[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 10354-10380]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2015


                             General Leave

  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. 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 materials on H.R. 4870, and that I may 
include tabular material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New Jersey?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 628 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. 4870.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from New York (Mr. Collins) to 
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1443


                     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. 4870) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for other purposes, with Mr. 
Collins of New York 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.
  The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) and the gentleman 
from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, as we begin consideration of this important 
legislation, all of us in this Chamber want to pay tribute to the men 
and women of our Armed Forces--all volunteers. They deserve our 
heartfelt thanks for their incredible service and sacrifices, and that 
of their families. Everything we do over the next few days should be 
dedicated to them.

[[Page 10355]]



                              {time}  1445

  My colleagues, the fiscal year 2015 Department of Defense 
Appropriations bill was reported out unanimously by the full 
Appropriations Committee on June 10. This recommendation is a product 
of countless staff hours, 10 official briefings, and 13 hearings.
  Most of our hearings related to assuring success and reducing risk 
for our warfighters in their mission. It is worth noting that one of 
these hearings was exclusively dedicated to taking testimony from 
Members of the House on their views, opinions, and priorities for this 
year's Defense Appropriations bill.
  I want to thank those Members who took time to inform and educate the 
committee, as well as other Members who made specific requests.
  At the outset, I would also like to thank Chairman Hal Rogers and 
Ranking Member Lowey for their support of our committee's work. As they 
know, this bill is a product of a bipartisan and cooperative effort, 
for which I thank my good friend, the ranking member, Pete Visclosky. 
He has been a valuable partner throughout this whole process. Thanks to 
all members of the committee and to our incredible staff.
  The base funding recommendation is $491 billion, which is $202 
million above the President's request and $4.1 billion above last 
year's enacted level.
  As many Members are aware, the committee has not yet received the 
President's recommendation for overseas contingency operations--the OCO 
budget, as it is known--so we are forced to include a $79.4 billion 
placeholder in our legislation.
  Our committee operates in a completely transparent and accountable 
manner, so clearly, this is not the way we wanted to proceed to the 
floor--with no details, with no context, with no facts for those 
accounts.
  We have pressed the administration at every opportunity to get us the 
OCO plan. The administration has told us for months that it is 
finalizing its plan for the enduring U.S. military presence in 
Afghanistan, which will have a serious impact on the size of that 
funding request.
  Three weeks ago, the President announced his plans for U.S. troop 
levels in Afghanistan beyond this year. The Army and Marines have 
already closed down bases and removed tons of equipment. Still, we have 
no request and are forced to debate a placeholder of nearly $80 
billion.
  While the Afghan Presidential elections are still unsettled, the 
leading candidates support the bilateral security agreement, supposedly 
the anchor for this funding request.
  What is the holdup? We need to get on with it. I have to say that 
many people find it just a bit bizarre that the administration has 
proclaimed its opposition to the bill yesterday, when they have failed 
to do their job and lay out their game plan for overseas operations.
  Whatever the recommendation we ultimately receive, we will closely 
examine their request because we still have troops and civilians on the 
ground, and no matter the number, they need to be protected.
  Of course, we will also consider the deepening war and conflict in 
Iraq, the continuing disintegration of Syria, the aggressiveness of 
Russia in Eastern Europe and China in the Pacific, and the growing 
influence of Iran, increased terrorist attacks around the globe, 
especially in Africa.
  While the administration feels the pending OCO request will have a 
great deal to do with our enduring U.S. military presence in 
Afghanistan, in reality, their request will have a great deal to do 
with our enduring role in the fight to protect Americans and our 
homeland from a growing list of global threats.
  Even though we have returned to regular order this year, the 
committee faced many challenges in crafting this year's defense bill, 
but we have held firm to two guiding principles: ensuring that our men 
and women in uniform have the resources they need to defend our Nation 
and support their families; and, secondly, ensuring that the Department 
of Defense and our intelligence community have the resources they need 
to carry out their mission in the most efficient and effective manner.
  Our goal throughout this bill is to support our warfighters, now and 
in the future, whenever the next crisis arises.
  At the same time, our committee clearly recognizes the Nation's debt 
crisis. We found areas and programs where reductions were possible 
without adverse impact. Finally, it is important to note that we make 
every dollar count, without harming readiness or increasing risk 
incurred by our warfighters.
  The bill before you attempts to meet those responsibilities within 
current fiscal restraints, while leaving no question for our allies and 
adversaries about our will and our ability to defend ourselves and our 
interests around the world. America must continue to lead, and this 
bipartisan bill enables that.
  Let me highlight, briefly, just a few items included in this fiscal 
year 2015 Defense Appropriations request. It includes an additional 
$1.2 billion to fill readiness shortfalls; $534 million to fully fund 
the authorized 1.8 percent pay raise for our troops; $789 million to 
begin the refueling of the USS George Washington--a vital power 
projection platform; $5.8 billion for a total of 38 Joint Strike 
Fighters; $975 million to buy 12 additional electronic attack Growlers; 
$120 million to upgrade M1 Abrams tanks; $351 million for the very 
important Israeli Cooperative Program; and an additional $39 million 
for suicide prevention activities--$19 million of it targeted 
specifically to our Special Forces.
  These are but a few examples of our commitment to the U.S. military 
dominance across the air, land, and sea, our commitment to our allies 
and partners, and our commitment to our servicemembers--all 
volunteers--and their families.
  Mr. Chairman, I understand all--all of us do--that Americans are 
weary after 13 years of war. Despite the proclamations of some that al 
Qaeda and its followers have been decimated, the American people must 
understand the reality that terrorism is actually spreading worldwide.
  Yes, our enemies have sustained serious damage, inflicted by the most 
skillful and powerful military intelligence organization on the globe, 
but in many cases, these enemies have adapted and grown to become even 
more dangerous.
  We are witnessing an alarming collapse in Iraq. The central 
government now controls less than half of its sovereign territory, as 
it reels before a full-blown insurgency. The concept of an autonomous 
jihadi state or caliphate determined to attack the West is an 
unacceptable development that demands a response. We pivot elsewhere at 
our peril.
  National defense is the priority job of the Federal Government. Our 
Constitution grants Congress the full range of authorities for 
establishing the defense of our Nation.
  Our task in this House is to ensure that our military is ready to 
respond when the Commander in Chief calls. This legislation moves us 
towards a state of current and future military readiness that will 
protect America, and I urge its passage.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 10356]]





[[Page 10357]]



[[Page 10358]]



[[Page 10359]]



[[Page 10360]]



[[Page 10361]]



[[Page 10362]]



[[Page 10363]]



[[Page 10364]]

  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I would like to begin by expressing my appreciation as well to 
Chairman Frelinghuysen and congratulate him on the collegial and 
transparent manner in which he crafted H.R. 4870, the fiscal year 2015 
Defense Appropriations Act. I also want to express my sincere 
appreciation for the efforts of Chairman Hal Rogers and Ranking Member 
Nita Lowey and all of the members of the Defense Subcommittee.
  Also, as I think all of my colleagues know, this bill could not have 
been written without the dedication, long hours, and discerning and 
thoughtful input by our committee staff and our associate and personal 
staffs. I want to thank each one of them.
  I would like to begin by saying a few words about the overseas 
contingency operations title that the chairman referred to.
  The committee has been placed in a very difficult position of having 
to provide $79.4 billion as a placeholder. Recent decisions on the 
post-2014 troop levels in Afghanistan clear up the major policy issue 
that held back a detailed budget request.
  Unfortunately, the clarity gained was quickly muddled by the proposed 
$5 billion counterterrorism partnerships fund and the $1 billion 
European reassurance initiative.
  At a time when many in Congress are rightfully looking to limit what 
is an eligible expense in OCO and shift activities to the base budget, 
these new proposals further complicate the issue. Clarity must be 
brought to the opaque nature of OCO, and I look forward to the debate 
on this during the consideration of amendments.
  I support the bill we are marking up today and believe it provides 
for our national security and the protection of U.S. interests at home 
and abroad. Put simply, the bill provides stability for our military 
personnel, maintains readiness, and preserves the industrial base.
  I am pleased by the subcommittee's continued efforts on sexual 
assault prevention and response. Specifically, the bill fully funds the 
budget request for the Special Victims' Counsel, continuing last year's 
initiative.
  The bill increases funding relative to the President's budget request 
for traumatic brain injury and psychological health research, suicide 
prevention outreach programs, and several other invaluable medical 
programs.
  Further, the bill and report carry strong language aimed at 
increasing cooperation between the Departments of Defense and Veterans 
Affairs in their ongoing efforts to develop interoperable electronic 
health records.
  Specific to readiness, the bill includes an increase of $1 billion to 
fill gaps in key programs to prepare our troops, including $135 million 
for the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. The bill makes 
investments in programs that are vital to the rebuilding and resetting 
of the force after 13 years of conflict.
  In particular, it increases funding by $720 million for facility 
sustainment and modernization and provides each military service with 
additional funding for depot maintenance.
  I especially appreciate the chairman's focus on encouraging DOD to 
meet the FY 2017 deadline for achieving fully auditable financial 
statements. The measure provides $8 million above the request for the 
Comptroller's office to improve business and financial systems 
throughout the Department.
  Continuing problems in DOD's strategic forces are also addressed in 
the bill, and funding is provided to address issues directly impacting 
intercontinental ballistic missile crews.
  With regard to the industrial base, I was dismayed that, in its FY 
2015 budget request, the administration proposed the elimination of 
several longstanding general provisions ensuring that contracts 
followed Buy America requirements and support domestic manufacturing.
  I am pleased to note that the committee chose to reject the 
administration's inexplicable proposal to jettison these Buy America 
proposals.
  The bill also contains several other provisions and initiatives aimed 
at securing our industrial base, including $220 million to establish a 
program for the domestic development of a next-generation liquid-fueled 
rocket engine. Hopefully, this program will swiftly fill a very 
troubling void in the U.S. space launch industry.
  One other area of the bill I would like to highlight is the funding 
increase for the Humanitarian Mine Action Program. Albeit a small 
program, I believe its mission is of immense value.
  All too often, innocent civilians are the victims of explosive 
remnants of war. It is only right to share our military's expertise 
with host nations on the detection, clearance, disposal, and 
demilitarization of explosive ordnance. I thank the chairman in 
particular for his special efforts in this area.
  However, I would point out that there are certain aspects of the bill 
that give me pause. Fundamentally, these concerns have little to do 
with the detailed work of the subcommittee, which I believe did its 
very best under the constraints in which it operated; rather, the 
concerns stem from Congress' continued failure to confront our long-
term fiscal challenges.
  In its fiscal year 2015 budget request, the Department of Defense 
proposed some significant initiatives, including military pay 
adjustments, restructuring TRICARE, and the retirement of several 
weapons system--such as the A-10 and the Kiowa Warrior--in order to 
stay under the fiscal year 2015 budget cap, provide for future 
flexibility, and to meet the national security strategy.
  Having said this, one could easily point out that the administration 
then undercut its own efforts by planning for higher spending in fiscal 
years 2016 through 2019 and by submitting the disingenuously named 
``Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative,'' and subsequently also 
submitting unfunded priority lists.
  Regardless, a number of the proposals the Department put forth for 
fiscal year 2015 do possess merit. With few exceptions, these proposals 
have gained no traction within Congress. Most were excluded or had 
language prohibiting or postponing their support in the recently passed 
National Defense Authorization Act.
  I do not suggest that the administration is uniformly correct, nor do 
I dismiss the resultant impacts of many of these initiatives, but the 
alternative of staying the course and hoping for some relief in fiscal 
year 2016 is very wishful thinking.
  The sooner Congress reaches the consensus required to make the 
difficult decisions that are essential to deal with the reality of 
finite resources, the better we can provide for our national defense.

