[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6585-6640]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017

  The Committee resumed its sitting.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Fleming

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia). It is now in order to 
consider amendment No. 2 printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

     SEC. 3__. PROHIBITION ON CARRYING OUT CERTAIN AUTHORITIES 
                   RELATING TO CLIMATE CHANGE.

       (a) In General.--None of the funds authorized to be 
     appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for 
     fiscal year 2017 for the Department of Defense may be 
     obligated or expended to carry out the provisions described 
     in subsection (b).
       (b) Provisions.--The provisions described in this 
     subsection are the following:
       (1) Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6(b)(iii), and 6(c) of Executive 
     Order 13653 (78 Fed. Reg. 66817, relating to preparing the 
     United States for the impacts of climate change).
       (2) Sections 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15(b) 
     of Executive Order 13693 (80 Fed. Reg. 15869, relating to 
     planning for Federal sustainability in the next decade).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, my amendment prevents scarce dollars from 
being wasted to fund two of President Obama's executive orders 
regarding climate change and green energy. These are dollars that 
should go to the readiness of our Armed Forces.
  A similar amendment has already been adopted by voice vote for the 
past 2 years during House floor consideration of the Defense 
appropriations bills.
  My amendment is supported by 28 outside organizations, including the 
Competitive Enterprise Institute, Americans for Prosperity, Council for 
Citizens Against Government Waste, and many others.
  These executive orders require the Department of Defense to 
squander--squander--precious defense dollars by incorporating climate 
change bureaucracies into its acquisition and military operations and 
to waste money on green energy projects. EPA bureaucrats and other 
political appointees are directing our military commanders on how to 
run their installations and procure green weapons, which undermines 
ongoing acquisition reforms in the NDAA. These activities are simply 
not the mission of the U.S. military.
  Regarding DOD's energy policy, decisions by installation commanders 
and DOD personnel need to be driven by requirements for actual cost-
effectiveness, readiness, not arbitrary and inflexible green energy 
quotas and CO2 benchmarks. My amendment does not prevent the 
DOD from considering renewable energy projects where it makes sense. 
But these decisions should not be driven by these mandates.
  Take, for example, the Naval Station Norfolk, where the solar array 
cost the Navy $21 million but only provided 2 percent of the base's 
electricity. According to the Inspector General's Office, it will take 
447 years for the savings to pay the cost of the project. However, 
solar panels usually only last about 25 years.
  These mandates are diverting limited military resources to Solyndra-
style boondoggles while sacrificing our military's readiness, 
modernization, and end strength. In a time of declining defense 
budgets, we need to ensure that every dollar spent goes directly to 
support the lethality of our Armed Forces.
  Again, my amendment is similar to repeated efforts by the House to 
prevent national security dollars from being wasted to advance the 
President's onerous green energy and climate change requirements. So I 
ask that the House continue that opposition to this nondefense agenda 
by supporting my amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment.
  In January of this year, the Pentagon issued a directive saying: 
``The Department of Defense must be able to adapt current and future 
operations to address the impacts of climate change in order to 
maintain an effective and efficient U.S. military.''
  This followed a DOD report to Congress released last July that said: 
``Climate change is an urgent and growing threat to our national 
security, contributing to increased natural disasters, refugee flows, 
and conflicts over basic resources such as food and water . . . and the 
scope, scale, and intensity of these impacts are projected to 
increase.''
  From 2006 to 2010, Syria experienced overwhelming refugee flows that 
DOD characterized as a climate-related security risk creating negative 
effects on human security and requiring DOD involvement and resources.
  In 2014, the Pentagon reported that the impacts of climate change may 
increase the frequency, scale, and complexity of future missions, while 
at the same time undermining the capacity of our domestic installation 
to support training activities.
  The readiness of our military depends on being able to train and 
equip the most advanced force in the world, but the threat of rising 
sea levels from escalating temperatures and melting icecaps could put 
dozens of military installations at risk.
  San Diego is home to the largest concentration of military forces in 
the world. With seven military installations in my district alone, 
rising sea

[[Page 6586]]

levels, drought, and finding reliable energy sources all pose 
challenges. San Diego military installations are investing in energy 
security and increasing water and energy efficiency. We should not 
undermine those efforts.
  This amendment is an attempt by top politicians to prevent the 
Department of Defense, which is tasked with maintaining a strong 
military, keeping all Americans safe, and protecting our global 
interests from addressing what they call an urgent and growing threat 
to our own national security. But national defense is not about 
politics or ideology. It is about security, readiness, and continuing 
to field the most dynamic and effective military in the world. We 
cannot have that if we ignore science and the concerns of the brightest 
military minds in the United States of America.
  I oppose this reckless amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the 
same.
  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana has 2 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Washington has 2\3/4\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, I would respond, first of all, by saying I 
think we all see the reports. If you are on Armed Services, you hear 
our generals talk about how our readiness is in dire straits, that we 
can't respond to the challenges around the world.
  At a time like this, why would we want to pay 5 or 10 times the 
nominal amount for fuel? It makes no sense.
  To my colleague who wants to argue climate change: fine, we can argue 
that. But this is not the place to debate that.
  You see, my amendment allows for the Department of Defense to do 
whatever is best for our Armed Forces. Whether you agree with climate 
change or not, it doesn't matter. All we say is let's free up the DOD, 
our Armed Forces, and our generals to do the right thing.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes).
  Mr. SARBANES. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, the Obama administration issued two critical executive 
orders directing Federal agencies to take responsibility for 
anticipating and responding to the effects of climate change.
  This amendment that is being proposed would block the Department of 
Defense from undertaking that effort. The amendment is ill-advised. It 
doesn't protect and prepare the American people for the impacts of 
climate change, and it won't help our military operate in a new 
security environment created by climate change.
  Climate change poses a significant security threat to the United 
States and the world at large. But don't take it from me. Our Nation's 
military leaders are saying we need to prepare for this new threat. The 
proponents of this amendment should listen to the military experts, not 
the special interest polluters that benefit from climate denial and the 
status quo.
  As a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, I have been 
frustrated that the Republican majority has refused to hold serious 
hearings on the urgent problem of climate change, so Democrats on that 
committee went to Annapolis in my State to hold a climate change field 
forum.
  We heard testimony from Vice Admiral Ted Carter, the Superintendent 
of the Naval Academy. He told us that our future military leaders are 
learning about the science of climate change and the national security 
consequences that stem from it. He testified that because the Naval 
Academy sits on the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, they have several 
projects in motion to address sea level rise and the increased 
regularity of flooding. They are retrofitting older buildings and 
building new facilities that double as seawalls to protect the campus.
  Vice Admiral Carter also told harrowing stories of sailing aircraft 
carriers in between two massive hurricanes and equipment that short-
circuited in waters with surface temperatures in excess of 100 degrees.
  Certainly my colleagues on the Republican side would not deny that 
these are consequential problems. Leaders like Admiral Carter cannot 
afford the luxury of ideological climate denial. He is taking the right 
steps to address climate change. We should support him and our other 
military leaders. Unfortunately, this amendment would do the opposite. 
For that reason, I urge its defeat.
  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, again, my amendment is not a debate about 
climate change, regardless of where you fall on that issue. All this 
does is free up DOD to make the vital important decisions on that, 
instead of handcuffing it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, actually, it precisely does 
handcuff them by telling them how to make their decisions, saying they 
can't make a decision based on their belief that needs for alternatives 
to fossil fuels are important. If we don't wish to handcuff them, don't 
offer an amendment telling them that they have to spend their money in 
a certain way. That is exactly what this amendment does.
  Again, there are multiple reasons for making these investments in 
alternative energy. I will return to one that was raised by Mr. Gibson.
  Out in the field, you need multiple different sources of energy. If 
you can get a situation where you have properly developed solar power 
or thermal power and you can use that on the spot where you are at, 
instead of relying on trucks to bring in diesel or gasoline, you are 
saving lives.
  This is an investment in making our military more prepared. What this 
amendment does is it restricts the ability of the Department of Defense 
to make that investment. If you don't want to restrict them, don't 
restrict them.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to the ranking 
member, all my amendment does is holds the status quo before these two 
executive orders; and that is, the commanders in the field and the 
generals at the Pentagon can do whatever is best for the military, 
whether or not it has to do with saving money or spending more money on 
alternative forms of energy.
  My amendment frees them up. It does not restrict them in any way.
  I urge adoption of this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. 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 Louisiana 
will be postponed.

                              {time}  1545


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Pearce

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       After section 7004, insert the following:

     SEC. 7005. RETURN OF CERTAIN LANDS AT FORT WINGATE TO THE 
                   ORIGINAL INHABITANTS ACT.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Return 
     of Certain Lands At Fort Wingate to The Original Inhabitants 
     Act''.
       (b) Division and Treatment of Lands of Former Fort Wingate 
     Depot Activity, New Mexico, to Benefit the Zuni Tribe and 
     Navajo Nation.--
       (1) Immediate trust on behalf of zuni tribe; exception.--
     Subject to valid existing rights and to easements reserved 
     pursuant to subsection (c), all right, title, and interest of 
     the United States in and to the lands of Former Fort Wingate 
     Depot Activity depicted in dark blue on the map titled ``The 
     Fort Wingate Depot Activity Negotiated

[[Page 6587]]

     Property Division April 2016'' (in this section referred to 
     as the ``Map'') and transferred to the Secretary of the 
     Interior are to be held in trust by the Secretary of the 
     Interior for the Zuni Tribe as part of the Zuni Reservation, 
     unless the Zuni Tribe otherwise elects under clause (ii) of 
     paragraph (3)(C) to have the parcel conveyed to it in 
     Restricted Fee Status.
       (2) Immediate trust on behalf of the navajo nation; 
     exception.--Subject to valid existing rights and to easements 
     reserved pursuant to subsection (c), all right, title, and 
     interest of the United States in and to the lands of Former 
     Fort Wingate Depot Activity depicted in dark green on the Map 
     and transferred to the Secretary of the Interior are to be 
     held in trust by the Secretary of the Interior for the Navajo 
     Nation as part of the Navajo Reservation, unless the Navajo 
     Nation otherwise elects under clause (ii) of paragraph (3)(C) 
     to have the parcel conveyed to it in Restricted Fee Status.
       (3) Subsequent transfer and trust; restricted fee status 
     alternative.--
       (A) Transfer upon completion of remediation.--Not later 
     than 60 days after the date on which the Secretary of the 
     Army, with the concurrence of the New Mexico Environment 
     Department, notifies the Secretary of the Interior that 
     remediation of a parcel of land of Former Fort Wingate Depot 
     Activity has been completed consistent with subsection (d), 
     the Secretary of the Army shall transfer administrative 
     jurisdiction over the parcel to the Secretary of the 
     Interior.
       (B) Notification of transfer.--Not later than 30 days after 
     the date on which the Secretary of the Army transfers 
     administrative jurisdiction over a parcel of land of Former 
     Fort Wingate Depot Activity under subparagraph (A), the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall notify the Zuni Tribe and 
     Navajo Nation of the transfer of administrative jurisdiction 
     over the parcel.
       (C) Trust or restricted fee status.--
       (i) Trust.--Except as provided in clause (ii), the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall hold each parcel of land of 
     Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity transferred under 
     subparagraph (A) in trust--

       (I) for the Zuni Tribe, in the case of land depicted in 
     blue on the Map; or
       (II) for the Navajo Nation, in the case of land depicted in 
     green on the Map.

       (ii) Restricted fee status.--In lieu of having a parcel of 
     land held in trust under clause (i), the Zuni Tribe, with 
     respect to land depicted in blue on the Map, and the Navajo 
     Nation, with respect to land depicted in green on the Map, 
     may elect to have the Secretary of the Interior convey the 
     parcel or any portion of the parcel to it in restricted fee 
     status.
       (iii) Notification of election.--Not later than 45 days 
     after the date on which the Zuni Tribe or the Navajo Nation 
     receives notice under subparagraph (B) of the transfer of 
     administrative jurisdiction over a parcel of land of Former 
     Fort Wingate Depot Activity, the Zuni Tribe or the Navajo 
     Nation shall notify the Secretary of the Interior of an 
     election under clause (ii) for conveyance of the parcel or 
     any portion of the parcel in restricted fee status.
       (iv) Conveyance.--As soon as practicable after receipt of a 
     notice from the Zuni Tribe or the Navajo Nation under clause 
     (iii), but in no case later than 6 months after receipt of 
     the notice, the Secretary of the Interior shall convey, in 
     restricted fee status, the parcel of land of Former Fort 
     Wingate Depot Activity covered by the notice to the Zuni 
     Tribe or the Navajo Nation, as the case may be.
       (v) Restricted fee status defined.--For purposes of this 
     section only, the term ``restricted fee status'', with 
     respect to land conveyed under clause (iv), means that the 
     land so conveyed--

       (I) shall be owned in fee by the Indian tribe to whom the 
     land is conveyed;
       (II) shall be part of the Indian tribe's Reservation and 
     expressly made subject to the jurisdiction of the Indian 
     Tribe;
       (III) shall not be sold by the Indian tribe without the 
     consent of Congress;
       (IV) shall not be subject to taxation by a State or local 
     government other than the government of the Indian tribe; and
       (V) shall not be subject to any provision of law providing 
     for the review or approval by the Secretary of the Interior 
     before an Indian tribe may use the land for any purpose, 
     directly or through agreement with another party.

       (4) Survey and boundary requirements.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall--
       (i) provide for the survey of lands of Former Fort Wingate 
     Depot Activity taken into trust for the Zuni Tribe or the 
     Navajo Nation or conveyed in restricted fee status for the 
     Zuni Tribe or the Navajo Nation under paragraph (1), (2), or 
     (3); and
       (ii) establish legal boundaries based on the Map as parcels 
     are taken into trust or conveyed in restricted fee status.
       (B) Consultation.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this section, the Secretary of the Interior 
     shall consult with the Zuni Tribe and the Navajo Nation to 
     determine their priorities regarding the order in which 
     parcels should be surveyed and, to the greatest extent 
     feasible, the Secretary shall follow these priorities.
       (5) Relation to certain regulations.--Part 151 of title 25, 
     Code of Federal Regulations, shall not apply to taking lands 
     of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity into trust under 
     paragraph (1), (2), or (3).
       (6) Fort wingate launch complex land status.--Upon 
     certification by the Secretary of Defense that the area 
     generally depicted as ``Fort Wingate Launch Complex'' on the 
     Map is no longer required for military purposes and can be 
     transferred to the Secretary of the Interior--
       (A) the areas generally depicted as ``FWLC A'' and ``FWLC 
     B'' on the Map shall be held in trust by the Secretary of the 
     Interior for the Zuni Tribe in accordance with this 
     subsection; and
       (B) the areas generally depicted as ``FWLC C'' and ``FWLC 
     D'' on the Map shall be held in trust by the Secretary of the 
     Interior for the Navajo Nation in accordance with this 
     subsection.
       (c) Retention of Necessary Easements and Access.--
       (1) Treatment of existing easements, permit rights, and 
     rights-of-way.--
       (A) In general.--The lands of Former Fort Wingate Depot 
     Activity held in trust or conveyed in restricted fee status 
     pursuant to subsection (b) shall be held in trust with 
     easements, permit rights, and rights-of-way, and access 
     associated with such easements, permit rights, and rights-of-
     way, of any applicable utility service provider in existence 
     or for which an application is pending for existing 
     facilities at the time of the conveyance or change to trust 
     status, including the right to upgrade applicable utility 
     services recognized and preserved, in perpetuity and without 
     the right of revocation (except as provided in subparagraph 
     (B)).
       (B) Termination.--An easement, permit right, or right-of-
     way recognized and preserved under subparagraph (A) shall 
     terminate only--
       (i) on the relocation of an applicable utility service 
     referred to in subparagraph (A), but only with respect to 
     that portion of the utility facilities that are relocated; or
       (ii) with the consent of the holder of the easement, permit 
     right, or right-of-way.
       (C) Additional easements.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     shall grant to a utility service provider, without 
     consideration, such additional easements across lands held in 
     trust or conveyed in restricted fee status pursuant to 
     subsection (b) as the Secretary considers necessary to 
     accommodate the relocation or reconnection of a utility 
     service existing on the date of enactment of this section.
       (2) Access for environmental response actions.--The lands 
     of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity held in trust or 
     conveyed in restricted fee status pursuant to subsection (b) 
     shall be subject to reserved access by the United States as 
     the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Interior 
     determine are reasonably required to permit access to lands 
     of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity for administrative and 
     environmental response purposes. The Secretary of the Army 
     shall provide to the governments of the Zuni Tribe and the 
     Navajo Nation written copies of all access reservations under 
     this subsection.
       (3) Shared access.--
       (A) Parcel 1 shared cultural and religious access.--In the 
     case of the lands of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity 
     depicted as Parcel 1 on the Map, the lands shall be held in 
     trust subject to a shared easement for cultural and religious 
     purposes only. Both the Zuni Tribe and the Navajo Nation 
     shall have unhindered access to their respective cultural and 
     religious sites within Parcel 1. Within 1 year after the date 
     of the enactment of this section, the Zuni Tribe and the 
     Navajo Nation shall exchange detailed information to document 
     the existence of cultural and religious sites within Parcel 1 
     for the purpose of carrying out this subparagraph. The 
     information shall also be provided to the Secretary of the 
     Interior.
       (B) Other shared access.--Subject to the written consent of 
     both the Zuni Tribe and the Navajo Nation, the Secretary of 
     the Interior may facilitate shared access to other lands held 
     in trust or restricted fee status pursuant to subsection (b), 
     including, but not limited to, religious and cultural sites.
       (4) I-40 frontage road entrance.--The access road for the 
     Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity, which originates at the 
     frontage road for Interstate 40 and leads to the parcel of 
     the Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity depicted as 
     ``administration area'' on the Map, shall be held in common 
     by the Zuni Tribe and Navajo Nation to provide for equal 
     access to Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity.
       (5) Compatibility with defense activities.--The lands of 
     Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity held in trust or conveyed 
     in restricted fee status pursuant to subsection (b) shall be 
     subject to reservations by the United States as the Secretary 
     of Defense determines are reasonably required to permit 
     access to lands of the Fort Wingate launch complex for 
     administrative, test operations, and launch operations 
     purposes. The Secretary of Defense shall provide the 
     governments of the Zuni Tribe and the Navajo Nation written 
     copies of all reservations under this paragraph.
       (d) Environmental Remediation.--Nothing in this section 
     shall be construed as alleviating, altering, or affecting the 
     responsibility of the United States for cleanup and

[[Page 6588]]

     remediation of Former Fort Wingate Depot Activity in 
     accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980.
       (e) Prohibition on Gaming.--Any real property of the Former 
     Fort Wingate Depot Activity and all other real property 
     subject to this section shall not be eligible, or used, for 
     any gaming activity carried out under the Indian Gaming 
     Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico.
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, in January of 1993, the BRAC Commission closed 
Fort Wingate in New Mexico. Fort Wingate was destined and designated to 
go to two tribes, equitably divided between the two--the Navajo Nation 
and the Zunis.
  During the past 12 years, I have been involved in negotiations back 
and forth between the tribes. The lands were occupied ancestrally by 
both tribes. There have been many long, ongoing discussions between all 
of the parties. We have gotten signatures in the past from different 
members of the Navajo government. We currently have a letter dated May 
16, 2016, in which it states that it is the opinion of the Navajo 
Nation that the land division and the terms developed between the two 
tribes would provide a solution to the land division.
  All we are asking is that the agreed-upon maps be distributed in 
accordance with the terms, signed by the speaker of the Navajo Nation 
and the Zunis. That is the purpose of this amendment today. It is a 
fairly simple distribution according to the provisions that are listed 
in the BRAC ruling of January 1993.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment in 
its current form and at this particular time.
  This amendment, as it has been pointed out, directly impacts two 
federally recognized tribal nations: the Navajo Nation and the Zuni 
Pueblo Nation in New Mexico.
  They have been working with the Department of Defense to resolve the 
disposition of this excess Federal land. The Navajo is one of the 
tribes that would receive the land in transfer, and it is opposed to 
some of the language that is still occurring in this amendment. The 
Pearce amendment, unfortunately, claims a provision that would require 
a right-of-way in perpetuity to the Navajo, and the Navajo agrees, it 
is my understanding, to work toward some of the land transfer.
  I ask the gentleman: Are they aware that the Navajo doesn't agree in 
having this land transfer go in perpetuity and that it would like to 
work something else out?
  I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, that is a provision that I, personally, did 
not put into the bill. It came from the committee of jurisdiction, the 
Natural Resources Committee. They insisted on it because it is 
prevailing language under the law.
  The objection in the letter from the Navajo, which I was just showing 
the gentlewoman previously, describes that, and the language reads that 
they have so far failed to acquire a new right-of-way with the U.S. 
Army and now have come to Congress to address their error.
  What has happened is that the right-of-way has yielded, and the 
language here was language that has previously been set up by the 
committee in order to address this.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chair, there is some disagreement as to how this language should 
be structured. I don't think we should be pushing through something 
that the Navajo Nation now finds controversial but that wasn't 
controversial when working with the Department of Defense and making 
sure that they had the right-of-way and access to the land.
  It is a sovereign nation. There are only 10 minutes of debate. There 
seems to be a little bit of uncertainty as to where the Navajo Nation 
is coming down on the particular language that the gentleman has. I do 
not fault the gentleman for bringing the language forward, as Chairman 
Bishop has changed from what the original conversation had been between 
the sovereign nation and the Department of Defense by putting the 
perpetuity in it.
  I believe we should respect the right of sovereignty of the tribe, 
and I believe at this time we should defeat the amendment. I would like 
to work with the gentleman to come up with language that is acceptable 
both for the Department of Defense and the two tribal nations. They 
were so very close. I would like to make that happen.
  Mr. PEARCE. Again, addressing the gentlewoman, those are the subjects 
that Mr. Lujan and I have agreed that we would work on in conference. I 
think that we are more than willing to accommodate, but to stall this 
out now--this is the last vehicle this year. Literally, we are out of 
time. I would gladly accept the gentlewoman's help in the conference 
committee, and I want to resolve this. Again, I have been working on it 
for 12 years. We go and we get the signatures. It has been very arduous 
on the parts of all, and I understand the difficulty when you have 
aboriginal lands.
  Again, when I look at the language, it is language that was 
previously established in the Ho-Chunk Nation distribution. The 
language literally is set in precedent, and the committee explains to 
us there is not much option there; but I am more than willing to work 
on the issue with the gentlewoman.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. PEARCE. I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I look forward to working with the 
gentleman. I am sure we can come up with an accommodation that will 
make everyone satisfied.
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, reclaiming my time, what we are trying to do 
is put into the hands of two Indian nations land that has been 
designated for them since 1993. I think that all parties just want it 
to be done in the right fashion. We are so close at this point that I 
would really appreciate the fact that we put it in this bill, that we 
include it, and move it into the conference. I am certain that with the 
Senator's input, they will be listening to the same concerns as the 
gentlewoman is listening to.
  Again, I appreciate the help of Mr. Young, Mr. Lujan--all of those 
parties--and both Chairman Thornberry and Chairman Bishop.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chair, in closing, again, I just appreciate the 
consideration by the gentlewoman.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).
  The amendment was agreed to.


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

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I offer 
amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 4, 13, 15, 16, 
17, 19, 21, 22, 24, 26, 29, 30, and 31 printed in House Report No. 114-
571, offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

          amendment no. 4 offered by mr. schweikert of arizona

       Page 372, after line 8, insert the following:

     SEC. 1014. UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS TRAINING MISSIONS.

