prepared for many of the historic 
battles that were fought in the Pacific.
  One of the places that I visited and met with many elementary and 
middle school students was Waimea Middle School, where unexploded 
ordnance has been found within the last few years by these students 
themselves. You are talking about 9-, 10-, 11-, 12-year-old students 
who have to be trained in this day and age to identify what an 
unexploded ordnance looks like and how to report it. This is not 
something that we should be facing in our society today.
  The effort to clean up these Formerly Used Defense Sites not only 
makes our communities safer, but has a significant and positive 
economic impact. There have been substantial investments in the 
training of local people in Hawaii to do this highly skilled and often 
dangerous work. By training these local people, we're actually saving 
taxpayer dollars because we're not having to import talent, pay per 
diem and all these other exorbitant costs, and we're providing jobs to 
the local community.
  I sponsor this amendment because Congress has a responsibility to 
ensure that the Department of Defense has the resources it needs to 
clean up these dangerous unexploded munitions.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. This amendment would add $25 million for the 
purpose of restoring these Formerly Used Defense Sites by cutting the 
same amount from the Army RDTE account for research and development.
  As important as this amendment might be, Army research and 
development is extremely important to the soldiers on the battlefield. 
In today's battlefield in Afghanistan, we're facing an enemy that is 
constantly moving. As we move one direction, they move another 
direction. As we present a new device, a new weapon, a new system, they 
develop a way to get around it. It's important that we continue to fund 
Army research and development.
  The President requested $237.4 million for this purpose. We added an 
additional $25 million for the cleanup of these sites over the 
President's budget request. The funding provided in the RDTE Army 
account supports critical research in Army laboratories and in colleges 
and universities across our country to ensure that our soldiers have 
the best that we can provide them as they face an enemy that is 
constantly moving on the battlefield. Unnecessary reductions to Army 
research and development is just not right, especially when we have 
already added the additional money over and above the President's 
budget request.
  We understand the importance of restoring these sites, but we also 
understand the importance of maintaining our research and development 
for the soldier on the battlefield to have the most advanced technology 
and the most advanced weapons that he or she can possibly have to carry 
out their mission and to protect themselves while they're doing it.
  So I must oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 printed in House 
Report 113-170.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I withdraw amendment No. 11.
  The CHAIR. The Chair understands amendment No. 11 will not be 
offered.


              Amendment No. 12 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 29, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 157, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.

                              {time}  1600

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the chairman of the subcommittee and I thank 
the ranking member of the subcommittee.
  Madam Chair, let me, first of all, acknowledge the hard work that it 
takes to provide for the men and women of the United States military 
and to secure America. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, 
I am well aware of the combined efforts, obviously, in the military and 
the line of demarcation between civilian, but we all are committed to 
the national security of this Nation.
  This amendment deals with the reduction in funding of the procurement 
Defense-wide by $1 million. I want to give the good news. The good news 
is that this money would be put in deficit reduction. But I do want to 
acknowledge that one of the issues that we must address as we go 
forward in the collective intelligence agencies, as we have listened to 
some of the challenges that we are facing in light of the present 
status of the leaks that have occurred by an American citizen who was 
working in the capacity as a contractor--this impacts all of us. So as

[[Page 12119]]

this $1 million would be submitted into the deficit reduction pool, I 
believe it is extremely important that we look very closely at the 
extended use of civilian contractors, the extended use of a budget that 
is responsible for 70 percent of the intelligence of this country.
  Now, I know that some of the contractors deal with issues that are 
not individual personnel, but are dealing with research and dealing 
with equipment. But I believe that it is important that we look at the 
question that resulted in the disclosure of leaked and highly sensitive 
classified information, and the continuing raising of concern of 
whether or not the national security of this Nation has been impacted 
because of the outsourcing of intelligence responsibility.
  In particular, I think we need to look at the outsourcing of 
determining top secret clearance. Obviously, the circumstances that 
resulted in the leaking is an individual that had an interesting 
resume, from the educational level of a high school GED--of which we 
respect and encourage people to complete their education--of the 
military service, and then on to top secret by a contractor who gave 
out top secret clearances. We hope that there was some kind of review. 
So my amendment is intended to highlight this issue.
  I would hope that as we proceed, that this question will, if you 
will, have the ability to slow--not halt--the use of civilian 
contractors out of all of our agencies dealing with the issue of 
intelligence. We want to assure the American people that we are 
concerned about the protection of this Nation's national security--
civil liberties as well, but also to prevent the leaks that have 
occurred.
  Let me conclude my remarks and let me just say that I hope this 
brings about a discussion that will cross jurisdictional lines of the 
Judiciary Committee, the Intelligence Committee, our appropriators. 
Let's fix this enormous use and reliance on these contractors' 
outsourcing. Let's develop a highly trained group of Federal 
Governmental professionals committed, if you will, to the ongoing 
service to their Nation. Respecting contractors have the same loyalty, 
but I think it would be better, Mr. Chairman, if we can frame the 
utilization of contractors in such a way that we can be assured that 
everything that deals with the national security of this Nation will be 
protected.
  With that, I will withdraw the amendment.


              Amendment No. 13 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 13 printed in House Report 113-170.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 29, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 34, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Young and 
Mr. Visclosky for their leadership for an important responsibility in 
this Nation.
  My amendment increases funding for the Defense Health Program's 
research and development by $10 million. These funds will address the 
question of breast cancer in the United States military.
  The American Cancer Society calls several strains of breast cancer as 
a particularly aggressive subtype associated with lower survival rates; 
in this instance, it's a triple negative. But I raise an article that 
says: ``Fighting a Different Battle; Breast Cancer and the Military.''
  We all know, by the way, that breast cancer can affect both men and 
women. The bad news is breast cancer has been just about as brutal on 
women in the military as combat. Let me say that sentence again. Breast 
cancer has been just about as brutal on women in the military as 
combat. More than 800 women have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, 
according to the Army Times; 874 military women were diagnosed with 
breast cancer just between 2000 and 2011. And according to that same 
study, more are suspected. It grows.
  The good news is that we have been working on it, and I want to add 
my appreciation to the military. This, however, will allow for the 
additional research. As new young women come into the United States 
military, as women stay longer in the United States military, as women 
get older in the United States military, as women ascend to leadership 
roles in the United States military, these dollars provide research.
  Not only is breast cancer striking relatively young military women at 
an alarming rate, but male servicemembers, veterans and their 
dependents are at risk as well. With a younger and generally healthier 
population, those in the military tend to have a lower risk for most 
cancers than civilians--including significantly lower colorectal, lung 
and cervical--but breast cancer is a different story.
  Military people in general, and in some cases very specifically, are 
at a significantly greater risk for contracting breast cancer, says Dr. 
Richard Clapp, a top cancer expert at Boston University who works at 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on military breast 
cancer issues. He says life in the military can mean exposure to a 
witch's brew of risk factors directly linked to greater chances of 
getting breast cancer.
  So, my friends, I am asking that we do the right thing. We're on the 
right track, we're on the right rail, we're on the right road. But with 
the expansion of women in the military, I can assure you, for long 
life, a vital service that these men and women give, it is extremely 
important to move forward with this amendment.
  Researchers point to a high use of oral contraception that's linked 
to breast cancer among women that would ensure that this particular 
amendment would be a positive step forward.
  So I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. With 
that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition 
to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the recognition. And I think I speak for 
the subcommittee when I will suggest that we would be delighted to 
accept the gentlewoman's amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentlemen, and thank them for their 
commitment to the men and women of the United States military. And let 
me thank my colleagues for accepting this amendment.
  With that, I know that we will be safer, secure and healthier with 
this fight against breast cancer that continues to grow in the United 
States military.
  I ask my colleagues to support it, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


        Amendments En Bloc No. 2 Offered by Mr. Young of Florida

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 312, 
I offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 2 consisting of amendment Nos. 83, 86, 87, 88, 
89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 and 96, printed in House Report No. 113-170, 
offered by Mr. Young of Florida:

[[Page 12120]]




        Amendment No. 83 Offered by Mr. Lowenthal of California

       Page 126, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $5,000,000) (increased by $5,000,000)''.


          Amendment No. 86 Offered by Mr. Griffin of Arkansas

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to cancel or modify the avionics modernization 
     program of record for C-130 aircraft.


          Amendment No. 87 Offered by Mr. Hunter of California

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to--
       (1) plan for, consider, or carry out any action to remove 
     any portion of the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial in San 
     Diego, California;
       (2) convey, or authorize the conveyance of, such memorial; 
     or
       (3) plan for or accept any reimbursement for any action 
     described in paragraph (1) or (2).


           Amendment No. 88 Offered by Mr. Kline of Minnesota

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Department of Defense to grant an enlistment 
     waiver for an offense within offense code 433 (rape, sexual 
     abuse, sexual assault, criminal sexual abuse, incest, or 
     other sex crimes), as specified in Table 1 of the memorandum 
     from the Under Secretary of Defense with the subject line 
     ``Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 08-018--`Enlistment 
     Waivers''', dated June 27, 2008 (incorporating Change 3, 
     March 20, 2013).


          Amendment No. 89 Offered by Mr. Nunes of California

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. 10002.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used by the Secretary of the Air Force to reduce the 
     force structure at Lajes Field, Azores, Portugal, below the 
     total number of military and civilian personnel assigned to 
     Lajes Field on October 1, 2012.


          Amendment No. 90 Offered by Mr. Runyan of New Jersey

       At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the Operation and Maintenance funds made 
     available in this Act may be used in contravention of section 
     41106 of title 49, United States Code.


          Amendment No. 91 Offered by Mrs. Bustos of Illinois

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. 10002.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used to enter into a contract for the purchase of an 
     American flag if the flag is certified (pursuant to the 
     Federal Acquisition Regulation) as a foreign end product.


           Amendment No. 92 Offered by Mr. Engel of New York

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Department of Defense to lease or purchase new 
     light duty vehicles for any executive fleet, or for an 
     agency's fleet inventory, except in accordance with 
     Presidential Memorandum--Federal Fleet Performance, dated May 
     24, 2011.


           Amendment No. 93 Offered by Mr. Grayson of Florida

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. 10002.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used to enter into a contract with any offeror or any 
     of its principals if the offeror certifies, pursuant to the 
     Federal Acquisition Regulation, that the offeror or any of 
     its principals--
       (1) within a three-year period preceding this offer has 
     been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against it 
     for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection 
     with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public 
     (Federal, State, or local) contract or subcontract; violation 
     of Federal or State antitrust statutes relating to the 
     submission of offers; or commission of embezzlement, theft, 
     forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, 
     making false statements, tax evasion, violating Federal 
     criminal tax laws, or receiving stolen property; or
       (2) are presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or 
     civilly charged by a governmental entity with, commission of 
     any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1); or
       (3) within a three-year period preceding this offer, has 
     been notified of any delinquent Federal taxes in an amount 
     that exceeds $3,000 for which the liability remains 
     unsatisfied.


           Amendment No. 94 Offered by Mr. Grayson of Florida

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to engage in an act covered by or described in 
     section 2340A of title 18, United States Code.


           Amendment No. 95 Offered by Mr. Grayson of Florida

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for flag or general officers for each military 
     department that are in excess to the number of such officers 
     serving in such military department as of the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.