                              {time}  1500

  In closing, I want to reiterate my appreciation to the chairman for 
his cooperation, his friendship and diligence. He and his staff have 
ensured that the Defense Subcommittee continues its tradition of 
operating collaboratively and effectively. I am pleased to support this 
bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to 
the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the full 
Committee on Appropriations.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I urge our colleagues to 
support this Defense spending bill for 2015.
  This bipartisan legislation provides $491 billion in discretionary 
funding for our Nation's highest duty, and that is the security of 
country, the sustainment of our military operations, and the well-being 
of the brave men and women of our Armed Forces.
  The bill before you today, Mr. Chairman, will help meet the most 
pressing needs of our military as we address current and arising 
threats to the safety of our Nation in an ever-changing global 
landscape. It also takes into account the ongoing challenges of our 
current fiscal situation, finding ways to trim excess spending and 
reduce lower priority programs without negatively affecting our troops 
or the success of our military missions.

[[Page 10365]]

  Providing our military with the highest standard of readiness is a 
top priority in this bill. This includes procuring important equipment 
and resources, supporting troop training and flight time, and 
maintaining our bases and facilities. The bill marks investments in 
important defense technology R&D to help advance the safety and success 
of our military operations now and into the future. Investments like 
these will help to preserve our military's status as the most effective 
and capable in the world.
  The backbone of our military is, of course, the brave men and women 
who lay their lives on the line in defense of this Nation. With that in 
mind, the bill fully funds the authorized 1.8 percent pay raise for our 
military personnel instead of the 1 percent as requested by the 
President. Troop housing costs are also fully funded as authorized. 
This ensures that our more than 1.3 million Active Duty troops and 
820,000 Guard and Reserve troops have the quality of life they deserve 
during their service. $31.6 billion is included for the Defense Health 
Program, to ensure a consistent and strong quality of care for our 
troops, their families, and retirees. Within this total, the bill 
includes increases above the President's request for cancer research, 
traumatic brain injury research, psychological health research, and 
suicide prevention outreach programs. The bill also provides an 
increase of $50 million above last year for sexual assault prevention 
and response programs, helping to address this growing challenge within 
our forces.
  Lastly, the bill provides $79.4 billion in overseas contingency 
operations funding to support our troops in Afghanistan. As we have yet 
to receive an official budget request that reflects the most current 
and anticipated status of our troops in the field, this OCO funding 
will undoubtedly require further evaluation, particularly with the 
developing situations in Iraq and the Middle East.
  By prioritizing these vital programs, closely scrutinizing the budget 
request and assessing the most current needs, the fiscal '15 Defense 
Appropriations bill ensures the best use of our limited Federal 
dollars. We made careful, targeted reductions wherever possible without 
adversely affecting the safety of our troops or the ongoing success of 
our military missions.
  Mr. Chairman, as of today, we have completed 10 appropriations bills 
of the 12 through subcommittee. Eight have gone through full committee, 
and we have begun or we have completed the consideration of six bills 
on the floor. So, when we finish this bill and the ag bill, we will be 
half through the 12 bills. That has not happened in many years. We are 
moving at a remarkable pace, and if our colleagues in the other body 
continue their good work as well, we stand a great chance of completing 
this important work on time.
  This is an even greater achievement because we have done so under 
regular order, with open rules that have allowed every Member to have 
his or her voice heard. Over the five bills we have considered on this 
floor so far, we have had more than 200 amendments, and I am sure we 
will add to that tally today. We have taken great care to weed out 
waste and excess and to terminate duplicative programs. In this year 
alone, we have found savings in every bill, and we have done all of 
this while abiding by the Ryan-Murray budget agreement.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. McClintock). The time of the gentleman has 
expired.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I am pleased to yield to the chairman an 
additional minute.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Before I finish, Mr. Chairman, I can't help 
but compliment the new chairman of this subcommittee. This is his 
maiden voyage after becoming chairman of the Defense Appropriations 
Subcommittee. I think he has steered the ship properly so far, and we 
look forward to the complete work that he is doing.
  So congratulations to Chairman Frelinghuysen and to Ranking Member 
Visclosky. They have done a great job. It is a bipartisan bill, and I 
urge the Members to support it.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member of the Appropriations 
Committee.
  Mrs. LOWEY. I would like to thank the chairman and the ranking 
member. The Defense Subcommittee has a long tradition of working 
closely together, and I sincerely appreciate these bipartisan efforts.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an extremely important and timely bill as the 
Department is tasked with drawing down forces in Afghanistan, is 
appropriately responding to the upheaval in Iraq, and is facing other 
challenges across the globe. Totaling $490.7 billion, the base portion 
of the bill is approximately $200 million above the President's 
request. However, after accounting for appropriate increases in Active 
Duty pay and housing costs, the remainder of the bill is actually below 
the President's proposed level. Budget caps and sequestration force 
difficult decisions, many of which will be debated this week.
  Before we begin that discussion, I want to again thank the chairman 
and ranking member and recognize the constraints under which they 
assembled the bill.
  The bill includes a number of provisions I strongly support: 
additional investments to address the epidemic of sexual assault 
plaguing our military; substantial funds for health services and 
suicide prevention as my colleague just informed me that, in March, 
there were zero combat fatalities, but there were 700 suicides; a 1.8 
percent increase for Active Duty pay; support for the National Guard 
and Reserves as well as family support programs; significant funding 
for cybersecurity to protect our critical infrastructure from cyber 
attacks; and continued support for the Israeli Cooperative missile 
defense programs.
  I applaud the inclusion of language that fences 75 percent of funds 
for the Defense Healthcare Management System Modernization, requiring a 
report from the Secretary of Defense on acquisition and the cost of the 
program, plus the status of efforts to achieve interoperability with 
the Department of Veterans Affairs. This system is critical to the 
health of our servicemembers, and expeditious interoperability between 
the DOD and the VA is essential to ensuring quality of care as they 
become veterans. Through continued oversight, this committee will make 
sure that the DOD stays on course and delivers the promised objectives.
  I remain concerned about the lack of a formal budget for the overseas 
contingency operations funds. With continued uncertainty about future 
U.S. actions in Afghanistan, work remains on this account.
  Again, I appreciate the professionalism and collegiality of the 
process, and I look forward to further cooperation as we work toward 
passing this bill.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to 
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw), a member of our Defense 
Subcommittee.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for yielding the 
time, and thank you for the work that you have done, along with Mr. 
Visclosky, to present what I consider to be a very strong bill.
  Mr. Chairman, when you look at the world today, it certainly hasn't 
gotten any smaller, and it certainly hasn't gotten any safer, but I 
think this bill balances the priorities that we need to balance and 
focuses on being able to meet the many, many challenges that we face in 
terms of our national security.
  I consider it an honor to serve on this subcommittee because, when I 
read the Constitution, it teaches me that the number one responsibility 
of the Federal Government is to protect American lives. The best way to 
keep America safe is to keep America strong, and I think this bill does 
that.
  We make sure that we are not making any short-term, budget-driven 
decisions that would be easy to make in these difficult economic times. 
The Navy decided that it would like to deactivate 11 ships. That is one 
half of

[[Page 10366]]

our cruiser fleet. We don't need fewer ships--we need more ships--and I 
am proud that the subcommittee has worked out a compromise by which 
these ships will be modernized and their lives will be extended, and 
they will continue to do the work that they need to do around the 
globe. The people I represent back in Jacksonville, Florida, care 
greatly about national security. They care about the men and women in 
uniform, and they care about the men and women who work so hard to make 
sure the ships are repaired and the planes are flying in the sky.
  The other thing that I wanted to point out in terms of shortsighted, 
budget-driven decisions is that there was an effort to say there is not 
enough money to refuel the USS George Washington. That is one of our 
nuclear carriers. It has 25 years left of useful life if we spend the 
money to refuel that, and we are going to do that. That will also help 
us comply with the law that I helped write 8 years ago that says you 
have to have 11 aircraft carriers unless Congress says otherwise.
  Finally, when I look at the airplanes--the new E-2D Advanced 
Hawkeye--these planes are relatively new, but they are incredibly 
important to our national security. Again, the P-8 Poseidon 
surveillance planes are relatively new but are critical to our national 
defense.
  I thank the chairman and the ranking member for putting together such 
a strong bill, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), a member of the Defense Appropriations 
Subcommittee.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, this appropriations bill will ensure that 
all of the men and women of our Armed Forces have the resources they 
need to keep our country safe and secure.
  I want to commend Chairman Frelinghuysen and Ranking Member Visclosky 
for their working together in order to craft a good bill under 
difficult budgetary conditions and with the uncertainty surrounding the 
OCO account.
  Thank you to all of the members of the subcommittee for working 
together in a bipartisan and collaborative manner to put this bill 
together.
  This legislation supports our troops and our military families. It 
strengthens the health care services available to our servicemembers, 
and it provides the essential support that our industrial base needs.
  One issue I am very concerned about is the epidemic of sexual assault 
in the military. Sexual assault will not be tolerated and must be both 
prevented and prosecuted. There are resources in this bill to do that, 
and Congress must hold military leaders accountable to make sure that 
this progress is made.
  I am also very concerned about the complete lack of oversight by this 
Congress in the armed drone program, which is funded under this bill.

                              {time}  1515

  The lack of transparency surrounding drone strikes hinders our 
ability to evaluate their impact on innocent civilians.
  There are other challenges and other tough choices made in this bill, 
and our hearings highlighted the fact there are tougher choices to make 
in the coming years.
  With sequestration on the horizon for FY16 and beyond, Congress needs 
to act responsibly to balance the need for military readiness with the 
many nondefense challenges domestically that the American people face.
  Congress needs to stop spending billions of dollars on excess bases 
and obsolete weapon systems that the Department of Defense does not 
want, and this bill starts that process by retiring the A-10 aircraft.
  I believe this bill is responsible, and an important step forward.
  Again, I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their 
leadership and doing what we need to do together as a country to 
maintain our military superiority in the 21st century.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of the bill.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to 
the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack), a member of the Defense 
Appropriations Subcommittee.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee 
and the ranking member, Mr. Frelinghuysen and Mr. Visclosky, for their 
terrific leadership and the great work, tough work that has taken place 
in crafting this Defense Appropriations bill.
  I also would like to thank the overall chairman and the ranking 
member, Mr. Rogers and Mrs. Lowey, for their leadership as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this critical 
legislation on which our men and women in uniform, our intelligence 
community, and our futures depend.
  America is at war, and we face continued uncertainty and new threats 
daily. Now is not the time to weaken our military. This bill equips the 
Department of Defense with the funding necessary to keep our Nation 
safe while making the tough decisions necessary to ensure we stay 
within our spending limits.
  With $491 billion provided in discretionary spending, and another $80 
billion as a placeholder in overseas contingency, the DOD will be able 
to maintain readiness at levels that protect our military's standing, 
support our ongoing war efforts abroad, and, most importantly, ensure 
that the health and well-being of our men and women in uniform and 
their ability to support their families is protected.
  Our subcommittee, and our committee as a whole, is keenly aware of 
our Nation's deficits and debt. We are committed to thoroughly 
evaluating our spending to ensure our defense officials, both military 
and civilian, are accountable for smart policy objectives that 
responsibly steward taxpayer dollars.
  We have had months of hearings, classified briefings, and bipartisan 
cooperation, and I believe we have successfully accomplished a bill, a 
good bipartisan bill, that is worthy of support.
  Mr. Chairman, as I was thinking about my remarks today, I thought 
about that famous verse in ``America the Beautiful'' that says: ``O 
beautiful, for heroes proved, in liberating strife, who more than self 
their country loved, and mercy more than life.''
  Mr. Chairman, we have an enormous obligation, a constitutional 
obligation, to protect the homeland. But we have an obligation to 
ensure that we protect those heroes referenced in that great patriotic 
song.
  So the least we can do today is put our partisan differences aside 
and join collectively to send our collective appreciation to those who 
serve us in uniform by passing this very important piece of 
legislation.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lee), a member of the Appropriations Committee.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for 
yielding, and for your very hard work on this Department of Defense 
Appropriations bill.
  Mr. Chairman, as the daughter of a veteran, I know how important it 
is to fully fund and support our troops. I strongly support these 
provisions of this legislation.
  With that said, though, there are many provisions in this bill which 
I cannot support. These include nearly $500 billion in discretionary 
funding, with an increase of $4 billion above the fiscal year 2014 
enacted level, which we have not seen for any other appropriations bill 
this year.
  This inflated level of spending fails to account, mind you, for the 
waste, fraud, and abuse that continue at the Pentagon. We must audit 
the Pentagon and reduce unnecessary Pentagon spending.
  This bill also includes nearly $80 billion for the overseas 
contingency operations slush fund, which is what it is, at a time when 
the President has not even made a specific request about how much is 
needed. This is outrageous, and this slush fund should be eliminated.
  Now I will be offering several amendments to this bill, one to limit 
operations in Afghanistan after 2014, as