       The Secretary of Defense shall coordinate unmanned aerial 
     systems training missions along the southern border of the 
     United States in order to support the Department of Homeland 
     Security's counter-narcotic trafficking efforts.


          amendment no. 13 offered by mrs. davis of california

       In section 522, page 120, strike lines 9 through 19, and 
     insert the following:

[[Page 6589]]

       Section 701(i) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) In the event that two members of the armed forces who 
     are married to each other adopt a child in a qualifying child 
     adoption, the two members shall be allowed a total of at 
     least 36 days of leave under this subsection, to be shared 
     between the two members. The Secretary concerned shall permit 
     the transfer of such leave between the two members to 
     accommodate individual family circumstances.''.
       In section 529, page 130, strike lines 9 through 20.


        amendment no. 15 offered by mr. costello of pennsylvania

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

     SEC. 5__. REPORT ON EXTENDING PROTECTIONS FOR STUDENT LOANS 
                   FOR ACTIVE DUTY BORROWERS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Education, shall submit to 
     the appropriate congressional committees a report detailing 
     the information, assistance, and efforts to support and 
     inform active duty members of the Armed Forces with respect 
     to the rights and resources available under the 
     Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. 3901 et seq.) 
     regarding student loans. The report shall include, at a 
     minimum, the following:
       (1) A description of the coordination and information 
     sharing between the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of 
     Education regarding the eligibility of members, and requests 
     by members, to apply the interest rate limitation under the 
     Servicemembers Civil Relief Act with respect to existing 
     Federal and private student loans.
       (2) The number of such members with student loans who elect 
     to have the maximum interest rates set in accordance with 
     such Act.
       (3) The number of such members whose student loans have an 
     interest rate that exceeds such maximum rate.
       (4) Methods by which the Secretary of Defense and the 
     Secretary of Education can automate the process by which 
     members with student loans elect to have the maximum interest 
     rates set in accordance with such Act.
       (5) A discussion of the effectiveness of such Act in 
     providing protection to members of the Armed Forces with 
     respect to student loans.
       (b) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' 
     means the follow:
       (1) The congressional defense committees.
       (2) The Committee on Education and the Workforce of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Health, 
     Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate.


          amendment no. 16 offered by mr. hastings of florida

       Page 173, after line 2, insert the following:

     SEC. 599A. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN REIMBURSEMENTS OF MEDICAL 
                   EXPENSES AND OTHER PAYMENTS FROM DETERMINATION 
                   OF ANNUAL INCOME WITH RESPECT TO PENSIONS FOR 
                   VETERANS AND SURVIVING SPOUSES AND CHILDREN OF 
                   VETERANS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1503(a) of title 38, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (12) as 
     paragraphs (7) through (13), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new 
     paragraph (6):
       ``(6) payments regarding reimbursements of any kind 
     (including insurance settlement payments) for medical 
     expenses resulting from any accident, theft, loss, or 
     casualty loss (as defined by the Secretary), but the amount 
     excluded under this clause shall not exceed the costs of 
     medical care provided to the victim of the accident, theft, 
     loss, or casualty loss.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act.


         amendment no. 17 offered by mr. larson of connecticut

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

     SEC. 7__. APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS.

       (a) Rates of Reimbursement.--
       (1) In general.--In furnishing applied behavior analysis 
     under the TRICARE program to individuals described in 
     paragraph (2) during the period beginning on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and ending on December 31, 2018, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the reimbursement 
     rates for providers of applied behavior analysis are not less 
     than the rates that were in effect on March 31, 2016.
       (2) Individuals described.--Individuals described in this 
     paragraph are individuals who are covered beneficiaries (as 
     defined in section 1072 of title 10, United States Code) by 
     reason of being a member or former member of the Army, Navy, 
     Air Force, or Marine Corps, including the reserve components 
     thereof, or a dependent of such a member or former member.
       (b) Analysis.--
       (1) In general.--Upon the completion of the Department of 
     Defense Comprehensive Autism Care Demonstration, the 
     Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs shall 
     conduct an analysis to--
       (A) use data gathered during the demonstration to set 
     future reimbursement rates for providers of applied behavior 
     analysis under the TRICARE program; and
       (B) review comparative commercial insurance claims for 
     purposes of setting such future rates, including by--
       (i) conducting an analysis of the comparative total of 
     commercial insurance claims billed for applied behavior 
     analysis; and
       (ii) reviewing any covered beneficiary limitations on 
     access to applied behavior analysis services at various 
     military installations throughout the United States.
       (2) Submission.--The Assistant Secretary shall submit to 
     the congressional defense committees the analysis conducted 
     under paragraph (1).
       (c) Funding.--
       (1) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 1405 for the Defense Health Program, 
     as specified in the corresponding funding table in section 
     4501, for Private Sector Care is hereby increased by 
     $32,000,000.
       (2) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 4301 for operation and maintenance, 
     as specified in the corresponding funding table in section 
     4301, for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (Line 300) 
     is hereby reduced by $32,000,000.
       (d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     amounts should be appropriated for behavioral health 
     treatment of TRICARE beneficiaries, including pursuant to 
     this section, in a manner to ensure the appropriate and 
     equitable access to such treatment by all such beneficiaries.


         amendment no. 19 offered by mr. kelly of pennsylvania

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

     SEC. 12XX. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS TO IMPLEMENT 
                   THE ARMS TRADE TREATY.

       (a) In General.--None of the funds authorized to be 
     appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for 
     fiscal year 2017 for the Department of Defense may be 
     obligated or expended to fund a Secretariat or any other 
     international organization established to support the 
     implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty, to sustain domestic 
     prosecutions based on any charge related to the Treaty, or to 
     implement the Treaty until the Senate approves a resolution 
     of ratification for the Treaty and implementing legislation 
     for the Treaty has been enacted into law.
       (b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to preclude the Department of Defense from 
     assisting foreign countries in bringing their laws, 
     regulations, and practices related to export control up to 
     United States standards.


       amendment no. 21 offered by mr. mulvaney of south carolina

       Page 603, after line 6, insert the following:

     SEC. 1523. CODIFICATION OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 
                   CRITERIA.

       The Secretary of Defense shall implement the following 
     criteria in requests for overseas contingency operations:
       (1) Geographic Area Covered - For theater of operations for 
     non-classified war overseas contingency operations funding, 
     the geographic areas in which combat or direct combat support 
     operations occur are: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, 
     Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrhyzstan, the Horn of Africa, 
     Persian Gulf and Gulf nations, Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean, 
     the Philippines, and other countries on a case-by-case basis.
       (2) Permitted Inclusions in the Overseas Contingency 
     Operation Budget
       (A) Major Equipment
       (i) Replacement of loses that have occurred but only for 
     items not already programmed for replacement in the Future 
     Years Defense Plan (FYDP), but not including accelerations, 
     which must be made in the base budget.
       (ii) Replacement or repair to original capability (to 
     upgraded capability if that is currently available) of 
     equipment returning from theater. The replacement may be a 
     similar end item if the original item is no longer in 
     production. Incremental cost of non-war related upgrades, if 
     made, should be included in the base.
       (iii) Purchase of specialized, theater-specific equipment.
       (iv) Funding for major equipment must be obligated within 
     12 months.
       (B) Ground Equipment Replacement
       (i) For combat losses and returning equipment that is not 
     economical to repair, the replacement of equipment may be 
     given to coalition partners, if consistent with approved 
     policy.
       (ii) In-theater stocks above customary equipping levels on 
     a case-by-case basis.
       (C) Equipment Modifications
       (i) Operationally-required modifications to equipment used 
     in theater or in direct support of combat operations and that 
     is not already programmed in FYDP.
       (ii) Funding for equipment modifications must be able be 
     obligated in 12 months.

[[Page 6590]]

       (D) Munitions
       (i) Replenishment of munitions expended in combat 
     operations in theater.
       (ii) Training ammunition for theater-unique training 
     events.
       (iii) While forecasted expenditures are not permitted, a 
     case-by-case assessment for munitions where existing stocks 
     are insufficient to sustain theater combat operations.
       (E) Aircraft Replacement
       (i) Combat losses by accident that occur in the theater of 
     operations.
       (ii) Combat losses by enemy action that occur in the 
     theater of operations.
       (F) Military Construction
       (i) Facilities and infrastructure in the theater of 
     operations in direct support of combat operations. The level 
     of construction should be the minimum to meet operational 
     requirements.
       (ii) At non-enduring locations, facilities and 
     infrastructure for temporary use.
       (iii) At enduring locations, facilities and infrastructure 
     for temporary use.
       (iv) At enduring locations, construction requirements must 
     be tied to surge operations or major changes in operational 
     requirements and will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
       (G) Research and development projects for combat operations 
     in these specific theaters that can be delivered in 12 
     months.
       (H) Operations
       (i) Direct War costs:

       (I) Transport of personnel, equipment, and supplies to, 
     from and within the theater of operations.
       (II) Deployment-specific training and preparation for 
     unites and personnel (military and civilian) to assume their 
     directed missions as defined in the orders for deployment 
     into the theater of operations.

       (ii) Within the theater, the incremental costs above the 
     funding programmed in the base budget to:

       (I) Support commanders in the conduct of their directed 
     missions (to include Emergency Response Programs).
       (II) Build and maintain temporary facilities.
       (III) Provide food, fuel, supplies, contracted services and 
     other support.
       (IV) Cover the operational costs of coalition partners 
     supporting US military missions, as mutually agreed.

       (iii) Indirect war costs incurred outside the theater of 
     operations will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

       (I) Health

       (i) Short-term care directly related to combat.
       (ii) Infrastructure that is only to be used during the 
     current conflict.
       (J) Personnel
       (i) Incremental special pays and allowances for Service 
     members and civilians deployed to a combat zone.
       (ii) Incremental pay, special pays and allowances for 
     Reserve Component personnel mobilized to support war 
     missions.
       (K) Special Operations Command
       (i) Operations that meet the criteria in this guidance.
       (ii) Equipment that meets the criteria in this guidance.

       (L) Prepositioned Supplies and equipment for resetting in-
     theater stocks of supplies and equipment to pre-war levels.

       (M) Security force funding to train, equip, and sustain 
     Iraqi and Afghan military and police forces.
       (N) Fuel
       (i) War fuel costs and funding to ensure that logistical 
     support to combat operations is not degraded due to cash 
     losses in the Department of Defense's baseline fuel program.
       (ii) Enough of any base fuel shortfall attributable to fuel 
     price increases to maintain sufficient on-hand cash for the 
     Defense Working Capital Funds to cover seven days 
     disbursements.
       (3) Excluded items from Overseas Contingency Funding that 
     must be funded from the base budget
       (A) Training vehicles, aircraft, ammunition, and 
     simulators, but not training base stocks of specialized, 
     theater-specific equipment that is required to support combat 
     operations in the theater of operations, and support to 
     deployment-specific training described above.
       (B) Acceleration of equipment service life extension 
     programs already in the Future Years Defense Plan.
       (C) Base Realignment and Closure projects.
       (D) Family support initiatives
       (i) Construction of childcare facilities.
       (ii) Funding for private-public partisanships to expand 
     military families' access to childcare.
       (iii) Support for service members' spouses professional 
     development.
       (E) Programs to maintain industrial base capacity including 
     ``war-stoppers.''
       (F) Personnel
       (i) Recruiting and retention bonuses to maintain end-
     strength.
       (ii) Basic Pay and the Basic allowances for Housing and 
     Subsistence for permanently authorized end strength.
       (iii) Individual augmentees on a case-by-case basis.
       (G) Support for the personnel, operations, or the 
     construction or maintenance of facilities, at U.S. Offices of 
     Security Cooperation in theater.
       (H) Costs for reconfiguring prepositioned supplies and 
     equipment or for maintaining them.
       (4) Special Situations - Items proposed for increases in 
     reprogrammings or as payback for prior reprogrammings must 
     meet the criteria above.


          amendment no. 22 offered by mr. himes of connecticut

       At the end of subtitle C of title XVI, add the following:

     SEC. 16_. REPORT ON POLICIES FOR RESPONDING TO MALICIOUS 
                   CYBER ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT AGAINST THE UNITED 
                   STATES OR UNITED STATES PERSONS BY FOREIGN 
                   STATES OR NON-STATE ACTORS.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
     on policies, doctrine, procedures, and authorities governing 
     Department of Defense activities in response to malicious 
     cyber activities carried out against the United States or 
     United States persons by foreign states or non-state actors.
       (b) Elements.--The report required under subsection (a) 
     shall include the following:
       (1) Specific citations to appropriate associated Executive 
     branch and agency directives, guidance, instructions, and 
     other authoritative policy documents.
       (2) Descriptions of relevant authorities, rules of 
     engagement, command and control structures, and response 
     plans.


        amendment no. 24 offered by ms. tsongas of massachusetts

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

     SEC. 1__. REPORT ON P-8 POSEIDON AIRCRAFT.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than October 1, 2017, the 
     Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the congressional 
     defense committees a report regarding future capabilities for 
     the P-8 Poseidon aircraft.
       (b) Elements.--The report under subsection (a) shall 
     include, with respect to the P-8 Poseidon aircraft, the 
     following:
       (1) A review of possible upgrades by the Navy to the 
     sensors onboard the aircraft, including intelligence, 
     surveillance, and reconnaissance sensors currently being 
     fielded on Air Force platforms.
       (2) An assessment of the ability of the Navy to use long-
     range multispectral imaging systems onboard the aircraft.


          amendment no. 26 offered by mr. blumenauer of oregon

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

     SEC. 1__. REPORT ON COST OF B-21 AIRCRAFT.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees a report on the cost of the 
     B-21 aircraft. The report shall include an estimate of the 
     total cost of research, production, and maintenance for the 
     aircraft expressed in constant base-year dollars and in 
     current dollars.


           amendment no. 29 offered by mr. kildee of michigan

       At the end of subtitle B of title III, insert the 
     following:

     SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

       It is the Sense of Congress that the Department of Defense 
     should work with State and local health officials to prevent 
     human exposure to perfluorinated chemicals.


           amendment no. 30 offered by mr. poliquin of maine

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

     SEC. 3__. REPORT ON AVERAGE TRAVEL COSTS OF MEMBERS OF THE 
                   RESERVE COMPONENTS.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
     report on the travel expenses of members of reserve 
     components associated with performing active duty service, 
     active service, full-time National Guard duty, active Guard 
     and Reserve duty, and inactive-duty training, as such terms 
     are defined in section 101(d) of title 10, United States 
     Code. Such report shall include the average annual cost for 
     all travel expenses for a member of a reserve component.


          amendment no. 31 offered by mr. farenthold of texas

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

     SEC. 3__. ACCESS TO WIRELESS HIGH-SPEED INTERNET AND NETWORK 
                   CONNECTIONS FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE ARMED 
                   FORCES DEPLOYED OVERSEAS.

       Consistent with section 2492a of title 10, United States 
     Code, the Secretary of Defense is encouraged to enter into 
     contracts with third-party vendors in order to provide 
     members of the Armed Forces who are deployed overseas at any 
     United States military facility, at which wireless high-speed 
     Internet and network connections are otherwise available, 
     with access to such Internet and network connections without 
     charge.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.

[[Page 6591]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Farenthold).
  Mr. FARENTHOLD. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment, which 
is included in here, that encourages the Department of Defense to 
provide free Wi-Fi access of the Internet to military personnel who are 
deployed overseas.
  Right now our military personnel, in some instances, are required to 
pay twice as much as a typical American family would pay for access to 
the Internet. Access to the Internet is a way for our troops to keep 
their morale high by staying in touch with their families back home by 
using technology like FaceTime and Skype.
  This amendment does not require any expenditure by the military. It 
merely instructs the military to work towards this goal: to make it 
available where possible and to indicate that it should be a priority. 
It doesn't cost anything, but it is a great morale booster, and it 
should be great for our troops.
  I urge my colleagues to support this.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  I speak about the broader bill. Unfortunately, something happened in 
the Rules Committee yesterday that has been happening far too often in 
recent years. This was much debated during the debate over the rule, 
but I didn't have a chance to come and talk about it.
  There was an amendment added in committee that overturns an executive 
order by the President. The executive order basically says: if you 
discriminate against the LGBT community, you will not be allowed to get 
government contracts.
  That executive order also had an exception for religious 
organizations. The amendment that was added in committee--and it is 
much debated as to what it did or didn't do, but my reading of it is 
that it dramatically expands that exception and basically increases the 
ability of defense firms and subcontractors to discriminate against the 
LGBT community.
  The larger problem here is: Why couldn't we vote on it?
  It puts our Members in the position of voting for a defense bill that 
has what we believe to be discriminatory language in it without our 
even having had the opportunity to have voted to remove that language.
  This is something that has happened for the last 3 or 4 years on an 
increasing basis. It used to be that this was an open rule. With the 
defense bill, you basically offered an amendment; you had a debate; and 
you had a chance. Then we started to shrink them down a little bit. 
Now, in the last couple of years, anything that is inconvenient for the 
majority to vote on or, even more distressingly, anything that they 
think will make it inconvenient for us to vote on the bill gets struck.
  That is not the way the Rules Committee is supposed to work. They are 
supposed to give us the opportunity to vote on these amendments. They, 
again, have narrowly crafted it down to just the amendments that they 
like. Having this discriminatory provision within the defense bill, in 
addition to all of the other problems, has forced me to the point at 
which I am actually going to oppose the bill, which I do not want to do 
and did not want to do; but I hope, in the future, the Rules Committee 
will at least give us a chance to vote.
  We had a robust debate about the substance of this particular 
amendment earlier. Again, it is not so much about the substance of the 
particular amendment. It is about the opportunity for our Members to 
have a vote. If we could go on record and vote against that amendment 
on the floor--do our best to strip it out--then at least we are on 
record. Here, we are simply forced to vote for a defense bill that 
contains discriminatory language that we do not support.
  I hope, in the future, the Rules Committee will stop doing this, will 
let the democratic process work, will give us the opportunity to vote, 
accept the outcome of that vote, and move forward.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  My understanding is that the provision that the gentleman refers to 
is a restatement of religious liberties from the 1964 Civil Rights Act. 
What that tells me, if he opposes the bill based on that, is that there 
are Members who are looking for some excuse to vote against this bill. 
You can always find one. I can find one myself. I don't think that is 
the right thing to do, however, for the men and women who serve our 
Nation.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. 
Poliquin).
  Mr. POLIQUIN. Mr. Chair, each month across our great country, our 
brave men and women in the National Guard and the Armed Forces Reserves 
leave their homes and report for duty. Each month they train on the 
ground and in the air and on the sea so that they are ready at a 
moment's notice to fight for our freedom. Our guardsmen and reservists 
often travel long distances to their training sites, and their travel 
costs often exceed their monthly training pay, which forces them to buy 
gas, meals, and sometimes hotel rooms out of pocket.
  Right now, today, under existing law, if you work for the IRS or the 
EPA or some other Federal Government agency, you are granted a tax 
deduction for out-of-pocket travel expenses if you travel beyond 50 
miles of your home; but if you are a guardsman or a woman or if you are 
in the Reserves, you need to travel more than 100 miles to receive the 
same benefits.
  Mr. Chair, this is not fair, and this is not right. I urge everybody 
to endorse and support my amendment No. 300.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
O'Rourke) will control the time of the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith).
  There was no objection.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. I thank my friend for yielding.
  Mr. Chair, for many years, the Air Force used perfluorinated 
chemicals in its compound for firefighting foam, but in the past few 
years, very high levels of these PFCs have been discovered in the fish 
near the former Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda, Michigan, which is 
in my district. Tests have revealed the presence of PFCs as well in the 
groundwater that people who live near the former Air Force base depend 
upon.
  The CDC and the EPA have both said that PFCs can be potentially 
harmful to people's health, though there is still not clear guidance as 
to what is a safe level of exposure, especially in the long term; 
although, there is great concern on this question.
  I have asked the Air Force as well as the State of Michigan to 
provide bottled water to those identified individuals who are living 
near Wurtsmith whose water may be contaminated by PFCs at least until 
more research is done on the safety of their water. My amendment would 
require the Department of Defense to do whatever it can to prevent 
further exposure to PFCs.

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
  Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the 
amendment to renew the 1-year ban on the Obama administration or any 
other administration from using any Department of Defense funds to 
implement the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, a treaty which, by the 
way, has never been ratified by our Senate.
  Specifically, the amendment bans the use of Department of Defense 
funds for the ATT Secretariat, a body that was created for effectively 
implementing the ATT according to the treaty's supporters.
  Last August, ATT member nations organized the Conference of States 
Parties to the ATT, a conference in which we did not have a vote and 
which decided that American taxpayers are now on the hook to pay 22 
percent of the expenses of this annual meeting. This taxpayer money 
would go directly to the ATT Secretariat and become part

[[Page 6592]]

of its core budget. My amendment prevents these hardworking American 
taxpayer dollars from flowing into the coffers of those who are working 
to implement the ATT.
  I thank the chairman and the ranking member for including this in the 
en bloc amendment, and I urge all my colleagues to stand in support of 
our Second Amendment and of our Nation's sovereignty and vote in 
support of this amendment to renew the annual ban on the funding of the 
United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Hastings).
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chair, my amendment would exempt reimbursement for 
medical expenses from the Department of Veterans Affairs calculation of 
annual income when determining pension eligibility for veterans. This 
amendment is a version of H.R. 4994, the Veterans Pensions Protection 
Act, bipartisan legislation endorsed by the Vietnam Veterans of 
America, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and others.
  A few years ago, a disabled veteran and a constituent of mine was 
struck by a vehicle while crossing the street. After receiving 
insurance compensation for his injuries, he lost his pension. This is 
because, under current law, compensation for medical expenses, 
including insurance settlement payments or reimbursements, are 
considered income by the VA.
  We effectively punish our veterans when they receive these types of 
compensation after suffering medical emergencies like the one I just 
outlined. This is, quite simply, wrong. My amendment will rectify this.
  I ask the House to support this amendment.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Farenthold) to discuss an additional 
amendment he has.
  Mr. FARENTHOLD. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of an amendment 
that directs our service academies to notify the Members of Congress of 
acceptees at least 48 hours before publishing the acceptance or letting 
the acceptee know.
  As most Members of this body know, we are actually the interviewing 
source for the service academies. Young men and women seeking to serve 
this country attending a service academy apply for a nomination from 
their Member of Congress, most often go through a very lengthy vetting 
process, and we develop a relationship with these young men and women.
  Historically, the service academies have allowed us to call them and 
tell them they are accepted and congratulate them. This year, in some 
instances, the service academies have quit doing that, which was a 
longstanding practice.
  I believe that it is appropriate that those who interview and work so 
hard to get those young men and women into our service academies should 
be the ones delivering the news to them rather than them reading it on 
a Web site or in a piece of mail.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment when it comes before 
the House.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Himes).
  Mr. HIMES. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank both the chairman of 
the committee and the ranking member for the opportunity to offer this 
amendment, which would be a very straightforward amendment, which 
simply requires the Department of Defense to report to the Congress on 
the policies, doctrine, procedures, and authorities, as well as the 
definitions associated with a cyber attack on the United States.
  This is a small step in a larger very, very important effort that 
Chairman Westmoreland and I have been working on for some period of 
time now to try to bring some clarity to what is, today, kind of the 
Wild West in the cyber realm. In the kinetic realm, we understand very 
clearly what an act of war is. We understand our doctrine for 
responding as such.
  In the cyber realm, we don't know exactly when a crime becomes an act 
of war, how to deal with an asymmetric actor versus a nation-state. It 
is terribly important that we begin the process, with other nations 
around the world, of establishing some clarity on these points. That 
won't help our adversaries, but it will remove uncertainty from the 
system in this new and very, very important realm.
  Again, I thank the leadership of the House Armed Services Committee 
and hope this amendment will be supported.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time on 
this en bloc amendment.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the committee for 
including, en bloc, my amendment No. 59, which is a step to look at 
commonsense, cost-saving proposals that the United States Navy itself 
has offered earlier this year that could save as much as $900 million 
by consolidating carrier Air Force wings from 10 to 9.
  In the fiscal year 2017 budget request, the Navy asked Congress to 
reallocate their 10th carrier wing into their 9 existing wings, which 
they feel would boost readiness and save money.
  I understand there is reluctance to make what I believe is a 
strategic, cost-effective move, and that is why I offer my amendment 
today, directing the Secretary of Defense to offer Congress a study on 
this issue. As Vice Admiral Michael Shoemaker said: ``Restructuring to 
nine carrier air wings is the most efficient use of those operational 
forces to meet global requirements.''
  The study will serve as an important step in realizing a more 
efficient, capable, cost-effective Navy. I am very encouraged that the 
committee was willing to include this en bloc today, and I see this as 
an important first step toward recognizing increased readiness as well 
as cost savings.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in 
permitting me to speak on the en bloc amendment, and I appreciate the 
committee having accepted the amendment dealing with cost 
accountability for the B-21 bomber. This is a new weapon that has both 
conventional and nuclear weapons capability.
  We are in a situation now where there is tremendous stress on our 
Defense Department budget with a whole range of weaponry. I think it is 
more important now than ever that we are able to understand exactly 
what we are getting into, how much this is going to cost. There is 
about $1.4 billion already into this. We ought to be able to know what 
the total commitment is being made, to be able to have appropriate 
decisions made by Congress.
  I am deeply concerned that the Defense Department, to this point, has 
resisted giving an appraisal of what the total cost is going to be, 
somehow fearing that, if the total budget were available, that would 
give too much information to our adversaries about the weight, size, 
and range of the plane. I think not. I think the real danger here is 
that the American public and Congress would know what the costs are. 
This is not an acceptable approach as we deal with these critical 
questions.
  It is important, Mr. Chairman, that we have full transparency about 
what the costs are going to be for these massive, expensive, and, in 
some cases, questionable weapons systems. This is not an argument for 
or against it. It is an argument for transparency and being able to 
know what we are getting into.
  The worst of all possible worlds is making commitments and then 
finding, 5 and 10 years down the line, that we can't follow through on 
them or they result in cannibalizing other important priorities. I 
would think that this is one area that we could all agree we need to 
have this transparency and have this information available.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Oregon.