         Amendment No. 96 Offered by Mr. LoBiondo of New Jersey

       At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to fund the performance of any Department of Defense 
     flight demonstration team at a location outside the United 
     States.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) 
each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lowenthal).
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. I'd like to thank Chairman Young and also Ranking 
Member Visclosky for providing me the time to speak today.
  Mr. Chairman, providing STEM education to America's youth is critical 
to the global competitiveness of our Nation. This will rely, however, 
on a solid pipeline of STEM-degree graduates.
  I stand here today to offer my revenue-neutral STARBASE amendment No. 
99 to H.R. 2397, the Department of Defense Appropriations, to increase 
funding to the STARBASE youth program by $5 million.
  STARBASE is currently active in 79 congressional districts throughout 
the country and engages local fifth-grade elementary students by 
exposing them to STEM subjects through an inquiry-based curriculum. The 
program is carried out by the military services because the Department 
of Defense has identified a shortage of young adults graduating from 
these difficult and hard sciences.
  The STARBASE academies work with school districts to engage students 
through ``hands-on, mind-on,'' experiential activities. They study 
engineering, nanotechnology, navigation and mapping. These are all 
critical fields that will keep our country competitive.
  My no-cost, revenue-neutral amendment makes a significant step 
towards providing and engaging America's youth with the tools they need 
to pursue careers in STEM, a field where jobs are available and there 
is a significant lack of trained workers.
  A recent Brookings Institution study said that as of 2011, there are 
now 26 million U.S. jobs--or approximately 20 percent of all jobs in 
the country--that require a high level of knowledge in any one of the 
STEM fields. I urge my colleagues to support this revenue-neutral 
amendment to H.R. 2396. Our students and our workforce need this.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Polis

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. POLIS. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 29, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $107,000,000)''.
       Page 157, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $107,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.

[[Page 12121]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, as Members of Congress, one of our greatest 
responsibilities is to keep our country safe and invest our resources 
wisely, especially when it comes to securing the safety of our country.
  The Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) program is a missile system 
that is supposed to be designed to deflect missiles from rogue states 
like Iran and North Korea. That would be great if it worked. It is a 
system with a long history of failure, and military leaders have 
expressed doubts for years about the viability of this program.
  I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment, which would return 
the funding level for the GMD program back to the Pentagon's own 
request level in the fiscal year 2014 Defense appropriations bill. 
Specifically, my amendment cuts funding for the GMD missiles by $107 
million and applies those savings to deficit reduction.
  Lacking a single successful test intercept since December 2008, the 
GMD program is simply a failure so far. These repeated failures 
unfortunately have not stopped us from continuing to authorize over $1 
billion for the GMD program to purchase 14 additional missiles on top 
of the 30 we already have in the NDAA Act of 2013.
  The Government Accountability Office has noted that the testing of 
the system to date has been insufficient to verify that it will 
function as intended, and there was a most recent test failure on July 
5 which supports that assessment from the GAO.
  Americans want a missile defense system we can count on. We need to 
ensure that our missile defenses are tested and are actually capable of 
keeping our families safe and don't merely provide the illusion of 
safety. Before we continue to build an arsenal, we should make sure 
that it works, as custodians of taxpayer funds.

                              {time}  1615

  Now, of course, those on the other side will argue that we need to 
make sure that in an ever more dangerous world we need to have and 
invest in the missile defenses to protect against the threats from Iran 
and North Korea. Of course, I agree. The issue is whether this works or 
not and whether we should reward failure as a Congress and as a 
country, or whether we should invest in success.
  I believe, Mr. Chairman, we should invest in success and not reward 
failure. We need to be candid about the challenges we face. Deterring 
threats and encouraging diplomacy is crucial to keeping America safe. 
Our national security, the safety of Americans is too important to rely 
on programs that have failed test after test when we need to have 
confidence that when we need them, they will work.
  If we are serious about cutting wasteful spending here in Congress, 
we need to be willing to take a close look at programs like the GMD and 
find ways to trim spending and increase our national security. We can 
do this by building a leaner, more agile, more affordable military that 
is suited to the 21st century, while being diligent in ensuring that 
our existing systems can keep us safe and operate as they are intended 
to.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I am reminded that when two 
airplanes hit two buildings, it cost our economy $2 trillion and many 
thousands of lives. It occurs to me that sometimes we are fairly 
shortsighted. Sometimes even as conservative fiscally as I am, 
sometimes in this Chamber we don't look to our primary duty and we 
become penny-wise and very pound-foolish.
  One nuclear armed missile coming into the United States could ruin 
our whole day. I am astonished sometimes at the lack of insight to this 
very real problem.
  The system that we are speaking of today, the GMD, is the only system 
that we have tested that is successfully capable of defending this 
country against intercontinental ballistic missiles carrying nuclear 
warheads or other ordnance.
  Mr. Chairman, I just find it astonishing that President Obama and his 
supporters have cut funding for our missile defenses every year they 
have been in office. They criticize these programs when there are test 
failures or delays that have been made worse by their slashing and 
burning of the program.
  Mr. Chairman, I am convinced that the cost of failing in this area is 
simply too high. While the Ground-based Midcourse Defense System did 
miss its target on a July 5 test, it was one test. It has been 
successfully tested repeatedly since the 1999 testing began. This 
administration has not offered funding for testing this system since 
2008.
  Mr. Chairman, it should not shock us that when we don't test our 
systems, sometimes they don't always perform perfectly. If we cut 
funding for systems that don't have a perfect test record, we are 
doomed to have no protection at all.
  Every sophisticated program in the Defense Department has had 
technical challenges at some time. But GMD's technical challenges are 
not insurmountable. We must commit to support these systems to see 
these challenges through.
  The amendment that Mr. Polis has offered would strike $107 million 
authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act. It would 
actually, because the authority for multi-year procurement would then 
be done away with, this Polis amendment actually costs the taxpayers 
money.
  I would just ask the gentleman: If not this system, what other system 
would he suggest that would protect our country against a potential 
situation where an intercontinental ballistic missile were coming into 
the homeland? I would ask him to consider that.
  I would now yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. Lamborn).
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment by 
the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. Chairman, the House has rejected these amendments--this and a 
following amendment by the gentleman from Colorado--on the National 
Defense Authorization Act already this year.
  This amendment would strike the funding provided in this bill to 
provide for multi-year procurement authority of booster motors for the 
ground-based interceptors, GBIs, that Secretary Hagel announced the 
United States would deploy this past March.
  This amendment, if it were adopted, and perhaps this is 
unintentional, but it would actually cost the United States as much as 
$200 million.
  Perhaps the gentleman is opposed to the Obama administration's 
missile defense policy as articulated by Secretary of Defense Hagel. If 
so, that is a separate issue.
  But when you look at North Korea, you look at Iran, I think it would 
be unwise to oppose the decision to add ground-based interceptors.
  All that this amendment is doing is raising the price that taxpayers 
have to pay for the GBIs that the President and the Secretary of 
Defense have said we should buy. This isn't just my position. It is 
what the Missile Defense Agency and the CBO have already said: multi-
year procurement will save the taxpayer money.
  Now, the reliability issues that the gentleman brought up have 
nothing to do with this funding, because this funding talks about 
booster motors. Of the 26 tests that involve the GMD system, Ground-
based Missile Defense, 18 of those were 100 percent successful. Of the 
remaining eight that had problems, none of them involved the booster 
motor. That is the subject of this amendment. So this amendment is 
misdirected if it is concerned about the stated concern of reliability.
  I can't understand why we would oppose multi-year procurement and 
advance procurement of the 14 GBIs that the Defense Department says we 
will buy.
  Mr. Chairman, I would urge opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I would just remind people in 
this

[[Page 12122]]

Chamber that nuclear missiles coming into this country are the most 
dangerous weapons that we face, and GMD is the only system that we have 
to protect ourselves from it. I hope this amendment will be defeated, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. To be clear, Mr. Chairman, this amendment saves taxpayer 
money and actually reduces the deficit by over $100 million.
  I will be happy to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana 
(Mr. Visclosky).
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment and would 
want to make a couple of things clear to all of my colleagues.
  The fact is the administration did ask for money. For the ballistic 
missile defense midcourse section in the bill they asked for $1.033 
billion this year, fiscal year 2014. This is not absent an 
administration request.
  Secondly, the gentleman from Arizona said that the bad test and the 
problems that they indicate are not unresolvable. I would absolutely 
agree with the gentleman, but this is a procurement account. Let us 
resolve these problems before we procure something that last month has 
not worked so we don't have to pull them out of silos, we don't have to 
invest additional taxpayers' money, and we don't have to waste that 
hard-earned money.
  There are threats, and we ought to make sure the systems we deploy to 
protect our Nation work before we procure and deploy them.
  I applaud the gentleman for his amendment and strongly support it.
  Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman.
  It is just simple business sense. It doesn't save money to preorder 
something that you don't know works. You don't do that in business. We 
as a country shouldn't do it.
  This is not a theoretical discussion about advance purchasing or 
economies of scale. When things work there's a legitimate discussion 
about that. It is absolutely foolish--foolish--to throw good taxpayer 
money after bad before our system has proven to work to keep America 
safe.
  I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment and yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado 
will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 30, line 21, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $85,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  This amendment simply reduces Research Development Test & Evaluation 
funds for the new Ohio-class nuclear-armed submarine by 10 percent. 
Bear in mind, we are facing 10 percent sequestration cuts over the next 
decade. This will help the Navy plan for the likely effects of 
sequestration by cutting Cold War weapons rather than what the military 
really needs.
  These replacement submarines are unaffordable and will weaken the 
surface Navy. They are expected to cost $6 billion per boat on average 
with a plan to procure 12 of them.
  According to a report from the Arms Control Association, the 
operating cost of this replacement will be $347 billion lifetime. Even 
the Navy's own shipbuilding plan for fiscal year 2014 said:

       Replacing the Ohio-class submarines will have a 
     disproportionate impact on Navy shipbuilding plans.

  It comes at the expense of other shipbuilding abilities and naval 
readiness. There are far more effective job creation plans than to 
undertake this initiative.
  Our amendment offers a more balanced approach. We can easily afford 
to phase down or slow the replacement submarine program. The Navy can 
deploy 1,000 nuclear warheads on its submarines--as planned under the 
New START Treaty--with eight Ohio-class submarines, which means this 
modest cut can be easily handled.
  The Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have determined that the 
United States can provide for its security with fewer nuclear weapons. 
Yet nuclear acquisition programs are racing to preserve the current 
size of today's nuclear force.
  Instead of wasting billions of dollars on weapons the Pentagon says 
it will not need, we should realign our budgets with the reality that 
the United States plans to reduce its nuclear arsenal.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I remind my colleagues that we have 
already cut the defense budget pretty drastically, and nuclear weapons 
exist in today's world. I might not like it, you might not like it, we 
might wish they didn't exist, but they do exist.
  Because nuclear weapons exist in this world, we need to have the 
ability to defend against them and also deter their use. That is 
important to our national security.
  We do that through what we call the nuclear triad. We have the 
capability to launch nuclear missiles from silos that are based on 
land, we have the ability to launch nuclear-capable missiles from 
airplanes, we also have the ability to launch nuclear-capable missiles 
from submarines that are somewhere in these vast oceans.
  Of those three of the triad, the nuclear submarine, or the submarine 
with nuclear capability, is the most survivable because you can blow up 
a silo, you can shoot down an airplane, but it is almost impossible to 
find a submarine somewhere in the ocean that has this nuclear 
capability. Because it is the most survivable, then it is the best 
deterrent, because we know what it can do and our enemies know what it 
can do.
  Right now, we are planning to replace what is called the Ohio-class 
submarines to continue this capability. This is a capability that has 
kept us safe for the last 60 years. It is still important to our long-
term national security. If we adopt this amendment, we will begin to 
cripple this capability, and that is bad for our national security.
  I would urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.
  I would like to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  I'd like to just sort of add a few points to the gentleman's prior 
comments.
  First of all, the fleet is not being replaced one to one--the current 
fleet size is 14, and the new fleet will be 12. The program has already 
been delayed by 2 years because of earlier reductions in the defense 
budget. That 2-year delay is going to push us right up to 2021, which 
is when the aging fleet which is in play right now is going to start 
being decommissioned over time in terms of the reduction. Because of 
investment in design and development, which is what this amendment is 
focused on, we have saved $2 billion per vessel from where the Navy 
started when this project first commenced a number of years ago. It was 
$7 billion,