[[Page 10367]]

well as to repeal the 2001 blank check authorization.
  The farm bill, transportation bill, other bills, other authorizations 
have end dates. We need to end this. Come back to Congress, debate what 
we are going to do in Iraq, if anything, in terms of military strikes 
and, in fact, repeal the authorization on Afghanistan passed in 2001.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume 
to my colleague from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) for the purpose of a 
colloquy.
  Mr. LoBIONDO. I thank you, Chairman Frelinghuysen, and also want to 
thank Ranking Member Peter Visclosky for setting an example of how to 
take care of our Nation's dramatic needs and do it in an inclusive, 
bipartisan fashion.
  Chairman Frelinghuysen has shown great leadership in providing the 
resources our warfighters need to successfully defend our Nation, both 
here and abroad. He and I have often worked together on issues of 
shared interest, and I thank him for engaging with me on this very 
important issue.
  Currently, the aircraft that are meant to protect our Nation's 
sovereign air space from both domestic and foreign threats, and also 
are routinely deployed, with the big Air Force, into war theaters 
overseas have gone without much-needed upgrades.
  The F-16 Block 30 aircraft are tasked with a mission that absolutely 
cannot fail. The 177th Fighter Wing out of Atlantic City, New Jersey, 
along with other Air National Guard wings throughout the country, are 
assigned this critically important task of ensuring our home defense 
and, again, being able to integrate fully with the big Air Force into 
conflicts overseas, as they have done multiple times and, in fact, they 
are doing right now as we speak.
  Due to the reduction of modernization programs, these F-16 Block 30 
aircraft are without key combat avionic upgrades, such as the Scalable 
Agile Beam Radar.
  Threats to our Nation continue to grow all over the world, from 
sovereign countries and terrorist organizations alike. The diversity of 
threats means that these aircraft must have the latest capability to 
make split-second decisions to protect our Nation here and abroad.
  I ask that the chairman work with me to ensure that our Nation's 
airspace is properly defended, and that these F-16 aircraft are 
properly fitted for the threats of the 21st century.
  With that, I yield to my good friend, the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Frelinghuysen).
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, my colleague, 
for yielding on this important issue. I agree that upgrading these 
legacy aircraft is vital to our Nation's defense. It is our job, as 
elected officials, to protect our citizens, and the mission of the 
Aerospace Control Alert aircraft does just that.
  I will work to ensure that we include report language in conference, 
or take other appropriate steps regarding this issue, as we work 
through the appropriations process.
  I thank my colleague and friend from New Jersey for bringing this 
vital concern to my attention.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Johnson).
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to discuss H.R. 4870, 
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act.
  I want to thank the committee for fully funding the Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Student Initiative. The 
$34.4 million allocation supports the educational development of a 
growing number of minority scholars in science, technology, 
engineering, and math, also known as STEM.
  I was proud when the House Armed Services Committee, and then the 
full House, approved my amendment to increase funding for this 
initiative by $10 million in the National Defense Authorization Act. By 
providing the full $34.4 million today, the Appropriations Committee 
and the full House will, once again, demonstrate our commitment to 
these outstanding scholars.
  HBCUs produce one-fifth of the Nation's undergraduate science 
graduates and 20 percent of Black undergraduate engineers. This 
funding, through the NDAA, emphasizes our support for these students 
and encourages more minorities to take the STEM path.
  In the long run, producing more qualified minority STEM graduates 
ensures a strong and diversified workforce, which is essential to our 
Nation's long-term well-being.
  I have serious concerns about this bill. I wanted to use this 
opportunity to express my heartfelt appreciation for the work of the 
House Appropriations Committee in support of this initiative.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage in a colloquy with Ranking 
Member Visclosky and Chairman Frelinghuysen. But first I would like to 
commend the chairman and the ranking member for their leadership on 
this bill.
  I am here today to address the importance of delivering the utmost 
care to our brave service men and women who suffer from mental health 
disorders, and the benefits that public-private partnerships between 
the Department of Defense and teaching hospitals can provide, 
specifically to members of the National Guard and Reserve components 
who return from tours of duty and transition into civilian life far 
from a military base and without easy access to the care that they 
need.
  I am pleased that the Department recognizes the benefits of these 
public-private partnerships and created a pilot program to improve 
efforts to treat members of the National Guard and Reserve components 
and their families who suffer from mental health disorders. But we must 
not stop there.
  It is heartbreaking that preliminary readouts of suicide data for 
2013 show that the Active component rate has come down about 18 
percent, but the Reserve rates rose slightly. This problem is not going 
away.
  That is why I am so pleased that the defense bill included language 
in the bill's report, recommended by the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
King) and me, that encourages the Secretary of Defense to expand this 
initial pilot to include additional community partners through a 
competitive and merit-based process.
  There are a number of teaching and clinical hospitals around the 
country that specialize in mental health treatment and can make a real 
difference in addressing the soaring demand for mental health 
treatment.
  I would like to work with the chairman and the ranking member to 
ensure that the Department has the necessary funding to expand this 
vital pilot program so more of our Nation's brave servicemembers are 
able to receive the best care possible.
  Mr. Chairman, at this time I am honored to yield to Chairman 
Frelinghuysen.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from New 
York's kind words.
  The committee recognized that suicide remains a very serious problem 
in the military, particularly among National Guard and Reserve troops.
  I am proud to say that our bill strongly supports the efforts of the 
services to address this crisis. The report includes language which 
speaks directly to the gentleman's interest in the pilot program that 
was created to treat servicemembers suffering from mental health 
disorders in the National Guard and Reserve components through 
community partnerships.
  In addition, the bill provides $158 million in requested funding for 
suicide prevention, mental health, and risk resiliency programs for the 
services. This includes an extra $39 million for suicide prevention 
programs, including the $19 million specifically for our special 
operators.
  All the military services have taken significant steps to make 
suicide prevention a top priority and to improve the resiliency and 
health of our servicemembers.

[[Page 10368]]

  We support those efforts, and I will continue to work with the 
gentleman from New York and his colleague, Mr. King, to address these 
important issues.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I would echo the sentiments about the 
importance of public-private partnerships and including teaching and 
clinical hospitals in finding ways to provide the best care possible to 
our servicemembers.
  Mental health disorders are a growing trend in our military, and we 
must use all resources at our disposal to address the demand for 
treatment.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his interest and for the 
colloquy.

                              {time}  1530

  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra) for the purpose of a 
colloquy.
  Mr. BECERRA. I thank the ranking member for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage in a colloquy with the gentleman from 
New Jersey, Chairman Frelinghuysen.
  First, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the ranking member 
for your efforts in putting together this legislation. In particular, I 
appreciate that this bill provides funding for the support for 
international sporting competition fund.
  This account is crucial for ensuring the safety and security of 
countless Americans who participate in different Olympic initiatives, 
including the preparations for the Olympics, Paralympics, and Special 
Olympics.
  The United States has a rich tradition of supporting the Special 
Olympics, both in the United States and abroad. These unique events 
empower people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, while 
promoting acceptance for all and fostering communities of understanding 
on a global scale.
  Approximately 1,000 athletes participated in the first Special 
Olympics World Games in 1968. By comparison, there has been a sevenfold 
increase, with 7,000 athletes expected to participate in the 2015 
Special Olympic World Games, which will be held in Los Angeles, 
California.
  With this substantial growth, there has come an increased need for 
security. It is important for this legislation to match as best 
possible our country's previous funding commitments. This critical 
funding need could be addressed either through additional funding for 
the support for international sporting competition fund or unobligated 
funds at the Department of Defense.
  I asked for and look forward to the opportunity to work with the 
chairman, ranking member, and all of our colleagues who wish to 
continue our country's support for the Special Olympics through any 
available funds in this legislation.
  At this point, I yield to the chairman for his response.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The committee has a long history of support for 
international sporting competitions. Ranking Member Visclosky and I 
will work with you to ensure that the remaining prior year balances 
appropriated for this purpose are spent for their intended purpose.
  Mr. BECERRA. I thank the chairman and the ranking member.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, at this point, I yield to the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Heck) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. HECK of Washington. Mr. Chairman, as the ranking member may be 
aware, Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps programs are conducted at 
schools throughout our great Nation.
  They are traditionally led by retired military officers and enlisted 
personnel, and the program prepares high school students for leadership 
roles. JROTC teaches the young men and women the kind of discipline and 
self-confidence required to succeed outside the classroom.
  In my congressional district is Shelton High School, which 
successfully operated their Navy JROTC program for 35 years. One year, 
they dropped three students below the minimum threshold, were placed on 
probation, and yet, despite the subsequent year exceeding the 
enrollment threshold, they were required to get to the end of the line, 
notwithstanding the 35 years of successful operation.
  I don't think Shelton High School ought to have to do that. I don't 
think any high school in the United States ought to have to do that.
  The Shelton High School Navy JROTC program provided unmatched 
leadership opportunities for students, and it instilled exactly the 
kind of values we want to instill in young people: patriotism, national 
service, and a sense of accomplishment and responsibility.
  Additionally, this JROTC program, in its community, served as the 
color guard at community events and helped provide volunteers for 
community organizations. Its absence is now being acutely felt 
throughout all of the county.
  So I respectfully request that we somehow find a way to work together 
to ensure the Navy has the necessary funds to support these programs at 
Shelton High School and throughout the Nation.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I certainly understand the gentleman's concerns and 
appreciate him making the committee aware of this issue.
  I know that the Junior ROTC program has made a difference in the 
lives of many students, as well as our country. I would be happy to 
work with the gentleman on providing funding for this important 
program.
  Mr. HECK of Washington. I thank the gentleman for agreeing to work 
with us, and I thank you and the chairman for your excellent work on 
this legislation, which I look forward to supporting.
  I also want you to know that, when you tell me you will work with me, 
I know it to be the case because both of you are men of your word.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I thank the gentleman and reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume 
to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) for the purpose of a 
colloquy.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I thank you, Chairman Frelinghuysen, 
for yielding for the purpose of a colloquy.
  I want to thank you for your tireless efforts for our Nation's brave 
servicemen and -women and, just as importantly, for those who served 
and never made it home. This legislation fully funds the Prisoner of 
War/Missing in Action Personnel Office account. The hardworking staff 
over at the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command, or JPAC, work tirelessly 
to track, locate, and recover these fallen heroes, and I thank them for 
their continued efforts.
  I would like to have a moment to discuss a hero of the Vietnam war. 
Major Lewis P. Smith III majored in music at Penn State and graduated 
in 1964. He planned to teach music after his obligation to the Air 
Force was over.
  Upon graduation from Penn State, Smith was trained on the T-38 and C-
130 aircraft for the next 3 years, sent to Vietnam, and was assigned to 
the 20th Tactical Air Support Squadron in Pleiku, South Vietnam.
  On May 30, 1968, Smith piloted a Cessna O-2A Skymaster aircraft in 
Saravane Province, Laos. During the mission, Smith encountered enemy 
fire, resulting in the crash of his plane.
  Electronic signals were heard at the scene, indicating that he had 
survived the crash, but he was not rescued. Major Smith was listed as 
missing in action and is honored on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, 
panel 62W, line 2.
  Major Smith's family has been working with the Joint POW/MIA 
Accounting Command to recover his remains. The excavation site in Laos 
has been on the list for over 2 years, and the trip to excavate the 
crash site has been postponed twice due to budget pressures and 
sequestration.
  Major Smith's family has reached out to me to help with their efforts 
to bring Lewis home. While I understand the budget-constrained times, 
the recovery of fallen servicemembers will