[[Page 6593]]


  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, this seems to me to be a priority going 
forward, given the experience we have had with cost overruns and given 
how many elements that this committee is trying to juggle. The demands 
on the committee, I think, are remarkable. It is not a job that I envy. 
These are hard decisions that are being made.
  The Department of Defense can do a favor for themselves and for us by 
being fully transparent so we know what we should be budgeting for in 
the future and that they can be held accountable for performance.
  Mr. O'ROURKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to speak about one of the amendments that is in 
this en bloc package offered by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. 
Mulvaney). My understanding of that amendment is that it tries to have 
a clearer process by which we fund the military, and that is a goal for 
which I have enormous sympathy.
  We clearly need to have more predictable funding for the military. 
That is true on behalf of our military commanders and all the troops. 
It is true on behalf of industry. It is true on behalf of budgeting in 
the government.
  I personally also agree we need to do away with the artificial caps 
that have caused such difficulty for the military in recent years. I 
also believe that it would be beneficial if administrations did not 
play political budgetary games.
  For example, in this year's budget, the President requests a very low 
number for Israeli missile defense, knowing full well that the 
Congress, on a bipartisan basis, is not going to let that go through. 
We are going to be more responsible. So they are counting on us to have 
to cut other programs so that we can do what they should have done to 
begin with. There are all sorts of tactics that are used in developing 
budgets. There has got to be a better way.
  Apparently, some administration political appointees have been urging 
Members of the House to call the approach in this bill a gimmick. 
Actually, I have heard that term used a few times on the floor over the 
last couple of days.
  Well, one question I have is: Was it a gimmick in 2008 when, under 
Democratic majority, this House used exactly the same approach in fully 
funding the base requirements for the year and then had a bridge fund 
that allowed the new President to evaluate deployments and the funding 
and to make adjustments, which President Obama took advantage of? That 
is what it was intended for. Now, why was it okay then, but it is a 
gimmick now? It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, someone would consider that 
a double standard.
  Would Members rather that we continue to cannibalize aircraft and 
deny pilots the minimum amount of training they are supposed to get? 
Are Members content to have class A mishaps continue to go up in 
service after service, or is the desire to score political points so 
strong that Members would rather let those trends continue rather than 
deal with them here in this bill before us?
  Mr. Chairman, my point is that I agree there has got to be a better 
way. But I also believe that we have a choice before us today, and that 
is whether we fund the training, the maintenance, the end strength, the 
modernization that starts to fix the problems that I have talked about 
or we stick with name-calling, we look for excuses to vote ``no'' and 
allow those problems to get worse. Lives are at stake.
  So while I don't know that I agree with all the particulars of the 
gentleman from South Carolina's amendment, I think he raises important 
issues. Therefore, I urge Members to support that amendment as part of 
this en bloc package and resolve to try to put partisanship and excuses 
aside and think about the men and women who serve and what is in their 
best interest.
  I urge adoption of the en bloc amendments.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

                              {time}  1615


                   Amendment No. 5 Offered by Ms. Lee

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

     SEC. 12XX. REPEAL OF AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

       (a) In General.--The Authorization for Use of Military 
     Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby 
     repealed.
       (b) Effective Date.--The repeal contained in subsection 
     (a)--
       (1) takes effect on the date that is 90 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act; and
       (2) applies with respect to each operation or other action 
     that is being carried out pursuant to the Authorization for 
     Use of Military Force initiated before such effective date.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, first let me just thank the Committee on Rules 
Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter and all of the members 
of the committee for making this amendment in order.
  My amendment is very straightforward. It would, after 90 days of 
enactment of this act, repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of 
Military Force which Congress passed into law September 14, 2001. When 
we repeal this 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, Congress 
would finally be forced to debate and vote on a specific AUMF to 
address the ISIL threat.
  Now, I voted against the 2001 authorization because I believed it 
opened the door for any President to wage endless war without a 
congressional debate or a vote, and I believe, quite frankly, that 
history has borne that out.
  I include in the Record a new report from the Congressional Research 
Service.

                               Congressional Research Service,

                                                     May 11, 2016.

                               Memorandum

     Subject: Presidential References to the 2001 Authorization 
         for Use of Military Force in Publicly Available Executive 
         Actions and Reports to Congress.
     From: Matthew Weed, Specialist in Foreign Policy Legislation.
     This memorandum was prepared to enable distribution to more 
         than one congressional office.
       This memorandum sets out information and analysis 
     concerning presidential references in official notifications 
     and records to the Authorization for Use of Military Force 
     (2001 AUMF; Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. Sec. 1541 note), 
     enacted in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist 
     attacks on the United States, to justify and undertake 
     military and other action. It contains very brief discussions 
     of the relevant provisions of the 2001 AUMF, and the uses of 
     U.S. armed forces connected with 2001 AUMF authority, as well 
     as excerpted language and other information from the 
     notifications.


     Use of Military Force Authorization Language in the 2001 AUMF

       Section 2(a) of the 2001 AUMF authorizes the use of force 
     in response to the September 11 attacks:
       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled,
       * * *

     SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--That the President is authorized to use 
     all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, 
     organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, 
     committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on 
     September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or 
     persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international 
     terrorism against the United States by such nations, 
     organizations or persons.
       The 2001 AUMF does not include a specified congressional 
     reporting requirement, but states that the authorization is 
     not intended to supersede any requirement of the War Powers 
     Resolution, which does require congressional reporting for 
     initial and continuing deployments of U.S. armed forces into 
     imminent or ongoing hostilities.

[[Page 6594]]




      Executive Branch Policy Concerning Utilization of 2001 AUMF 
                             Authorization

       Prior to the U.S. military campaign against the Islamic 
     State that began in summer 2014, executive branch officials 
     made statements that included certain interpretations 
     concerning the 2001 AUMF, including the following 
     interpretations:
       The 2001 AUMF is primarily an authorization to enter into 
     and prosecute an armed conflict against Al Qaeda and the 
     Taliban in Afghanistan.
       The 2001 AUMF authorizes the President to use military 
     force against Al Qaeda and the Taliban outside Afghanistan, 
     but such uses of force must meet a higher standard of threat 
     to the United States and must use limited, precise methods 
     against specific individual targets rather than general 
     military action against enemy forces.
       Because the 2001 AUMF authorizes U.S. involvement in an 
     international armed conflict, the international law of armed 
     conflict informs the authority within the 2001 AUMF. This law 
     permits the use of military force against forces associated 
     with Al Qaeda and the Taliban as co-belligerents; such forces 
     must be operating in some sort of coordination and 
     cooperation with Al Qaeda and/or the Taliban, not just share 
     similar goals, objectives, or ideologies.
       According to the Obama Administration, this interpretation 
     of the scope of 2001 AUMF authority fits within the overall 
     framework of presidential power to use military force against 
     those posing a threat to U.S. national security and U.S. 
     interests. In situations where the 2001 AUMF or other 
     relevant legislation does not seem to authorize a given use 
     of military force or related activity, the executive branch 
     will determine whether the President's Article II powers as 
     Commander in Chief and Chief Executive, as interpreted by the 
     executive branch itself, might authorize such actions. In 
     this way, similar U.S. military action to meet U.S. 
     counterterrorism objectives might be interpreted to fall 
     under different authorities, of which the 2001 AUMF is just 
     one, albeit important, example.


  Records of Executive Actions and Presidential Reporting to Congress 
                       Referencing the 2001 AUMF

       CRS has located 37 relevant occurrences of an official 
     record, disclosed publicly, of presidential reference to the 
     2001 AUMF in connection with initiating or continuing 
     military or related action (including nonlethal military 
     activities such as detentions and military trials). Of the 37 
     occurrences, 18 were made during the Bush Administration, and 
     19 have been made during the Obama Administration. The 
     notifications reference both statutory and constitutional 
     authority for the President to take such action, as well as 
     statutory provisions requiring congressional notification, 
     including reference to provisions in the 2001 AUMF. As will 
     be discussed in detail below, the manner in which Presidents 
     have presented information on military deployments and 
     actions in these notifications, the constitutional and 
     statutory authority for such actions, and the reporting 
     requirements for such actions, have changed over time.


  Notifications of Deploying U.S. Armed Forces and/or Using Military 
               Force Involving Reference to the 2001 AUMF

       Both President Bush and President Obama have provided 
     formal notifications of military deployments and/or action to 
     Congress at various times since enactment of the 2001 AUMF, 
     referring to that authorization to various degrees and ends. 
     While presidential reports to Congress concerning the use of 
     military force and other activities undertaken by the U.S. 
     armed forces initially provided a fairly simple and 
     straightforward discussion of actions and related 
     authorities, over time these reports became increasingly 
     detailed, complicated, and difficult to decipher with regard 
     to determining applicable presidential authority. At all 
     times, both Presidents have relied primarily on their 
     constitutional Article II powers as Commander in Chief and 
     Chief Executive. In many instances, reference to 2001 AUMF 
     authority has been supplementary and indirect; in only a few 
     cases has a President relied directly on 2001 AUMF authority 
     as justification for a military operation, deployment, or 
     other action. This is not to say that 2001 AUMF authority 
     does not serve as a sole or primary legal basis for military 
     action in any given situation reported in a notification, 
     only that the notification language is susceptible to more 
     than one interpretation when it concerns presidential 
     authority to use to military force or undertake other 
     military action.
       Below are provided several tables of information concerning 
     presidential notifications and records of other executive 
     action referencing the 2001 AUMF. Each table provides:
       a date of each notification or record;
       the relevant military activity, location, and/or purpose of 
     such activities, as available;
       the constitutional and statutory authority provided in the 
     notification or record as provided; and
       the reference to applicable reporting requirements 
     precipitating each respective notification or record.
       For Tables 1-8, each set out in its own section with 
     accompanying analysis, each table includes a group of 
     notifications that are similar in composition and content. 
     Each subsequent table and section, therefore, denotes a 
     change in composition of the notifications referencing the 
     2001 AUMF in some way.
     Initial Reporting in the Aftermath of the September 11, 2001 
         Attacks
       President Bush's reports to Congress concerning military 
     deployments in the weeks following the September 11, 2001 
     terror attacks were relatively concise, focusing on the need 
     to address the terrorist threat in the immediate aftermath of 
     the attacks, and the deployments and actions taken in 
     response to such threat. The first notification on September 
     24, 2001 references deployments to ``a number of foreign 
     nations'' in the ``Central and Pacific Command areas of 
     operations.'' Major military operations in Afghanistan had 
     not yet commenced. The second notification on October 9, 2001 
     includes similar information but also notifies Congress of 
     the commencement of combat against Al Qaeda and the Taliban 
     in Afghanistan. In these two notifications, President Bush 
     stated that he had taken the actions described pursuant to 
     his constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and Chief 
     Executive. In both notifications, he referred to the 2001 
     AUMF as evidencing the continuing support of Congress, but 
     did not specifically state he had taken such action pursuant 
     to 2001 AUMF authority. The President stated in these 
     notifications that he was reporting on these actions to 
     Congress consistent with both the War Powers Resolution and 
     the 2001 AUMF. It is possible to conclude that reporting 
     action consistent with the 2001 AUMF would mean that the 
     action was considered taken pursuant to 2001 AUMF authority.

  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to encourage all my colleagues to read 
this report. It shows that this authorization has, in fact, become that 
blank check for war. In the more than 14 years since its passage, it 
has been used 37 times in 14 countries to wage war with little or no 
congressional oversight. It has been used 18 times by President Bush 
and 19 times by President Obama.
  This report only looks at unclassified incidents. How many other 
times has it been used without the knowledge of Congress or the 
American people? Not only has this authorization been used to justify 
military action thousands of miles away, it has also been used much 
closer to home to allow warrantless surveillance and wiretaps, 
indefinite detention practices at GTMO, and targeted killing by drones, 
including of American citizens. It has also been cited as the authority 
for the nearly 2-year-long war against ISIL, a war that Congress has 
never debated, voted on, or specifically authorized.
  Mr. Chairman, our brave servicemen and -women continue to be deployed 
around the world. Whether they are combat troops or not, they are in 
combat zones. They are risking their lives. Don't we at least owe them 
our representation in terms of our job to debate and vote on the cost 
and consequences of the war? I think we owe them that.
  If we all agree that ISIL must be degraded and dismantled, then why 
is Congress missing in action? Every day more bombs fall. We have 
already lost three brave servicemen. We have already spent more than 
$9.6 billion, and we spend an additional $615,000 per hour.
  I know that while we may not share a common position on what the 
shape of any new AUMF to address ISIL might look like, I know that many 
of us do agree that the overly broad and almost 15-year-old AUMF 
represents a major and very concerning deterioration of congressional 
oversight. That means a lack of involvement and input and voice of the 
American people.
  Let's repeal this blank check and finally, 90 days later, debate and 
vote on an AUMF to address the ISIL threat.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the distinguished chairman of 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment which would 
unilaterally end the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda.
  Mr. Chair, ISIS grew out of al Qaeda in Iraq. The President has 
determined

[[Page 6595]]

that the 2001 AUMF allows the United States to target ISIS. Both the 
Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs agree that they 
have full legal authority to combat ISIS, and Congress has supported 
that view by appropriating funds.
  Many Members want to enact a new AUMF to renew the authority to fight 
ISIS and support our troops, but this amendment fails to do so. We must 
understand that a new AUMF cannot give President Obama any more 
authority to fight ISIS than he currently claims. It could give him 
less. The President asked for less in his proposal. It is clear many 
want an AUMF that limits the authority of this President and the next 
President.
  The administration still does not have the broad, overarching 
strategy needed to defeat these radical Islamist terrorists. Once the 
President provides that strategy, this House can have an informed 
debate over a new AUMF, but this amendment would leave us with no 
strategy and no authority. That is irresponsible.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, let me just make one comment before yielding to 
my colleague from Minnesota.
  First, the President has sent over an AUMF. He sent this over 15 
months ago. The Speaker yet has to take this Authorization for Use of 
Military Force up. The President has asked for it. Why don't we do our 
job? We could at least either bring the one that he sent over, or we 
need to put our own on the floor.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Ellison).
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California has 1\1/4\ minutes 
remaining.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the gentlewoman's 
amendment.
  I want to just say that the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) is 
absolutely wrong when he says there would be a unilateral ending to the 
struggle against Daesh, or ISIL. The only way that would happen is if 
we do not take up a new AUMF that would authorize us to take on that 
battle.
  What we need to do is take on our constitutional responsibility. We 
cannot abdicate it with this out-of-date AUMF that is only tenuously 
connected to many of the conflicts we see arising today. We have a 
responsibility under the Constitution, Article I, section 8, to debate 
and vote, up or down, use of force. We should do that. We should do it 
now. There is nothing to prevent us from passing a new one or crafting 
our own or passing the President's unless we abdicate that 
responsibility.
  This allows us to criticize anything the President does and yet, at 
the same time, never take responsibility for passing our own AUMF 
adapted for the moment that we are in. That is not right.
  I support the gentlewoman's amendment.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I will just close by saying my amendment is 
enacted 90 days after the signing of this law. That means we have 90 
days to debate and vote upon an ISIL-specific Authorization for Use of 
Military Force. We need to do our job. We have a constitutional 
responsibility to do our job. Unfortunately, Congress is missing in 
action. We need to do exactly what the American people sent us to do.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, no one can contest the gentlewoman from California's 
sincerity on this issue. On September 14, 2001, when this House passed 
the Authorization for the Use of Military Force that she is talking 
about, 3 days after 3,000 Americans had been murdered on 9/11, the vote 
in this House was 420-1, and the one person who voted against this AUMF 
was the gentlewoman from California who offered this amendment. So her 
sincerity cannot be questioned.
  I also, by the way, happen to agree with her that we need to update 
this AUMF. As a matter of fact, this House passed, twice, provisions 
that I had authored to update the 2001 AUMF. We passed it in 2011; we 
passed it in 2012. Unfortunately, the administration says: No, we are 
opposed to that; the one we have got is just fine. And the Senate took 
that position, and so it did not get passed into law.
  But to say, now, to unilaterally repeal the 2001 AUMF on which the 
administration is relying for all its counterterrorism activities not 
only against al Qaeda, but against ISIS and others, to repeal it now, I 
believe, would be a mistake. There are still real dangers in the world 
from terrorists. I don't think I need to remind Members of Paris, of 
Brussels, of San Bernardino, and just today, of Baghdad.
  The other point I want to make, Mr. Chairman, is I think we all 
underestimate the catastrophes that have been avoided--in other words, 
the terrorist plots, what they wanted to do, what they tried to do--
that were thwarted. Sometimes they were thwarted just because we were 
lucky, but a lot of times they were thwarted because of the work of the 
men and women in the military, the men and women in the intelligence 
community, the men and women in law enforcement doing a lot of hard 
work, sacrificing, some of them losing their lives to make sure that we 
did not have a repeat of the 3,000 people murdered on 9/11.
  We owe them, Mr. Chairman, more than just a thank-you. We owe them 
whatever preparation, whatever equipment, whatever support they need to 
continue to battle terrorists today. That is what this bill tries to 
do: to make sure that we don't send people out in the Middle East to 
bomb terrorists on airplanes that cannot fly, that cannot be 
maintained, that we don't wear our pilots and our mechanics out. That 
is readiness. That is what we are talking about in this bill. That is 
what we have an obligation in this House to do for them who do so much 
for us.
  I oppose the gentlewoman's amendment. As I say, I have tremendous 
respect for her views and the sincerity with which she holds them. I 
think it results in a more dangerous world.
  Mr. Chair, 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).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California 
will be postponed.


                  Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Polis

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

     SEC. 1098. REDUCTION OF AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Reduction.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     Act, but subject to subsection (b), the President, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 
     Energy, and the Administrator for Nuclear Security, shall 
     make such reductions in the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated under this Act in such manner as the President 
     considers appropriate to achieve an aggregate reduction of 1 
     percent of the total amount of funds authorized to be 
     appropriated under this Act. Such reduction shall be in 
     addition to any other reduction of funds required by law.
       (b) Exclusions.--In carrying out subsection (a), the 
     President shall not reduce the amount of funds for the 
     following accounts:
       (1) Military personnel, reserve personnel, and National 
     Guard personnel accounts of the Department of Defense.
       (2) The Defense Health Program account.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, this is a very simple amendment. When we look 
at

[[Page 6596]]

our country's national security, it is important to make sure that we 
don't mortgage our national security because fiscal security is an 
important part of protecting our country.
  My amendment would give authority to the President of the United 
States and the Secretary of Defense to reduce the overall amount of 
money authorized by this bill by 1 percent. It simply cuts defense 
spending by 1 percent.
  As you know, we spend as much as the rest of the world, combined, on 
defense. We want to have a strong defense, but of course, as you know, 
this current authorization exceeds the levels of the Budget Control 
Act, even with this 1 percent reduction, which is really a compromise. 
It only reduces it by $5.5 billion and, in fact, continues to authorize 
at a level of $10 billion more than the bipartisan Budget Control Act.
  In a bill in which we overfunded multiple accounts and weapons 
systems above the request level of the military, I think 1 percent is a 
very reasonable request. It is about $5.5 billion. It is certainly 
possible to find these cuts. In fact, they are very likely to occur 
because, again, if we conform to the Budget Control Act, there would 
actually be a larger cut than even this humble one that we are offering 
before you today.
  As an example, the bill authorizes $9.5 billion in nuclear weapons 
activities alone. We could pass my amendment. Even if we allocated the 
entire cuts to nuclear weapons, we would still be spending $4 billion 
on nuclear weapons. I think the estimate is we would then have enough 
to destroy the entire world and wipe out life as we know it three times 
instead of six times. How much is enough?
  There are plenty of other programs that we could look at. Of course, 
it should not be Congress making those decisions in a political manner; 
it should be the military and the executive. I imagine they would start 
with accounts that Congress has chosen to overfund.
  At some point, we have to stand up for fiscal security and realize 
that mortgaging our future and our children's future to Saudi Arabia 
and China does not enhance our national security; it detracts from it.
  My amendment is a small first step toward taking a stand against a 
military budget that we simply cannot afford. We need to reduce our 
budget deficit. This is a very small and simple way to start. We can 
make these strategic cuts and, of course, still fully protect our 
national security and even enhance it.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on my amendment and take this 
modest step toward fiscal responsibility as a compromise between the 
Budget Control Act levels and the committee authorization levels.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  This amendment cuts defense below the President's request, below last 
year's funding, and below what the last Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff said was the lower, ragged edge of what it takes to defend this 
country.
  Let's just put in a little bit of context here. This bill, counting 
OCO and everything, is a whopping one-half of 1 percent over what we 
spent last year. One-half of 1 percent. Inflation is supposed to be 2.1 
percent. So what it really means is this bill, even in real dollars, is 
a cut, even as it is.
  This bill is 23 percent less than we were spending on defense in real 
terms in 2010. Mr. Chairman, the world is not 23 percent safer now than 
it was 6 years ago. And yet the gentleman from Colorado's amendment 
would cut that even further.
  This bill stays within the amount requested by the President. It 
meets the need for base requirements and provides a bridge fund for 
deployments, just like Democratic majorities did for the last change of 
administration. And I think that is the most reasonable response.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from the great State of California (Ms. Lee), a cosponsor of this 
amendment.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to first thank Congressman Polis for 
yielding time and for his work to ensure that our Nation's fiscal 
security is secure through this amendment. It is an honor to cosponsor 
this amendment with him. I want to thank the ranking member also for 
guiding us through this very difficult bill to make sure that we all 
know what is included in the bill.
  I just have to say, our amendment, I think, would take a modest step 
in making this bill a lot better to help us rein in the over-the-top, 
quite frankly, Pentagon spending, while protecting the pay or health 
benefit accounts of our brave servicemen and -women and their families.
  Over the last 15 years, Pentagon spending has ballooned by 50 percent 
in real terms. Pentagon spending now consumes more than half of the 
Federal discretionary budget. That is just outrageous.
  Recently, The New York Times made this case in their editorial called 
``A Better, Not Fatter, Defense Budget,'' which I include for the 
Record.