[[Page 12123]]

and we are down to $5 billion per boat in terms of the projected costs 
that the Navy has actually come forward with.
  I would just lastly note that the strategic review, which has been 
done under Secretary Gates and under Secretary Hagel, has repeatedly 
put SSBN replacement at the absolute apex in terms of national defense 
priorities, again, for a lot of the reasons the prior speaker 
indicated. Sea-based nuclear deterrence fits in perfectly well with the 
START Treaty, but as for the math of eight subs for 1,000 warheads, if 
you're going to have sailors being back home after deployment and if 
you're going to have repairs and maintenance, you'll need 12 as a bare 
minimum--a far cry from the Cold War days when 41 for Freedom was 
actually the size of this fleet.
  We are now down to the bare bones, and we should not cut it any 
further. I would oppose the amendment.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
  Mr. KILMER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise not only as the Representative of the area that 
includes Naval Base Kitsap, which is the home port of eight SSBNs and 
60 percent of the Navy's SSBN force, but I rise with a nonparochial 
interest as well.
  I am in opposition to this amendment because we know the SSBNs, or 
the Ohio-class subs, have been a pillar of our national defense for 
over three decades. These subs and their crews act as peacekeepers 
around the world every single day. They are amongst our most 
significant assets for a continued forward-presence and are a strategic 
deterrent around the world. Our country, our Navy, and our sailors 
cannot afford to delay the recapitalization of this platform.
  While I thank the gentleman from Oregon for bringing this forward, I 
urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon has 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I listened to my good friend from Florida, and I 
agree in terms of the necessity of having a strong nuclear deterrent, 
but he just ticked off that we would still have the air-based bombers 
and we would have land-based missiles. Even with eight nuclear 
submarines, we would have more than enough capacity.
  Now, the historic arguments, I think, are a little bit distorted. 
Each of these new submarines carries 16 to 20 missiles. Each missile 
today carries four to five nuclear warheads, each 20 times more 
powerful than the bombs that decimated Hiroshima. One of these 
submarines--two, three, four--is adequate to serve as a deterrent for 
anybody going forward, especially when we have our air- and land-based 
in addition to this.
  We have a deterrent that will make a difference to anybody as we are 
moving now to scale down the overall number of warheads, because who is 
it that we are deterring? North Korea? It doesn't yet have a missile 
that can even get to us, one, and a fraction of the firepower would 
destroy it. We could wreck China. We could decimate the Soviet Union. 
Deterrence is alive and well with a fraction of this, but embarking on 
a program to spend hundreds of billions of dollars--freezing us in time 
with, as I mentioned, $347 billion going forward--is foolish. Every 
independent analysis suggests that we will be better off in going 
forward with being able to right-size the nuclear deterrent. Even the 
1,000 is probably more than we need today.
  If we can't come to grips with the fact that we are spending hundreds 
of billions of dollars on things that don't make us any safer, that we 
can't afford, and that come at the expense of operational activities 
for our military that do matter, we are going to be trapped in this 
downward budget spiral, wasting tax dollars, not making America safer, 
not making it stronger, and not being able to have resources for things 
that would be of a higher priority for our military.
  Now, notwithstanding all of the hyperbole here, this is a modest 10 
percent reduction in the development resources. It's not going to stop 
our going forward, but it will be a signal to maybe take a deep breath 
and look at how we do this most effectively. I would strongly urge the 
approval of this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will 
be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Pocan

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 30, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $12,010,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to introduce an amendment to 
the Defense appropriations bill, and I want to thank Chairman Young and 
Ranking Member Visclosky for their efforts on this important 
legislation.
  My amendment would help improve the safety of advanced batteries, 
which are critical to both our new energy economy as well as to our 
current and future Department of Defense missions.
  Advanced energy technologies not only produce good-paying, high-
quality American jobs, but they also reduce our dependence on foreign 
oil, protect the environment, and lead to the advancements of new 
energy-efficient sources that are more effective. Thus, it is no 
surprise that our military requires this type of innovative technology 
to meet its expanding needs. Longer lasting energy sources mean our 
military's transportation and weapons systems are more effective in the 
field and limit safety risks that arise from refueling or recharging. 
More efficient energy capabilities mean a more efficient, more 
effective, and safer military.
  On that front, lithium-ion batteries represent some of the most 
significant clean energy advancements of our recent history: they 
contain no toxic chemicals; they have up to three times the performance 
capabilities of other battery products; and they are required for many 
of the military's next generation weapons systems. Their need will only 
increase, but as often is the case with new technologies, improvements 
need to be made in order to ensure their safe and effective use.
  Current lithium-ion batteries can cause violent fires with extreme 
smoke and high temperatures that are potentially catastrophic, 
especially on ships. As a result of these safety concerns, the 
acceptance and adoption of many lithium-ion-powered Navy systems under 
development are greatly delayed, thus greatly limiting our ability to 
respond to emerging threats.
  None of us here want to have any members of our military in danger, 
but we don't have to choose between improving our operational 
capabilities and keeping our courageous servicemembers safe. We are not 
far away from these types of advancements. New research has produced 
high-temperature material compounds that can significantly extend the 
maximum temperatures at which the batteries can safely operate.
  We need to continue to develop and test these innovative compounds 
that require further research and development support. That is why I 
introduced this budget-neutral amendment, which I am proud to have 
introduced with

[[Page 12124]]

Congressman Cardenas--to provide for the necessary funding for 
research, development, and testing to improve the safety of advanced 
batteries.
  I now yield 2 minutes to my friend from California, Congressman 
Cardenas.
  Mr. CARDENAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of Congressman 
Pocan's amendment, which increases the Navy Research, Testing, 
Development, and Evaluation account by $10 million. This would support 
research, improving the safety of advanced batteries, specifically 
lithium-ion batteries. This amendment does not add new funding to the 
bill.
  Lithium-ion is the present and future of our energy storage 
technology. This technology is critical to U.S. military personnel for 
communications, navigation, and vehicles on land and in the sea, air, 
and space. It is also important to many other sectors of the economy, 
including to the utility companies, transportation, aviation, 
aerospace, and medical devices.
  As we have seen with recent airliner incidents, we can do more to 
address the safety of these batteries. Without improving that safety, 
we cannot fully realize the potential of lithium-ion technology. 
Without realizing that potential, we cannot improve our production 
capability here in the United States of America.
  The global market for lithium batteries was worth more than $11 
billion in 2012, and it is expected to double to $22 billion by 2016. 
Right now, the U.S. has a very small market share of the lithium-ion 
industry. The bulk of the industry is in Japan, China, and Korea. 
Investments like this are critical to growing the U.S. industrial base 
and in creating middle class manufacturing jobs. Funding research and 
development for this cutting-edge technology can ensure that the 
lithium-ion industry grows right here in America. With that growth 
comes more government and commercial applications.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. As an electrical 
engineer myself, I am very, very proud of the innovation of the United 
States of America, but little by little, we see that slipping away to 
other countries. Yet, at the same time, if we just invest a little, 
this $10 million will yield billions of dollars in the future.
  Mr. POCAN. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I certainly appreciate what my colleague from 
Wisconsin is trying to do with his amendment. As a former chairman and 
ranking member on the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, I 
certainly attach great importance to battery research. Mr. 
Frelinghuysen is on the floor as well, who chairs Energy and Water.
  The concern I do have is to make sure that we are organized as the 
Federal Government on this research and that we are looking at the 
appropriate expenditure in the appropriate places for the funds.
  One example I simply would give is that, in this 2014 fiscal year's 
Energy and Water appropriations bill, $24 million was provided to the 
Joint Center for Energy Research, a DOE energy innovative hub. This 
hub, which team includes five of the national laboratories and several 
major research universities, is seeking new technologies to move in the 
direction that my colleague supports.
  So I do appreciate his long-term goal. Obviously, we have to reduce 
our dependency on carbon fossil fuel from a national security 
perspective, but, again, I want to make sure that we are cautious as 
far as where and how much of this money we can effectively spend in the 
coming fiscal year.
  I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
  Is there some movement to withdraw this?
  Mr. POCAN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. POCAN. If I understand correctly, the chairman and the ranking 
member have said we can continue to have this conversation. In 
recognition of that, I would be glad at this time to withdraw my 
amendment.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I look forward to working with the gentleman.


                 Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Nugent

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 31, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,500,000)''.
       Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $12,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Nugent) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Chairman, it's not every day I get to stand up here 
in front of the House and talk about a government program that is 
actually doing well and running ahead of schedule, but that's what 
brings me here today.
  The Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Missile Project, or 
CHAMP for short, is an Air Force program to develop a capability to 
disrupt or eliminate an adversary's electronics without causing 
physical destruction to people or facilities. The only real question 
with CHAMP is what vehicle to use to deliver that microwave to the 
intended target.
  As it turns out, we have an available stockpile of cruise missiles 
which are expensive to build and for which we have no other use. 
Fitting CHAMP into our existing cruise missiles is far cheaper than 
trying to construct a new vehicle just for that purpose. My amendment, 
which is fully offset, would provide $10.5 million toward that end.
  By making this investment now, we can ensure that CHAMP will be able 
to put this weapon in the field years ahead of schedule and at a lower 
cost, while also continuing to develop a longer-term solution. It's a 
shame that fixing every government program isn't as simple as this.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I rise in opposition because of where the funds for 
the gentleman's amendment are coming from.
  The amendment would use funds from a committee priority, the Defense 
Rapid Innovation program. This program emphasizes technology 
development issues done primarily through small businesses.
  Certainly, in my short time as ranking member on this subcommittee, I 
have been impressed by the lack of a true small business program at the 
Department of Defense, despite their protestations. DOD's track record 
of support for small businesses must be improved for many reasons, not 
the least of which is what small businesses provide to solve major 
issues for the Department. In the 2 years of program execution so far, 
fiscal years 2011 and 2012, the Department of Defense has received over 
3,000 proposals for funding. This includes 2,200 proposals from small 
businesses across America for fiscal year 2012 funding for completion 
and execution this year.
  Again, my concern is where the money is coming from in this 
amendment, and I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Chairman, all I can tell you is this: the offset from 
the Rapid Innovation Fund--currently the outlay rate, I think, for the 
first year was 43 percent from that fund.
  This is a ready project. This is actually one that the Air Force has 
tested in a positive manner with positive results in regards to 
actually eliminating

[[Page 12125]]

a threat without destroying a building or without destroying lives. If 
we had something like this when we went into Iraq or that area, we 
possibly could have done something without having to rebuild an entire 
infrastructure while still doing what we needed to do to be able to do 
our military mission.
  Mr. Chairman, all I can tell you is that it is, in fact, a program 
that is working. It just needs a delivery vehicle. This is offset in 
regards to no additional spending that would be required, other than 
what comes from that fund that is sitting there. That's what that rapid 
development fund was actually designed for.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Nugent).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will 
be postponed.


             Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Heck of Nevada

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $15,000,000) (increased by $15,000,000)''.
       Page 86, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $15,000,000)''.
       Page 86, line 22, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $15,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Nevada (Mr. Heck) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada.
  Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, since its inception, the Iron Dome 
system has achieved tremendous success defeating rockets fired at the 
State of Israel from the Gaza Strip, and I am pleased that the 
underlying bill supports the President's request and fully funds this 
critical program. However, despite significant investments in this 
vital program, the United States has no rights to any of the 
proprietary information associated with that system.
  My amendment would provide $15 million for the Israeli Iron Dome 
short-range defense system to initiate co-production of missile 
interceptors in the United States. This is $15 million, in addition to 
the funds appropriated to support Israel's Iron Dome program, to help 
ensure that the U.S. has a role in future production and can leverage 
the technology that we have invested in. Specifically, these funds will 
support the infrastructure, tooling, transferring data, special test 
equipment, and related components for U.S. production.
  This amendment will help stabilize U.S. manufacturers who are facing 
an uncertain future with U.S. military procurement shrinking in the 
face of sequestration. By increasing opportunities for U.S. 
manufacturers, we will help support our Nation's struggling economy, 
while supporting and creating critical jobs here at home.
  This funding will also provide a second source of production for 
Israel, who can leverage the rate-production capabilities of American 
firms to ensure that necessary quantities of Iron Dome interceptors are 
fielded as rapidly as possible. Providing this funding will ensure that 
our most critical ally in the Middle East, Israel, has the necessary 
capacity to defend itself against rocket attacks launched by Hamas.
  In March of 2013, during President Obama's trip to Israel, the 
commander of the Israeli Air Defense Command, Brigadier General Shohat, 
spoke of the need for U.S. co-production of Iron Dome missile 
interceptors.
  In response to concerns about future missile interceptor shortfalls 
and the desire to increase Israel's Iron Dome deployment from 5 to 13 
batteries, the general stated:

       What would be impacted is the pace at which we equip 
     ourselves. Bottom line, I need as many air defense units as 
     possible and as quickly as possible.