[[Page 10369]]

bring closure to the families after such a loss.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask for your support and urge the Joint POW/MIA 
Accounting Command to schedule the recovery trip to Laos and to bring 
home Major Lewis Smith's remains to his family and his country.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I yield to the gentleman from New 
Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  I understand the Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office's 
mission is to provide the families of servicemembers lost in battle or 
taken as prisoners of war with information and, in applicable cases, to 
recover personnel from World War II, the Korean war, the cold war, the 
Vietnam war, and the Iraqi theater of operations.
  I fully support the office and the work they do in searching and 
reuniting lost soldiers with their families. Returning the fallen 
servicemembers to their families is a priority, and I support your 
strong efforts and advocacy on behalf of Major Smith and his family. It 
is commendable. We honor it, and I thank you for bringing this to our 
attention.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield to the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Bishop) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to 
engage in a colloquy with the distinguished ranking member of the 
subcommittee.
  As many of our colleagues know, thousands of men and women from our 
Armed Forces have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan with a variety of 
service-connected illnesses and complications caused by exposure to the 
noxious fumes of open-air burn pits and other airborne hazards.
  There is a growing body of research about the disabling effects of 
burn pit exposure that confirms that such exposure is the cause of 
serious illnesses, including various cancers that have killed veterans 
and have left countless others seriously ill.
  Leading researchers in this area, including Dr. Anthony Szema of 
Stony Brook University's School of Medicine in my district, are 
discovering clear evidence that fumes from burn pits have sickened the 
personnel deployed in their vicinity.
  While their precise numbers remain unknown, it is estimated that up 
to 30,000 Active Duty servicemembers and veterans might be suffering as 
a result of their exposure to burn pits. We must learn from past 
mistakes to stop open-air burn pit exposure before such exposure 
becomes the agent orange for this generation of veterans.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I certainly understand the gentleman's concerns and 
appreciate him making the committee aware of this issue. I would be 
happy to work with him to provide attention and resources to this 
issue.
  I am very pleased that he brought this to our attention today on the 
floor.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. I thank the gentleman for his response and 
his leadership. I also thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his 
leadership, and I look forward to working with them on this issue.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I would be delighted to yield to the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member and the chairman 
for including language supporting continued work on lithium ion battery 
research.
  However, in reviewing the underlying bill, I am concerned about the 
possible interpretation by the Office of Naval Research with respect to 
this effort. I believe it is important that the Office of Naval 
Research emphasize battery safety as a part of this work.
  I would also request the opportunity to continue to work with the 
chairman and the ranking member to allocate research and development 
funding to promote battery safety and to retain such funding through 
conference on the underlying bill.
  I hope to make it clear that this Chamber encourages investment in 
battery safety research.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I would want to make it clear to all of my colleagues, 
first of all, that my good friend from Wisconsin has been working on 
this issue for a number of years. I remember a meeting we had about a 
year ago on this issue, and he continues to press ahead, which I 
appreciate.
  I certainly will continue to work with him on the development of 
lithium ion battery technology and promote battery safety as an 
important part of this research, and I appreciate the gentleman's 
concern, as well as his good work.
  Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time 
as well.
  Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Chair, I rise today to highlight an 
important provision that was included in H.R. 4870, the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act of 2015, which could help my constituent, 
Debbie Zelman, along with thousands of others like her with stomach 
cancer.
  Five years ago, Debbie was diagnosed with Stage IV stomach cancer. 
While the doctor gave her only a 50/50 chance to live after one year, 
Debbie is still with us, fighting one of the deadliest forms of cancer.
  Debbie is not alone in her battle. Every year, 21,000 Americans are 
diagnosed with stomach cancer, and it is the second leading cause of 
cancer deaths for women in this country.
  To help Debbie and others affected by this horrible cancer, I, along 
with 57 of my colleagues, requested from the Appropriations Committee 
that stomach cancer research become eligible for funding through the 
Defense Department's Peer Reviewed Research Program (PRCRP) for 2015.
  The PRCRP funds research into eleven cancer types, including blood 
cancer, colorectal cancer, and pancreatic cancer. Adding stomach cancer 
to the list of eligible diseases could make an enormous difference in 
understanding this under-researched cancer, including its array of risk 
factors and causes.
  I'm proud that the House Defense Appropriations bill includes report 
language to allow stomach cancer research to be funded through this 
Research Program. I look forward to working with my colleagues to 
ensure that the Senate passes this important language as well.
  By taking this step, we will be able to better understand this deadly 
disease, and, hopefully, get closer to finding a much-needed cure.
  Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Chair, with numerous and significant reservations, I 
will vote for final passage of H.R. 4870, the FY2015 Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act. I supported this bill because it provides 
the means to support the brave men and women of our armed services who 
put their lives on the line to protect ours. The bill provides a pay 
raise for our troops and includes important provisions that support the 
missions of the Delaware National Guard and Dover Air Force Base.
  That said, I disagreed with numerous policy provisions included in 
the bill, most notably the lack of guidance for how the Administration 
can use funds provided in the Overseas Contingency Operation accounts. 
I also remain concerned that the bill prevents the Department of 
Defense from taking responsible measures to cut defense spending and 
continues to maintain the Authorization for Use of Military Force, 
despite the fact that our military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq 
have drawn to a close. I was also concerned that the bill prevents the 
transfer of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay Facility and fails to 
provide a comprehensive plan to close the facility. I am hopeful these 
deficiencies in the bill will be addressed when the House and Senate 
meet in conference to work out their differences.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise today in reluctant opposition to 
H.R. 4870, the FY2015 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.
  I commend the House Appropriations Committee's continued support for 
our servicemembers and our national defense. However, I have serious 
concerns with a number of misguided funding provisions in this year's 
DoD Appropriations bill. We have to budget based on reality, instead of 
writing a blank check and holding onto as ``much of the stuff and the 
training as possible'' and hoping that ``some miracle happens and we 
get money next year that we don't have now,'' as Chairman McKeon put it 
last month. As a result of this line of thinking, this legislation 
avoids making many tough choices.

[[Page 10370]]

  As was the case with last month's Defense Authorization bill, H.R. 
4870 provides billions of dollars in funding that the Department of 
Defense neither requested nor needs. This includes funding for 
additional EA-18G aircraft, High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled 
Vehicles, and unrequested upgrades to the M-1 Abrams tank. It also 
blocks the Administration's ability to retire aging and unnecessary 
military aircraft, including the C-130 AMP, when less expensive options 
are readily available.
  I also strongly object to sections 8107, 8108, 8139, and 9015 of the 
bill, which continue funding restrictions on the construction or 
modification of detention facilities in the United States to house 
Guantanamo detainees. I was also disappointed that two amendments were 
adopted on the House floor which would bar the use of funds to transfer 
Guantanamo detainees to Yemen and other foreign countries. As the 
President made clear in his State of the Union Address earlier this 
year, we cannot wait any longer to lift the remaining restrictions on 
detainee transfers and close down this facility once-and-for-all.
  This bill also provides $79 billion for Overseas Contingency 
Operations even though we have not received a detailed OCO budget 
request. There is no justification for this amount. The bill holds back 
85% of the funding from being obligated until the Pentagon submits a 
detailed spending plan. But this is no safeguard because the Pentagon 
still determines virtually all of the details of how the funding is 
spent. Congress has no opportunity to provide input through regular 
order into how much we should spend for war operations and on what. We 
should take notice that $79 billion is larger than every other 
appropriations bill except for two--Defense and Labor, HHS, Education. 
We need to provide at least some minimum level of oversight and control 
over such a large sum of money.
  Despite my overall opposition to this legislation, I was happy that a 
bipartisan amendment offered by Rep. Lofgren was adopted that would 
limit funding for many backdoor programs within Section 702 of the FISA 
Amendments Act. This was a provision that was initially in the USA 
Freedom Act before being stripped in its final passage and would 
prevent the NSA from being able to search government databases for 
foreign communications content of American citizens without a warrant. 
The passage of this amendment will strengthen the privacy and civil 
liberties of all Americans. Today's bill also continues to address the 
problem of sexual assault in the military and fully funds the 
President's request for Sexual Assault Prevention and Response 
Programs.
  I also want to make clear my views with respect to the amendments 
relating to the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force against 
the al Queda elements responsible for the attacks of 9/11/2001 and the 
2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The President has 
announced his intention to end combat operations in Afghanistan at the 
end of this year, and to keep a residual force in Afghanistan for an 
additional year subject to a Status of Forces Agreement. There is also 
the question of how the existing use of force authorization applies to 
military action outside of Afghanistan, such as in Yemen. Given the 
changing circumstances, it makes sense to end it or to revise the 
current authorization and adapt it to the current situation.
  As for the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq, it should 
be terminated. We have withdrawn our troops from Iraq, and we should no 
longer provide the Executive Branch with a blank check for future 
military action there. That does not mean that the President could not 
seek Congressional authorization for future military action in Iraq or, 
if the conditions apply, exercise his constitutional authorities as 
Commander in Chief. However, I supported the amendment to prohibit the 
use of funds in this bill for combat operations in Iraq because I don't 
think there is a sound case for putting American troops in combat and, 
in the absence of such a limitation, there is no check on the unlimited 
use of force in Iraq given the current 2002 authorization to use force 
there.
  Finally, I want to say a word about the Gosar Amendment. This 
amendment was a blatant effort to exploit fear and misunderstanding. 
There is no intention to provide Iran, Syria, Hamas, or ISIS with any 
military assistance. I would strongly oppose any such move. However, 
the United States, with the support of the State of Israel, has at 
times provided different forms of assistance to the Palestinian 
Authority to enhance security and fight terrorism. By including the 
Palestinian Authority in the list of entities that should be prohibited 
from receiving assistance, the amendment was an obvious example of what 
is known around here as a ``gotya'' amendment. It is time to stop 
playing those political games.
  It is my hope that many of my objections to the Defense 
Appropriations bill will be resolved in Conference with the Senate and 
that I will be able to support its final passage.
  The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment, each amendment shall 
be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the 
proponent and an opponent and shall not be subject to amendment. No pro 
forma amendment shall be in order except that the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, or their respective 
designees, may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point 
for the purpose of debate. The Chair of the Committee of the Whole may 
accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member 
offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
Congressional Record designated for that purpose. Amendments so printed 
shall be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 4870

       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, 2015, 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, $41,183,729,000.

                        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, $27,387,344,000.

                    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, 
     $12,785,431,000.

                     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, $27,564,362,000.

                        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

[[Page 10371]]

     payments to the Department of Defense Military Retirement 
     Fund, $4,304,159,000.

                        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, $1,836,024,000.

                    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, $659,224,000.

                      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, 
     $1,652,148,000.

                     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, $7,644,632,000.

                              {time}  1545


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Gohmert

  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 7, line 2, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $41,492,000)''.
       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $41,492,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, right now, as I speak, there are thousands 
of unaccompanied minors, many of whom are 15, 16, and 17 years of age, 
but nonetheless, they are classified as minors, under 18, and our 
Border Patrol is being overwhelmed.
  Our ICE agents, who are supposed to deport people improperly here, 
are being overwhelmed. As one ICE agent said yesterday, Chris Crane, 
that is the union president for the ICE agents, he said, basically:

       We are having to change diapers, and so there is no 
     criminal interdiction going on. We are not able to do our 
     jobs because of the thousands of children that are coming.