                 [From the New York Times, May 9, 2016]

                  A Better, Not Fatter, Defense Budget

                        (By the Editorial Board)

       To hear some military commanders and members of Congress 
     talk, the American military is worn out and in desperate need 
     of more money. After more than a decade in Iraq and 
     Afghanistan, they say, troops are lagging in training and new 
     weaponry, which is jeopardizing their ability to defeat the 
     Islamic State and deal with potential conflicts with Russia 
     and China.
       While increased funding for some programs may be needed, 
     total military spending, at nearly $600 billion annually, is 
     not too low. The trouble is, the investment has often yielded 
     poor results, with the Pentagon, Congress and the White House 
     all making bad judgments, playing budget games and falling 
     under the sway of defense industry lobbyists. Current 
     military spending is 50 percent higher in real terms than it 
     was before 9/11, yet the number of active duty and reserve 
     troops is 6 percent smaller.
       For nearly a decade after 9/11, the Pentagon had a virtual 
     blank check; the base defense budget rose, in adjusted 
     dollars, from $378 billion in 1998 to $600 billion in 2010. 
     As the military fought Al Qaeda and the Taliban, billions of 
     dollars were squandered on unnecessary items, including new 
     weapons that ran late and over budget like the troubled F-35 
     jet fighter.
       The waste and the budget games continue with the House 
     Armed Services Committee approving a $583 billion total 
     defense authorization bill for 2017 last month that skirts 
     the across-the-board caps imposed by Congress in 2011 on 
     discretionary federal spending.
       The caps are supposed to restrain domestic and military 
     spending equally, but defense hawks have insisted on throwing 
     more money at the Pentagon. That doesn't encourage efficiency 
     or wise choices. The panel took $18 billion from a $59 
     billion off-budget account, which has become a slush fund 
     renewed annually to finance the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and 
     other trouble spots, and is not subject to the budget caps, 
     and repurposed that money for use in the $524 billion base 
     military budget.
       The move will underwrite the purchase of more ships, jet 
     fighters, helicopters and other big-ticket weapons that the 
     Pentagon didn't request and will keep the Army from falling 
     below 480,000 active-duty troops. It also means the war 
     account will run out of money next April. Representative Mac 
     Thornberry, the Republican chairman of the committee, 
     apparently assumes the next president will be forced to ask 
     for, and Congress will be forced to approve, more money for 
     the war account. This sleight of hand runs the risk that 
     troops overseas, at some point, could be deprived of some 
     resources, at least temporarily. The full House should reject 
     this maneuver.
       Many defense experts, liberals and centrists as well as 
     hawks, agree that more investment is needed in maintenance, 
     training and modernizing aging weapons and equipment. These 
     needs were identified years ago, yet the Pentagon and 
     Congress have chosen to invest in excessively costly high-
     tech weaponry while deferring maintenance and other 
     operational expenses.
       The Pentagon can do with far fewer than the 1,700 F-35s it 
     plans on buying. It should pare back on President Obama's $1 
     trillion plan to replace nearly every missile, submarine, 
     aircraft and warhead in the nuclear arsenal. Defense 
     officials recently reported that 22 percent of all military 
     bases will not

[[Page 6597]]

     be needed by 2019. Civilian positions will have to be 
     reduced, while reforms in health care and the military 
     procurement system need to be carried out. All of these 
     changes make good sense, given the savings they would bring. 
     But they are politically unpalatable; base closings, for 
     instance, have been stubbornly resisted in recent years by 
     lawmakers fearful of angering voters by eliminating jobs in 
     communities that are economically dependent on those bases.
       Todd Harrison, a defense budget expert with the Center for 
     Strategic and International Studies, says that sustaining the 
     current military force of roughly two million and paying for 
     all the new weapons systems will cost billions more than 
     Congress has allowed under the budget caps. To maintain 
     sensible troop levels, Congress and the administration need 
     to begin honestly addressing the hard fiscal choices that 
     they have largely been loath to make.

  Ms. LEE. The article lists program after program, many of which our 
generals did not ask for, that have cost taxpayers billions without 
making us any safer.
  Clearly, we also need to audit the Pentagon. That is why I am pleased 
the House adopted the Burgess-Lee amendment yesterday to require a 
report on auditability and help keep moving toward auditing the 
Pentagon. While we were working on that, we should take every 
opportunity to address Pentagon spending.
  The article in The New York Times sets forth: ``The waste and the 
budget games continue with the House Armed Services Committee approving 
a $583 billion total defense authorization.''
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee 
on Readiness.
  Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Chairman, I want to reiterate the importance of 
making sure that we are funding defense at the President's request. The 
FY 2017 request, I think, is minimally adequate, but it is not just me. 
The administration's own Secretary of the Army Murphy stated that this 
budget request is minimally adequate and that we are taking a high risk 
as an Army and as a Nation when the Army is funded at this level. So 
there is still risk there with this level of funding.
  As the chairman pointed out, we live in a more dangerous world today, 
but we see our Marine Corps and Air Force having to go to aircraft that 
are museum exhibits to cannibalize parts to bring them in to have a 
minimally operational cadre of aircraft.
  We see this, too, when we talk about only 9 of the 20 B-1 bombers are 
available today because they are lacking parts and when we have 30 
percent or less of our Marine Corps helicopters available because they 
are lacking parts. We see that, in a squadron of 14 jets, only 3 in the 
Marine Corps are available because they are lacking parts.
  It is irresponsible not to provide to the brave men and women that 
serve this Nation the things that they need. We are asking them to go 
into harm's way. We are asking them to do tremendously difficult jobs. 
We are asking them to maintain safety. Yet we are not providing them 
the resources necessary.
  This amendment would do even more to take away what is already a 
challenging situation for those brave men and women that are doing a 
tremendous job and that, as their leaders have said, are being stressed 
to the breaking point because they do not have the basic resources to 
keep those aircraft flying, to keep those ships on the water, to keep 
those systems necessary to be able to perform the job that we have 
asked them to do.
  We have an obligation as a Nation that, when we ask those brave men 
and women to go into harm's way, to support them. It is unconscionable 
when we don't do that, when we have situations like 84 percent of our 
Marine Corps aircraft are in a nonready status, based on a 10-year 
average.
  So when we talk about taking dollars away, what signal does that send 
to the brave men and women serving in the military? I think this 
amendment cuts to the heart of what we must do as a Nation, and that is 
to rebuild readiness, not degrade readiness.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, there are a number of programs which 
Congress has forced spending on the military that even the military has 
not requested.
  As an example, we blocked the Navy from making a sound fiscal 
decision saving $900 million to shutter a carrier air wing. There are a 
dozen more Black Hawk and Apache helicopters than requested by the 
military to meet our national defense needs. There are two extra V-22 
Ospreys that were not requested, 500 extra Javelin missiles above the 
request, 500 more extra Hydra guided rockets, and 75 extra Sidewinder 
missiles.
  These are just some of the examples of some the low-hanging fruit 
that we can use to restore military funding to a more fiscally 
responsible manner.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Colorado raising the 
issue that he just raised because it gives me the opportunity to affirm 
that many of the programs he was just mentioning like the Black Hawks, 
for example, have been requested by many of the Members on his side of 
the aisle. And they were included in the unfunded requirements list 
from the Army.
  So the way it works is we get all sorts of requests from Members on 
both sides of the aisle. Each of the services gives us a list of what 
they would like to have had in the budget request but the 
administration took out, and then where the two match up as Member 
priorities and service priorities, that is what these funds are.
  It is not that they weren't asked for from the military. It is the 
military wanted them but OMB took them out. And when you have many 
Members, particularly on the Black Hawks, the V-22s, the LCS, and a 
number of the items he just mentioned on his side of the aisle, asking 
for them as well as the service, then that becomes part of the 
modernization priority.
  Let me just make one other point. In the Black Hawk case 
specifically, these new Black Hawks will replace helicopters that were 
built in 1979, for which we cannot get parts, which have very 
restricted flight envelopes because of all the restrictions. They can't 
be repaired. They can't do everything the Army wants them to do.
  So the administration did not ask for any. Many Members on the 
Democratic side asked for some. We put them in here. And that is the 
way to fix readiness: by replacing a 1979 helicopter with a 2016 
helicopter.
  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. Polis).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. POLIS. 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 California 
will be postponed.


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

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 2 consisting of amendment Nos. 8, 14, 25, 27, 
28, 32, 33, 34, 35, 38, 40, 41, 42, and 45 printed in House Report 114-
571, offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:


           amendment no. 8 offered by mr. desantis of florida

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

     SEC. 12XX. LIMITATION ON MILITARY CONTACT AND COOPERATION 
                   BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND CUBA.

       (a) Limitation.--Except as provided in subsection (b), none 
     of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made 
     available for fiscal year 2017 for the Department of Defense 
     may be used for any bilateral military-to-military contact or 
     cooperation between the Governments of the United States and 
     Cuba until the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of 
     State, in consultation with the Director of National 
     Intelligence, certify to the appropriate congressional 
     committees that--
       (1) the Government of Cuba has--
       (A) met the requirements and satisfied the factors 
     specified in sections 205 and 206 of the

[[Page 6598]]

     Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 
     1996 (22 U.S.C. 6065 and 6066); and
       (B) resolved, to the full satisfaction of United States 
     law, all outstanding claims and judgments belonging to United 
     States nationals against the Government of Cuba, including 
     but not limited to claims regarding property confiscated by 
     the Government of Cuba;
       (2) the Cuban military and other security forces in Cuba 
     have ceased committing human right abuses, including 
     arbitrary arrests, beatings, and other acts of repudiation, 
     against those who express opposition to the Castro regime, 
     civil rights activists and other citizens of Cuba, as well as 
     all persecution, intimidation, arrest, imprisonment, and 
     assassination of dissidents and members of faith-based 
     organizations;
       (3) the Cuban military has ceased providing military 
     intelligence, weapons training, strategic planning, and 
     security logistics to the military and security forces of 
     Venezuela;
       (4) the Government of Cuba no longer demands that the 
     United States relinquish control of Guantanamo Bay, in 
     violation of an international treaty;
       (5) the Government of Cuba returns to the United States 
     fugitives wanted by the Department of Justice for crimes 
     committed in the United States; and
       (6) the officials of the Cuban military that were indicted 
     in the murder of United States citizens during the shoot down 
     of planes operated by the Brothers to the Rescue humanitarian 
     organization in 1996 are brought to justice.
       (b) Exceptions.--The limitation on the use of funds under 
     subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to--
       (1) payments in furtherance of the lease agreement, or 
     other financial transactions necessary for maintenance and 
     improvements of the military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, 
     including any adjacent areas under the control or possession 
     of the United States;
       (2) assistance or support in furtherance of democracy-
     building efforts for Cuba described in section 109 of the 
     Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 
     1996 (22 U.S.C. 6039); or
       (3) customary and routine financial transactions necessary 
     for the maintenance, improvements, or regular duties of the 
     United States mission in Havana, including outreach to the 
     pro-democracy opposition.
       (c) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term 
     ``appropriate congressional committees'' means--
       (A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Foreign Relations of the Senate; and
       (B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.
       (2) Bilateral military-to-military contact or 
     cooperation.--The term ``bilateral military-to-military 
     contact or cooperation''--
       (A) means--
       (i) reciprocal visits and meetings by high-ranking 
     delegations;
       (ii) information sharing, policy consultations, security 
     dialogues or other forms of consultative discussions;
       (iii) exchange of military instructors, training personnel, 
     and students;
       (iv) defense planning; and
       (v) military training or exercises; but
       (B) does not include any contact or cooperation that is in 
     support of the United States stability operations.
       (3) Cuban military.--The term ``Cuban military'' means--
       (A) the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Cuba, 
     the Ministry of the Interior of Cuba, or any subdivision of 
     either such Ministry;
       (B) any agency, instrumentality, or other entity that is 
     owned, operated, or controlled by an entity specified in 
     subparagraph (A); or
       (C) an individual who is a senior member of the Ministry of 
     the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Cuba or the Ministry of the 
     Interior of Cuba.
       (d) Effective Date.--This section takes effect on the date 
     of the enactment of this Act and applies with respect to 
     funds described in subsection (a) that are unobligated as of 
     such date of enactment.


          amendment no. 14 offered by mr. desantis of florida

       Page 139, after line 22, insert the following:

     SEC. 547. CAREER MILITARY JUSTICE LITIGATION TRACK FOR JUDGE 
                   ADVOCATES.

       (a) Career Litigation Track Required.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of each military department 
     shall establish a career military justice litigation track 
     for judge advocates in the Armed Forces under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary.
       (2) Consultation.--The Secretary of the Army and the 
     Secretary of the Air Force shall establish the litigation 
     track required by this section in consultation with the Judge 
     Advocate General of the Army and the Judge Advocate General 
     of the Air Force, respectively. The Secretary of the Navy 
     shall establish the litigation track in consultation with the 
     Judge Advocate General of the Navy and the Staff Judge 
     Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps.
       (b) Elements.--Each career litigation track under this 
     section shall provide for the following:
       (1) Assignment and advancement of qualified judge advocates 
     in and through assignments and billets relating to the 
     practice of military justice under chapter 47 of title 10, 
     United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice).
       (2) Establishing for each Armed Force the assignments and 
     billets covered by paragraph (1), which shall include trial 
     counsel, defense counsel, military trial judge, military 
     appellate judge, academic instructor, all positions within 
     criminal law offices or divisions of such Armed Force, 
     Special Victims Prosecutor, Victims' Legal Counsel, Special 
     Victims' Counsel, and such other positions as the Secretary 
     of the military department concerned shall specify.
       (3) For judge advocates participating in such litigation 
     track, mechanisms as follows:
       (A) To prohibit a judge advocate from more than a total of 
     four years of duty or assignments outside such litigation 
     track
       (B) To prohibit any adverse assessment of a judge advocate 
     so participating by reason of such participation in the 
     promotion of officers through grade O-6 (or such higher grade 
     as the Secretary of the military department concerned shall 
     specify for purposes of such litigation track).
       (4) Such additional requirements and qualifications for the 
     litigation track as the Secretary of the military department 
     concerned considers appropriate, including requirements and 
     qualifications that take into account the unique personnel 
     needs and requirement of an Armed Force.
       (c) Implementation Deadline.--Each Secretary of a military 
     department shall implement the career litigation track 
     required by this section for the Armed Forces under the 
     jurisdiction of such Secretary by not later than 18 months 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (d) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, each Secretary of a military 
     department shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services 
     of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on 
     the progress of such Secretary in implementing the career 
     litigation track required under this section for the Armed 
     Forces under the jurisdiction of such Secretary.


         amendment no. 25 offered by mr. lamalfa of california

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

     SEC. 1__. PROHIBITION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR RETIREMENT 
                   OF U-2 AIRCRAFT.

       None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act 
     or otherwise made available for the Air Force may be 
     obligated or expended to retire, prepare to retire, or place 
     in storage or on backup aircraft inventory status any U-2 
     aircraft.


        amendment no. 27 offered by mr. hudson of north carolina

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

     SEC. 1__. BRIEFING ON ACQUISITION STRATEGY FOR GROUND 
                   MOBILITY VEHICLE.

       (a) Briefing Required.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of 
     Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of the Army, shall present to 
     the congressional defense committees a briefing on the 
     acquisition strategy for the Ground Mobility Vehicle for use 
     with the Global Response Force.
       (b) Elements.--The briefing under subsection (a) shall 
     include an assessment of--
       (1) whether the Ground Mobility Vehicle is a suitable 
     candidate for solutions that would utilize militarized 
     commercial off-the-shelf platforms leveraging existing global 
     automotive supply chains to satisfy requirements and reduce 
     the life-cycle cost of the program;
       (2) whether the acquisition strategy meets the focus areas 
     specified in the Better Buying Power initiative of the 
     Secretary of Defense; and
       (3) whether including an active safety system like 
     electronic stability control in the Ground Mobility Vehicle, 
     as such system is used on the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, 
     is expected to reduce the risk of vehicle rollover.


       amendment no. 28 offered by mr. sanford of south carolina

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

     SEC. 1__. STANDARDIZATION OF 5.56MM RIFLE AMMUNITION.

       (a) Report.--If, on the date that is 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Army and the Marine 
     Corps are each using different variants of 5.56mm rifle 
     ammunition, the Secretary of Defense shall, on such date, 
     submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
     explaining the reasons that the Army and the Marine Corps are 
     using different variants of such ammunition.
       (b) Standardization Requirement.--Not later than one year 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall ensure that the Army and the

[[Page 6599]]

     Marine Corps are using the same variant of 5.56mm rifle 
     ammunition.
       (c) Exception.--Subsection (b) shall not apply in a case in 
     which the Secretary of Defense--
       (1) determines that a state of emergency requires the Army 
     and the Marine Corps to use different variants of 5.56mm 
     rifle ammunition; and
       (2) certifies to the congressional defense committees that 
     such a determination has been made.


       amendment no. 32 offered by mr. cartwright of pennsylvania

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

     SEC. 3__. SYSTEM FOR COMMUNICATING AVAILABILITY OF SURPLUS 
                   AMMUNITION.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall implement a formal 
     process to provide Government agencies outside the Department 
     of Defense with information on the availability of surplus, 
     serviceable ammunition for the purpose of reducing the 
     overall storage and disposal costs related to such 
     ammunition.


           amendment no. 33 offered by mr. forbes of virginia

       Page 107, line 20, strike ``322,900'' and insert 
     ``324,615''.


        amendment no. 34 offered by mr. jones of north carolina

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

     SEC. 6__. ACCEPTANCE OF MILITARY STAR CARD AT COMMISSARIES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure 
     that--
       (1) commissary stores accept as payment the Military Star 
     Card; and
       (2) any financial liability of the United States relating 
     to such acceptance as payment be assumed by the Army and Air 
     Force Exchange Service.
       (b) Military Star Card Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``Military Star Card'' means a credit card administered under 
     the Exchange Credit Program by the Army and Air Force 
     Exchange Service.


            amendment no. 35 offered by mr. allen of georgia

       Page 141, line 17, after ``senior military college'' insert 
     the following: ``and each of the Reserve Officer Training 
     Corps institutions selected for partnership by the cyber 
     institutes at the individual service academies''.


        amendment no. 38 offered by mr. desaulnier of california

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

     SEC. 568. INCLUSION OF INFORMATION IN TRANSITION ASSISTANCE 
                   PROGRAM.

       Section 1144(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(10) Provide information regarding the deduction of 
     disability compensation paid by the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs pursuant to section 1175a(h) of this title by reason 
     of voluntary separation pay received by the member.''.


        amendment no. 40 offered by mr. keating of massachusetts

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

     SEC. 5__. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON DESIRABILITY OF SERVICE-WIDE 
                   ADOPTION OF GOLD STAR INSTALLATION ACCESS CARD.

       It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of each 
     military department and the Secretary of the Department in 
     which the Coast Guard is operating should--
       (1) provide for the issuance of a Gold Star Installation 
     Access Card to Gold Star family members who are the survivors 
     of deceased members of the Armed Forces in order to expedite 
     the ability of a Gold Star family member to gain unescorted 
     access to military installations for the purpose of obtaining 
     the on-base services and benefits for which the Gold Star 
     family member is entitled or eligible;
       (2) work jointly to ensure that a Gold Star Installation 
     Access Card issued to a Gold Star family member by one Armed 
     Force is accepted for access to military installations of 
     another Armed Force; and
       (3) in developing, issuing, and accepting the Gold Star 
     Installation Access Card--
       (A) prevent fraud in the procurement or use of the Gold 
     Star Installation Access Card;
       (B) limit installation access to those areas that provide 
     the services and benefits for which the Gold Star family 
     member is entitled or eligible; and
       (C) ensure that the availability and use of the Gold Star 
     Installation Access Card does not adversely affect military 
     installation security.


             amendment no. 41 offered by ms. kaptur of ohio

       Page 186, after line 25, insert the following new 
     subsection:
       (c) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to the congressional defense committees a report on the 
     dependency and indemnity compensation offset under sections 
     1450(c) of title 10, United States Code. The report shall 
     include the following:
       (1) The total number of individuals affected by such 
     offset.
       (2) Of the number of individuals covered under paragraph 
     (1), the number who are covered by section 1448(d) of title 
     10, United States Code, listed by the rank of the deceased 
     member and the current age of the individual.
       (3) Of the number of individuals under paragraph (1), the 
     number who are not covered by section 1448(d) of title 10, 
     United States Code, listed by the rank of the deceased member 
     and the current age of the individual.
       (4) The average amount of money that is affected by such 
     offset, including the average amounts with respect to--
       (A) individuals described in paragraph (2); and
       (B) individuals described in paragraph (3).
       (5) The number of recipients for the special survivor 
     indemnity allowance under section 1450(m) of title 10, United 
     States Code.


           amendment no. 42 offered by mr. kildee of michigan

       Page 264, line 7, insert ``and units'' after ``members''.
       Page 265, after line 8, insert the following:
       (3) High risk veterans.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     shall use the results under subsection (c) to provide 
     outreach regarding the available preventative and treatment 
     resources for mental health for enrolled veterans who were 
     deployed with the units identified under this subsection.
       Page 265, line 16, insert ``and the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs'' after ``Defense''.
       Page 265, line 17, insert ``and the Committee on Veterans' 
     Affairs'' after ``Services''.
       Page 265, line 18, insert ``and the Committee on Veterans' 
     Affairs'' after ``Services''.
       Page 266, strike lines 3 through 6 and insert the 
     following:
       (f) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Military services.--The term ``military services'' 
     means the Army, Navy, Air Force, and the Marine Corps, 
     including the reserve components thereof.
       (2) Enrolled veteran.--The term ``enrolled veteran'' means 
     a veteran enrolled in the health care system of the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs.


          amendment no. 45 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

       At the end of title VII (page 273, after line 12), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 749. INCREASED COLLABORATION WITH NIH TO COMBAT TRIPLE 
                   NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER.