  By accepting this amendment, the House will ensure that Israel has 
the capability, as well as the capacity, to defend itself.
  Further, in written testimony provided to the House Armed Services 
Strategic Forces Subcommittee, Director of the Missile Defense Agency 
Vice Admiral James Syring indicated that the Missile Defense Agency was 
actively seeking Iron Dome co-production opportunities and was 
negotiating to obtain available technical data packages and data 
rights. This amendment will ensure that funding is available to move 
forward on this important effort.
  During consideration of H.R. 1960, the National Defense Authorization 
Act of 2014, by the House Armed Services Committee, I offered an 
amendment to authorize funding for co-production of Iron Dome, which 
was unanimously agreed to. Additionally, the House of Representatives 
authorized this funding when it voted to pass the fiscal year 2014 NDAA 
last month.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, in order to offset the cost of this co-
production, my amendment reduces two applied research programs within 
the Defense-wide RDT&E. Specifically, it reduces applied research in 
joint munitions technology by $5 million and reduces funding for 
applied research in chemical and biological defense programs by $10 
million. These modest reductions conform to the funding levels 
authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act and ensure that 
these programs still receive adequate and appropriate funding.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment ensures that Israel has the capacity to 
defend itself while providing the U.S. the ability to leverage our 
significant investments in Israel's Iron Dome short-range rocket 
defense program.
  I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment and 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time to speak on the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, this Israeli cooperative program is 
an important program, and the Israelis are very good and loyal allies 
of ours. So we support the gentleman's amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Heck).
  The amendment was agreed to.


  Amendment No. 19 Offered by Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I have an 
amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman 
from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Mexico.
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, In 1990, the 
existing U.S. satellite-communications capacity would not support the 
warfighters during the first gulf war. The United States made an urgent 
attempt to launch an additional Defense Satellite Communication System 
III spacecraft to support the war effort; but it was not until February 
11, 1992, more than a year after the war ended, that the mission was 
finally launched.
  In nearly every national space policy guidance document, resiliency 
and responsiveness are key objectives in global communications, 
navigation,

[[Page 12126]]

and guided munitions, all of which rely on satellites that provide 
game-changing advantages on the battlefield. Before Operationally 
Responsive Space, ORS, was established, the capacity to rapidly develop 
and deploy satellites was inadequate. ORS's mission is to respond to 
emerging, persistent, or unanticipated needs and quickly deploy cost-
effective satellites to provide transformational advantages on the 
battlefield. ORS has the ability to launch field-ready satellites 
within just a few days or weeks. It also rapidly develops, delivers, 
and employs new capabilities in a few months to less than a year.
  Increased speed for the delivery of space assets not only helps to 
close gaps in the United States' space systems capacity; it can also 
improve resiliency and reconstitute satellites lost to countermeasures. 
In 2007, China used a ground-based missile to destroy one of its own 
satellites, demonstrating their capacity to target our satellites and 
space-defense systems. Russia is currently developing a sea-based 
missile and space-defense system. As other countries modernize their 
military, the threat level to our communications, navigation, and 
guided munitions satellites intensifies.
  ORS has also demonstrated the ability to cost effectively deploy 
space assets. General Schwartz said:

       ORS is exactly what we need, innovation and greater 
     efficiency as we contend with ongoing fiscal constraints and 
     changing space posture.

  Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley called ORS ``critical to 
our Nation's national security posture, and we need to proceed at the 
speed of need.''
  Eliminating ORS would cut the very programs that give our Nation's 
warfighters their military asymmetric advantage in space. The growing 
need for information dominance is driving a remarkable transition in 
space systems. ORS is integral to maintaining our advantage in space. 
Our amendment reserves $10 million from RDT&E for this program.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the chair and the ranking member, and I look 
forward to continuing to work on this important issue.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. I yield to the gentleman 
from Indiana.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman yielding 
and would point out to my colleagues that on this particular issue she 
has been dogged.
  I do believe that this is one of a number of items within the bill 
where reasonable people can have a disagreement. Certainly the position 
that my colleague has from New Mexico is that she believes she has the 
most cost-effective approach that the United States Air Force should 
take. The problem that we face on the subcommittee, given the financial 
and fiscal constraints we have, is that the Air Force did not ask for 
funding for this program for fiscal year 2013 or fiscal year 2014. So 
we deferred.
  I appreciate her concern, and I appreciate her raising it to the body 
without making any representations as to what the future holds, but 
again would commend her for her work on this program and again her 
doggedness on behalf of it.
  I appreciate the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my 
amendment.


                 Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Nadler

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 20 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 31, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $70,200,000)''.
       Page 157, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $70,200,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Nadler) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.

                              {time}  1700

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Nadler-Garamendi-Polis amendment 
to eliminate additional funding for a new, costly, unproven, and 
unnecessary missile defense site. Our amendment would cut $70 million 
that was added by the Appropriations Committee for an east coast 
missile defense system that the Pentagon says it does not want or need.
  In a June 10 letter to Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl 
Levin, Vice Admiral James Syring, director of the Missile Defense 
Agency and Lieutenant General Richard Formica, Commander, Joint 
Functional Command for Integrated Missile Defense, unequivocally 
stated:

       There is no validated military requirement to deploy an 
     east coast missile defense site.

  Admiral Syring told the House Armed Services Committee earlier this 
year that he would not be able to use additional funds for an east 
coast site this year because the Pentagon has only begun to study the 
concept. And the Pentagon already has the funding it needs for this 
study in FY 2014.
  Furthermore, the technology is still unproven at this time. There 
have been no successful intercept tests for the past 5 years of the 
system that might be deployed on the east coast. The recent test 
failure of the ground-based mid-course system that would be deployed on 
the east coast is another reason not to rush forward with deployment.
  In a time of budget deficits and looming sequester of funds, we 
cannot afford to spend money on a program that the military says it 
does not yet need and does not yet work. The Pentagon says the current 
system, based in Alaska and California, is sufficient to defend the 
entire continental United States against a limited attack from North 
Korea and Iran.
  The CBO says an east coast base would cost approximately $3.5 billion 
over the next 5 years. Admiral Syring and General Formica said there 
are currently more cost-effective and less expensive alternatives to 
improving the defense of the U.S. homeland than an east coast missile 
site. It is a pure waste of money to deploy a missile defense site on 
the east coast before a need for such a site is identified and before 
the interceptors can be proved effective and suitable in operationally 
realistic tests. So we should not have this funding now.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                                                      U.S. Senate,


                                  Committee on Armed Services,

                                     Washington, DC, June 6, 2013.
     Vice Admiral James D. Syring, USN,
     Director, Missile Defense Agency, Department of Defense, Ft. 
         Belvoir, VA.
     Lieutenant General Richard P. Formica, USA,
     Commander, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, 
         Huntsville, AL.
       Dear Vice Admiral Syring and Lieutenant General Formica: 
     Following the briefing you provided earlier this week, I am 
     writing to request. your responses to the following questions 
     regarding possible future options for homeland ballistic 
     missile defense:
       1. Is there currently a validated military requirement to 
     deploy an East Coast missile defense site?
       2. Do you favor Congress mandating the deployment of an 
     East Coast site before the completion of the pending 
     Environmental Impact Statement required by section 227 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal-Year 2013 
     (Public Law 112-239)?
       3. At this time do you believe there is a more effective 
     and less expensive alternative to an East Coast missile 
     defense site that is also available sooner than deployment of 
     an East Coast missile defense site?
       I would appreciate your responses to these questions no 
     later than June 10, 2013, so that we may consider them for 
     our upcoming markup of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2014. I have written the questions in a way 
     that will hopefully facilitate a prompt and unclassified 
     response.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Carl Levin,
                                                         Chairman.

[[Page 12127]]

     
                                  ____
                                        Department of Defense,

                                    Washington, DC, June 10, 2013.
     Hon. Carl Levin,
     Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Levin: Thank you for your June 6, 2013, 
     letter requesting additional information regarding a 
     potential East Coast Missile Field. The Missile Defense 
     Agency and the Joint Functional Component Command for 
     Integrated Missile Defense jointly offer the following 
     response:
       1. Is there currently a validated military requirement to 
     deploy an East Coast missile defense site?
       Response: There is no validated military requirement to 
     deploy an East Coast missile defense site.
       2. Do you favor Congress mandating the deployment of an 
     East Coast site before the completion of the pending 
     Environmental Impact Statement required by Section 227 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 
     (Public Law 112-239)?
       Response: No. We support completing the requirements 
     mandated by Section 227 of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239).
       3. At this time do you believe there is a more cost 
     effective and less expensive alternative to an East Coast 
     missile defense site that is also available sooner than 
     deployment of an East Coast missile defense site?
       Response: Yes. Investment in Ballistic Missile Defense 
     System (BMDS) discrimination and sensor capabilities would 
     result in more cost-effective near-term improvements to 
     homeland missile defense. The Department of Defense is 
     evaluating potential sensors enhancements that could be 
     pursued to improve the BMDS kill chain and increase threat 
     discrimination in addition to the evaluation of an additional 
     interceptor site. While a potential East Coast site would add 
     operational capability it would also come at significant 
     materiel development and service sustainment cost. This 
     evaluation, and others, will serve to inform decisions on our 
     future BMDS architecture and budget requests.
       Thank you for the opportunity to inform the Committee in 
     advance of its Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense 
     Authorization Act deliberations. If you have additional 
     questions, please have your staff contact * * *
           Very Respectfully,
     J.D. Syring,
       Vice Admiral, USN, Director, Missile Defense Agency.
     Richard P. Formica,
       Lieutenant General, U.S. Army, Commander, Joint Functional 
     Command for Integrated Missile Defense.

  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.
  I rise in opposition to the amendment from the gentleman from New 
York. Two Presidents and three Secretaries of Defense recognize the 
advantage of an additional missile defense site for a more effective 
defense against long-range missile threats from the Middle East.
  President Bush wanted to deploy 10 ground-based interceptors in 
Poland. President Obama wanted to deploy 24 SM-3 block IIB missiles in 
Poland. I would remind my colleague from New York that the additional 
idea of a homeland defense site is bipartisan and was supported by 
President Obama as recently as this March. But President Obama changed 
his mind with the cancellation of the SM-3 block IIB missiles intended 
for Poland in 2020, and now we no longer have a third homeland defense 
site which the Obama administration supported prior to March 15.
  The termination of the SM-3 block IIB missile intended for Poland now 
means defense of the homeland against ICBM threats from the Middle East 
will not be as strong as originally sought by this President--that's 
this President, Mr. Chairman--President Obama, who has cut missile 
defense every time he has had the opportunity since he started in the 
face of a growing threat, while the centrifuges in Iran continue to 
spin.
  The warfighters agree an east coast site adds to the defense of the 
United States. General Jacoby, NORTHCOM Commander, said:

       What a third site gives me, whether it's on the east coast 
     or an alternate location, would be increased battle space; 
     that means an increased opportunity for me to engage threats 
     from either Iran or North Korea.