  I saw a report today from CBP, the Border Patrol, Customs and Border 
Protection, and they were saying the interviews they are doing yield 
results from the children saying that they are coming to America now 
because of a new law that the President has that allows children to 
come in and stay here if they just get here quick enough.
  It has caused a national emergency. So what $41,492,000 does is 
provide for 1,000 National Guard troops. We know in the amendment we 
cannot legislate, but in order for the money to be available for the 
National Guard troops to assist on the border, the money needs to be 
available, and, therefore, we are asking that the money be moved from 
one account over into an account that could be utilized for National 
Guard troops to help with what has been termed by so many people as a 
humanitarian crisis.
  Why is it a crisis? Because people in the administration are 
refusing, and failing to refuse, to do the job and faithfully execute 
the laws of this Nation. They have done a terrible job, and it is a 
great injustice to all those children who have been sent by aunts and 
uncles, by parents, and by others. Just get to the border, and if their 
parents are sending them, we get reports that the parents are hoping 
once they get in then they can bring the parents in in order to take 
care of them.
  There are other reports, as we have seen from a Federal judge in 
south Texas, that the Department of Homeland Security is now engaging 
in human trafficking. It is part of the lure of these thousands and 
thousands of children every week coming in, that if they get to the 
border and either one of their parents or any relative is in the 
country, then DHS will engage in human trafficking and try to take them 
wherever in the country they think their parents might be, even though 
they may be here illegally.
  So this money is to help with a Federal problem that should not be 
costing the States. It is a Federal problem, as the Department of 
Justice has indicated through our Attorney General's suing States like 
Arizona and saying that you can't deal with this problem, this is a 
Federal issue, you must have hands off.
  Well, the locals need help. This will provide help. And that is why I 
am asking to move $41,492,000 over in the DOD budget so that we can 
help with National Guard troops when and where they are needed.
  Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes to amend portions of the bill 
not yet read.
  The amendment may not be considered en bloc under clause 2(f) of rule 
XXI because the amendment proposes to increase the level of outlays in 
the bill.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, I do.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, it is only the Congressional Budget 
Office, CBO, accounting that would say moving $41,492,000 from one 
account by that same amount into another account is having more in 
outlays than is being taken from one account. I think it is fuzzy math 
that the CBO is engaged in. To most of us, if you move $41,492,000 out 
of one account and you put that same amount in another account, it is 
not causing more outlays than we were removing from the account.
  But I will leave that to the ruling of the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  To be considered en bloc pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI, an 
amendment must not propose to increase the levels of budget authority 
or outlays in the bill. Because the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Texas proposes a net increase in the level of outlays in the bill, 
as argued by the chairman of the relevant Subcommittee on 
Appropriations, it may not avail itself of clause 2(f) to address 
portions of the bill not yet read.
  The point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Gohmert

  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 7, line 2, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $41,492,000)''.

[[Page 10372]]

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $57,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, anticipating the fuzzy math from CBO that 
taking $41,492,000 from one account and putting that same amount in 
another account would not be considered equal, I went ahead and have 
another amendment that reduces the one account by $57 million, over $15 
million more than we are transferring into the account that could be 
used for National Guard troops, so that, according to the fuzzy CBO 
math, the reduction will equal the increase.
  But with that said, no matter how fuzzy the accounting is here in 
Washington, there is a massive problem on our border, and for this body 
to turn away when we can force the President's hand--he is not 
faithfully executing the laws of his office, he is not enforcing the 
immigration laws, and he is not enforcing the border. We can force his 
hand by making the proceeds available, the $41,492,000, to get the 
National Guard, make them available for this purpose, and then we think 
the outcry from America will force the President's hand to get these 
people there, and the Governors will have a stake in this claim, but it 
is a Federal problem.
  I continue to insist on this. Americans across the country are 
watching what we are doing. We need to be responsible and faithfully 
execute the laws of this country, and that is without regard to whether 
or not the President does. We have an obligation to get this money 
where it is needed. We believe this will do that, and so, Mr. Chairman, 
we move this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes to amend portions of the bill 
not yet read.
  The amendment may not be considered en bloc under clause 2(f) of rule 
XXI because the amendment proposes to increase the level of outlays in 
the bill.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, I certainly do.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Because under the math of CBO, as fuzzy as it is, by 
reducing one account by $57 million, even CBO says, yes, that takes 
care of equalizing the outlay of $41,492,000 in the account to increase 
that for the National Guard. So it should have been addressed with the 
first amendment that I made. But this second one certainly addresses 
the fuzzy math that CBO provides. This does not increase the amount of 
expenditures over what is being taken from another account.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Seeing none, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  To be considered en bloc pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI, an 
amendment must not propose to increase the levels of budget authority 
or outlays in the bill. Because the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Texas proposes a net increase in the level of outlays in the bill, 
as argued by the chairman of the relevant Subcommittee on 
Appropriations, it may not avail itself of clause 2(f) to address 
portions of the bill not yet read.
  The point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chair, parliamentary inquiry.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. GOHMERT. My inquiry is this, Mr. Chairman.
  Can the Chair tell me how reducing one account by $57 million is not 
adequate to cover a $41,492,000 increase in another account? It is 
$15.5 million more we are reducing than the amount we are increasing.
  So my inquiry is, please, Mr. Chairman, explain how the increase of 
$41,492,000 is more than the $57 million reduction.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair based the ruling on the fact that the 
amendment increased budget outlays.
  Mr. GOHMERT. The rates are addressed, Mr. Chairman, by this $15.5 
million amount. That is covered. Even CBO admits that. So I don't know 
where the chairman is getting his numbers. They are certainly not 
supported even by the fuzziest of math of our CBO.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair has ruled that the amendment increases 
the amount of outlays in the bill and is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                  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, $3,110,587,000.

                                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, 
     $32,671,980,000: Provided, That 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.

                    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, $39,073,543,000: Provided, That 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.

                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, $5,984,680,000.

                  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, $35,024,160,000: Provided, That not to exceed $7,699,000 
     can be used for emergencies and extraordinary expenses, to be 
     expended on the approval or authority of the Secretary of the 
     Air Force, and payments may be made on his certificate of 
     necessity for confidential military purposes.

                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, $30,896,741,000: Provided, That not 
     more than $15,000,000 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 $8,881,000, to remain available until expended, 
     is available only for expenses relating to certain classified 
     activities, and may

[[Page 10373]]

     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.

                              {time}  1600


               Amendment Offered by Ms. Lee of California

  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 33, line 11, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 33, line 19, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentlewoman 
from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and the 
ranking member for working with me on this very important amendment. 
This is a very simple amendment that would provide a $5 million 
increase to available funds for research, development, testing, and 
evaluation related to multiple sclerosis under the Defense Health 
Program.
  These funds would increase funding for multiple sclerosis research 
under DOD to $10 million. This amendment fulfills the request of $10 
million for MS research that was included in a bipartisan letter signed 
by 78 Members of Congress earlier this year, including cochairs of the 
Congressional MS Caucus, Representative Michael Burgess and 
Representative Van Hollen, and I will include the Dear Colleague letter 
for the Record.

                                Congress of the United States,

                                   Washington, DC, March 28, 2014.
     Hon. Rodney Frelinghuysen,
     Chairman, Subcommittee on Defense Committee on 
         Appropriations, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Pete Visclosky,
     Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Defense Committee on 
         Appropriations, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Frelinghuysen and Ranking Member Visclosky: 
     On behalf of all people living with multiple sclerosis (MS), 
     we would like to thank you for your past support for funding 
     MS research through the Congressionally Directed Medical 
     Research Programs (CDMRP). As you know, MS is a chronic, 
     unpredictable, often disabling disease of the central nervous 
     system. MS is generally diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 
     50, during the prime of an individual's life. Sadly, the 
     cause of MS is still unknown and there is no cure. While we 
     recognize the fiscal constraints the country faces, it is 
     critical that we continue to fund this important research, 
     which holds great promise for our military service members 
     and all those who are affected by MS. We respectfully ask 
     that you direct $10 million to fund the MS research program 
     for Fiscal Year 2015.
       MS interrupts the flow of information within the brain, and 
     between the brain and body. Every hour in the United States, 
     someone is newly diagnosed with the disease. Symptoms range 
     from numbness and tingling to blindness and paralysis. The 
     progress, severity and specific symptoms of MS in any one 
     person cannot yet be predicted, but advances in research are 
     improving the possibility of a world free of MS.
       Currently, the FDA-approved treatments that are available 
     to treat MS only slow the progression of the disease for a 
     subset of the MS population. Of these available medical 
     treatments, many are not effective for patients and cannot be 
     tolerated by many others. Additionally, the cost of treating 
     and living with MS is costly--approximately $69,000 annually.
       Many U.S. veterans have stories and symptoms of multiple 
     sclerosis. Preliminary evidence suggests that some combat 
     veterans could have an increased risk of developing MS.
       Over 23,000 veterans are being treated for MS through the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
       A study in the Annals of Neurology identified 5,345 cases 
     of ``service-connected'' MS among U.S. veterans.
       An epidemiologic study found a two-fold increase in MS 
     between 1993 and 2000 in Kuwait, which suggests a potential 
     environmental trigger for MS.
       The VA is currently funding two MS Centers of Excellence to 
     provide clinical care and education for these veterans, but 
     now physicians at these institutions are seeking funding to 
     explore a potential link between MS and combat service.
       MS research has the potential to help all those living with 
     MS, including our veterans. We ask that you support MS 
     research by including $10 million in funding for the MS 
     program within the CDMRP in the Fiscal Year 2015 Defense 
     Appropriations. Thank you for your consideration of this 
     request.
           Sincerely,
       Michael C. Burgess, M.D., Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., 
     Andre Carson, Daniel W. Lipinski, James R. Langevin, Charles 
     B. Rangel, Chris Van Hollen, Eliot L. Engel, Sander Levin, 
     Yvette D. Clarke, John Yarmuth, Frederica S. Wilson.
       Peter DeFazio, Sheila Jackson Lee, Tony Cardenas, 
     Christopher H. Smith, Mike Michaud, Ron Kind, Brad Schneider, 
     Lloyd Doggett, Joe Courtney, Peter King, Jon Runyan, Alcee L. 
     Hastings, Rick Larsen, Barbara Lee, Donald M. Payne, Jr., 
     Danny K. Davis, Ann MacLane Kuster, C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger.
       Jan Schakowsky, Steve Israel, Michael Grimm, Carolyn 
     McCarthy, Steve Cohen, Luis V. Gutierrez, Tim Bishop, Gerald 
     E. Connolly, Tim Murphy, Carol Shea-Porter, Stephen F. Lynch, 
     Rush Holt, Chellie Pingree, David N. Cicilline, Bill Foster, 
     Gloria Negrete McLeod, Jim McDermott, Elijah E. Cummings.
       John F. Tierney, Chaka Fattah, Dave Loebsack, Matt 
     Cartwright, Juan Vargas, John Delaney, David Price, Jim 
     Himes, Julia Brownley, Lois Frankel, Collin C. Peterson, Alan 
     Grayson, Gregory W. Meeks, Spencer Bachus, John Garamendi, 
     Robert A. Brady, Marc Veasey, Cheri Bustos.
       Mark Pocan, Elizabeth H. Esty, Ann Kirkpatrick, Susan A. 
     Davis, Dan Kildee, Dan Benishek, M.D., Ben Ray Lujan, Ron 
     Barber, Grace Meng, Tim Walz, John Conyers, Jr., Mike 
     Thompson.