       The Office of Health of the Department of Defense shall 
     work in collaboration with the National Institutes of Health 
     to--
       (1) identify specific genetic and molecular targets and 
     biomarkers for triple negative breast cancer; and
       (2) provide information useful in biomarker selection, drug 
     discovery, and clinical trials design that will enable both--
       (A) triple negative breast cancer patients to be identified 
     earlier in the progression of their disease; and
       (B) the development of multiple targeted therapies for the 
     disease.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chair, I am very grateful to Chairman Thornberry for 
allowing me to present this amendment.
  Today, I rise in support of my amendment to the NDAA in support of 
the U-2, known as the Dragon Lady, one of the must successful spy 
planes ever built. Its unique capabilities have served our Nation's 
high-altitude intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance mission 
for decades.
  What many don't know is that the U-2 is not a cold war relic. It is 
still current. The most recent ones were made in the 1980s. U-2s are 
currently flying more hours today than at any point since the end of 
the cold war and have been deployed in our ongoing efforts to defeat 
ISIS.
  Flying at an altitude of 70,000 feet, the U-2 is able to reach 
heights other spy planes cannot. Because the U-2 can reach such 
extraordinary heights, it is able to use high-tech sensors to increase 
its ability to collect intelligence.
  Other unique features of the U-2 include cloud-piercing radar and 
interchangeable nose cones. The U-2 can also take incredible high-
resolution photographs on a 10,500-foot reel wet film.
  My amendment to the NDAA will prevent the Air Force from retiring the

[[Page 6600]]

U-2. It is absolutely essential to our ability to meet our high-
altitude intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance needs.
  In addition to aiding in the fight against ISIS, General Philip 
Breedlove, NATO's supreme allied commander and the head of U.S. forces 
in Europe, called for the use of U-2s in countering the strategic 
threat posed by Vladimir Putin.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. LaMALFA. General Breedlove said:
  ``EUCOM needs additional intelligence collection platforms, such as 
the U-2 or the RC-135, to assist the increased collection requirements 
in the theatre.''
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I listened to the frustration of the 
chairman describing the process, and I sympathize with that. I have sat 
and admitted that this committee has one of the most difficult tasks, 
because as long as we are sort of unhinged here from the reality and 
the accountability of how they all work out, we will have people make 
requests for this or the administration will leave something out there, 
and it is difficult for the committee to try to make sense of reality 
out of these conflicting requests.
  Out of this, I think there is an elephant in the room of an 
unrealistic, unsustainable, and unnecessary trillion-dollar path we are 
on for the nuclear triad of bombers, land-based missiles, and the 
submarines.
  These are weapons that we have never used in 71 years. These are 
weapons that do not help us with the major challenges that vex this 
committee right now in terms of military readiness, the challenges 
dealing with ISIS, dealing with encroachment by the Chinese, problems 
with Russia.
  These are weapons that didn't stop Russian aggression in the Crimea 
or Ukraine or Chinese encroachment. These are weapons that don't deter 
the greatest nuclear threat we face, which is nuclear materials falling 
into the hands of extremist elements from rogue nations like North 
Korea or some of our purported friends in Pakistan.
  These are the threats that we face. And this muscle-bound nuclear 
triad that we are going to spend a trillion dollars on does not help 
us.
  There is enough blame, I think, to go around. The administration made 
an agreement to upgrade and modernize all these nuclear weapons in 
their effort to get the nonproliferation treaty advanced. I think it 
was a foolish bargain, an expensive bargain. They are not going to be 
around to have to deliver on the trillion dollars. They are nibbling 
around the edges and moving these things forward and leaving the big 
decisions for the future.
  They have actually made it worse by not fighting aggressively for 
nonproliferation resources to help us keep these materials out of the 
hands of the extremists and retire nuclear weapons that are floating 
around the world now.
  We have more nuclear weapons than we need, more nuclear weapons than 
we can use, more nuclear weapons than we can afford. We can debate 
whether we have enough to destroy the world 3 times, 5 times, or 10 
times. What is ironic is that we never have that debate on the floor of 
the House on how the tradeoffs occur, what the threats to conventional 
military capacity are, and how they fit into an overall scheme of 
affairs.

                              {time}  1645

  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I suggest this is the least-effective part of our 
overall defense inventory. I would hope that, in the future, when maybe 
we have a new administration willing to turn a page, when we have a 
Congress that is willing to entertain a broad and robust debate about 
this critical issue, that we can deal with an effort to rein in this 
trillion-dollar spending folly that is going to have disastrous effects 
for our military readiness in the years ahead.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, the reason these weapons have not been used since 1945 
is that we have had a credible nuclear deterrent. The fastest way to 
have a more dangerous, destabilized world is for the credibility of 
that deterrent to erode, and I worry about that.
  Secondly, if you look at what is planned with upgrading the weapons 
and the delivery systems, at no point does it become more than 11 
percent of the U.S. defense budget. That is a pretty good investment to 
make sure that they are not used, and I suggest that it is well worth 
the investment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
  Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment I offer today, in cooperation with the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) requires a report simply from 
the Secretary of Defense, detailing the quantity, composition, and lost 
income of survivors currently affected by the Dependency and Indemnity 
Compensation offset to the Survivor Benefit Program.
  It continues this body's crucial, bipartisan effort to find a 
feasible solution for the disgraceful way we shortchange and penalize 
our military widows and widowers.
  This mandatory offset hurts those who have already given more to 
freedom than most of us ever will, the life of a spouse.
  It hurts women like the Army Sergeant First Class who recently 
contacted me. She is an Afghan veteran herself, mother of three. 
Tragically, she also is a Gold Star Wife due to the death of her 
husband in Iraq in 2004. As a young widow of a servicemember who died 
as a result of his service, she is not eligible to receive the full 
amount of her benefits, making the burden of living without her spouse 
that much more difficult at a time of enormous adjustment for their 
family. What's more, if she were a Federal civil service survivor, she 
could receive both benefits.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentlewoman an 
additional 30 seconds.
  Ms. KAPTUR. If she were a civil service survivor, she could receive 
both benefits; and if she were over the age of 37, she could receive 
both benefits. Her husband gave his life for liberty. She is a veteran, 
too. We must honor their sacrifice as we honor the sacrifice of any 
other American who dies in service to our Nation, and find a way to fix 
this awkward offset.
  This report will help us better define the situation so we can find 
just solutions. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Montana (Mr. Zinke), a member of the 
committee.
  Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my colleague from 
Florida's amendment to create a Judge Advocate General career 
litigation track in the Army and the U.S. Air Force.
  The legislation provides the Army and Air Force JAG officers with 
trial and prosecutorial experience that is absolutely critical.
  Currently, Army and Air Force JAGs lack experience, as multiple 
reports have said. As a matter of fact, a shocking 89 percent of 
military prosecutors only have 10 or fewer contested cases. This 
inexperience is a disservice to those who seek justice under the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice.
  Anyone who has suffered a transgression and sexual assault or other 
crime while serving in the military, quite frankly, deserves the best.

[[Page 6601]]

  The Navy has implemented this litigation path and is already reaping 
great results. It is time for the Air Force and the Army to follow 
suit.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I want to make clear that my opposition to the bill at this point is 
not just based on the exclusion of the amendment that would have lifted 
the discrimination against the LGBT community. That was sort of the 
last straw.
  I was on the fence about this bill from the very beginning because, 
understand that this bill continues the pattern of the last few years, 
of putting our defense on a fiscal path to nowhere, a fiscal path 
towards a cliff of not having the money to fund what needs to be funded 
because the Budget Control Act remains in place.
  Now, the chairman repeatedly says that in 2008, we did this when a 
new administration was coming in. We only funded half of the overseas 
contingency operation fund, knowing the supplemental was coming.
  There was no Budget Control Act in 2008. The Budget Control Act is in 
place. Even if we get a supplemental in April--and in this Congress, 
getting additional money is no guarantee--the Budget Control Act 
remains in place, and this Congress has shown a complete unwillingness 
to get rid of it.
  So what we are doing by funding all of these programs that some of my 
colleagues have started, we are funding a defense that we cannot 
sustain.
  I think the best example of this is the military wanted to cut the 
size of the Marine Corps and the Army. Now, the levels that they wanted 
to cut them to were levels that no one in the defense community wanted 
to cut them to, but that was the amount of money that they have 
available under the Budget Control Act.
  As soon as we repeal the Budget Control Act, we will have a lot 
easier conversation about how to fund defense; but what we are doing to 
national security right now is we are creating a bow wave that they 
will not be able to absorb.
  When the Budget Control Act kicks in again next year, all of a sudden 
the Army and the Marine Corps will have to, like that, cut--my numbers 
may be off a little bit here--30,000 in the Army, 10,000 in the Marine 
Corps. You can't really do that in any sort of reasonable way. It will 
be incredibly disruptive to the military, incredibly disruptive to 
readiness.
  Now, I will agree with the chairman that a passionate case can be 
made for spending more on defense. Heck, if we spent a trillion dollars 
on defense, a passionate case could be made for spending even more than 
that when you look at the threat environment. But we have the money we 
have.
  He also cited that, in 2010 numbers, we are now 23 percent below 
where we are at, and that is true. But we are 23 percent below where we 
are at because of the 2011 Budget Control Act which, again, this House 
refuses to repeal.
  So instead of dealing with the amount of money that Congress has 
forced the Department of Defense to deal with, we fantasize that more 
money will appear, and in that fantasy, we put the military in an 
impossible situation.
  We start all of these programs. There is not the money to finish 
those programs. And maybe someone can tell me where this money is going 
to come from, how it is going to magically appear, when we are $19 
trillion in debt--I forget off the top of my head what the deficit is 
this year, but it is somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 or $600 
billion--deficits for as far as the eye can see; the Freedom Caucus on 
the Republican side refusing to spend any more money.
  This money is not going to appear. And so what we are going to have 
is we are going to have a military that has to cut drastically and 
irresponsibly in the blink of an eye because we refused to let them do 
it responsibly.
  I would urge Members to read Secretary Carter's testimony before the 
Senate earlier this week or last week where he outlined what a 
devastating impact this defense bill will have on our national security 
when the bills that it is charging actually come due.
  Now, that is the primary reason to oppose this bill; contemplating 
swallowing that and hoping that, like last year, we could fix that in 
conference.
  But in addition to that, to have discriminatory provisions in it 
brings me back to 2009, when the Republicans opposed the defense bill 
because it had an antihate crime piece of legislation attached to it.
  There are reasons to oppose the defense bill other than you just 
don't really like people who serve in the military, and that is a 
condescending and irresponsible argument to make against those who 
would oppose the bill.
  If we continue down this funding path, we are not serving the 
military. All of these readiness disasters that we keep hearing about 
have, in part, happened because of the way this committee and the 
Appropriations Committee has funded defense for the last 3 or 4 years, 
by taking from readiness to fund a wide variety of programs, including 
the beginning of the $1 trillion Mr. Blumenauer talked about for our 
nuclear deterrent.
  We are not making choices. We refuse to get rid of the A-10. We 
refuse to lay off 11 cruisers. We refuse to allow the military to 
shrink its size and, instead, we keep putting it on a credit card and 
hoping that the money will appear.
  Well, when that money doesn't appear--and it is not going to. I 
haven't seen money just sort of burst out of nowhere in my lifetime. 
Maybe we will be lucky and maybe it will be the first time--but it puts 
the Department of Defense in a tenuous position.
  We need to start making choices based on the money that we actually 
have. This bill doesn't do that.
  Six months from now, our troops serving in Afghanistan and Iraq will 
have no money, and we hope that problem fixes itself. That is a 
national security reason for opposing this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 7 minutes remaining.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I think I made clear a few moments ago that I believe 
we need to have a better way to fund defense, a more predictable way. 
But, Mr. Chairman, I am not willing to wait to support the military 
until that is done. I am not willing to wait until we have tax reform 
and entitlement reform and all sorts of other things before I am 
willing to stand up and support the military. There are lives at stake 
today, and we have enormous challenges in the future, there is no 
question, budgetary and otherwise.
  But I think it would be a mistake if I were to say we have all these 
challenges coming down the road, therefore, I am not going to fix this 
problem that is affecting pilots, mechanics, others today. We can do 
something about it today.
  As a matter of fact, the gentleman talks about the Budget Control 
Act. We have made some alterations to the Budget Control Act for each 
of the last 4 years because of this problem.
  I think most people, at least on both sides of the aisle, realize 
that when you cut defense 23 percent since 2010, and the world is not 
23 percent safer, we are not asking our military folks for 23 percent 
fewer deployments, that something has got to give.
  So there has been--it has been painful, it has been messy, it has not 
been ideal, but there has been some alterations to the Budget Control 
Act.
  I said a while ago that I am for doing away with these artificial 
caps. The Budget Control Act did not work as anyone, I think, intended. 
There was never the mandatory spending reform that was the goal.
  And what bore the brunt of the cuts?
  Defense.
  Fifteen percent of the budget has absorbed 50 percent of the cuts 
under the Budget Control Act. That is wrong.
  Now, I think if Members on both sides of the aisle committed to 
working together to fix that, we could. Now, that would involve not 
having a President use the military as a hostage to try to force more 
domestic spending, which is what this President has done.

[[Page 6602]]

That would mean that we focus on trying to fix defense, and understand 
that all of us have other priorities that we need to also work on at 
the same time.
  But we are always going to have different budget laws and different 
circumstances. I still do not understand how a Democratic majority, in 
2008, could use this approach, to give the new President the benefit of 
the doubt, the benefit of a fresh look; and when we try to do the same 
for the next President, who none of us know who it is going to be, but 
when we try to use the same approach, all of a sudden then you just 
can't do it. It is irresponsible, it is a gimmick, and all sorts of 
names.
  The gentleman mentioned that we are not making choices and mentioned 
specifically the A-10.
  Mr. Chairman, there are a lot more things that I would like to have 
done in this bill, lots of additional programs I would like to have 
authorized. We had to make difficult choices.
  But just to take the A-10 for an example, the administration has 
proposed eliminating the A-10 for the past several years. This Congress 
reached a different judgment on that. That is what the Constitution, by 
the way, says we are supposed to do. It is our job to raise and 
support, build and maintain the Armed Forces of the United States.
  On the A-10 program, we reached a different conclusion. We decided 
that, until you have something to take its place, we shouldn't get rid 
of it.
  And you know what?
  The Secretary of Defense has testified that it has been devastating 
in its use against ISIS today. If we had eliminated it, it wouldn't be 
there.
  So sometimes our judgment--and we have a long list of instances where 
Congress, under majorities of both parties, have exercised a different 
judgment from the administration and where we were proved right. So we 
make tough choices. Sometimes our choices actually turn out to look 
pretty good in hindsight.
  But the bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is we could all wait to support a 
defense bill until some far-off condition were met. It is easy to vote 
``no'' unless something happens or unless some condition is met; but 
for this, if only that. That is easy.
  But that does not fix the immediate problems that face the men and 
women who volunteer to defend our country, the problems that they are 
facing today. That is what we are trying to do with this bill. We don't 
actually fix them. We just start to turn it around.
  I don't think there is an excuse that justifies opposing doing what 
is right for them, and that is the reason I believe that this bill 
should be supported. I hope Members will support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.

                              {time}  1700


                 Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Ellison

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       In section 1215(b)--
       (1) strike paragraphs (2), (3), and (4);
       (2) in paragraph (6), insert ``and'' after ``2018;'';
       (3) in paragraph (7), strike ``; and'' and insert a period; 
     and
       (4) strike paragraph (8).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, my amendment strikes language telling the 
President to expand our mission in Afghanistan, language that tells the 
President to put more of our troops in harm's way, to go backwards 
towards a combat mission in Afghanistan.
  Now, Republicans may not say it, but the effect is exactly what they 
are pushing for--moving the United States military and the United 
States back toward a combat mission in Afghanistan, not forward away 
from one. Worse yet, they are pushing for an expanded mission before 
the new commander on the ground, General John Nicholson, finishes his 
review. That is right. Congress is giving instructions to the President 
before the current commander has weighed in. This is a mistake.
  So the opening line of the sense of Congress tells the President to 
leave 9,800 troops in Afghanistan next year. The current plan calls for 
5,500. This sets the tone for what is next. Unfortunately, the 
amendment that strikes this language was not ruled in order.
  My amendment starts by striking the next provision. The Republicans 
want our military to unilaterally strike the Taliban. Now, of course, 
these people are absolutely bad news, but the State Department does not 
recognize them as a terrorist organization at this time. This is a 
decision that should be based on military considerations.
  Thus, our counterterrorism mission is allowed to strike and go after 
Daesh and al Qaeda, but the mission regarding the Taliban is defensive 
in nature; and if that is going to be changed, it should be based on 
military considerations, not just through a piece of legislation.
  In fact, the Afghans are leading all missions against the Taliban, 
and this has been happening well before we transitioned to a noncombat 
mission. So let's not call for going back to combat mission tactics, 
especially when the commander has not asked for it.
  Finally, I would like to talk about a particular provision that is 
close to me. I would like to address what I regard as actually a 
troubling piece in the provision, which says, and I will quote from the 
proposed legislation:

       The United States military personnel who are tasked with 
     the mission of providing combat search and rescue support, 
     casualty evacuation, and medical support should not be 
     counted as part of any force management level limitation on 
     the number of United States ground forces in Afghanistan.

  This is a mistake. I believe that our medical personnel and others 
should be considered boots on the ground, contrary to the language in 
the provision. Combat medics carry weapons, they take casualties, and 
they are killed. Why shouldn't we count them? It doesn't seem to make 
sense to me. One of the closest people in the whole wide world to me is 
an Active Duty military combat medic, and if they are in a war zone, I 
want them counted.
  So with that, I ask for my amendment to be approved and included, and 
I ask that we listen to military people on the ground before we start 
trying to tell them what to do, and that we absolutely count combat 
medics and people who do rescue.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner), the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Tactical Air and Land Forces.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, I am going to try to make some sense of 
this.
  We just had an amendment where we were debating providing the 
Authorization of Use of Military Force to the President, and we wanted 
to make certain that the President had the authority, and this is the 
portion of our bill where we actually provide authority. The word 
``authority'' is throughout these sections that are, by this amendment, 
being asked to be deleted. But as Mr. Ellison stated, we should look to 
the commanders on the ground. So let's look at what they have said.
  General Campbell, testifying about the Haqqani network, said that it 
remains the most capable threat to U.S. and coalition forces.
  Now, what does threat mean? It means that they are trying to kill us 
and our coalition forces. It is a State Department-designated terrorist 
organization which harbors al Qaeda and is

[[Page 6603]]

the most lethal actor on the battlefield. These provisions that will be 
deleted relate to our ability to fight them.
  Approximately 30 percent of district centers are under Taliban 
control and influence or are at such risk, says General Campbell.
  Now, General Nicholson, who is currently the commander, is doing his 
review. That is correct. But what we are doing in these provisions is 
providing the status quo. We are not presuming that he is going to come 
back and say: Let's cut; we can go do this with less troops. We are 
allowing that he would have the same resources that General Campbell 
had so that he would have an ability to defend our troops.
  Basically, if you go down to these paragraphs that are being deleted, 
this comes down to some fairly easy decisions:
  If you believe that ISIL is not a threat to our troops, vote for this 
amendment.
  If you believe that ISIL is not a threat to our allies in the Middle 
East, vote for this amendment.
  If you believe that the killings that were directed and inspired by 
ISIL in Brussels and Paris are not a threat to our Nation or our NATO 
allies, vote for this amendment.
  If you believe that it is okay for the Taliban to control portions of 
Afghan territory, even though al Qaeda planned and directed 9/11 under 
Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, vote for this amendment.
  If you believe that the U.S. and NATO troops should be responsible 
for Afghan security, and not Afghan security forces, vote for this 
amendment.
  If you believe, however, that we have a responsibility for our 
national security and to our troops, vote against this amendment.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Minnesota has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Texas has 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, first, let me thank Congressman Ellison for 
yielding and for his tremendous leadership. This amendment is extremely 
important.
  Today I rise to urge my colleagues to support this amendment and, 
really, allow our ground commanders to do their job. Now, of course, 
time and time again, Congress has refused to do its job. From Zika 
funding to confirming a new Supreme Court Justice, we failed to do our 
job.
  Instead of letting Congress do its job, the majority only seems 
interested in Congress doing other peoples' jobs, and that is including 
our military commanders. There is no way we should be allowing this to 
happen.
  Make no mistake, Republicans are trying to expand the U.S. mission in 
Afghanistan and further expand America's longest war. For nearly 15 
years, we have been fighting a war in Afghanistan. Our brave servicemen 
and -women have gone way beyond the call of duty. They have done 
everything we have asked them to do. It is past time to bring them home 
to their families and to their children. But minimally, we should not 
be telling our military leaders what to do in a war zone, especially 
before they have completed their on-the-ground assessment.
  So I hope that we vote ``yes'' on this commonsense amendment. While 
our young men and women are in Afghanistan, until we bring them home, 
let's use the best type of intelligence, the best information, and the 
best direction that the ground commanders have determined based on 
their ground assessment in this war.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, just to be clear, the underlying provisions which the 
gentleman's amendment would strike are sense of Congress provisions. 
Basically, it is the sense of Congress that the ground commanders ought 
to make these decisions.
  Unfortunately, artificial troop caps and overly restrictive 
requirements on our military increase the danger that our military 
faces in Afghanistan. So if you draw down too low the number of people 
you have, for example, then you don't have enough to protect yourself. 
That is part of what we are seeing in Afghanistan.
  If you tie the military's hands and say, ``Okay. You cannot go after 
this enemy, even though they may pose the most deadly threat to you,'' 
then you increase the danger to our military. That is exactly what 
these provisions try to deal with.
  Mr. Chairman, the Afghans are doing the fighting in Afghanistan. They 
are advancing and getting more capable all the time, but they still 
need us to be there and to advise and assist them.
  Just to look briefly at some of the provisions that the gentleman 
would strike, one says that the commander in Afghanistan has the 
authority to strike the Haqqani network. They are the ones that pose, 
in many people's eyes, the biggest threat for big bombings and so forth 
in that region. Why would we not allow our military commander, if he 
wants to, if he thinks it is right, to strike them?
  Another provision the gentleman strikes is the one that says that we 
ought to have resources to go after ISIS. Remember, Mr. Chairman, that 
it is not just al Qaeda and the Taliban that are growing in 
Afghanistan. ISIS is growing there, too. This just says we ought to do 
something about that. The gentleman's amendment would strike it.
  On troop caps, part of what is happening in Afghanistan is that we 
are artificially limiting the number of people there. As I mentioned, 
that increases the danger to the troops we do have there. Otherwise, we 
are bringing some people in on a temporary basis or hiring contractors 
to do the job.
  So these artificial troop caps mean that commanders and the 
administration have got to find all these ways around it, but they 
still increase the danger that the people we do have there face. That 
doesn't make sense. There are still dangers in Afghanistan to our 
national security.
  These provisions the gentleman would strike just try to untie the 
hands of our military so they can deal with it on a military basis, not 
a political basis.
  Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I urge Members to do 
likewise.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. ELLISON. 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 Minnesota 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Ellison

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike section 1502 and insert the following new section:

     SEC. 1502. PROCUREMENT.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2017 for 
     procurement accounts for the Army, the Navy and the Marine 
     Corps, the Air Force, and Defense-wide activities, as 
     specified in--
       (1) the funding table in section 4102; or
       (2) the funding table in section 4103.
       (b) Funding Reduction.--Notwithstanding the amounts set 
     forth in the funding tables in division D, the amount 
     authorized to be appropriated for procurement for overseas 
     contingency operations for base requirements, as specified in 
     the funding table in section 4103, is hereby reduced by 
     $9,440,300,000.
       Strike section 1504 and insert the following new section:

     SEC. 1504. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2017 for the 
     use of the

[[Page 6604]]

     Armed Forces and other activities and agencies of the 
     Department of Defense for expenses, not otherwise provided 
     for, for operation and maintenance, as specified in--
       (1) the funding table in section 4302, or
       (2) the funding table in section 4303.
       (b) Period of Availability.--Amounts specified in the 
     funding table in section 4302 shall remain available for 
     obligation only until April 30, 2017, at a rate for 
     operations as provided in the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 2016 (division C of Public Law 114-113).
       (c) Funding Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set 
     forth in the funding tables in division D, the amount 
     authorized to be appropriated in this section for operation 
     and maintenance, as specified in the funding table in section 
     4302, is hereby increased by $9,440,300,000, of which 
     $26,000,000 is designated for suicide prevention.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge support for my amendment to 
H.R. 4909, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017.
  The overseas contingency operations account is supposed to provide 
emergency funding for wars and unexpected operations overseas, 
operations that cannot be planned for in the base budget.
  Republicans are raiding this account. They are taking money from 
missions designed to protect our Nation from imminent threats to feed 
the military industrial complex. They argue that this makes our 
military stronger and that it improves our national security; but what 
it really does is, the Republicans have taken money from operations 
overseas and put it towards money for procurement, for nonwar needs, so 
much so that the operators would only be funded through 2017, April of 
next year. My amendment puts the money back.
  Mr. Chairman, Secretary Carter stated that this gimmick is gambling 
``with warfighter money at a time of war.'' He said: ``It would spend 
money taken from the war account on things that are not DOD's highest 
priorities across the joint force.''
  My amendment takes the $9.4 billion taken for procurement on items 
like extra F-35s and the littoral combat ship, which the Pentagon did 
not prioritize, and puts the funds back in the OCO operations and 
maintenance account.