  Mr. Chairman, it's a very simple matter of telemetry and geography. 
The east coast site would allow us much greater battle space and not 
have to make our West Coast sites travel the entire length of the 
continent in order to engage a potential incoming Iranian missile.
  Mr. Chairman, I continue to sometimes be amazed. This is the most 
dangerous kind of threat that we face in America. The first purpose of 
this body is to make sure that the country's defenses are taken care of 
and that we provide for the national security of this country. And yet 
in a growing threat environment, by colleagues on the other side 
continue to want to cut missile defense. Mr. Chairman, I would urge 
defeat of this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Garamendi).
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman and my good friends who serve on these 
committees with me, this is not about the President and this is not 
about missile defense. This is about the unnecessary expenditure of a 
very important national asset--our money.
  Testimony given in committee indicates that we may or may not need an 
east coast missile defense site. And we also know that the current 
missiles that are being used for these anti-ballistic missiles don't 
work. At least there's a failure, and there's been repeated failures 
just in the boost system, let alone if we can hit Iraq with a rock. So 
the problem here is this money should not be spent now for this site.
  It is absolutely clear: the Department of Defense from last year's 
budget and appropriation has sufficient money to determine where to 
locate a site. With regard to the cancellation of the missile that was 
discussed a few minutes ago, it doesn't fit in the existing sites, and 
so they canceled it because it doesn't fit in the hole in the ground. 
So what are we doing here? This is $70 million, not a vast amount of 
money when considering the appropriation for the Department of Defense, 
but that's $70 million that could be used to--well, how about 
protecting a levee of some city in the United States? It could be used 
to much better effect.
  There was another amendment that I understand that failed that took 
another $100 million or so out of this particular thing. We ought to be 
taking what money's available and putting it into something that 
actually might work, which would be directed energy. But an amendment 
for directed energy was refused an opportunity to be heard on the 
floor. So we really ought to be thinking seriously about how we move 
forward with this. I have great respect for my colleagues, but we ought 
not just throw money after other money.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the Strategic 
Forces Subcommittee.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. I thank the gentleman, and I, too, rise in 
opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, according to the Missile Defense Agency estimates 
provided in 2012, the cost of 20 silo GBI sites, that's including 
missiles, is approximately $3 billion and could be built over a 5-6 
year period of time. This cost is almost half the funding the 
administration has stripped from MDA in the past 2 years.
  These funds are critical today. Iran will not slow down its ballistic 
missile program just because the gentleman wants to cut the funds for 
our defense. They are testing rocket engines and missiles now.
  The Department of Defense tells us also that Iran continues to 
advance its space launch and longer-range ballistic missile 
capabilities. Iran has used a space-launch vehicle, the Safir-2, to 
place a satellite in orbit, demonstrating some of the key technologies 
required for an ICBM to be successfully developed.
  This was reaffirmed recently by the latest biennial report from 
NASIC, the leading experts on ballistic missile intelligence. General 
Jacoby, Commander of the U.S. Northern Command stated:

       We should consider that Iran has capability in the next few 
     years of flight testing ICBM-capable technologies.


[[Page 12128]]


  And:

       The Iranians are intent on developing an ICBM.

  The Missile Defense Agency's own illustrative briefings to the House 
Armed Services Committee have shown that MDA planned to spend funds--
like those appropriated in Chairman Young's mark--while site selection 
and EIS processes were underway. These funds absolutely can be spent 
today.
  That the administration didn't request them is dispositive of 
nothing. Chairman Young showed leadership in adding these funds to 
match those provided by the FY14 NDAA, and I thank him for that 
support. I urge defeat of the Nadler-Garamendi-Polis amendment.
  Mr. NADLER. I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Garamendi).
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I have great respect for my colleagues on the 
subcommittee. However, the argument that has been made is incomplete. 
We're talking about whether we're going to spend an additional sum of 
money this next year on a program that, A, has large questions about 
whether it works; and, B, the military doesn't need the money right 
now. If the gentlemen remember the committee hearing, Mr. Chairman, the 
general said he didn't need more money now. He had sufficient money 
from this year's appropriations for next year carrying on the studies 
that are necessary as to where to locate the site. It may not be on the 
east coast; it may be elsewhere.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman said that the 
testimony was that they did not need the money today for additional 
testing, but they do need the money today for deployment, Mr. Chairman. 
This administration, throughout its tenure, has weakened our missile 
defense capabilities, which protect us against the most dangerous 
weapons in the history of humanity. We should not continue to go down 
that road. I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, the question is, will we waste the money? We are told 
by the director of the Missile Defense Agency and the general 
commanding the Joint Functional Command that they cannot use the money. 
There is no validated military requirement to deploy an east coast 
missile defense site, and he would not be able to use additional funds 
for an east coast site this year because they have only begun to study 
the concept.
  It may be that in the future we may want an east coast site. But to 
appropriate this money now is a pure waste of money because now they 
are simply studying the concept. They can't spend it; they probably 
won't spend it. Why waste the money? I urge people to vote for this 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York 
will be postponed.


              Amendment No. 21 Offered by Ms. Shea-Porter

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21 printed in 
House Report 113-170.
  Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 34, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $4,500,000) (increased by $4,500,000)''.
       Page 34, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $4,500,000) (increased by $4,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman 
from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Hampshire.
  Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Chairman, today I'm offering an amendment with 
my colleague, Congressman LoBiondo, to support veterans with PTSD and 
traumatic brain injury, or TBI.
  This amendment designates $4.5 million within the peer-reviewed 
Psychological Health/Traumatic Brain Injury Research account for a 3-
year study to evaluate the therapeutic service dog training program 
currently operating at the National Intrepid Center of Excellence and 
Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.
  This innovative servicemember dog-training program is designed to a 
safe, effective, nondrug intervention to treat the symptoms of PTSD and 
TBI. Servicemembers report improvement in their PTSD or TBI symptoms 
when participating in a therapeutic service dog training program.
  The servicemen and -women involved in this program report a number of 
positive results, including lower levels of depression, improved self-
control, improved sleep patterns, a greater sense of purpose, better 
integration into their communities, pain reduction, and improved 
parenting skills. This year's NDAA House report directed the Secretary 
of Defense to conduct whatever studies are necessary to evaluate this 
promising program. This amendment provides the resources for such a 
study.
  There is now considerable anecdotal evidence that training service 
dogs reduces the PTSD symptoms of their warrior trainers, and that the 
presence of the dogs increases the sense of wellness in servicemembers 
and their families.

                              {time}  1715

  The most eloquent testimonials are from servicemember trainees 
themselves. One said:

       It's been great working with the dogs. They're helping me 
     with my depression, anxiety and sleep. With a dog at my side, 
     my stress measurements returned to normal for the first time.

  Another:

       It's great knowing that I'm helping to train a service dog 
     for a servicemember who has physical disabilities.

  Another:

       It's hard for me to put into words how very important 
     working with these dogs has been to me. Working with the dogs 
     gave me a purpose again and a way to continue to give back to 
     soldiers. Training these dogs helps me rebuild my confidence 
     level and to feel that I'm functioning as an effective member 
     of the Army and of society.

  And one more:

       The dog I'm training bonded quickly with my daughter and 
     me. The dog allowed us to connect in a very positive way. 
     Working with the dog has taught me patience, which also 
     carries over to being a parent.

  And finally:

       Going out into crowded public places has been very hard for 
     me. However, to train a service dog, you have to lead them 
     confidently through places like grocery stores and on 
     underground trains. I find that while I'm teaching the young 
     dogs how to navigate these places, I am much more comfortable 
     as well. I'm even learning how to enjoy interaction with 
     strangers who approach me to talk about the dog.

  The soldier also noted:

       Being allowed to sleep with a dog that I'm training has 
     been very helpful. I had been only managing to sleep a couple 
     of hours a night before being cleared to have a dog spend the 
     night with me. That night I slept almost 6 hours and I had no 
     nightmares. I awake so much more refreshed. My wife has noted 
     the improvement as well.

  The dogs that these servicemembers with PTSD train become highly 
skilled service dogs for veterans with disabilities, while the Warrior-
trainers reap the therapeutic benefits of training them. This amendment 
is a win-win-win. It's good for returning vets, it helps combat PTSD, 
and it doesn't add a dime to the deficit.
  I and Congressman LoBiondo urge you to support these promising 
research efforts.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time to speak on the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.

[[Page 12129]]


  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We're pleased to accept the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 22 Offered by Mr. O'Rourke

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 22 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike section 8058.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. O'Rourke) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, my amendment aims to provide the Department 
of Defense with additional budgetary flexibility, should they need it, 
to guarantee that the resources are available to properly maintain 
family housing at our military installations.
  Section 8058 of this legislation prohibits funds from being used to 
repair or maintain military family housing. My amendment would strike 
that provision and, I believe, provide needed flexibility at a time of 
austere budgets and sequester.
  I represent Fort Bliss, one of the largest installations in the Army. 
There are over 3,700 homes on Fort Bliss, and my community, El Paso, 
Texas, takes immense pride in creating a high quality of life for all 
those who serve at Fort Bliss.
  We have an obligation to our servicemembers and their families to 
ensure they have first-rate housing. It is good for morale, and it is 
the right thing to do.
  I understand that funds for repair and maintenance are included in 
the Military Construction-VA appropriations bill. My goal is simply to 
do everything we can to protect our servicemembers and fulfill our 
responsibility to them.
  I know that the chair and the ranking member share my goal. I am 
prepared to withdraw my amendment, and I would hope the chair and 
ranking member would be willing to work with me going forward to 
continue providing our servicemembers and their families first-rate 
housing.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. O'Rourke).
  The amendment was rejected.


                 Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Moran

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 23 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike sections 8107, 8108, and 8109.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Moran) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes to begin with.
  Mr. Chairman, the political and legal expediency of the detention 
center at Guantanamo, Cuba, has not been worth the cost to America's 
reputation around the world, nor to the erosion of our legal and 
ethical standards here at home.
  My amendment would enable the U.S. military to transfer or release 
the detainees who have been cleared by the intelligence community and 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff to their home countries and bring those not 
cleared for release to the United States to be charged, tried, and 
sentenced.
  Those who advocate the continuance of Guantanamo don't seem to 
realize that so many of the prisoners still held at Guantanamo were, in 
fact, wrongly captured. The majority never engaged in hostile actions 
against the United States or its allies.
  The fact is that we know today Guantanamo continues to serve as a 
rallying cry for extremists around the world; and until we transfer and 
try the detainees, there is no denying that Guantanamo is hurting our 
national security.
  We need to re-evaluate our approach to the long-term threat of 
terrorism and realize that policies that mock the concept of equal 
justice under the law, and that undermine our respect for human rights, 
make it more likely, rather than less likely, that we will be attacked 
again.
  How can we expect Americans held captive abroad to be accorded the 
right to be sentenced and brought to trial when we hold 166 prisoners 
in Guantanamo, without charge and without trial?
  Eighty-six percent of the Guantanamo detainees were captured in 
exchange for a bounty, in many cases a very large bounty that 
represented a whole year's pay for people turning them in. The majority 
of them, as I say, have never committed hostile acts against the U.S. 
or its coalition allies; and yet they have been held for more than 12 
years without charge.
  My colleagues like to argue that detaining or trying suspected 
terrorists in the U.S. would endanger national security, but that's 
simply not true. More than 400 defendants charged with terrorism crimes 
have been successfully convicted in the United States since 9/11, 
including a former Gitmo detainee who was tried in New York City, the 
Times Square Bomber; the Shoe Bomber, Zacarias Moussaoui, who conspired 
to kill innocent Americans on 
9/11. They've all been charged; they've all been tried; they've all 
been convicted--all of them here in the United States, and no security 
incidents.
  More than 300 individuals convicted of crimes of international 
terrorism are today incarcerated in 98 Federal prisons within the 
United States, with no escapes or attacks and attempts to free them.
  There are six Department of Defense facilities where Guantanamo 
detainees could be held in the United States that are currently only at 
48 percent capacity.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I'll yield myself another minute.
  Now, it should be said in the context of an appropriations bill how 
expensive it is to keep Guantanamo open. We're currently spending $1.6 
million per detainee, compared to $34,000 per inmate at a high-security 
Federal prison here in the United States.
  And in the defense authorization we just provided another $260 
million in operations costs and another $186 million for construction 
to continue this temporary facility, almost half a billion dollars. 
This does not make sense.
  And now we've got the hunger strikes because people see no future 
ahead of them. They're afraid that they'll be jailed indefinitely for 
charges that they can't even defend because they haven't been given the 
opportunity.
  That's not who we are as a Nation. We're a Nation of law. We're a 
Nation of respect for human life.
  But to hold these detainees and, in some cases, 46 of them are being 
tube-fed, strapped down for hours while a tube is inserted down their 
nose, that's not what we do.
  So let's stop it. Let's close down Guantanamo and do the right thing.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I would like to start by saying that Mr. Moran 
is a very important member of the Defense Subcommittee, and he and I 
have very few differences, except on this one issue where we have a 
strong disagreement.