  Ms. LEE of California. There are 2 million people worldwide living 
with MS. This complicated and unpredictable neurological disease 
interrupts the flow of information within the brain and between the 
brain and the body.
  MS is a chronic disease that can often be debilitating for those 
living with it, and the symptoms of MS are as diverse as the people it 
impacts.
  I am pleased to introduce this amendment to the Defense 
Appropriations bill, since MS has a significant impact on our armed 
services. Some 23,000 veterans are currently being treated for MS, with 
more than 5,000 cases having been identified as service connected.
  Because of increased research funding in MS, the first disease-
modifying drugs became available for people living with MS 20 years 
ago. However, these drugs only work for a subset of the population, and 
many people living with MS still have no viable treatment options.
  Increased research funding could give scientists a better 
understanding of the disease, which could potentially unveil new 
therapies.
  I will close by adding that I understand, on a very personal level, 
the impact of this disease. My sister, Mildred, shows me every day what 
life is like to live with the disease, and I am consistently amazed by 
her strength and her bravery. She and the millions of people around the 
world living with MS are really a testament to the importance of making 
stronger investments to find a cure.
  Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my sister Mildred and on behalf of all of 
those living with MS, on behalf of the families and caregivers, I urge 
my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. LEE of California. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. First, I commend you on your amendment, and I 
withdraw my reservation.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Duncan of Tennessee). The reservation of the 
point of order is withdrawn.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, and I 
urge a ``yes'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

[[Page 10374]]

  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Lamborn

  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $5,000,000) (increased by 
     $5,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from Colorado and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, there is an important program to help our 
Special Forces troops and families. It is called the Preservation of 
the Force and Family program.
  Admiral McRaven, who is the commander of Special Operations Command, 
has told the Armed Services Committee that this is his highest 
priority. It combines several kinds of help and assistance to wounded 
warriors and to their families in a holistic way. For those who are in 
it and have benefited from it, it has been a tremendous, tremendous 
program.
  What I am proposing in this amendment is to take $5 million from the 
Special Operation Command's budget request for flying hours, which in 
my understanding was increased by the Appropriations Committee, which 
is normally an excellent thing to fund, but they even gave, in my 
understanding, Mr. Chairman, above and beyond what the command had 
asked for.
  So based on that, I am asking for a transfer back of $5 million from 
the flying hours budget to the Preservation of the Force and Family 
Program.
  This aligns with what the Armed Services Committee had put in the 
NDAA after their deliberations in committee. I would ask that the House 
adopt this amendment.
  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, I rise in opposition. The subcommittee 
has always done everything we can to take care of our special 
operators, and that is reflected in the mark.
  I do believe the gentleman's amendment is philosophically 
inconsistent with the underlying bill. I cannot justify devoting 
significant resources to SOCOM's $1 billion proposal to establish their 
own separate contractor-staffed facilities, when our services are 
undergoing tremendous downsizing pressures. It runs contrary to what we 
are trying to do in the bill.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey, the 
committee chair.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Further, SOCOM has provided no information or data to support this 
costly new endeavor, and Congress has raised questions in both the 
authorization bill and the appropriations bill about the affordability 
and efficacy of this program.
  As our mark reflects, we have also raised serious concerns regarding 
SOCOM's prioritization of its requirements. Again this year, SOCOM 
proposed to fund their flying hour readiness programs at only 67 
percent of their requirement, so they could fund these new contractors 
and facilities. They then made restoration of flying hours their number 
one unfunded priority.
  I believe it is ill-advised to provide a 50 percent increase to hire 
personal trainers, sports nutritionists, and sports psychologists for 
special operators at an average cost in excess of $200,000.
  With all due respect, all those who serve in our military--men and 
women, whether they be Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve or whether they 
are special operators--deserve the type of equipment and programs that 
keep them healthy and steadfast.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's remarks and 
would also point out that the committee has raised significant 
questions regarding duplication with service-related facilities and 
services by the Special Forces.
  More importantly--and I think this is key--we must be careful not to 
create or give the perception that we are treating Special Forces 
differently than anyone else who serves this country in uniform.
  Anyone who puts the uniform of the United States military on, they 
are all special. I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I would agree with the assertion that 
every single fighting man and woman is special. The Special Operations 
Forces do have some tremendous stresses that they can undergo, 
especially in the kind of combat missions that they perform.
  I believe that this is a program that has been successful in 
preventing suicide, so for that reason, I think it is timely. It is 
appropriate.
  There are different programs to treat our wounded warriors who have 
PTSD, and every program does not work for every soldier, sailor, 
airman, or marine; but for those who do get the treatment they need, it 
is literally a lifesaver.
  For that reason, I think it is a priority to address the aftereffects 
of PTSD, and this would be a very good program. I do appreciate the 
Appropriations Committee work that they do and the tough choices that 
they are constantly making, and I respect that, but I think this is a 
good choice, so I offer the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I would simply close by saying that all 
members of the military are equal and that this amendment is 
unwarranted, and I do oppose it.
  I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey if he has anything to add.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, we have $19 million specifically to 
address the high incidence of suicide among our special operators, so 
it is not only servicewide, but we recognize the special burdens that 
special operators bear through their incredible work.
  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 Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).
  The amendment was rejected.


                  Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $500,000)''.
       Page 33, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $500,000)''.
       Page 33, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $500,000)''.

  Ms. JACKSON LEE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be considered as read.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentlewoman from Texas and a 
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, this is a daunting time to be on the 
floor of the House during Defense Appropriations, and I add my 
appreciation to the chairman and to the ranking member for the 
bipartisan approach with which they have treated our men and women.
  As we speak, there are soldiers who have left our soil, and they are 
in Iraq protecting our men and women at our embassy. There is never a 
time that we do not call upon our soldiers to stand and to defend our 
Nation or our citizens. My amendment recognizes that.
  My amendment is a budget-neutral amendment. It adds $500,000 by 
reducing another account by $500,000 for an

[[Page 10375]]

emphasis on PTSD, for outreach toward hard-to-reach veterans, 
especially those who are homeless or reside in underserved urban and 
rural areas.
  Let me congratulate the committee for its hard work in recognition of 
the crisis of PTSD, but let me also cite that Houston is the third 
largest military retirement community in the United States, exceeded 
only by San Antonio and San Diego, California.

                              {time}  1615

  Houston is the second highest military recruiting district in the 
United States for all Armed Forces, to include the Coast Guard, and 
many return back to Houston. Twenty-three percent of the Houston adult 
homeless population are veterans, and nearly 2,500 men and women. I see 
them every day in my district. I have several homeless facilities that 
are particularly for veterans. As I interact with them, I see the clear 
signs of PTSD.
  Over the years, I have had the privilege of working with this 
committee in establishing a PTSD center in one of our hospitals that 
was not a veteran facility. An estimated 7.8 percent of Americans will 
experience PTSD at some point in their lives, with women 10.4 percent 
and men 5 percent to develop PTSD; as well, estimates of PTSD from the 
gulf war as high as 10 percent; estimates from the war in Afghanistan 
are between 6 percent and 11 percent; and current estimates of PTSD in 
military personnel who served in Iraq range from 12 percent to 20 
percent.
  Posttraumatic stress disorder is of course something of great 
concern, and many times I have seen, again, these individuals who are 
in these very facilities. My amendment will help to ensure that no 
soldier is left behind and the urgent need for more outreach toward 
hard-to-reach veterans suffering from PTSD, especially those who are 
homeless and reside in underserved areas.
  Mr. Chairman, I have been to what we call stand-downs. We have a 
number of them in our community. I started going to stand-downs way 
before I came to the United States Congress. These are street events 
that soldiers, retirees, or veterans come together, and particularly 
those who are homeless. I would say to you they are the most moving 
experiences that I have ever seen. The soldiers, the veterans are glad 
to see people who care. Many of them are suffering, but many of them--
all of them--put on that uniform and served us.
  Joe, for example, saw a good deal of active combat during his time in 
the military. Some incidents in particular have never left his mind, 
like the horrifying sight of Gary, a close comrade and friend, being 
blown up by a land mine. Even when he returned to civilian life, those 
images haunted him. Scenes from the battle would run repeatedly through 
his mind and disrupt his focus on work. Filling up at the gas station, 
for example, the smell of diesel immediately rekindled certain horrific 
memories. At other times, he had difficulty remembering the past, as if 
some events were too painful to allow back into his mind. He found 
himself avoiding socializing with old military buddies, as this would 
inevitably trigger a new round of memories. His girlfriend complained 
that he was always pent up and irritable, as if he were on guard, and 
Joe noticed that at night he had difficulty relaxing. When he heard 
loud noises, such as a truck backfiring, he literally jumped as if he 
were readying himself for combat. He began to drink heavily.
  I am glad that this committee has recognized the importance of 
providing these services for our soldiers, no matter the long range of 
time that they have been out, that they are now veterans, that they are 
still important and they still were willing to put on the uniform.
  In light of our crisis with the Veterans Affairs, I would ask my 
colleagues to support this amendment providing extra outreach to those 
veterans who did not think for one moment to put on that uniform and 
defend their Nation. Let's now provide them with that extra comfort.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I withdraw my reservation.
  We on the committee commend the gentlewoman for her concern for the 
health and well-being of all of our brave men and women in uniform. 
Taking care of the health and welfare of our servicemembers is of 
paramount importance and a concern to all of us.
  I can assure you that both Mr. Visclosky and I will work with you as 
well as the money we put in our bill to address the concerns you have 
rightly raised.
  I thank you for yielding.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, as I said earlier, I don't know if you 
heard, I thanked you for your caring response, along with the ranking 
member, putting together a bill that really recognizes service to our 
veterans.
  With that, let me conclude and ask my colleagues to support the 
Jackson Lee amendment. I indicate that Mr. Conyers of Michigan joins me 
in this amendment.
  I thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Frelinghuysen and Ranking Member 
Visclosky for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their 
devotion to the men and women of the Armed Forces who risk their lives 
to keep our nation safe.
  Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to explain my amendment, 
which is virtually identical to an amendment that I offered and was 
adopted in last year's Defense Appropriations Act (H.R. 2397).
  My amendment increases funding for the PTSD by $500,000. These funds 
should be used toward outreach activities targeting hard to reach 
veterans, especially those who are homeless or reside in underserved 
urban and rural areas, who suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder 
(PTSD).
  Mr. Chair, along with traumatic brain injury, PTSD is the signature 
wound suffered by the brave men and women fighting in Afghanistan, 
Iraq, and far off lands to defend the values and freedom we hold dear.
  For those of us whose daily existence is not lived in harm's way, it 
is difficult to imagine the horrific images that American servicemen 
and women deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other theaters of war see 
on a daily basis.
  In an instant a suicide bomber, an IED, or an insurgent can 
obliterate your best friend and right in front of your face. Yet, you 
are trained and expected to continue on with the mission, and you do, 
even though you may not even have reached your 20th birthday.
  But there always comes a reckoning. And it usually comes after the 
stress and trauma of battle is over and you are alone with your 
thoughts and memories.
  And the horror of those desperate and dangerous encounters with the 
enemy and your own mortality come flooding back.
  PTSD was first brought to public attention in relation to war 
veterans, but it can result from a variety of traumatic incidents, such 
as torture, being kidnapped or held captive, bombings, or natural 
disasters such as floods or earthquakes.
  People with PTSD may startle easily, become emotionally numb 
(especially in relation to people with whom they used to be close), 
lose interest in things they used to enjoy, have trouble feeling 
affectionate, be irritable, become more aggressive, or even become 
violent.
  They avoid situations that remind them of the original incident, and 
anniversaries of the incident are often very difficult.
  Most people with PTSD repeatedly relive the trauma in their thoughts 
during the day and in nightmares when they sleep. These are called 
flashbacks. A person having a flashback may lose touch with reality and 
believe that the traumatic incident is happening all over again.
  Mr. Chair, the fact of the matter is that most veterans with PTSD 
also have other psychiatric disorders, which are a consequence of PTSD. 
These veterans have co-occurring disorders, which include depression, 
alcohol and/or drug abuse problems, panic, and/or other anxiety 
disorders.
  My amendment recognizes that these soldiers are first and foremost, 
human. They carry their experiences with them.
  Ask a veteran of Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan about the frequency of 
nightmares they experience, and one will realize that serving in the 
Armed Forces leaves a lasting impression, whether good or bad.
  My amendment will help ensure that ``no soldier is left behind'' by 
addressing the urgent need for more outreach toward hard to reach 
veterans suffering from PTSD, especially

[[Page 10376]]

those who are homeless or reside in underserved urban and rural areas 
of our country.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee Amendment.