                              {time}  1715

  Mr. Chair, $26 million of that money will go to preventing suicides 
amongst our military, as the President's request for this was $26 
million lower than the amount we appropriated in 2016. This problem is 
not going down, and it should not receive less support from us.
  In summary, we are putting money back where it belongs. We are 
supporting our troops on the ground. We are supporting those services 
overseas. We are supporting military readiness. We are supporting the 
priorities of the Pentagon and the President, not those of the defense 
industry.
  And I will say, Mr. Chairman, that if I were to ask you who I got a 
call from and ask you to guess, did I get a call from the President's 
office or the Pentagon or Boeing, the answer would be number three, 
Boeing. That is who called me and doesn't like this particular 
amendment. In fact, we didn't hear from the others. We heard from the 
industry, the special interests.
  Let's just say the Republicans do push through extra funds for OCO 
next year. This would still be shortchanging domestic programs that 
will have to be cut to pay for the defense industry.
  We all know that Republicans won't let us raise taxes to cover 
additional costs. We won't be able to take on more debt. Americans are 
going to suffer under the Republicans' scheme to give the Pentagon 
equipment and the industry just more.
  I oppose it, and I urge support for my amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Turner).
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, when we read our newspapers, we certainly 
know that the world is becoming a much less safe place. The conflicts 
around the world and the ability of our military to respond are 
incredibly important. But also, if you read the newspaper, you 
understand that our military is at a critical juncture. The effects of 
sequestration have significantly undermined the readiness of our 
military.
  The argument that Mr. Ellison is making about what pot of money funds 
come out of is kind of irrelevant in that his amendment isn't pure and 
that he doesn't take all of the money out of one pot and move it into 
another. He only takes a portion. The President does the same thing in 
this shell game of where dollars come from. It is not an issue of where 
do dollars come from. It is an issue of, where do they go?
  If you read this bill, the issue of where these go, which is what Mr. 
Ellison wants to stop, is moneys that go to readiness. It goes to the 
ability of our military to be prepared.
  The Admiral Vice Chief of Staff, General Daniel Allyn, recently 
explained that to build readiness ``the Army has been forced to cancel 
or delay military construction, sustainment, restoration, and 
modernization across our posts, camps, and stations. Additionally, the 
Army reduced key installation services, individual training programs, 
and modernization.'' In essence, readiness.
  This amendment strips away funding from critical programs that have 
been identified by our military services that were not fully funded by 
the President's budget request that go to readiness. We are currently 
in a readiness crisis.
  Marine pilots are having to cannibalize museum parts to get their F-
18s ready to deploy. Of the Marine Corps 271 strike aircraft, only 46 
can fly. Of the most severe type of aviation accidents, Marines are 84 
percent above their 10-year average. The Air Force maintainers are also 
cannibalizing museum parts to get aircraft in the air. Of the 20 B-1 
bombers, which are workhorses in Iraq and Syria, only 9 can fly due to 
parts and maintenance shortfalls. Pilots are getting less than half of 
their training required during a time when our adversaries are becoming 
increasingly capable and technologically advanced.
  The Air Force's Vice Chief of Staff, David Goldfein, recently stated 
during congressional testimony that lower than planned funding levels 
have resulted in one of the smallest, oldest, and least ready forces 
across the full-spectrum of operations in our history.
  Voting for this amendment supports cutting our troops' strength, 
cutting training and maintenance, forcing our armed services to 
maintain crumbling facilities, and forcing our servicemembers to 
continue to rely on faulty and worn out equipment.
  It is not an issue of what pot this money comes out of. It is a 
matter of where it goes. It needs to go for our servicemembers, so vote 
against this amendment.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Rice of South Carolina). The gentleman from 
Minnesota has 2 minutes remaining.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman for yielding, and 
for introducing this amendment, and for his leadership to end waste, 
fraud, and abuse at the Pentagon.
  This amendment, which I am proud to cosponsor, would stop Republicans 
from using the overseas contingency operation fund as a piggy bank for 
more wasteful Pentagon spending. Yes, it really does appear that 
Christmas is coming in May for the military-industrial complex.
  Right now, Republicans have robbed critical programs, like military 
suicide prevention, and redirected that money to the OCO fund where 
there is no accountability, no transparency, or oversight. By funneling 
this money to the OCO account, Republicans are shortchanging lifesaving 
programs to fund wasteful programs, like the F-35 and tanks that rust 
in the Nevada desert.

[[Page 6605]]

  Even the Pentagon say they don't want these programs funded. Yet, 
Republicans are jeopardizing our real national security priorities to 
further enrich the military-industrial complex.
  Our troops deserve better, Mr. Chairman. This is a dangerous 
budgeting gimmick. This amendment would end the OCO fraud and return 
the funds to the important programs that they were intended for.
  Let's end this scheme and put the money back into where it belongs, 
and that is protecting our troops and the American people.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, let me just conclude by saying that it is 
time to put resources where they are needed, among suicide prevention 
and directly to our troops, not into simply more military-industrial 
complex procurement stuff, not just to help private business feed its 
bottom line profit, but to help our soldiers and to help our military 
on the ground, when needed.
  I urge support for my amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, just to be clear, the President in his budget request 
takes some of the OCO dollars and uses it to meet base requirements. He 
does that in his budget. It is not a question of whether it is done or 
not. The question is, how much?
  And even though the President uses OCO dollars to help meet base 
shortfalls, his own Comptroller in the defense budget review writes, 
even though they do that in the President's budget request: ``The 
Department will continue to experience gaps in training and maintenance 
over the near term and have a reduced margin of error in dealing with 
risks of uncertainty in a dynamic and shifting security environment.''
  In other words, even the President's own budget documents say that it 
is not enough what he has done. So what we try to do is we try to do 
more. We are not going to do it all, but we try to do more to make sure 
that the training and maintenance that our troops are entitled to are 
provided. What that means is we should not send anyone out on a mission 
for which they are not fully prepared and fully supported.
  The problem is, as I mentioned awhile ago with the Black Hawk 
example, some of these folks have to fly helicopters that were made in 
1979. I, myself, saw a fighter plane that President Reagan sent to bomb 
Muammar Qadhafi in 1986, and they couldn't find the parts for it. The 
pilot tried. He figured out a way to take a part off of a museum 
aircraft and tried to make it fit, but the holes were drilled in the 
wrong place, so it didn't work.
  The only thing you can do to replace a helicopter made in 1979 or an 
airplane that was flown on a mission in 1986 is to get a new one. So 
that is what the procurement is.
  As I mentioned a few moments ago, we have had a number of people from 
the Democratic side of the aisle who have asked for C-40s, MQ-4s, Black 
Hawks, B-22s, F-18s, F-35s, C-130s. Now, they didn't just invent that. 
The reason that Democratic Members have asked for those things above 
and beyond what the President submitted is because there is a real need 
and because the only way we are going to fix some of these readiness 
problems, in addition to more money for training and maintenance, more 
money for facilities, and preventing further cuts in end strength, is 
to replace some of this old equipment with new equipment. That is what 
we do. The gentleman would undo that. I think his amendment should be 
defeated.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. ELLISON. 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 Minnesota 
will be postponed.


      Amendments En Bloc No. 3 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 3 consisting of amendment Nos. 20, 36, 37, 39, 
48, 49, 52, 53, 59, and 63 printed in House Report 114-571, offered by 
Mr. Thornberry of Texas:


          amendment no. 20 offered by mr. thornberry of texas

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

     SEC. 12XX. GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT CENTER.

       (a) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State, in 
     coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of 
     other relevant Federal departments and agencies, shall 
     establish a Global Engagement Center (in this section 
     referred to as the ``Center''). The purposes of the Center 
     are--
       (1) to lead and coordinate the compilation and examination 
     of information on foreign government information warfare 
     efforts monitored and integrated by the appropriate 
     interagency entities with responsibility for such 
     information, including information provided by recipients of 
     information access fund grants awarded under subsection (f) 
     and other sources;
       (2) to establish a framework for the integration of 
     critical data and analysis provided by the appropriate 
     interagency entities with responsibility for such information 
     on foreign propaganda and disinformation efforts into the 
     development of national strategy;
       (3) to develop, plan, and synchronize, in coordination with 
     the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of other relevant 
     Federal departments and agencies, whole-of-government 
     initiatives to expose and counter foreign propaganda and 
     disinformation directed against United States national 
     security interests and proactively advance fact-based 
     narratives that support United States allies and interests;
       (4) to demonstrate new technologies, methodologies and 
     concepts relevant to the missions of the Center that can be 
     transitioned to other departments or agencies of the United 
     States Government, foreign partners or allies, or other 
     nongovernmental entities;
       (5) to establish cooperative or liaison relationships with 
     foreign partners and allies in consultation with interagency 
     entities with responsibility for such activities, and other 
     entities, such as academia, nongovernmental organizations, 
     and the private sector; and
       (6) to identify shortfalls in United States capabilities in 
     any areas relevant to the United States Government's mission, 
     and recommend necessary enhancements or changes.
       (b) Functions.--The Center shall carry out the following 
     functions:
       (1) Integrating interagency and international efforts to 
     track and evaluate counterfactual narratives abroad that 
     threaten the national security interests of the United States 
     and United States allies.
       (2) Integrating, and analyzing relevant information, data, 
     analysis, and analytics from United States Government 
     agencies, allied nations, think tanks, academic institutions, 
     civil society groups, and other nongovernmental 
     organizations.
       (3) Developing and disseminating fact-based narratives and 
     analysis to counter propaganda and disinformation directed at 
     United States allies and partners.
       (4) Identifying current and emerging trends in foreign 
     propaganda and disinformation based on the information 
     provided by the appropriate interagency entities with 
     responsibility for such information, including information 
     obtained from print, broadcast, online and social media, 
     support for third-party outlets such as think tanks, 
     political parties, and nongovernmental organizations, and the 
     use of covert or clandestine special operators and agents to 
     influence targeted populations and governments in order to 
     coordinate and shape the development of tactics, techniques, 
     and procedures to expose and refute foreign misinformation 
     and disinformation and proactively promote fact-based 
     narratives and policies to audiences outside the United 
     States.
       (5) Facilitating the use of a wide range of technologies 
     and techniques by sharing expertise among agencies, seeking 
     expertise from external sources, and implementing best 
     practices.
       (6) Identifying gaps in United States capabilities in areas 
     relevant to the Center's mission and recommending necessary 
     enhancements or changes.
       (7) Identifying the countries and populations most 
     susceptible to foreign government propaganda and 
     disinformation based on information provided by appropriate 
     interagency entities.
       (8) Administering the information access fund established 
     pursuant to subsection (f).
       (9) Coordinating with allied and partner nations, 
     particularly those frequently targeted by foreign 
     disinformation operations, and international organizations 
     and entities such as the NATO Center of Excellence on 
     Strategic Communications, the European

[[Page 6606]]

     Endowment for Democracy, and the European External Action 
     Service Task Force on Strategic Communications, in order to 
     amplify the Center's efforts and avoid duplication.
       (c) Coordinator.--The Secretary of State shall appoint a 
     full-time Coordinator to lead the Center.
       (d) Employees of the Center.--
       (1) Detailees.--Any Federal Government employee may be 
     detailed to the Center without reimbursement, and such detail 
     shall be without interruption or loss of civil service status 
     or privilege for a period of not more than three years.
       (2) Personal service contractors.--The Secretary of State 
     may exercise the authority provided under section 3161 of 
     title 5, United States Code, to establish a program (referred 
     to in this subsection as the ``Program'') for hiring United 
     States citizens or aliens as personal services contractors 
     for purposes of personnel resources of the Center, if--
       (A) the Secretary determines that existing personnel 
     resources are insufficient;
       (B) the period in which services are provided by a personal 
     services contractor under the Program, including options, 
     does not exceed three years, unless the Secretary determines 
     that exceptional circumstances justify an extension of up to 
     one additional year;
       (C) not more than 20 United States citizens or aliens are 
     employed as personal services contractors under the Program 
     at any time; and
       (D) the Program is only used to obtain specialized skills 
     or experience or to respond to urgent needs.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--Under ``Diplomatic 
     and Consular Programs'', for each of fiscal years 2017 and 
     2018, $10,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of State and may remain available until expended 
     to carry out the functions, duties, and responsibilities of 
     the Center.
       (f) Information Access Fund.--
       (1) Authority for grants.--The Center is authorized to 
     provide grants or contracts of financial support to civil 
     society groups, journalists, nongovernmental organizations, 
     federally-funded research and development centers, private 
     companies, or academic institutions for the following 
     purposes:
       (A) To support local independent media who are best placed 
     to refute foreign disinformation and manipulation in their 
     own communities.
       (B) To collect and store examples in print, online, and 
     social media, disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda 
     directed at the United States and its allies and partners.
       (C) To analyze and report on tactics, techniques, and 
     procedures of foreign government information warfare with 
     respect to disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda.
       (D) To support efforts by the Center to counter efforts by 
     foreign governments to use disinformation, misinformation, 
     and propaganda to influence the policies and social and 
     political stability of the United States and United States 
     allies and partners.
       (2) Funding availability and limitations.--The Secretary of 
     State shall provide that each organization that applies to 
     receive funds under this subsection undergoes a vetting 
     process in accordance with the relevant existing regulations 
     to ensure its bona fides, capability, and experience, and its 
     compatibility with United States interests and objectives.
       (g) Limitation.--None of the funds authorized to be 
     appropriated by the Act to carry out this section shall be 
     used for purposes other than countering foreign propaganda 
     and misinformation that threatens United States national 
     security.
       (h) Termination of Center.--The Center shall terminate on 
     the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.

     SEC. 12YY. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BROADCASTING BOARD OF 
                   GOVERNORS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER POSITION.

       The United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994 
     (22 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.; Public Law 103-236) is amended--
       (1) by amending section 304 (22 U.S.C. 6203) to read as 
     follows:

     ``SEC. 304. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF 
                   THE BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS.

       ``(a) Continued Existence Within Executive Branch.--The 
     Broadcasting Board of Governors shall continue to exist 
     within the Executive branch of Government as an entity 
     described in section 104 of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(b) Chief Executive Officer.--
       ``(1) In general.--The head of the Broadcasting Board of 
     Governors shall be a Chief Executive Officer, who shall be 
     appointed by the President, by and with the advice and 
     consent of the Senate. The President shall nominate the Chief 
     Executive Officer not later than 60 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this section. Until such time as a Chief 
     Executive Officer is appointed and has qualified, the current 
     or acting Chief Executive Officer appointed by the Board may 
     continue to serve and exercise the authorities and powers 
     under this Act.
       ``(2) Term.--The first Chief Executive Officer appointed 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) shall serve for an initial term of 
     three years.
       ``(3) Compensation.--A Chief Executive Officer appointed 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be compensated at the annual 
     rate of basic pay for level III of the Executive Schedule 
     under section 5314 of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(c) Termination of Director of International Broadcasting 
     Bureau.--Immediately upon appointment of the Chief Executive 
     Officer under subsection (b), the Director of the 
     International Broadcasting Bureau shall be terminated, and 
     all of the responsibilities, authorities, and immunities of 
     the Director or the Board under this or any other Act or 
     authority before the date of the enactment of this section 
     shall be transferred to and assumed or overseen by the Chief 
     Executive Officer, as head of the agency.
       ``(d) Members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors.--
     Members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors in office as 
     of the date of the enactment of this section may serve the 
     remainder of their terms of office in an advisory capacity, 
     but such terms may not be extended beyond the date on which 
     such terms are set to expire.
       ``(e) Immunity From Civil Liability.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, all limitations on liability that 
     apply to the Chief Executive Officer shall also apply to 
     members of the board of directors of RFE/RL, Inc., Radio Free 
     Asia, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks, or any 
     organization that consolidates such entities when such 
     members are acting in their official capacities.''; and
       (2) in section 305 (22 U.S.C. 6204)--
       (A) in subsection (a)--
       (i) by striking ``Board'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``Chief Executive Officer'';
       (ii) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``direct and'' before 
     ``supervise'';
       (iii) in paragraph (5)--

       (I) by inserting ``and cooperative agreements'' after 
     ``grants''; and
       (II) by striking ``sections 308 and 309'' and inserting 
     ``this Act, and on behalf of other agencies, accordingly'';

       (iv) in paragraph (6), by striking ``subject to the 
     limitations in sections 308 and 309 and'';
       (v) in paragraph (11), by inserting ``not'' before 
     ``subject'';
       (vi) in paragraph (15)(A), by striking--

       (I) ``temporary and intermittent''; and
       (II) ``to the same extent as is authorized by section 3109 
     of title 5, United States Code,''; and

       (vii) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(20) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     including section 308(a), to condition, if appropriate, any 
     grant or cooperative agreement to RFE/RL, Inc., Radio Free 
     Asia, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks on authority 
     to determine membership of their respective boards, and the 
     consolidation of such entities into a single grantee 
     organization.
       ``(21) To redirect funds within the scope of any grant or 
     cooperative agreement, or between grantees, as necessary, and 
     to condition grants or cooperative agreements, if 
     appropriate, on similar amendments as authorized under 
     section 308(a) to meet the purposes of this Act.
       ``(22) To change the name of the Board pursuant to 
     congressional notification 60 days prior to any such 
     change.'';
       (B) by striking subsections (b) and (c); and
       (C) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (b).

     SEC. 12ZZ. UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL BROADCASTING ACT OF 
                   1994.

       The United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994 
     (22 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.; Public Law 103-236) is amended--
       (1) in section 306 (22 U.S.C. 6205)--
       (A) in subsection (a)--
       (i) by striking the heading; and
       (ii) by striking ``Board'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``Agency''; and
       (B) by striking subsection (b);
       (2) by striking section 307 (22 U.S.C. 6206); and
       (3) by inserting after section 309 the following new 
     sections:

     ``SEC. 310. BROADCAST ENTITIES REPORTING TO CHIEF EXECUTIVE 
                   OFFICER.

       ``(a) Grantee Organizations.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the following provisions shall apply:
       ``(1) Consolidation.--The Chief Executive Officer, subject 
     to the regular notification procedures of the Committee on 
     Appropriations and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Appropriations 
     and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, who is 
     authorized to incorporate a grantee, may condition annual 
     grants to RFE/RL, Inc., Radio Free Asia, and the Middle East 
     Broadcasting Networks on the consolidation of such grantees 
     into a single, consolidated private, non-profit corporation 
     (in accordance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code), 
     which may broadcast and provide news and information to 
     audiences wherever the Agency may broadcast, for activities 
     that the Chief Executive Officer determines are consistent 
     with the purposes of this Act, including the terms and 
     conditions of subsections (g)(5), (h), (i), and (j) of 
     section 308, except that the Agency may select any name for 
     such a consolidated grantee.

[[Page 6607]]

       ``(2) Federal status.--Nothing in this or any other Act, or 
     any action taken pursuant to this or any other Act, may be 
     construed to make such a consolidated grantee described in 
     paragraph (1) or RFE/RL, Inc., Radio Free Asia, or the Middle 
     East Broadcasting Networks or any other grantee or entity 
     provided funding by the Agency a Federal agency or 
     instrumentality. Employees or staff of such grantees or 
     entities shall not be considered Federal employees. For 
     purposes of this subsection and this Act, the term `grant' 
     includes agreements under section 6305 of title 31, United 
     States Code, and the term `grantee' includes recipients of 
     such agreements.
       ``(3) Leadership of grantee organizations.--Officers of 
     RFE/RL Inc., Radio Free Asia, and the Middle East 
     Broadcasting Networks or any organization that is established 
     through the consolidation of such entities, or authorized 
     under this Act, shall serve at the pleasure of the Chief 
     Executive Officer of the Agency.
       ``(b) Voice of America.--
       ``(1) Status as a federal entity.--The Chief Executive 
     Officer is authorized to establish an independent grantee 
     organization, as a private nonprofit organization, to carry 
     out all broadcasting and related programs currently performed 
     by the Voice of America. The Chief Executive Officer may make 
     and supervise grants or cooperative agreements to such 
     grantee, including under terms and conditions and in any 
     manner authorized under section 305(a). Such grantee shall 
     not be considered a Federal agency or instrumentality and 
     shall adhere to the same standards of professionalism and 
     accountability required of all Board broadcasters and 
     grantees. The Board is authorized to transfer any facilities 
     or equipment to such grantee, and to utilize the provisions 
     of subchapter VI of chapter 33 of title 5, United States 
     Code.
       ``(2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that the Voice of America, operating as a nonprofit 
     organization, should have the mission to--
       ``(A) serve as a consistently reliable and authoritative 
     source of news on the United States, its policies, its 
     people, and the international developments that affect the 
     United States;
       ``(B) provide accurate, objective, and comprehensive 
     information, with the understanding that these three values 
     provide credibility among global news audiences;
       ``(C) present the official policies of the United States, 
     and related discussions and opinions about those policies, 
     clearly and effectively; and
       ``(D) represent the whole of the United States, and shall 
     accordingly work to produce programming and content that 
     presents a balanced and comprehensive projection of the 
     diversity of thought and institutions of the United States.

     ``SEC. 311. INSPECTOR GENERAL AUTHORITIES.