[[Page 12130]]

  The language that is in the bill that he would strike is the same 
language that we've been carrying now since FY 2010, and it is the same 
language that was included in the National Defense Authorization Act 
that the House passed earlier this year.
  The provisions that we include ensure that the remaining Gitmo 
detainees who are judged as the most dangerous will never be released 
or otherwise brought into our homeland where U.S. citizens could be 
threatened.
  Second, they ensure that, prior to releasing a Guantanamo detainee to 
a foreign country, a careful and deliberate assessment must be made 
that the detainee is not likely to reengage in terrorist activities and 
the foreign government can maintain control over that individual.
  Unfortunately, we have already seen an alarmingly high rate for Gitmo 
detainees to return to the battlefield. These detainees have posed 
direct threats to U.S. personnel and U.S. interests, a threat that 
could only grow as we draw down from Afghanistan if they are able to 
establish safe havens to plot against the United States.
  The single greatest threat to the U.S. homeland and interests abroad 
currently is al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, a group established and 
run by two foreign Gitmo detainees that were released under a previous 
administration.
  The current law provisions in the bill reflect the right balance on 
this important issue, and I think a ``no'' vote is appropriate. A 
``no'' vote is keeping in context with the House position as has been 
stated many times over.
  And so rather than give these bad guys an opportunity to go back 
home, or to go back to some other country adjacent to their home, and 
allow them to get involved in recreating a danger, a threat to our 
troops and our interests, wherever they might be, I just think it's not 
smart to remove the language from the bill that we already have.
  So I oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Nadler), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.
  Mr. NADLER. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment which would remove 
the existing limitations on transferring detainees out of Guantanamo.
  Our Federal courts have a proven record of prosecuting terrorists, 
and our Federal prison system is already imprisoning hundreds of 
convicted terrorists in facilities here in the United States.

                              {time}  1730

  It makes no sense to have an external facility, especially one in 
Cuba, of all places. Guantanamo is a continuing stain on our national 
honor. It should be closed now. Of the 166 detainees at Guantanamo, 86 
have been cleared for release; that is to say, they have been found 
guilty of nothing and judged to pose no danger. There is no reason and 
no right for us to hold them further.
  The detainees will gain no additional rights by being held in the 
United States. The Supreme Court has ruled that detainees have the same 
constitutional rights at Guantanamo as they do here. We cannot hold 
people indefinitely. People may not be terrorists and may be guilty of 
nothing. We must restore who we are and vote for this amendment.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 15 seconds 
remaining.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
ranking member, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding, and I simply 
would reiterate that in my opening statements, I indicated that I do 
believe the language in the bill and the limitations are a mistake. 
Guantanamo Bay ought to be closed. It is not constructive. I do not 
believe at this point in time it is constitutional, and so I do support 
the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, these detainees are detained for 
a reason. The reason is they either hurt, killed, or threatened our 
American troops or our American interests. That's why they're at 
Guantanamo in the first place. It just doesn't seem right to me to send 
them back to the battlefield to threaten more troops, to threaten the 
lives of more soldiers. It's just not right, and it's not a good 
amendment.
  I suggest that we should defeat this amendment right where we stand, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Terry

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 24 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 126, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000,000)''.
       Page 134, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by 
     $2,600,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to represent Omaha and its 
surrounding areas. It has a magnificent base with extremely important 
missions. What that means is that I represent not only uniformed 
members who serve there, but civilian workers who work on that base 
also.
  Mr. Chairman, I can't go out in public without somebody coming up to 
me and saying, I'm one of the furloughed workers. I can't afford to 
lose those days. What are you going to do?
  Well, I think that's a legitimate ask of that person. Frankly, I 
can't go to a sporting event. Even in my own neighborhood there are 
people asking me what we're going to do to help them.
  Now, the answer here in this body has been, mostly, if the DOD really 
wanted to make their pay whole and not give them furlough dates, they 
could do that. This is a political move by the President. Well, Mr. 
Chairman, I'm not willing to play that level of politics with my 
constituents' pay.
  So what this amendment does is moves $2.6 billion out of the Afghan 
Security Forces account. It reduces that account from $7.7 billion to 
$5.1 billion, moving it to an account that can be used to supplement 
those wages and eliminate the furloughs of 55,000 civilian workers 
working on our bases across the country.
  Does this cure every furlough? No. But it does the vast majority, and 
it gives flexibility to the DOD to perhaps reduce the furloughs to the 
point where it is a negligible impact on 100 percent.
  Let's talk about this fund, because there seems to be some confusion 
about the fund.
  The Afghan Security Forces account is the fund of which the Special 
Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction, or SIGAR, has uncovered $2 
billion, Mr. Chairman, of waste, fraud, and abuse. This is that fund 
that has been in the paper a lot lately for building bases that nobody 
wanted and nobody is using. This is the fund that bought Russian 
helicopters for the Afghan military that no one knows how to fly and 
they're sitting there rusting. This is basically a type of slush fund 
to be used for special projects that accusations have been made are 
simply lining the pockets of some Afghan officials.
  So all we're doing is reducing the amount of proven fraud within this 
fund. The reality here is we reduce the fund and we save our own 
civilian employees that go to work every day but now have been told to 
stay home for a certain amount of days. We can protect

[[Page 12131]]

those workers. Let's focus on U.S. workers, those working on our bases. 
Let's make them the priority.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I rise to claim time in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Walberg). The gentleman from Indiana is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, given the time limitation, I would 
address the issue of furloughs that the gentleman makes.
  Furloughs are a result of the Budget Control Act that was passed in 
2011. It's the result of sequestration that occurred because of the 
adoption of that law. The gentleman who has offered the amendment voted 
for that act that has caused sequestration to occur and now is causing 
furloughs to take place.
  I would point out that I think it is patently wrong to carve out any 
class of Federal civilian employees to the detriment of others. I 
mentioned in my opening statement that I thought it was wrong that for 
the 4th year in a row we are not providing a pay raise for any Federal 
civilian employee at the Department of Defense, which essentially 
represents a revenue loss to those employees working for the people of 
this country of $437 million.
  So it is not a lack of sympathy for those who are losing a portion of 
that paycheck over and above that pay increase for the last 4 years 
that is the cause of my concern, but I would point out to all of my 
colleagues that other government agencies have also decided to use 
furloughs. And as the gentleman rightly pointed out, he doesn't solve 
all of those problems. They include the Department of Labor, the 
Internal Revenue Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, Housing 
and Urban Development, the Department of Justice, the Office of 
Management and Budget.
  While this bill under consideration doesn't fund these agencies, 
where is the outcry, where is the concern for those Federal employees, 
and who is speaking for them now?
  Three fiscal year 2014 appropriation bills have passed the House. 
While the Department of Veterans Affairs was exempted entirely from 
sequestration under the Budget Control Act that the gentleman voted 
for, no furlough exemptions were granted within the other two bills. 
There was no hedging of funds to avert furloughs for them for bills 
that have already been considered by this body and passed by this House 
without this type of exemption.
  Allowing exemptions for one agency is unfair to others--allowing 
exemptions that pit one agency against another agency and wrongfully 
determines the value of work performed by one Federal employee vis-a-
vis another depending on what department they work in. If we value the 
work of our government employees, we should seek to block all scheduled 
furloughs, not a select few. We should end sequestration. And I did not 
vote for the Budget Control Act.
  Until we fix this problem, the work of the government will not be 
done as efficiently and as effectively as possible. Maybe parts will 
not be bought; maybe maintenance will be deferred; maybe somebody is 
going to lose their job because a contract is not let; maybe someone is 
furloughed; but we should not temporarily fix one dislocation caused by 
sequestration that only defers decisions of significance that need to 
be made today, going forward.
  Again, I would strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I will be happy to yield to the chairman.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Can I ask how much time the gentleman has 
remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I don't have a lot of confidence that when the 
American troops are out of Afghanistan it's going to be any different 
than it was when the American troops went to Afghanistan. And we have 
paid a dear price for our involvement there, but I have the hope that 
maybe the Afghanistan Security Force will shape up and do what we think 
they should--and that is to keep al Qaeda and Hezbollah and all the 
other terrorist groups away from creating more trouble for the United 
States and becoming a breeding ground and training grounds. Therefore, 
I have to oppose the amendment. But I do not have a lot of confidence 
in that government and the Afghan Security Force.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Garamendi).
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, if you don't trust the Afghan 
Government, you should never give them $2.6 billion. This is on top of 
the $5 billion that they were to receive. This money was specifically 
added to the budget for the Afghan military to buy something--parts, 
airplanes. We have absolutely no idea what they're going to do with 
this money.
  We would never, under any circumstance, give our own military a $2.6 
billion blank check, but that's exactly what we're doing here. You're 
asking for fraud and abuse. We should bring this money back and make 
sure our own people are doing the work that the Defense Department 
needs.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  As the U.S. draws down forces--and I appreciate the chairman's 
remarks--for the post-2014 security environment, we should prepare to 
leave Afghanistan on positive terms. We should help repair a nation 
torn by years of war with the means to develop itself and to move 
beyond the past conflict. And so I am opposed to the means to finance 
the gentleman's amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, the issue before us is will you vote ``yes'' 
for our civilian employees working on the base or will you vote ``no,'' 
which says I support the waste, fraud, and abuse in this fund.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska 
will be postponed.

                              {time}  1745


              Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 25 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 126, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $600,000,000)''.
       Page 126, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $600,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Poe) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  My amendment cuts aid to Pakistan in this bill in half. This is the 
same amendment that passed this House last year by voice vote.
  Pakistan seems to be the Benedict Arnold nation in the list of 
countries that we call allies. They have proven to be deceptive, 
deceitful, and a danger to the United States.
  The day Osama bin Laden met his maker will go down in history as an 
important moment. Our manhunt did not end in a remote cave in the 
mountains, but in a palace in a bustling military town 35 miles from 
Islamabad. To think that the most senior levels of the Pakistani 
Government did not know he was there requires, as Secretary Clinton has 
said, the ``willing suspension of disbelief.''
  Soon after, our suspicions were confirmed. Instead of celebrating 
with us

[[Page 12132]]

the capture of the number one terrorist in the world, Pakistan arrested 
the one person that helped the United States capture Osama bin Laden. 
And last year, Pakistan sentenced Dr. Afridi to 33 years in prison.
  In February of 2012, a NATO report said ISI--which is Pakistan's 
CIA--is aiding the Taliban and other extremist groups in Afghanistan 
and Pakistan by providing resources, sanctuary, and training. In June 
of 2011, Pakistan tipped off terrorists making IEDs not once, but 
twice, after we told them where the bomb-making factories were and 
asked Pakistan to go after them. But they did not. They told the 
terrorists that we were coming.
  Throughout 2011, Pakistan tried to cheat the United States by filing 
bogus reimbursement claims for allegedly going after militants when 
they weren't even doing that. On September 22, 2011, Admiral Mike 
Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the 
Senate Armed Services Committee that:

       With ISI support, Haqqani operatives planned and conducted 
     that truck bomb attack, as well as the assault on our 
     Embassy.