                             PTSD Anecdotes


                         Anecdote #1: (Veteran)

       Joe saw a good deal of active combat during his time in the 
     military. Some incidents in particular had never left his 
     mind--like the horrifying sight of Gary, a close comrade and 
     friend, being blown-up by a land mine.
       Even when he returned from to civilian life, these images 
     haunted him. Scenes repeatedly through his mind and disrupt 
     his focus on work.
       Filing up at the gas station, for example, the smell of 
     diesel immediately rekindled certain horrific memories. At 
     other times, he had difficulty remembering the past--as if 
     some events were too painful to allow back in his mind. He 
     found himself avoiding himself socializing with old military 
     buddies, as this would inevitably trigger a new round of 
     memories.
       His girlfriend complained that he was always pent-up and 
     irritable--as if he were on guard, and Joe noticed that at 
     night he had difficulty falling asleep.
       When he heard loud noises, such as a truck back-firing he 
     literally jumped, as if here were readying himself for 
     combat. He began to drink heavily.


              Anecdote #2: (as told by a Military Spouse)

       My husband's PTS manifested itself in different ways. I 
     remember Fourth of July at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., when we were 
     all standing outside listening to the band, enjoying the 
     picnic and listening to fireworks.
       The fireworks bothered Adrian because they sounded so much 
     like gunfire.
       It made other soldiers upset too, and we all went inside. I 
     thought it was ironic because the celebration was supposed to 
     be for the American soldiers; they couldn't even enjoy it.
       He'd see a can on the side of the road and swerve, thinking 
     it was an improvised explosive device.
       When he'd go out to dinner with other soldiers, I'd say it 
     looked like a ``The Last Supper'' painting because they'd all 
     sit there with their backs against the wall.
       If a room became too busy, he'd want to leave. He'd 
     suddenly become unfriendly or unapproachable.
       At first, I confused his behavior with depression, or I 
     thought maybe he was just tired. I also couldn't help but 
     think it had to do with me; I'm only human.
       I was fortunate that Adrian was willing to get help once he 
     got back. Once he was diagnosed, I knew we'd know better how 
     to deal with his symptoms. I educated myself on PTSD; I went 
     to his group therapist and reached out to the Real Warriors 
     Campaign for information. But the most important thing I did 
     was listen to Adrian.


                     Anecdote #3: (teen-aged girl)

       Maria was only 15 when she was attacked by a group of men 
     on the way home from school. They took turns screaming abuse 
     at her and then they each raped her. Finally, they tried to 
     stab her to death and would almost certainly have succeeded 
     had the police not arrived on the scene.
       For months after this horrifying event, Maria was not 
     herself. She was unable to keep the memories of the attack 
     out of her mind. At night she would have terrible dreams of 
     rape, and would wake up screaming.
       She had difficulty walking back from school because the 
     route took her past the site of the attack, so she would have 
     to go the long way home. She felt as though her emotions were 
     numbed, and as though she had no real future. At home she was 
     anxious, tense, and easily startled. She felt ``dirty'' and 
     somehow shamed by the event, and she resolved not to tell 
     close friends about the event, in case they too rejected her.


                     Anecdote #4: (civilian woman)

       A 35-year-old lady was riding a bicycle in a carpark when 
     she was hit from behind by a car.
       Six months after the accident, she still had frequent vivid 
     and intrusive memories of the incident.
       She described seeing the car's wheels stopping just in 
     front of her face and hearing the screeching sound of the 
     brakes.
       It felt as if it were happening again each time she 
     recalled it. She jumped whenever she heard loud traffic 
     noises and especially when she heard car brakes screeching.
       She stayed in her room much more than usual, avoided using 
     the bicycles at all and avoided travelling in any vehicle as 
     much as she could.
       She felt helpless and useless to overcome her symptoms even 
     though her family were warm and encouraging to her.
                                  ____

       Houston is the 3rd largest military retirement community in 
     the United States (exceeded by San Antonio, TX and San Diego, 
     CA).
       Houston is the 2nd largest Veterans Community in the United 
     States in terms of resident Veterans.
       Houston is the 2nd largest Military Recruiting District in 
     the United States for all Armed Forces Services, to include 
     the U.S. Coast Guard.
       23% of the Houston adult homeless population are veterans, 
     nearly 2,500 men and women.

  The Acting CHAIR. The reservation of a point of order is withdrawn.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Lamborn

  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chair, I am offering the second Lamborn amendment, 
052.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from Colorado and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, when you look at press accounts on what is 
happening at our southwest border, we are being overwhelmed. This 
amendment would take $5 million and give it to the Army National Guard 
out of the Department of Defense's administration operations account so 
that the National Guard is better able to get people and station them 
at our southwest border. They do not have dedicated funding or the 
additional funding they need for this border protection mission, yet 
they are involved in trying to establish order at the border.
  The primary role of the Federal Government is to provide for our 
national security, and securing our borders is part of that national 
security mission. Mr. Chairman, I believe that this $5 million would be 
better spent on securing our border than adding more people to the 
Secretary of Defense's staff.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAMBORN. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I appreciate the gentleman's interest in defending 
our borders, appreciate your raising this important issue, and we 
support your amendment.
  Thank you for yielding.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate the chairman's hard 
work and for his support of this amendment.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Jeffries

  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 33, line 11, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 33, line 19, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from New York and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chair, let me first thank the distinguished 
chairman as well as the distinguished ranking member for their great 
work with respect to this legislation.
  This amendment makes a modest adjustment to the bill that would 
increase funding for the Defense Health Program by $10 million. It is 
budget neutral by reducing the Department of Defense's departmentwide 
operation and maintenance funds by a corresponding amount.
  Let me first take this opportunity to express my strong support for 
the critical work of the Defense Department overall. The adjustment 
made by this amendment will still leave the Department with an 
extremely robust amount of operation and maintenance funding while 
ensuring that necessary resources are available for vital research and 
development that will aid both servicemembers and civilians alike.

[[Page 10377]]

  The Defense Health Program oversees all medical and health care 
programs for the Defense Department. DHP's research and development 
activities help advance medical research to provide innovative 
solutions for servicemembers and their families facing medical trauma 
as well as advance the state of medical science in areas that benefit 
our broader society.
  Over the last 10 years, there has been a significant increase in the 
amount of reported cases of PTSD in servicemembers. These increases are 
seen in both those deployed overseas as well as in nondeployed 
servicemembers. For those servicemembers who are deployed, the number 
of incidents of PTSD has increased twelvefold over the last 10 years. 
For those not deployed, the number of reported incident cases has 
nearly doubled. The annual total for reported PTSD cases has remained 
at unprecedentedly high levels over the last 5 years.
  While we are currently winding down the war in Afghanistan, American 
troops continue to see action on the battlefield. With more of these 
troops returning from deployments over the next several years, it is 
likely that the number of PTSD cases will hold steady, if not increase. 
Furthermore, increased international unrest and uncertainty may result 
in future troop deployments to other parts of world, making it likely 
that the number of reported PTSD cases will remain at a high level. 
This amendment will invest resources to help inform health 
professionals on how best to treat our military personnel moving 
forward.
  Furthermore, the need for increased research concerning PTSD is not 
limited to our military. High levels of violence in many communities 
throughout America have induced PTSD-like conditions for some trapped 
in these unfortunate circumstances. Research undertaken by the 
Department of Defense can benefit families and community health 
professionals in treating our children and others impacted in this way. 
I, therefore, urge my colleagues to support additional medical research 
to help the military victims of PTSD and our broader society.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. JEFFRIES. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We on the committee thank the gentleman from New 
York for his concern regarding funding levels for traumatic brain 
injury, posttraumatic stress disorder, and psychological health 
research.
  Just for the record, you should know that our bill does include $414 
million, including a plus-up of $125 million above the request level of 
$289 million for all of those important issues.
  We appreciate his work and his willingness to work with us, and we 
accept his amendment.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the Chair for his work on this issue as well as 
the ranking member.
  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. Jeffries).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. McKinley

  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

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

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from West Virginia and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, earlier this year the Office of 
Management and Budget admitted that they made a mistake when they 
presented the President's budget request for the National Guard Youth 
ChalleNGe Program. Since then, they have expressed that they intend to 
correct this mistake by offering a supplemental appropriation, because 
you and I know supplemental appropriations don't happen very often 
around here.
  Congresswoman Napolitano and I have a two-part approach to solve this 
mistake that has been created by OMB. First, Congress already has 
unanimously passed our amendment to the National Defense Authorization 
Act by increasing the authorization by $55 million to take care of this 
mistake. Under this amendment--this amendment--this bipartisan approach 
is we are willing to compromise to lower that amount to $21 million and 
restore the program, keep it intact.
  Mr. Chairman, we shouldn't perpetuate the mistake that has been 
created by OMB by rejecting this amendment. Two mistakes don't make it 
right.
  Mr. Chairman, this program addresses some serious needs and a dropout 
epidemic among our youth. These are real people with real problems. 
They need our help. Society may have given up on them, but we in 
Congress shouldn't.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McKINLEY. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. I rise to address this amendment, Mr. Chairman.
  I thank my cochairman, Mr. McKinley, on the National Guard ChalleNGe 
Program.

                              {time}  1630

  Thank you for your great help in the outreach to all of our Members 
of Congress.
  We have been working in a bipartisan manner to help our Nation's 
throwaway children, those who have fallen through the cracks.
  For 2015, Defense Appropriations will fund the program at $114 
million. The current funding is $135 million, so it would be short.
  This amendment increases by, as he mentioned, $21 million to have the 
same funding as 2014, increasing it to the same level of $135 million. 
It would prevent cuts to critical programs that are helping our youth 
integrate back into society. It reduces the budget line in operation 
and maintenance by the same amount.
  It is critical for hundreds of our young people who drop out yearly 
to have an opportunity to be accepted into the program. The ChalleNGe 
Program has already educated 120,000 young people nationally. It also 
is a volunteer program free for 16- to 18-year-olds at no cost to the 
child or the family; 22\1/2\-week residential boot camp-like program 
led by the State's National Guard cadre; prepares them, educates them, 
instills discipline, builds employment potential, and returns them to 
school.
  The 2012 RAND Corporation study finds that for every dollar spent, in 
return is $2.66, a yield of 166 percent return on investment--the best 
youth program in the Nation.
  It effectively addresses part of our Nation's dropout epidemic on a 
very small level. America needs more of these programs, not less.
  It is beneficial to our local businesses, to our communities, and to 
our Nation's ability to compete, to our future economy.
  According to the 2009 National Labor Market study, California alone 
has 714,000 dropouts yearly, the sixth-worst State.
  Our graduates are 800 a year. Basically, we need more funding to 
expand it to more qualified individuals who are on a waiting list. Our 
best retention rate is in California. It is educating, training, and 
retaining more than 90 percent.
  There is very much a need for these programs. Please support this 
amendment.
  Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, this is a mistake caused by OMB. We can 
correct it right here today. Again, as I said, these are real people 
with real problems, and they are trying to get on with their lives. The 
program has worked all across America. Let's not perpetuate this 
problem by reducing their funds. It was a mistake by OMB, and we can 
correct it here today.
  I ask that my colleagues support this amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. McGovern