       ``(a) In General.--The Inspector General of the Department 
     of State and the Foreign Service shall exercise the same 
     authorities with respect to the Broadcasting Board of 
     Governors and the International Broadcasting Bureau as the 
     Inspector General exercises under the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978 and section 209 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 
     with respect to the Department of State.
       ``(b) Respect for Journalistic Integrity of Broadcasters.--
     The Inspector General shall respect the journalistic 
     integrity of all the broadcasters covered by this title and 
     may not evaluate the philosophical or political perspectives 
     reflected in the content of broadcasts.''.


         amendment no. 36 offered by mrs. comstock of virginia

       At the end of subtitle E of title V (page 153, after line 
     9), add the following new section:

     SEC. 568. REPORT AND GUIDANCE REGARDING JOB TRAINING, 
                   EMPLOYMENT SKILLS TRAINING, APPRENTICESHIPS, 
                   AND INTERNSHIPS AND SKILLBRIDGE INITIATIVES FOR 
                   MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO ARE BEING 
                   SEPARATED.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Defense 
     for Personnel and Readiness shall submit to the Committees on 
     Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, and make available to the public, a report 
     evaluating the success of the Job Training, Employment Skills 
     Training, Apprenticeships, and Internships (known as JTEST-
     AI) and SkillBridge initiatives, under which civilian 
     businesses and companies make available to members of the 
     Armed Forces who are being separated from the Armed Forces 
     training or internship opportunities that offer a high 
     probability of employment for the members after their 
     separation.
       (b) Elements of Report.--In preparing the report required 
     by subsection (a), the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Personnel and Readiness shall use the effectiveness metrics 
     described in Enclosure 5 of Department of Defense Instruction 
     No. 1322.29. The report shall include, at a minimum, the 
     following:
       (1) An assessment of the successes of the JTEST-AI and 
     SkillBridge initiatives.
       (2) Recommendations by the Under Secretary regarding ways 
     in which the administration of the JTEST-AI and SkillBridge 
     initiatives could be improved.
       (3) Recommendations by civilian companies participating in 
     the initiatives regarding ways in which the administration of 
     the JTEST-AI and SkillBridge initiatives could be improved.
       (4) Testimony from a sample of members of the Armed Forces 
     who are participating in a JTEST-AI or SkillBridge initiative 
     regarding the effectiveness of the initiatives and the 
     members' support for the initiatives.
       (5) Testimony from a sample of recently separated members 
     of the Armed Forces who participated in a JTEST-AI or 
     SkillBridge initiative regarding the effectiveness of the 
     initiatives and the members' support for the initiatives.
       (c) Issuance of Guidance.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the submission of the report required by subsection (a), the 
     Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness shall 
     issue guidance to commanders of units of the Armed Forces for 
     the purpose of encouraging commanders, consistent with unit 
     readiness, to allow members of the Armed Forces under their 
     command who are being separated from the Armed Forces to 
     participate in a JTEST-AI or SkillBridge initiative.


          amendment no. 37 offered by mr. farenthold of texas

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

     SEC. 5__. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION IN ADVANCE OF 
                   APPOINTMENTS TO SERVICE ACADEMIES.

       (a) United States Military Academy.--Section 4342(a) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended in the matter after 
     paragraph (10) by adding at the end the following new 
     sentence: ``When a nominee of a Senator, Representative, or 
     Delegate is selected for appointment as a cadet, the Senator, 
     Representative, or Delegate shall be notified at least 48 
     hours before the official notification or announcement of the 
     appointment is made.''.
       (b) United States Naval Academy.--Section 6954(a) of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended in the matter after 
     paragraph (10) by adding at the end the following new 
     sentence: ``When a nominee of a Senator, Representative, or 
     Delegate is selected for appointment as a midshipman, the 
     Senator, Representative, or Delegate shall be notified at 
     least 48 hours before the official notification or 
     announcement of the appointment is made.''.
       (c) United States Air Force Academy.--Section 9342(a) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended in the matter after 
     paragraph (10) by adding at the end the following new 
     sentence: ``When a nominee of a Senator, Representative, or 
     Delegate is selected for appointment as a cadet, the Senator, 
     Representative, or Delegate shall be notified at least 48 
     hours before the official notification or announcement of the 
     appointment is made.''.
       (d) United States Merchant Marine Academy.--Section 51302 
     of title 46, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(e) Congressional Notification in Advance of 
     Appointments.--When a nominee of a Senator, Representative, 
     or Delegate is selected for appointment as a cadet, the 
     Senator, Representative, or Delegate shall be notified at 
     least 48 hours before the official notification or 
     announcement of the appointment is made''.
       (e) Application of Amendments.--The amendments made by this 
     section shall apply with respect to the appointment of cadets 
     and midshipmen to the United States Military Academy, the 
     United States Naval Academy, the United States Air Force 
     Academy, and United States Merchant Marine Academy for 
     classes entering these service academies after January 1, 
     2018.


          amendment no. 39 offered by mr. hunter of california

       Page 173, after line 2, insert the following:

     SEC. 599A. SERVICEMEMBERS' GROUP LIFE INSURANCE.

       Section 1967(f)(4) of title 38, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking the second sentence.


            amendment no. 48 offered by ms. meng of new york

       Page 173, after line 2, insert the following:

     SEC. 599A. EXTENSION OF SUICIDE PREVENTION AND RESILIENCE 
                   PROGRAM.

       Section 10219(g) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``October 1, 2017'' and inserting 
     ``October 1, 2018''.


      amendment no. 49 offered by ms. maxine waters of california

       At the end of subtitle D of title VIII (page 326, after 
     line 4), insert the following new section:

     SEC. 843. STUDY AND REPORT ON CONTRACTS AWARDED TO MINORITY-
                   OWNED AND WOMEN-OWNED BUSINESSES.

       (a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States 
     shall carry out a study on the number and types of contracts 
     for the procurement of goods or services for the Department 
     of Defense awarded to minority-owned and women-owned 
     businesses during fiscal years 2010 through 2015. In 
     conducting the study, the Comptroller General shall identify 
     minority-owned businesses according to the categories 
     identified in the Federal procurement data system (described 
     in

[[Page 6608]]

     section 1122(a)(4)(A) of title 41, United States Code).
       (b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit 
     to the congressional defense committees a report on the 
     results of the study under subsection (a).


       amendment no. 52 offered by mr. sanford of south carolina

       In section 1047(c)(1), strike ``and approvals'' and insert 
     ``, approvals, and the total costs of all flyover missions, 
     including the costs of fuel, maintenance, and manpower,''.


           amendment no. 53 offered by mr. walz of minnesota

       Page 394, after line 5, insert the following new 
     subsection:
       (e) State Defined.--In this section, the term ``State'' 
     includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
     Rico, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 
     and any territory or possession of the United States.


           amendment no. 59 offered by mr. polis of colorado

       Page 423, after line 3, insert the following:

     SEC. 1070. REPORT ON CARRIER AIR WING FORCE STRUCTURE.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
     report on the impact of changes to existing carrier air wing 
     force structure and the impact a potential reduction to 9 
     carrier air wings would have on overall fleet readiness if 
     aircraft and personnel were to be distributed throughout the 
     remaining 9 air wings.


        amendment no. 63 offered by mr. courtney of connecticut

       Page 462, after line 13, insert the following new section 
     (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 1098. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Maritime Occupational Safety 
     and Health Advisory Committee Act''.

     SEC. 2. MARITIME OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADVISORY 
                   COMMITTEE.

       Section 7 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 
     (29 U.S.C. 656) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(d) There is established a Maritime Occupational Safety 
     and Health Advisory Committee, which shall be a continuing 
     body and shall provide advice to the Secretary in formulating 
     maritime industry standards and regarding matters pertaining 
     to the administration of this Act related to the maritime 
     industry. The composition of this advisory committee shall be 
     consistent with the advisory committees established under 
     subsection (b), provided that a member of this committee who 
     is otherwise qualified may continue to serve until a 
     successor is appointed. The Secretary may promulgate or amend 
     regulations as necessary to implement this subsection.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Moulton) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak first about an amendment to be 
considered in a later en bloc regarding Special Immigrant Visas. I want 
to call attention to the urgent need to continue the Special Immigrant 
Visa program for Afghans who worked for U.S. forces.
  This bipartisan amendment, backed by several veterans on the 
committee, would remove the unfortunate narrowing of eligibility 
requirements included in the mark, which would prevent hundreds of 
Afghans whose lives are at risk because of their work for our country 
from even being considered for resettlement in the United States.
  The narrowing of eligibility intentionally excludes hundreds of 
Afghans who worked for the State Department, USAID, and U.S. security 
contractors in a number of capacities, many of whom face well-
documented death threats due to their work with our government, 
regardless of whether that was with frontline troops or on an American 
base.
  By narrowing eligibility, the program would erode the expectations of 
hundreds of Afghan staff whose lives remain in danger because of their 
work for the U.S. mission and also make it more difficult to hire and 
retain qualified Afghan staff in the future who are essential to 
achieving our diplomatic and assistance goals.
  For that risk and sacrifice, the very least we can do is offer them a 
chance to stay live, to keep living, rather than abandoning them to the 
same enemies they united with us to destroy.
  One of the things I was most proud of as a Marine infantry officer 
was that we never let our enemies make us compromise our values. One of 
those values is a solemn commitment to our allies and to our brothers 
in arms.
  I urge your support on the floor in following through on our 
commitment to our Afghan partners.
  I also want to comment on the fact that the chairman of the committee 
and I worked to resolve some differences that we had on understanding 
the concerns of our diplomatic mission in Afghanistan. I appreciate 
very much his work with me on that to support our troops and mission 
overseas.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, and he is exactly right. He and other Members are very 
concerned about this issue. He has talked to me about it a number of 
times.
  I have been concerned that there was abuse of this system. That was 
gathered from visits I have made to Afghanistan, including last year.
  But I very much appreciate the points that the gentleman from 
Massachusetts has made. I think he and others who have worked on this 
issue have come up with a good amendment. I support it.
  All of us agree that if someone has risked their lives or would be in 
danger for supporting the United States and our folks in Afghanistan, 
then that person needs protection. None of us want to see the program 
abused.
  But I am convinced that the changes that the gentleman has been 
instrumental in working out are helpful. I support it. And I thank him 
for his efforts on doing this.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Iowa (Mr. Young).

                              {time}  1730

  Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. Mr. Chair, I will be brief.
  According to the Federal Trade Commission, our men and women who are 
defending our Nation and their families are twice as likely to fall 
victim to identity theft and fraud. Because they protect us, we need to 
do more to protect them and their families from scammers who take 
advantage of their service. My amendment No. 177 simply requires the 
Department of Defense to report to Congress on its efforts to protect 
their information.
  I thank the chairman for working with me on this amendment, and I 
look forward to working the committee to better protect those who 
sacrifice so much to defend our Nation. I also thank my co-chair of the 
Bipartisan Congressional Task Force to Combat Identity Theft and Fraud, 
the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Sinema), for her great work. She has 
been a great partner in helping to protect taxpayers and now our 
servicemembers from having their identities stolen.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Arizona (Ms. Sinema).
  Ms. SINEMA. I thank Chairman Thornberry and Mr. Moulton for 
supporting the Young-Sinema amendment. I thank Congressman Young for 
working with me and others in offering this bipartisan amendment to 
protect members of the Armed Forces and their families from identity 
theft.
  My home State of Arizona is one of the top 10 States that is affected 
by identity theft. Military families are among those most targeted and 
most at risk for these crimes. Our amendment improves the Department of 
Defense's efforts to protect military families' financial information 
from identity theft. I am committed to working with my colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle to combat identity theft and financial fraud.
  Again, I thank my friend, Congressman Young, for working with me on 
this important, commonsense amendment.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page 6609]]

  Among the amendments in this en bloc package is one that I have 
authored to establish a global engagement center. I thank my cosponsors 
of this amendment, Mr. Wilson and Mr. Langevin, the chair and ranking 
member of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats & Capabilities. I also 
thank Chairman Royce, who has worked with us. Included in this 
amendment are reforms of the Broadcasting Board of Governors that he 
and his ranking member have worked on for some time.
  Mr. Chair, it has been a source of great frustration for me that our 
government has seemed to be so inept in the battle of ideas against the 
terrorists.
  I first introduced a bill on this topic in 2005. Today there is a lot 
of talk not only of the so-called physical caliphate that ISIS claims, 
but of the virtual caliphate. Unless and until we can be more effective 
at engaging in the battle of ideas, we will not succeed in defeating 
terrorism.
  It is not just the terrorists we have to worry about. We have seen 
the Russians lie and use deception for military gain. We have seen 
similar sorts of tactics by the Chinese in their building these islands 
out in the South China Sea and elsewhere around the world.
  This amendment requires the Secretary of State, the Secretary of 
Defense, and others--the executive branch--to get their act together, 
coordinate, and more effectively engage in the battle of ideas. I hope 
it helps. As I say, this is a crucial battlefield, and our country 
needs to do better in this field.
  Mr. Chair, as I have no further speakers at this point, I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Maxine Waters).
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. I am appreciative to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts for allowing me to speak on my amendment.
  Mr. Chair and Members, a lack of opportunity for Federal contracting 
is one of the main factors of the widening racial wealth gap. As the 
Nation's largest employer, the Federal Government has a critical 
responsibility to focus on increasing minority and female inclusion in 
the job market; yet, only a fraction of Federal contracts goes to 
minority- or female-owned businesses. This is partly why the wealth gap 
and extreme disparities in racial incomes continue.
  Amendment No. 49 ensures that we meet important contracting goals by 
analyzing a 5-year study by the GAO on how the DOD contracts with 
minority- and female-owned businesses. While there are many ways the 
government can address the issue of more equitable contracting, one 
important and more immediate impact, I believe, the Federal Government 
can have is by providing more opportunities for minority-owned 
businesses.
  The DOD spends roughly $285 billion a year on contracting, more than 
all Federal agencies combined. With such large purchasing power, it is 
imperative that these funds are used not only to provide the best 
services for the Department of Defense, but also to distribute fairly 
and wisely in all communities.
  The study proposed is the first step toward identifying where those 
opportunities lie for great inclusion. This amendment further 
emphasizes and underscores the importance of minorities in both our 
local and national communities.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for 
yielding and also for his service to the Nation. I thank the ranking 
member of the full committee, Mr. Smith; the chairman of the full 
committee, Mr. Thornberry; and the Rules Committee for accepting this 
amendment. Let me thank the gentlemen doubly and triply for being kind 
enough to accept this amendment on a regular basis, and I am going to 
persist because I believe it is important.
  Mr. Chair, let me make a big pronouncement or announcement or 
breaking news: there are women in the United States military. I want to 
say that again. There are women in the United States military.
  My amendment deals with triple negative breast cancer. It calls for 
the increased collaboration between the DOD and the National Institutes 
of Health to combat triple negative breast cancer. This amendment 
directs the Department of Defense to identify specific genetic and 
molecular targets and biomarkers for TNBC. ``Triple negative breast 
cancer'' is a term used to describe breast cancer. Its cells do not 
have estrogen receptors and progesterone receptors and does not have an 
excess of HER2 protein on its cell membrane of tumor cells.
  I am not in the military. I have had many family members in the 
military, but I would venture to say this is a case in which you have 
battalions, and you are on the field, and you have a difficult enemy 
who keeps moving away from your sight and your target. Though you have 
used overlapping forces, you can't seem to pinpoint the enemy. 
Ultimately you are victorious, but that is because you collaborate and 
you work together. This makes commonly used tests and methods to detect 
breast cancer not as effective, meaning the ordinary style of fighting 
does not work for triple negative breast cancer.
  Seventy percent of women with metastatic triple negative breast 
cancer do not live more than 5 years after being diagnosed. It is 
important to note that TNBC affects women under 50 years of age, and it 
makes up more than 30 percent of all breast cancer diagnoses, 
specifically in African American women.
  The collaboration between the Department of Defense and the NIH to 
combat triple negative breast cancer can support the development of 
multiple targeted therapies for this devastating disease and can help 
women in the United States military, those who are serving our country. 
Triple negative breast cancer is a specific strain of breast cancer for 
which no targeted treatment is available.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. MOULTON. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentleman so very much.
  Mr. Chair, it is a disease, however, that can be conquered. Triple 
negative breast cancer, TNBC, accounts for between 13 percent and 25 
percent of all breast cancers in the United States. It is of a higher 
grade, and it onsets at a young age. That means these women are in the 
United States military.
  Finally, because it continues, there is a need for research funding 
for biomarker selection, drug discovery, and clinical trials that will 
lead to the early detection of TNBC and to the development of multiple 
targeted therapies to treat this awful disease. My amendment would 
provide for that.
  In coming from Houston, Texas, with MD Anderson Cancer Center, I can 
tell you that they are looking at major research that can be very 
helpful between the NIH and the Department of Defense. I hope my 
amendment will stay in this particular bill, and I hope it will go to 
the Senate and will be signed by the President.
  Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Thornberry, Ranking Member Adam Smith and 
the Rules Committee for making in order and including Jackson Lee 
Amendment and including it in En Bloc Amendment Number 2 to the 
``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017.''
  This is the first of 3 Jackson Lee amendments made in order by the 
House Rules Committee.
  Jackson Lee Amendment Number 45, calls for increased collaboration 
between the DoD and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to combat 
Triple Negative Breast Cancer.
  Jackson Lee Amendment Number 45 directs the DoD and NIH to 
collaborate to combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer.
  This amendment directs the Department of Defense to identify specific 
genetic and molecular targets and biomarkers for TNBC.
  ``Triple Negative Breast Cancer'' is a term used to describe breast 
cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone 
receptors, and do not have an excess of the ``HER2'' protein on their 
cell membrane of tumor cells.

[[Page 6610]]

  This makes commonly used tests and methods to detect breast cancer 
not as effective.
  This is a serious illness that affects between 10-17% of female 
breast cancer patients and this condition is more likely to cause death 
than the most common form of breast cancer.
  Seventy percent of women with metastatic triple negative breast 
cancer do not live more than five years after being diagnosed.
  Jackson Lee Amendment Number 45 will help to save lives.
  TNBC disproportionately impacts younger women, African American 
women, Hispanic/Latina women, and women with a ``BRCA1 genetic 
mutation, which is prevalent in Jewish women.
  TNBC usually affects women under 50 years of age and makes up more 
than 30% of all breast cancer diagnoses in African Americans. Black 
women are far more susceptible to this dangerous subtype than white or 
Hispanic women.
  The collaboration between the Department of Defense and NIH to combat 
Triple Negative Breast Cancer can support the development of multiple 
targeted therapies for this devastating disease.
  Triple negative breast cancer is a specific strain of breast cancer 
for which no targeted treatment is available.
  The American Cancer Society calls this particular strain of breast 
cancer ``an aggressive subtype associated with lower survival rates.''
  Triple negative breast cancer is a term used to describe breast 
cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone 
receptors, and do not have an excess of the HER2 protein on their cell 
membrane of tumor cells
  In 2011, the Centers for Disease Control predicted that that year 
26,840 black women would be diagnosed with TNBC.
  The overall incidence rate of breast cancer is 10% lower in African 
American women than white women.
  African American women have a five year survival rate of 78% after 
diagnosis as compared to 90% for white women.
  The incidence rate of breast cancer among women under 45 is higher 
for African American women compared to white women.
  Triple Negative Breast Cancer cells: TNBC accounts for between 13% 
and 25% of all breast cancer in the United States; usually of a higher 
grade and size; onset at a younger age; are more aggressive; are more 
likely to metastasize.
  Currently, 70% of women with metastatic triple negative breast cancer 
do not live more than five years after being diagnosed.
  African American women are 3 times more likely to develop triple-
negative breast cancer than White women.
  African-American women have prevalence TNBC of 26% versus 16% in non-
African-American women.
  African-American women are more likely to be diagnosed with larger 
tumors and more advanced stages of breast cancer.
  Currently there is no targeted treatment for TNBC.
  Breast cancers with specific, targeted treatment methods, such as 
hormone and gene based strains, have higher survival rates than the 
triple negative subtype, highlighting the need for a targeted 
treatment.
  Because there continues to be a need for research funding for 
biomarker selection, drug discovery, and clinical trial designs that 
will lead to the early detection of TNBC and to the development of 
multiple targeted therapies to treat this awful disease Jackson Lee 
Amendment Number 45 included in En Bloc 2 is essential to paving a way 
for advancements in these areas.
  I thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith for including 
these amendments in the En Bloc Amendment Number 2, and I urge all 
Members to join me in voting for its adoption.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
  Mr. LIPINSKI. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I rise in support of an amendment I offered along with Mrs. Comstock.
  It seeks to expand the SkillBridge job training program by directing 
unit commanders to encourage participation by departing servicemembers. 
It also directs the DOD to form a comprehensive study so that they can 
evaluate and improve the program as needed. The SkillBridge initiative 
helps returning veterans by providing them with job training and 
apprenticeship programs in areas that span every sector of the 
workforce.
  This program has already trained around 4,500 servicemembers, and the 
18 SkillBridge programs claim to have an employment success rate of 100 
percent. Encouraging participation will help more of our veterans find 
employment when they reenter civilian life, which is something we need 
to do all we can to promote.
  I thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith for supporting 
this amendment in this bloc. I urge my colleagues to support the bloc.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  I would like to discuss an amendment to come up in a future en bloc 
package.
  I joined a vast array of foreign policy experts and retired 
generals--and even Israel's own nuclear commission--in supporting the 
nuclear deal with Iran because, although it was an imperfect deal, 
nobody could articulate a better pathway to a better deal to prevent 
Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The nuclear deal, however, is 
only that--a nuclear deal. As when President Reagan was negotiating 
nuclear deals with the Soviets, we make these agreements with our 
enemies, not with our friends, and we must not forget that Iran remains 
opposed to us in a vast array of other ways. As with the Soviets, 
enforcement of the deal requires continued vigilance.
  My amendment would require the President to notify Congress whenever 
Iran conducts a ballistic missile launch and inform Congress as to the 
actions the President will take in response, including diplomatic 
efforts to pursue additional sanctions and the passage of a United 
Nations Security Council resolution.
  While we have been successful in deterring Iran from building a 
nuclear weapon with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, we must 
continue to apply pressure to deter further actions that destabilize 
this fragile region and threaten our allies.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I urge the adoption of the en bloc 
package.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Carter of Georgia). The question is on the 
amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Zinke

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, I offer amendment No. 10 as the designee of 
Mrs. Lummis from the great State of Wyoming.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

     SEC. 16__. MATTERS RELATED TO INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC 
                   MISSILES.