  The truck bombing he mentions here wounded more than 70 Americans and 
NATO troops, who were injured because of that bombing. Admiral Mullen 
went on to say that this terrorist network acts as the arm of 
Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Agency.
  It doesn't seem to me that Pakistan deserves any more of our money. 
We've been doing the same thing for the last 10 years. Since 2002, 
Pakistan has collected a total of $26 billion of American money. And 
what have we gotten in return? Treachery. It's time for a new strategy 
with Pakistan.
  There are some who say we need to pay Pakistan to help with our 
withdrawal. All their shutting down of the southern route showed was 
that we don't need Pakistan. We were able to pursue our mission even 
though they shut down that route. What really endangers our troops is 
not whether or not we have a southern supply route but whether or not 
we have access to Pakistan's tribal areas. Of course that has been off 
limits, according to the Pakistan Government.
  This bill gives Pakistan over $1 billion. Cutting funding in half 
hopefully will send a message--long overdue--to the Pakistanis that 
they can't play us anymore, that we mean business.
  To add a few more comments, Mr. Chairman, a poll conducted in 
Pakistan showed that 64 percent of the Pakistanis consider the United 
States the enemy, and yet we are paying them $1 billion a year? Doesn't 
make any sense to me. Plus, Americans who have an unfavorable view of 
Pakistan is 81 percent.
  So why do we pay Pakistan to be our enemy? Why do we pay them to hate 
us? Mr. Chairman, I submit they will do both of those things for free.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman suggests that we need a 
new relationship with Pakistan. The gentleman claims--and I'm sorry 
that the easel just disappeared, but I believe it was about 64 percent 
of the Pakistan people consider us the enemy. I don't know the origin 
of that report, but I would take it at face value given the 
representation of my colleague.
  My colleague also suggests there's another poll that says 81 percent 
of the U.S. people do not have a favorable opinion about Pakistan.
  He did say that we need a new relationship, and I would agree with 
him. I think relationships are built on communication, and not polls. I 
think if we governed all of our actions in this Congress based on 
polls, we would get nothing done. Sometimes we have to suck it up and 
do things that maybe at first are not politic to do. Sometimes people 
fight in their families, unfortunately. And hopefully they sit down and 
communicate and resolve their differences. Sometimes different groups 
of people have problems and maybe even don't like each other sometimes. 
But if they talk to each other and they get to know each other, maybe 
they can resolve their differences.
  The relationship with Pakistan, I would not deny, has been difficult, 
but maintaining that relationship is essential. This relationship has 
helped the U.S. make progress against terrorism. And Pakistan has 
allocated a significant part of their forces within their own borders 
to the counterterrorism mission.
  The world, I would remind my colleagues, is a very great place. In 
June of 2012, Pakistan demonstrated its commitment to a stable and 
secure Afghanistan by reopening the ground lines of communication. I 
regret, with the gentleman, that they were closed for a period of time. 
This has eased tensions with the U.S. and improved logistical support 
for our troops.
  Withdrawal of U.S. assistance would likely polarize Pakistan and 
exacerbate significant pro- and anti-American rifts within their 
military and their government generally--rifts and difficulties we 
should be looking to heal, not exacerbate today. Aggravating this 
divide is very, very counterproductive to the objectives in this 
region.
  I would add one further comment. In addition to counterterrorism 
activity, the fact is Pakistan's nuclear weapons capability provides 
ample reason for the U.S. to continue positive engagement.
  I certainly would appreciate yielding to my colleague from New Jersey 
(Mr. Frelinghuysen) if he wishes it.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Let me associate myself with your remarks. Respectfully, we need to 
assure we have a relationship with the Pakistani Government to make 
sure that their nuclear weapons capacity is well secured.
  And while polls may reflect, as the gentleman says, a very poor view 
by Americans of Pakistan, we need their support and cooperation not 
only for the 68,000 troops we have there but the international forces 
that are working with our troops to help the people of Afghanistan have 
a better life.
  So yes, there may be corruption and there may be ill will among the 
Pakistani people, in our view, of our involvement over there, but we 
need to, as we exit Pakistan, to make sure that we get our forces out 
of there using the road network. Otherwise, we'll have to take a lot of 
our supplies and men by air, and that would be enormously expensive. We 
need to keep a good relationship with the Pakistani Government.
  I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman for his remarks, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. POE of Texas. I appreciate the ranking member's comments 
regarding Pakistan.
  One thing, the bill cuts half of the funding to Pakistan. It does not 
cut the nuclear protection that the United States further emphasizes 
for Pakistan. So that is not cut in my amendment.
  The gentleman mentioned actions. I think the Government of Pakistan 
over the last decade has shown that they cannot be trusted, that they 
use the money for improper purposes in Pakistan. And I am of the 
opinion that some of that money goes to hurt American troops that have 
been in the field for a good number of years.
  So I think that we should cut 50 percent of the money that we send 
Pakistan. It's in the best interest, in my opinion, of the United 
States. Their actions prove they cannot be trusted.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by

[[Page 12133]]

the gentleman from Texas will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 26 Offered by Ms. Bonamici

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 26 
printed in House Report 113-170.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 130, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $30,000,000)''.
       Page 141, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $30,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentlewoman 
from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Oregon.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the men and women of our National Guard serve their 
dual Federal and State missions bravely. It is essential that we 
appropriately equip them to succeed in both of those missions.
  The Guard plays a critical role in supporting emergency disaster 
relief. And I applaud their purchase of 500 Humvee ambulances for use 
in every State, but these ambulances are severely lacking. They contain 
only the minimal and most basic medical equipment sets. Alarmingly, 
they lack modern life-saving equipment like cardiac defibrillators and 
vital signs monitors.
  The Guard's ambulances must be properly equipped to deal with 
emergencies. This is especially important in a State like Oregon, which 
faces the threat of wildfires and the prospect of a massive earthquake 
and resulting tidal wave.
  As the ambulances are outfitted now, personnel will be extremely 
limited in the available treatment they can provide to the injured 
people they seek to protect. State Guard associations and the National 
Guard Association agree. They have ranked their procurement of medical 
equipment sets as a priority for the last 2 years. Clearly, there is a 
need, and we need to meet it.
  Chairman Young and Ranking Member Visclosky, it's my understanding 
that you are opposed to the amendment, as drafted, but support the 
underlying policy. And Chairman Young, I appreciate your support of an 
assessment on this issue on the floor last year. I ask if both of you 
will be willing to work with me to address this issue as the 
appropriations process moves forward. And if so, I would withdraw my 
amendment.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. BONAMICI. I yield to the ranking member, the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I would, first of all, not make any representations as 
to what will happen ultimately in conference; that is unpredictable. 
But I do compliment the woman for pointing out the valuable role that 
the Guard serves both as far as our military as well as disaster 
relief.
  The fact is that additional resources are needed as far as saving 
lives and ensuring people's safety. In particular, again, a dual use, 
if you would, a twofer. The fact is, despite the large amount of money 
set aside in this bill, there are fiscal constraints. Some of that 
pressure is evidenced by the lack of funding for the program that you 
so ardently are addressing. So again, I would think, speaking for 
myself, I certainly hear your voice.
  Ms. BONAMICI. I thank the ranking member.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Will the gentlelady yield?
  Ms. BONAMICI. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I want to thank her for being willing to work 
with the subcommittee on this issue for quite some time.
  We understand her interest and we agree with that interest. And we 
look forward to continuing to work with her as we proceed with this 
bill through the conference and back to the House floor--hopefully one 
day. We just want to guarantee her that we will continue to work, and 
we thank her for her cooperation.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Reclaiming my time, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman 
and ranking member, for your leadership on this bill, and also for your 
efforts to support the Guard.

                              {time}  1800

  I withdraw my amendment in light of the comments made on the floor 
this afternoon.


                Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Walberg

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 27 printed in House Report 113-170.
  Mr. WALBERG. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 131, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $79,000,000)''.
       Page 157, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $79,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 312, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Walberg) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a bipartisan amendment 
with Mr. Cohen of Tennessee, Ms. Esty of Connecticut, and Mr. Rigell of 
Virginia that will go a long ways to ensure American tax dollars in 
Afghanistan are spent in a wise and realistic fashion.
  My amendment would specifically reduce funding of the Afghanistan 
Infrastructure Fund by $79 million to a total of $200 million, the 
level adopted by this House during last year's Defense appropriations 
bill. The savings would then be sent to the spending reduction account.
  We have already spent billions of dollars toward rebuilding the 
infrastructure of Afghanistan, and Congress has appropriated over $1 
billion alone to the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund since it was 
created in 2011.
  As of March 31 of this year, SIGAR, the Special Inspector General for 
Afghanistan Reconstruction, reported that only $102.9 million of the $1 
billion that Congress has appropriated has actually been dispersed for 
projects.
  Perhaps even more significant, SIGAR has found that the projects 
which are under way are behind schedule and years away from completion 
and raise serious concerns about whether some of the projects may run 
counter to our goals and the COIN strategy, either because they have 
created expectation gaps among the Afghan people or that they lack 
local citizen support.
  This year, $279 million has been requested for two new infrastructure 
projects. Now, I know we all look to our commanders in the field for 
guidance on what they need to finish the job in Afghanistan; but with 
$400 million in unobligated funds, I ask, Mr. Chairman, why commit to 
two brand-new projects that we will likely never complete?
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition 
to the gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentleman from 
Indiana is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I have used the infrastructure fund in Afghanistan on 
any number of occasions in my district and in the committee and on this 
floor as an example of the failure of our country to invest in the 
infrastructure of the United States of America, and have indicated that 
we are spending money to invest in the infrastructure of Afghanistan 
and failing in the United States.
  The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that in the coming 
years we have about $3.6 trillion of economic infrastructure investment 
we need to make, and a shortfall as far as funding is about $1.6 
trillion.
  But I would note that the gentleman's amendment does not rectify that 
domestic problem we face because the cut he proposes that I do oppose 
redirects those funds to the Spending Reduction Account.

[[Page 12134]]

  The fact is as far as a legacy in giving the people of Afghan a 
chance in the future, I do believe we have to continue with this 
program. It was requested by the Secretaries of Defense and State in 
November of 2010 for the fiscal year 2011 appropriations act. At that 
time, Secretary of Defense Gates and Secretary of State Clinton said it 
is needed to support critical infrastructure projects, such as an 
initiative under way to bring electricity, simple electricity, to 
Kandahar City, which directly supports counterinsurgency strategy.
  I would point out to the House that in 1989, the international 
community--and I think we would have to include our country in that--
abandoned Afghanistan to years of civil war. As a result, this region 
of the world gave us the Taliban and al Qaeda in the wake of the 
withdrawal after Soviet incursion of the 1980s. I do not think we 
should make that mistake again, and we should make an investment.
  As I mentioned in an earlier debate, as the U.S. draws down forces 
for the post-2014 security environment, we should prepare to leave 
Afghanistan on positive terms. As we depart, the U.S. should help to 
repair a nation torn by years of war with the means to develop itself 
to move beyond the past conflict.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the ranking member for yielding to me.
  I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, according to the President's own budget request:

       The Afghan Infrastructure Fund has been an invaluable 
     resource in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Initiated 
     in fiscal year 2011, the AIF funds infrastructure projects in 
     Afghanistan that are a key feature of the counterinsurgency 
     strategy and the civil-military strategic framework endorsed 
     by the commander, U.S. Forces-Afghanistan to lock in security 
     gains and maintain stability by providing basic, essential 
     infrastructure of the people of Afghanistan.