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

[[Page 10378]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $3,500,000)'',
       Page 33, line 11, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $3,000,000)'',
       Page 33, line 12, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $3,000,000).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Representatives Jones, Shea-Porter, 
Tsongas, Bordallo, and Moore for joining me today in offering this 
amendment. They are leaders and champions in support of the benefits 
that service dogs provide to our servicemen and -women on and off the 
battlefield.
  This amendment establishes a $3 million competitive grants pilot 
program for qualified nonprofit organizations whose mission is to 
address the physical and mental health needs of veterans and 
servicemembers with the assistance from trained service dogs. This is a 
very modest amount of money when we consider the need of our veterans 
and the number of organizations around the country dedicated to 
addressing this need.
  Many of our servicemembers return home from the battlefield suffering 
from traumatic brain injury, PTSD, blindness or impaired vision, the 
loss of a limb, paralysis, impaired mobility, loss of hearing, and 
other mental and physical disabilities. Too many struggle with suicidal 
thoughts or find themselves unable to reintegrate back into family life 
or their communities.
  Working with a trained service dog is a proven aid for these wounded 
warriors, the merits of which have been documented in decades of 
programs for civilians with similar mental or physical challenges. 
Providing grant opportunities for groups professionally engaged in this 
field is critical to ensuring that our military and our veterans 
receive the care that they deserve.
  In December, I held a briefing that brought together experts to look 
more closely at the impact service dogs have on veterans' care. Medical 
experts, nonprofits, and veterans with trained service dogs 
participated, including retired Navy Lieutenant Bradley Snyder, who 
lost his eyesight to an IED while serving in Afghanistan. He was 
accompanied by this Fidelco-trained guide dog, Gizzy. Fidelco is a 
nonprofit guide dog training organization in Connecticut. Lieutenant 
Snyder has since gone on to compete in the 2012 London Paralympics 
Games, where he won two gold medals and one silver medal in swimming.
  John Moon and service dog Rainbow represented the National Education 
for Assistance Dog Services, a nonprofit accredited service dog 
provider founded in 1976. Based in Massachusetts, NEADS has trained 
more than 1,400 assistance dogs. Since 2005, it has been actively 
working to bring service dogs to veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan 
wars.
  Brett Simon is a veteran handler for police canines. Twice deployed 
to Iraq as an explosives detector canine handler, he described his work 
as a dog training specialist at K9s for Warriors Academy in Florida.
  We also heard from Rick Yount, founder of the Warrior Canine 
Connection. The WCC Service Dog Training Therapy Program has operated 
at the National Intrepid Center of Excellence at Walter Reed National 
Military Medical Center in Bethesda since October 2011. I am very 
pleased to see that this bill continues to provide funds for this very 
special program.
  Mr. Chairman, there are scores of similar organizations across the 
Nation. A modest grant pilot program will ensure that they reach even 
more of our wounded warriors with the assistance of a service dog.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).
  Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Two weeks ago, I went to Walter Reed Hospital. I was told that two of 
my marines from Camp Lejeune had been severely wounded in Afghanistan. 
The first marine I saw was 23 years of age. He had lost both legs and 
an arm. His father was there from Louisiana, and I saw pain, I saw 
worry, I saw sadness in his eyes. The second marine I saw had stepped 
on a 40-pound IED and lost both legs. He was telling me about his 
little 8-month-old daughter and his wife. They were not there, but I 
heard that.
  I know that these service dogs are making a difference in the life of 
the wounded, whether it be mental or it might be physical. This $3 
million, when we are spending billions in Afghanistan, it would be a 
sin and a shame if we cannot find the $3 million to put into this 
program to make sure that those who have given so much have a little 
bit of support and a little bit of pleasure in having a loving animal 
that has been trained to give support to that person that has given so 
much for this country.
  I hope that this amendment will be accepted.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McGOVERN. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The committee would like to thank you, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts, the gentleman from North Carolina, and 
your colleagues for sponsoring this amendment.
  The $3 million would be added to the $3 million which the committee, 
Mr. Visclosky and I, put into our bill for similar purposes.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McGOVERN. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I thank both gentlemen for raising this issue and 
offering the amendment. I strongly support it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Benishek

  Mr. BENISHEK. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 33, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 33, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Benishek) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  Mr. BENISHEK. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of a very simple amendment, in 
which I am joined and sponsored by Mr. Lowenthal of California. I 
believe strongly that there is an epidemic, commonly referred to as 
Alzheimer's disease, that is sweeping our country.
  My amendment would increase funding for the Defense Health Program by 
$2 million, with the intent of providing more peer-reviewed research to 
fight this devastating disease.
  As a doctor who served at the Iron Mountain VA for 20 years, I know 
how important the health research programs at the Department of Defense 
are. These programs provide groundbreaking research into the health 
challenges that our veterans face.
  These health research programs help us to provide better quality of 
care to those who have served our country and frequently lead to 
advances in treatment that benefit the rest of the population.
  According to the Alzheimer's Association, over 5 million Americans 
are currently living with this disease. This number is expected to 
continue to rise, resulting in increased suffering for patients and 
their families and a dramatic rise in health care costs.

[[Page 10379]]

  As a representative for a district with a large population of 
veterans and a large population of seniors, I have seen firsthand the 
devastating effects of Alzheimer's. We must do more to combat this 
terrible disease.
  This amendment will cut $2 million in funding for the Secretary of 
Defense's general operation and maintenance fund, an account which I 
believe can take a small cut, and applies those funds to the Defense 
Health Program for medical research.
  By voting for this amendment, you will be supporting more research 
and development on the ground, rather than the salaries of bureaucrats 
in Washington.
  I believe this amendment is a good, commonsense effort, and I hope my 
colleagues will support me in this effort to increase research into 
treating and eventually curing Alzheimer's.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BENISHEK. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We on the committee thank you for this amendment. 
Understanding your professional background and many of our constituents 
suffering under Alzheimer's, we are supportive of it.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BENISHEK. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. If supplied with a copy of his amendment, I would 
appreciate it very much.
  Mr. BENISHEK. Absolutely.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Benishek).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Kildee

  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 22, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $50,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would appropriate $10 million 
to fund an amendment passed unanimously in the 2015 NDAA that allocates 
additional financial literacy training programs for incoming and 
transitioning servicemembers. This $10 million will be spread equally 
among the service's operation and maintenance accounts.
  This increased financial literacy training would be funded by 
allocating $10 million from the Navy's $14 billion aircraft procurement 
account, which includes nearly $1 billion in funding over the Navy's 
request to purchase 12 EA-18G Growler aircraft. The Navy actually 
requested none of these 12 aircraft.
  The problem we have is that far too often servicemembers have 
inadequate training or experience. We are often talking about young 
people who have yet to really fully have their feet underneath them. 
When a servicemember has financial difficulty, often they are preyed 
upon by unscrupulous lenders, payday lenders, often.

                              {time}  1645

  In fact, in some cases--this was reported widely recently--offering 
and executing loans at up to 400 percent interest rates, often 
targeting these young servicemembers.
  While this has an effect clearly on the financial condition of 
servicemembers, it also can have an effect on readiness, in that many 
servicemembers require a security clearance to perform their duties, 
and financial difficulties and the loss of a clearance can have an 
enormous impact on readiness.
  All that being said, I will be withdrawing my amendment. The offset 
that we offered, according to CBO, would require a $50 million 
offsetting cut to raise $10 million, and I will certainly yield to 
anybody who would like to explain to me the mathematics behind some of 
the scoring that comes up.
  Hearing none, I will move on.
  This is an important area. It is an important question. The House has 
already unanimously acted in the NDAA to support this program.
  While it is my intention to withdraw this amendment, what I would 
ask, if the chairman and ranking member would engage and work with us 
on this--and certainly engage the Department of Defense--to find the 
financial resources to support this expanded literacy program, it would 
be of great benefit to our servicemembers, and it would be of 
tremendous value in terms of our readiness.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KILDEE. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I am sure the ranking member and I would be 
pleased to work with you on this issue
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Michigan?
  There was no objection.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Gohmert

  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $35,956,000)''.
       Page 36, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $35,956,000)''.
       Page 36, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $35,956,000)''.

  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I would point out to the Chair that we 
do not have a copy of the gentleman's amendment.
  I would also point out to the Chair, if I would be given permission 
to, that this is the second time in the first hour of debate we have 
not been supplied with an amendment offered on the floor.
  I would certainly appreciate the courtesy of making sure that we are 
noticed as far as the content of these very important amendments, so we 
can give them the appropriate consideration that they are due.
  I appreciate the Chair's indulgence.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will distribute copies of the amendment.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 628, the gentleman from Texas and a 
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, as read, this would transfer $35.956 
million into an account under the bill that specifies, ``shall be for 
National Guard counterdrug program.''
  We have spoken with people on the border. They know the problems they 
are having. They need equipment.
  This amount would allow eight UH-72 helicopters to help with drug 
interdiction on the border. It is not like there are not enough 
helicopters to go around. There are 100 National Guard helicopters. 
This would only be utilizing eight of them, putting them in a place 
where they could be used on the border to help with the problem.
  Mr. Chairman, right now, with so many of our ICE agents and so many 
of our Border Patrol engaged, as ICE agents said yesterday, in changing 
diapers instead of being involved in interdicting, as they should be, 
they need this equipment. This would be National Guard equipment that 
would allow them to participate in stopping the drugs that are flowing.
  It is very apparent, from what is going on, that we even have drug 
cartels that are taking advantage of the situation. As ICE agents have 
explained, they are using this time--with all of the attention toward 
the children and the humanitarian crisis on the border--to step up 
their game in getting drugs into the United States.
  According to the figures from CBO and from the figures we have gotten

[[Page 10380]]

from the committee, this will not create an increase in outlays and 
should be in order in that regard.
  I would like to point out that, since 2012, aircentric operations 
have resulted in an almost 70 percent increase in detection and 
interdiction, compared to the ground-based operations.
  So this could make a real difference in providing for the common 
defense, which is our duty here in Congress, as well as the duty of the 
executive branch. This would make their job easier.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, 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, I certainly appreciate the gentleman's 
concern, but would make three points to our colleagues.
  The first is that the committee is absolutely aware of the problem 
that is taking place along the borders of our country.
  Both relative to the problem that the gentleman has highlighted, as 
well as for this Nation's defense, I would point out to my colleagues 
that, in the underlying bill, we provide $1.356,227 billion for the 
procurement of 87 UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters, which is an increase of 
$119.226 million and eight aircraft above the President's request, so 
there is a recognition by the committee and in the bill that there is a 
need, and we filled that bill.
  I would also point out that, relative to drug interdiction, the 
committee recommendation is for $944.687 million to deal with this 
problem; and I would, again, point out the gentleman's concern, that 
that is an increase of $124 million above the administration's request.
  The last point is that the gentleman is taking it out of operation 
and maintenance, departmentwide.
  I spoke in my opening remarks about the increases we have tried to 
provide to make sure our troops are prepared, maintained, trained, and 
ready. It is a mistake to take over $35 million away from our troops, 
who need that money for training.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Let me associate myself with the ranking member's 
comments earlier. We need to see the amendments. We are not seeing the 
amendments on a timely basis. As a basic courtesy, it would be helpful 
if both sides were provided with amendments by our colleagues.
  Relative to this amendment, for the last several years, the National 
Guard has not even been able to spend the amount of money we have 
provided for counternarcotics, but instead has actually chosen to 
return funds to the Treasury; hence, the adjustment this year to 
actually re-source the National Guard.
  Also, for the record, Mr. Chairman, the intent of the gentleman's 
request is to purchase equipment. This account does not provide 
resources to buy helicopters. This account provides funds for the 
National Guard's States' plan, operational funding, it is not money 
that can be used to buy helicopters.
  I urge a ``no'' vote.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate the gentleman's 
remarks.
  Again, I would point out to my colleagues that I think $1.356 million 
is enough, and I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment, given the 5 
minutes we were allowed to review it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the attention that the 
committee has given to the issue and that, in the past, the National 
Guard may have had extra funds that were moved and able to be used 
elsewhere, but these are recent developments that have been going on 
even since our Appropriations Committee has been having hearings, and 
so this is such a dramatic problem that it is escalating every day.
  I would like to correct the record. Actually, this proposal will not 
purchase any new helicopters. There are 100 National Guard helicopters. 
This would just pay for the use and the crew and the maintenance and 
upkeep of eight of those they already have. It won't purchase any more. 
I wish we could get helicopters that cheaply.
  It will keep eight of them in use with the drug interdiction on our 
border right now because there is an invasion going on at our southern 
border. It is an invasion, and it is increasing, as I say, every day.
  With that request, I don't think it is asking too much to have eight 
helicopters that have already been purchased--they just need crews, 
equipment, and upkeep--to help in the interdiction of the invasion in 
which drugs are being brought across our border in the south.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GOHMERT. 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 Texas will 
be postponed.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. 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. 
Coffman) having assumed the chair, Mr. Duncan of Tennessee, 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. 4870) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for other purposes, had come 
to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________