  Mr. Chairman, in other words, these projects that would be eliminated 
or reduced are vital to protecting our currently deployed troops and 
civilian employees besides the Afghanis themselves, and that is a 
worthy investment. We still have 68,000 troops over there, a lot of 
civilians supporting the effort, contractors even, and a lot of 
international forces. They deserve this protection. This is a good 
long-term investment.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALBERG. I request of the Chairman how much time I have 
remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan has 2\1/2\ minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Indiana has 1 minute remaining and the 
right to close.
  Mr. WALBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  I would like to yield at this time 1 minute to my good friend, the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
  Mr. COHEN. Thank you, sir. I appreciate the time.
  Mr. Chairman, this is truly bipartisan in that we are bipartisan in 
favor and they are bipartisan against. We all, Mr. Chairman, have the 
best intentions.
  But I would submit to the people that speak in favor of the spending 
of this fund, in theory it is wonderful and it is great; but the same 
people that endorsed this built a $43 million base that will never be 
used and will be torn down.
  The fact is much of this money cannot be maintained. We are giving 
moneys to the Afghanis for programs that they cannot maintain--they 
can't maintain the roads, they can't maintain the equipment that we 
give them; and so it is wasted. It has gone on and on and on. Much of 
it has been stolen over the years. There is a lot of theft and a lot of 
corruption.
  The gentleman's amendment, which I joined with him on in a bipartisan 
fashion, cut $79 million. Mr. Cicilline has an amendment that cuts 
everything. I've got to compromise the cuts--about half of it. Some of 
it needs to be cut, if not all of it, but at least half.
  We are throwing away moneys that we know from the past are wasted and 
not doing the job that they are intended to do. Hell is paved with good 
intentions.
  Mr. WALBERG. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, as a review, my amendment would reduce funding of the 
Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund by $79 million to a total of $200 
million--the level adopted by this House during last year's Defense 
appropriations bill.
  SIGAR has found that the projects which are under way right now are 
behind schedule and years away from completion and raise serious 
concerns about whether some of the projects may run counter to our 
goals and the COIN strategy.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, additionally, as the end of operations in 
Afghanistan draws near, the Afghan people will need to bear the 
responsibility of building and maintaining their own infrastructure, to 
say the least.
  The Afghan Government has often not been a reliable partner in these 
projects. They have often had little role in designating these 
projects--designing them, carrying them out, power lines, roads, and 
building projects that ultimately will not be used.
  The Department's own budget justification states that because not all 
fiscal year 2012 and 2013 projects have been awarded, the fiscal year 
2014 budget estimate is based on ``limited actual cost data.''
  At a time when often difficult choices need to be made, we have a 
concern that as Congress is being asked to support funding and 
projects, that they really have limited cost data involved.
  I ask for support for this amendment. I believe that the dollars can 
be used, indeed, to grow an economy for ourselves and ultimately deal 
with infrastructure projects here in our own country.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. ESTY. Mr. Chair, I thank my colleagues Mr. Walberg (R-MI); Mr. 
Cohen (D-TN); Mr. Rigell (R-VA) for crafting this smart, commonsense 
amendment which would simply reduce the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund 
by $79 million and redirect those funds to the Spending Reduction 
Account, saving taxpayer dollars.
  This is a targeted and smart cut, at a time when we are asking all to 
do more with less.
  And in fact, with this amendment, we would simply be funding this 
account at the level which this body passed last year.
  Now more than ever, we need to make smart investments in our own 
infrastructure to create jobs and improve efficiency for our 
businesses.
  A business owner in my district recently told me how his drivers lose 
two hours a day sitting in traffic . . .
  . . . And many citizens in Connecticut are pleading to widen I-84 
around Waterbury and to modernize our interchanges.
  Additionally, Newtown has recommended rebuilding Sandy Hook 
Elementary School, and there is an appropriate role for the Federal 
Government.
  We must prioritize our investments and find ways to reduce our 
deficit.
  I urge Members to support this amendment.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan 
will be postponed.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 113-170 on 
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 3 by Ms. Gabbard of Hawaii.
  Amendment No. 10 by Mr. Blumenauer of Oregon.
  Amendment No. 14 by Mr. Polis of Colorado.

[[Page 12135]]

  Amendment No. 15 by Mr. Blumenauer of Oregon.
  Amendment No. 17 by Mr. Nugent of Florida.
  Amendment No. 20 by Mr. Nadler of New York.
  Amendment No. 23 by Mr. Moran of Virginia.
  Amendment No. 25 by Mr. Poe of Texas.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Gabbard

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 50, 
noes 372, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 379]

                                AYES--50

     Bass
     Beatty
     Braley (IA)
     Capps
     Castro (TX)
     Clarke
     Crowley
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     Engel
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garcia
     Grimm
     Hastings (FL)
     Honda
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Kelly (IL)
     Lipinski
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Maffei
     Maloney, Sean
     McKinley
     Meeks
     Moran
     Payne
     Peters (CA)
     Richmond
     Ruiz
     Ryan (OH)
     Schakowsky
     Scott (VA)
     Sires
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (MS)
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Walz
     Waxman
     Webster (FL)

                               NOES--372

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amash
     Amodei
     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capuano
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter
     Cartwright
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Daines
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huffman
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Israel
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Lowenthal
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meng
     Messer
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nolan
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pocan
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Radel
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Slaughter
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Weber (TX)
     Welch
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Campbell
     Cardenas
     Coble
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     King (NY)
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Tsongas

                              {time}  1840

  Messrs. CLYBURN, ROSKAM, AMASH, NOLAN, MURPHY of Florida, FORBES, 
HIGGINS, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Ms. BROWN of Florida, Ms. 
SCHWARTZ, Ms. SEWELL of Alabama, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, and Ms. DeGETTE 
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. HONDA, LIPINSKI, GARCIA, and Ms. CLARKE changed their vote 
from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 176, 
noes 242, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 380]

                               AYES--176

     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fitzpatrick
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Michaud

[[Page 12136]]


     Miller, George
     Moore
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peters (CA)
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--242

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amash
     Amodei
     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carney
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clay
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (PA)
     Kildee
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Levin
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Maffei
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moran
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters (MI)
     Petri
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Campbell
     Coble
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Honda
     Horsford
     King (NY)
     Lucas
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Nunes
     Rice (SC)
     Rokita
     Stutzman
     Tsongas


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  1844

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


                 Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Polis

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 141, 
noes 272, not voting 20, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 381]

                               AYES--141

     Amash
     Andrews
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Burgess
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carney
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Grayson
     Griffith (VA)
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jeffries
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kind
     Kuster
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--272

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardenas
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castro (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clyburn
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Enyart
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (PA)
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meng
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Swalwell (CA)

[[Page 12137]]


     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Waxman
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--20

     Bass
     Campbell
     Carson (IN)
     Coble
     Coffman
     Grijalva
     Hall
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Horsford
     Johnson (GA)
     King (NY)
     McCarthy (NY)
     Meeks
     Miller, Gary
     Pittenger
     Rokita
     Ruppersberger
     Stutzman
     Tsongas


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  1848

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. PITTENGER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 381, I inadvertently missed 
the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''


               Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 49, 
noes 372, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 382]

                                AYES--49

     Amash
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Chu
     Clarke
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     Doggett
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Farr
     Grayson
     Hastings (FL)
     Honda
     Huffman
     Johnson (GA)
     Kelly (IL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis
     Lofgren
     McDermott
     Meng
     Miller, George
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Payne
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rohrabacher
     Rush
     Schakowsky
     Serrano
     Slaughter
     Takano
     Titus
     Velazquez
     Waters
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--372

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amodei
     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carney
     Carter
     Cartwright
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Cicilline
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Daines
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Rodney
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Ellmers
     Engel
     Enyart
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Fattah
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hahn
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Holding
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Latta
     Levin
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Long
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Messer
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moore
     Moran
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pocan
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Swalwell (CA)
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Campbell
     Coble
     Eshoo
     Gutierrez
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Horsford
     King (NY)
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Rokita
     Tsongas


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  1851

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


                 Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Nugent

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 93, 
noes 327, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 383]

                                AYES--93

     Bachus
     Barber
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Burgess
     Cantor
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cook
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Franks (AZ)
     Gabbard
     Gingrey (GA)
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Griffith (VA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hurt
     King (IA)
     Lamborn
     Lankford
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     McCaul
     McKeon
     Messer
     Miller (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Reichert
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (NE)

[[Page 12138]]


     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stockman
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Turner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Walz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoho

                               NOES--327

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amash
     Amodei
     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Barletta
     Barrow (GA)
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carter
     Cartwright
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Daines
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fitzpatrick
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hahn
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huelskamp
     Huffman
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pittenger
     Pocan
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Radel
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Roskam
     Rothfus
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (FL)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Campbell
     Carson (IN)
     Coble
     Coffman
     Gutierrez
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Horsford
     King (NY)
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Rokita
     Tsongas


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  1855

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


                 Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Nadler

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 173, 
noes 249, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 384]

                               AYES--173

     Amash
     Andrews
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith (VA)
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Huizenga (MI)
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Van Hollen
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--249

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Bentivolio
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gabbard
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grayson
     Griffin (AR)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Maffei
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pingree (ME)
     Pittenger

[[Page 12139]]


     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vargas
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Waxman
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Campbell
     Coble
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Horsford
     King (NY)
     Lummis
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Rokita
     Tsongas


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  1858

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


                 Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Moran

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 175, 
noes 247, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 385]

                               AYES--175

     Amash
     Andrews
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Garamendi
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Meeks
     Meng
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (CA)
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--247

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallego
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Maffei
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters (MI)
     Petri
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shea-Porter
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vela
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Campbell
     Coble
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Horsford
     King (NY)
     Marchant
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Rokita
     Tsongas


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  1902

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


              Amendment No. 25 Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186, 
noes 237, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 386]

                               AYES--186

     Amash
     Amodei
     Barletta
     Bass
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Camp
     Capito
     Carson (IN)
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Doggett
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming

[[Page 12140]]


     Flores
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grayson
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Hahn
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harris
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Honda
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hurt
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Keating
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, George
     Moran
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Napolitano
     Neugebauer
     Nolan
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Pallone
     Perry
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Ruiz
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sherman
     Shuster
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Waters
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Williams
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--237

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Cantor
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carter
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cole
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Cook
     Costa
     Cotton
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Ellmers
     Engel
     Enyart
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fitzpatrick
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garcia
     Gingrey (GA)
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hunter
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Levin
     Long
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller (FL)
     Moore
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Noem
     Nunnelee
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Pittenger
     Pocan
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Richmond
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Roskam
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schwartz
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stockman
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tipton
     Titus
     Turner
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watt
     Waxman
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Campbell
     Coble
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Horsford
     King (NY)
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Rokita
     Tsongas


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

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

                              {time}  1905

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 386, I mistakenly voted 
``no''/meant to vote ``yes.''


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on the following amendment printed in House Report 113-
170 on which further proceedings were postponed:
  Amendment No. 27 by Mr. Walberg of Michigan.


                Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Walberg

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


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 283, 
noes 139, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 387]

                               AYES--283

     Amash
     Amodei
     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Broun (GA)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Camp
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Daines
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellison
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Fattah
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleming
     Flores
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Gabbard
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Grayson
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Holding
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huffman
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hurt
     Israel
     Issa
     Johnson (OH)
     Jordan
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kingston
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lance
     Larson (CT)
     Latta
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meng
     Messer
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Neugebauer
     Nolan
     Nugent
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Pocan
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Radel
     Rahall
     Reed
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waxman
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Wenstrup

[[Page 12141]]


     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wolf
     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--139

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Beatty
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Cantor
     Cardenas
     Carter
     Castro (TX)
     Clarke
     Clyburn
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Davis, Danny
     Delaney
     Dent
     Edwards
     Ellmers
     Farr
     Fleischmann
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gallego
     Gardner
     Gerlach
     Granger
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al
     Grimm
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Hensarling
     Hunter
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Joyce
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     King (IA)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Lamborn
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     McCarthy (CA)
     McDermott
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Mullin
     Noem
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Richmond
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Roskam
     Rothfus
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sarbanes
     Schock
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (WA)
     Stewart
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Turner
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Visclosky
     Walorski
     Waters
     Watt
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Campbell
     Coble
     Herrera Beutler
     Holt
     Horsford
     Jones
     King (NY)
     McCarthy (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Rokita
     Tsongas

                              {time}  1922

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now 
rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Wenstrup) having assumed the chair, Mr. Hastings of Washington, Acting 
Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 2397) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for other purposes, had come 
to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________