       (a) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States to 
     maintain and modernize a responsive and alert 
     intercontinental ballistic missile force to ensure robust 
     nuclear deterrence by preventing any adversary from believing 
     it can carry out a small, surprise, first-strike attack on 
     the United States that disarms the strategic forces of the 
     United States.
       (b) Prohibition.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided by paragraph (2), none 
     of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or 
     otherwise made available for fiscal year 2017 shall be 
     obligated or expended for--
       (A) reducing, or preparing to reduce, the responsiveness or 
     alert level of the intercontinental ballistic missiles of the 
     United States; or
       (B) reducing, or preparing to reduce, the quantity of 
     deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles of the United 
     States to a number less than 400.
       (2) Exception.--The prohibition in paragraph (1) shall not 
     apply to any of the following activities:
       (A) The maintenance or sustainment of intercontinental 
     ballistic missiles.
       (B) Ensuring the safety, security, or reliability of 
     intercontinental ballistic missiles.
       (C) Reduction in the number of deployed intercontinental 
     ballistic missiles that are carried out in compliance with--
       (i) the limitations of the New START Treaty (as defined in 
     section 494(a)(2)(D) of title 10, United States Code); and
       (ii) section 1644 of the Carl Levin an Howard P. ``Buck'' 
     McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2015 (Public

[[Page 6611]]

     Law 113-291; 128 Stat. 3651; 10 U.S.C. 494 note).
       (c) Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force and 
     the Chairman of the Nuclear Weapons Council shall submit to 
     the congressional defense committees a report regarding 
     efforts to carry out section 1057 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 10 
     U.S.C. 495 note).
       (2) Elements.--The report under paragraph (1) shall include 
     the following with respect to the period of the expected 
     lifespan of the Minuteman III system:
       (A) The number of nuclear warheads required to support the 
     capability to redeploy multiple independently retargetable 
     reentry vehicles across the full intercontinental ballistic 
     missile fleet.
       (B) The current and planned (until 2030) readiness state of 
     nuclear warheads intended to support the capability to 
     redeploy multiple independently retargetable reentry vehicles 
     across the full intercontinental ballistic missile fleet, 
     including which portion of the active or inactive stockpile 
     such warheads are classified within.
       (C) The current and planned (until 2030) reserve of 
     components or subsystems required to redeploy multiple 
     independently retargetable reentry vehicles across the full 
     intercontinental ballistic missile fleet, including the plans 
     or industrial capability and capacity to produce more such 
     components or subsystems, if needed.
       (D) The current and planned (until 2030) time required to 
     commence redeployment of multiple independently retargetable 
     reentry vehicles across the intercontinental ballistic 
     missile fleet, including the time required to finish 
     deployment across the full fleet.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Montana (Mr. Zinke) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Montana.
  Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in support of this amendment to highlight the importance of 
maintaining our nuclear deterrence. This amendment will ensure that our 
land-based nuclear ICBMs are ready at a moment's notice and are not 
placed on a reduced-alert status.
  President Reagan had it right. He championed the notion of peace 
through strength. Those wise words still apply today, even greater. The 
harsh reality is that we live in an increasingly unstable international 
environment. Nuclear deterrence provided by the triad has been the 
backbone of our national security posture for over half a century. Just 
last fall, the Secretary of Defense stated: ``The nuclear deterrent is 
a must-have . . . It is the foundation. It's the bedrock and it needs 
to remain healthy . . .''
  Montana is a proud defender of our triad, and our troops are always 
ready. Our ICBMs should be, too.
  As more nation-states, including Iran, begin to defy international 
laws and pursue nuclear and ballistic missiles, it is critical that we 
do not scale back our nuclear deterrence.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1745

  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Rhode Island is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Having previously served as the chairman of the Strategic Forces 
Subcommittee for several years, I am intimately familiar with our 
intercontinental ballistic missile forces and the important role ICBM 
deterrence plays when it comes to our national defense. While I 
understand the intent of this amendment, it is fundamentally 
unnecessary, dramatically overreaching, and lacks meaningful policy 
reform.
  The budget request for FY 2017 contains no funding for reducing the 
alert level or reducing the number of deployed ICBMs below 400, and 
there are no plans to do so in the future. Furthermore, the statement 
of policy with regard to ICBMs, which is legally binding, significantly 
overreaches. It states that modernization of the ICBMs and retaining an 
alert ICBM force is necessary to ensure robust nuclear deterrence by 
preventing any adversary from believing it can carry out a small, 
surprise, first-strike attack which disarms the strategic forces of the 
United States.
  However, this disregards the crucial and fundamental role of 
submarines that provide assured, survivable second-strike capability, 
which would dissuade an adversary from even thinking they could launch 
a disarming attack against the United States.
  If we include any legislation on ICBMs, Mr. Chairman, it should be 
that we increase accountability and ensure that we are improving the 
morale and culture inside the Air Force with regard to nuclear weapons. 
Some of the serious and embarrassing problems that have plagued the 
ICBM missileers and security forces in recent years unfortunately 
continues, such as the Air Force base in Wyoming where 14 enlisted 
airmen in the security forces were being investigated for drug use just 
several weeks ago. I see nothing in this amendment that addresses that 
problem, nor do I see anything in the bill that addresses that issue.
  If we are going to talk about keeping ICBMs, it should be in a 
meaningful way, instead of yet another annual amendment driven by what 
seems like parochial interests in highlighting their role, particularly 
at the exclusion of other legs of the nuclear triad.
  While the committee tried to work with Ms. Lummis, Mr. Chairman, to 
avail the amendment of some of these concerns, bipartisan negotiations 
was seemingly rejected.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I hope that we are able to make some of these 
adjustments as we conference with the Senate, but I urge my colleagues 
to oppose this amendment as offered.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the 
great State of North Dakota (Mr. Cramer).
  Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, reducing our ICBM alertness is reducing our 
readiness, and the whole point of the Defense Authorization Act is to 
ensure our military readiness.
  The ICBMs have been a very effective deterrent to enemy aggression 
for decades. This amendment is simply a deterrent to those who would 
try to reduce our readiness by reducing our alertness and reducing the 
number of ICBMs. This would be a dangerous step, contrary to the 
longstanding policies of our defense and certainly a bad posture.
  Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the 
great State of Alabama (Mr. Rogers).
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the Strategic 
Forces Subcommittee, I understand that the responsiveness and 
distributed nature of our ICBMs are their most critical feature and 
their unique contribution to our nuclear triad.
  Without ICBMs, an adversary would only need to strike less than 10 
targets to disarm our nuclear forces. With ICBMs, an adversary needs to 
strike hundreds of hardened targets deep in the American homeland. That 
is a much more difficult proposition and is at the very heart of 
deterrence.
  This is not a parochial issue or a political issue. This is a 
profound national security issue. De-alerting our ICBMs or unilaterally 
cutting their numbers is a terrible idea.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, as I previously stated--and with all due 
respect to my colleague--this bill contains no funding for reducing the 
alert level or reducing the number of deployed ICBMs below 400, and 
there are no plans to do so in the future.
  Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Rhode Island has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy and 
his leadership on this, and I think he laid it out very clearly.
  This is an imaginary problem, but it is an area that actually needs 
to have some attention to it. He referenced recent problems in terms of 
potential

[[Page 6612]]

drug abuse. You know they found the cheating earlier because they were 
investigating drug abuse when they found out that there was cheating on 
the readiness test.
  I would advise my colleagues to read Eric Schlosser's ``Command and 
Control,'' a fascinating study about the history of American nuclear 
weapons and problems that we have had, mistakes that were made, and 
near misses.
  There are serious issues that we need to be thinking in terms of the 
readiness and how it goes forward. We need to think clearly about what 
we do in the future, what is the right level of deterrence, and how are 
we going to adequately analyze it.
  454 land-based missiles are not necessarily a magic number that we 
should be freezing on a permanent basis. Looking at what happens going 
forward with the trillion-dollar commitment with missiles that are 
submarine based--we have our bombers; we have land based--and being 
able to have a critical appraisal of how much deterrence is enough and 
look at problems, such as security lapses, training problems, drug 
problems, this is not a situation that we should just sort of happily 
freeze for the next go-around and maintain that any adjustment to this 
or even evaluating an adjustment is somehow a threat to national 
security.
  The real problems that we face dealing with international terrorism 
and the potential of nuclear weapons falling into rogue hands, those 
are very real problems that we need to be doing more. This vast nuclear 
triad that we will spend a trillion dollars on does not help us with 
those challenges. Rather than hollow out the military, we ought to be 
looking at potential changes going forward.
  This amendment is ill-advised, unnecessary, and is the wrong 
direction we should be going.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Chair, this amendment is about ensuring that our 
nuclear deterrence that has protected this country for over 70 years 
remains strong and viable.
  Yesterday, this body passed a measure to keep our nukes safe. It is 
now time to ensure they are ready at a moment's notice. There is no 
reason to have a nuclear force unless they are ready.
  To lower the alert posture of our land-based ICBMs would result in a 
2-week delay before our ICBMs would be ready to use. This would cripple 
our ability to respond quickly, which is the entire point of having a 
nuclear triad.
  In the military, we always hope for the best but plan for the worse. 
While I hope we never have to use our nuclear weapons--and, indeed, I 
believe everyone in this body does--to lower their posture status of 
land-based ICBMs would unnecessarily put us at risk.
  I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Montana (Mr. Zinke).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Lamborn

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike subsections (b) and (c) of section 2856 and insert 
     the following:
       (b) Recognition.--Congress recognizes the National Museum 
     of World War II Aviation in Colorado Springs, Colorado, as 
     America's National World War II Aviation Museum.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas and 
committee staff for their willingness to work with me on this 
amendment. I fought long and hard to get this museum the recognition it 
deserves, and I am very pleased that we have a path forward where we 
can finally achieve that.
  My amendment simply recognizes this museum in Colorado Springs as the 
National Museum of World War II Aviation. This amendment does not 
authorize any funds. The museum is not seeking Federal funds and does 
not have plans to do so in the future.
  The National Museum of World War II Aviation has taken great care to 
focus its story line on an aspect of military history that has not been 
fully explored by other national military museums. The intent is to 
augment the tremendous work that is being done by those museums, not to 
duplicate or replace it.
  It is the only museum in the United States that exists to exclusively 
preserve and promote an understanding of the role of aviation in 
winning World War II. It is dedicated to celebrating the American 
spirit and to recognizing the teamwork, patriotism, and courage of the 
men and women who fought, as well as those on the home front who 
mobilized and supported the national aviation effort.
  I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) for the purpose 
of engaging in a colloquy.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) 
has been a strong advocate for this museum, and I certainly appreciate 
him bringing it to the committee's attention and to the attention of 
the House.
  Many Members share the gentleman's commitment to the preservation of 
historic aircraft, and I will certainly work with him on this and 
related issues.
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, based on that reassurance and on that 
pledge to work together, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.


                Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Sanford

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title XXXV add the following:

     SEC. __. GAO REPORT ON MARITIME SECURITY FLEET PROGRAM.

       Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     study and report to the relevant congressional committees on 
     the following:
       (1) The justification for the size of the Maritime Security 
     Fleet established under chapter 531 of title 46, United 
     States Code, given present national defense operational 
     requirements for such fleet, and how the annual per-vessel 
     payment under that chapter corresponds to the costs of 
     operating vessels in such Fleet.
       (2) The difference in costs between the Maritime Security 
     Fleet program and other options for achieving the same 
     objectives as that program, such as--
       (A) procurement by the United States of a national defense 
     sealift fleet;
       (B) contracting for United States-flag vessels and foreign-
     flag vessels on a temporary basis; and
       (C) other potential options.
       (3) Instances, examined in detail, in which use of foreign-
     flag, foreign-crewed vessels for national defense sealift 
     purposes has hindered national security or impeded United 
     States military operations.
       (4) Comparison, in detail, of volumes and types of--
       (A) Federal cargo that has been carried on foreign-flagged 
     vessels; and
       (B) Federal cargo that has been carried on vessels in the 
     Maritime Security Fleet.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I rise with a very simple amendment. It 
would do nothing more than call for a GAO report of the maritime 
security fleet. I do so because I think that we would all acknowledge 
that knowledge is power, and the ability to look very closely at what 
is happening within that fleet, I think, is important. I

[[Page 6613]]

would also say that, as a believer that defense is a core function of 
the Federal Government, we would want to have transparency in the way 
that we expend those funds in pursuit of our Nation's defense.
  I think that this is important in light of the fact that overall 
funding has risen by about $89 million here over the last, I guess, 
funding cycle. You have seen the per-ship stipend go from $3.5 million 
to $5 million.
  There has not been a study of what is happening within that fleet of 
ships for more than 12 years, and so, again, this is not in any way 
prescriptive in nature as to what should or shouldn't happen or the 
merits or demerits of the program. It is simply saying might we not 
learn a little bit more of what is happening within that fleet, and 
that is it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  The gentleman from South Carolina is correctly concerned about the 
expenditure of money. I would suggest to him that this study is a waste 
of the expenditure of money by the GAO and, hence, the taxpayers of the 
United States.
  Studies about the MSP have been available over many, many years; and 
in fact, there is now, in the Office of Management and Budget, a 
comprehensive study that was commissioned by the Assistant Secretary of 
the Navy. The gentleman can certainly contact OMB and get that study 
and, quite probably, get all the information he is going to request in 
this particular analysis and, furthermore, not have to waste taxpayer 
money in the process.
  I would point out to the gentleman a statement that was made on 
January 17 of this year concerning the MSP program by General Darren 
McDew, commander of US TRANSCOM. This is the guy who is responsible for 
moving men, women, materiel, and equipment around the world.
  He said: ``Our overwhelming success was due in large part to the 
10,000 U.S. mariners who sped 220 shiploads of decisive U.S. combat 
power throughout the buildup known as Operation Desert Shield. Without 
those mariners and vessels, our ability to project decisive force and 
demonstrate our national resolve would have been a mere fraction of 
what was required to ensure the swift victory the world witnessed. 
Simply put, moving an army of decisive size and power can only be 
accomplished by sea,'' and the MSP is the central part of that.
  We don't need this study. What we need is strong support for the MSP.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chair, I would say to my colleague that, again, what 
we would all recognize is that OMB is different than the Government 
Accountability Office. The OMB is fundamentally executive branch in 
nature. I think there is a real value to having a third party 
independent look at what is happening with the study. Again, it is not 
prescriptive in nature, but having that third party look, I think, is 
that much more important in all of our justifications of this program 
or other programs like it.
  I would also say this, in terms of ``waste of money,'' as we know, 
GAO is funded through the legislative branch. This would not involve an 
additional expenditure of money. It would be incorporated into the 
expenditures that currently take place within the legislative branch 
and, again, GAO, by extension. In that regard, I think it would be a 
good use of taxpayer money to take a look that has not been taken in 
more than 12 years.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, that is the first time I have ever heard 
that expenditure by the House of Representatives is not taxpayer money, 
but I guess some people can claim that.
  I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes).
  Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
thank the gentleman for offering this amendment. I know how committed 
he is to national defense and to fiscal responsibility in the country. 
However, one of the things that we haven't talked about in this 
amendment is it asks us to look at outsourcing this to foreign 
countries to be able to do, and I think today I rise not just as 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, but 
also on behalf of my good friend Mr. Courtney, who is the ranking 
member on that subcommittee and who has given us authority to say that 
he is opposed to this as well for these reasons.
  The sealift, if we lose that sealift, we have lost the lifeblood to 
our warfighters because that is the vessel, that is the lifeline that 
keeps them and sustains them. The very question for us is this: If that 
balloon goes up and the bell rings, are we going to trust a foreign 
power to hold in their hand that very lifeblood for our men and women 
and our warfighters?
  I want to remind everyone in the House that in World War II, 1 in 26 
merchant mariners were actually killed. It was a higher rate of loss 
than any other service. The rate was so high, in fact, that the 
merchant marine concealed it because they were afraid they couldn't 
find enough mariners if the true danger of the services were known.
  So our big question here is, even if we came back with a study that 
said it might be cheaper to outsource it, would anyone in this room 
dare place that trust in a foreign country? I think very clearly we 
would not.
  Mr. Chairman, also these decisions are probably best made by military 
transportation command, sealift command, and maritime command, and they 
have said there is no guarantee whatsoever that a foreign-flagged fleet 
will sail into harm's way if we need them. They have said a 60-ship 
capability is extremely important, and they have said that foreign-
flagged ships which might be cheaper cannot be relied on for critical 
national security missions.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope we will oppose this amendment, we will reject 
it.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from South Carolina has 3 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I would say this: in essence, we already 
have outsourced this. I think the question about the maritime security 
fleet is that it is currently run by a foreign-flagged fleet of 
vessels. If I am not mistaken, it is almost exclusively run by Maersk, 
which is a foreign-flagged vessel.
  The question of this amendment is to say: Might not there be other 
ways of doing it? Maybe this is the best way to do it. Maybe there are 
other ways to do it. But this notion of not being willing to look, not 
being willing to have a third party validate or, if you will, take a 
look and say this makes sense or, no, there is a better way of skinning 
this cat both for the military and for the taxpayer, I think again 
warrants, in this case, the study by the GAO.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  In Desert Storm I, back in the 1990s, a ship that was manned by 
Pakistanis was loaded at the docks, began to sail, and turned around 
because the crew refused to go into that zone. We cannot allow that to 
happen ever again. The MSP was started specifically to provide that 
kind of sealift power that we need to move our men, materiel, and 
equipment, wherever they may be needed in the world. It does us little 
good to spend $680 billion on a Defense appropriation bill and not be 
able to get where the trouble is. Do away with the MSP, and that is 
where you are

[[Page 6614]]

headed with this, moving toward foreign flags and, indeed, Maersk is 
operated by a foreign country, but it is licensed to operate in the 
United States with American sailors on American ships for the MSP 
program.
  We don't need to waste money on this. The studies are available 
dating back to 2006, 2009, and, more recently, with the OMB study. We 
don't need to waste our money. We need to get on with supporting the 
MSP program. I ask for a ``no'' vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I would again go back to the basics. This 
stipend goes to Maersk presently. It has been raised from $3.5 million 
to $5 million. Maybe that is the best thing in the world to do; maybe 
it is not. But I think it is worthy of study, particularly given the 
fact that we have raised the stipend by $89 million over the last year, 
particularly given the fact that we have not looked at this issue from 
the standpoint of an outside third-party validation from the GAO for 
more than 12 years.
  It is for that reason I simply say, again, in no way prescriptively, 
it is worth a look. And again, given the fact that the Government 
Accountability Office does regular studies on a whole host of different 
issues on a very regular basis, I think this is worthy, given the 
additional $89 million that was spent last year.
  I would ask for a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SANFORD. 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 South 
Carolina will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Thornberry

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike section 1045 and insert the following:

     SEC. 1045. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN FEDERAL SPECTRUM OPERATIONS.

       Section 1004 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (Public 
     Law 114-74; 47 U.S.C. 921 note) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(d) Protection of Certain Federal Spectrum Operations.--
     If the report required by subsection (a) determines that 
     reallocation and auction of the spectrum described in the 
     report would harm national security by impacting existing 
     terrestrial Federal spectrum operations at the Nevada Test 
     and Training Range, the Commission, in coordination with the 
     Secretary shall, prior to the auction described in subsection 
     (c)(1)(B), establish rules for licensees in such spectrum 
     sufficient to mitigate harmful interference to such 
     operations.
       ``(e) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be construed to affect any requirement under section 1062(b) 
     of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2000 (47 U.S.C. 921 note; Public Law 106-65).''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the Spectrum Pipeline Act was included in the 
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 that we passed in December. Now, 
apparently, there has developed some disagreement among lawyers about 
whether that had some effect on section 1062(b) of the fiscal year 2000 
National Defense Authorization Act related to spectrum.
  My amendment simply clarifies what everyone that I know of agrees on, 
and that is it was never intended to have any effect. We have assurance 
from the Office of Management and Budget that was their intention. I 
appreciate Chairman Fred Upton, who has worked with us on this 
amendment, saying that was not his intention. Basically, Mr. Chairman, 
I see this as a technical amendment to resolve some disagreement among 
lawyers.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, the Nation's spectrum is one of our most 
valuable natural resources. Under the bipartisan oversight of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce, one spectrum auction alone last year 
raised more than $40 billion. It is imperative that we continue our 
bipartisan management of this valuable national asset, but to do that 
we must follow regular order through the proper committee of 
jurisdiction. That is the only way that we can make sure that we 
continue proper congressional oversight.
  This amendment that we are considering today was made public 1 day 
ago. This process runs counter to our successful bipartisan efforts to 
manage spectrum well. It does not allow the relevant agencies adequate 
time to weigh in, and it does not allow interested stakeholders to 
provide meaningful input.
  I appreciate my colleague's efforts to improve this amendment, but 
these are extremely complicated issues of national importance. They 
cannot be put together overnight.
  Earlier today when the rule for consideration of this bill was 
debated here on the floor, my Republican colleagues said that they 
chose to exclude some Democratic amendments because those amendments 
did not go through the committee process. Well, the same can be said of 
this amendment as well, Mr. Chairman.
  If there are issues of national security underlying this amendment, 
the Democrats on the Committee on Energy and Commerce stand ready to 
work on them expeditiously, but we must stand by our commitment to 
regular order. The consequences of getting this wrong are simply too 
high.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Smith), the ranking member of the Committee on Armed 
Services.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, this is clearly a problem that 
we need to work on. The chairman and I have worked together in talking 
about it and making sure that our military assets are protected as we 
deal with spectrum auctions.
  I look forward to having the conversation in conference committee 
about how to deal with this, but my concern is this is something that 
many on the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and I as well, have 
worked on for a number of years. We worked with the Department of 
Defense for years to try and make sure that their equities were 
protected. We talked with everyone we could conceivably talk with. This 
auction was originally set up to make sure that we protected those.
  Now we are hearing a slightly new argument. I certainly want to make 
sure that the Department of Defense's interests are protected, but I 
also want to make sure that they don't have absolute veto power on 
auctioning spectrum. That was sort of the law before all of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce and others worked on, and it really 
tied up a very valuable national asset, as Mr. Pallone points out.
  I hope that as we get into conference committee we will figure out 
how to both protect the interests of national security and the Defense, 
but also make sure that, if spectrum can be safely made available, it 
is safely made available.
  As I said, this was something that was worked on for a very long 
time,

[[Page 6615]]

and we thought we had it worked out. So right at the eleventh hour 
here, to have the Department of Defense say ``No, we want to change 
it'' is something I think we still need to examine more closely.
  I thank Mr. Pallone for the time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time 
simply to say this amendment, a version of this amendment, was filed 
last week. Working with the Committee on Energy and Commerce, it has 
been revised. Again, the purpose of this amendment is--and what I think 
it clearly does is simply restate what everybody thought was the case--
to resolve a disagreement among lawyers. That is the reason I call it, 
really, a technical amendment. I hope that the House will adopt it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1815


      Amendments En Bloc No. 4 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 4 consisting of amendment Nos. 23, 43, 44, 46, 
47, 50, 51, 54, 64, 65, 66, 67, and 69 printed in House Report 114-571, 
offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

           amendment no. 23 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

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

     SEC. 16__. HARMFUL INTERFERENCE TO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM.

       (a) Federal Communications Commission Conditions on 
     Commercial Terrestrial Operations.--Part I of title III of 
     the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 343. CONDITIONS ON COMMERCIAL TERRESTRIAL OPERATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Commission shall not permit 
     commercial terrestrial operations in the 1525-1559 megahertz 
     band or the 1626.5-1660.5 megahertz band until the date that 
     is 90 days after the Commission resolves concerns of 
     widespread harmful interference by such operations in such 
     band to covered GPS devices.
       ``(b) Notice to Congress.--
       ``(1) In general.--At the conclusion of the proceeding on 
     such operations in such band, the Commission shall submit to 
     the congressional committees described in paragraph (2) 
     official copies of the documents containing the final 
     decision of the Commission regarding whether to permit such 
     operations in such band. If the decision is to permit such 
     operations in such band, such documents shall contain or be 
     accompanied by an explanation of how the concerns described 
     in subsection (a) have been resolved.
       ``(2) Congressional committees described.--The 
     congressional committees described in this paragraph are the 
     following:
       ``(A) The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.
       ``(B) The Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation and the Committee on Armed Services of the 
     Senate.
       ``(c) Covered GPS Device Defined.--In this section, the 
     term `covered GPS device' means a Global Position System 
     device of the Department of Defense.''.
       (b) Secretary of Defense Review of Harmful Interference.--
       (1) Review.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter until the 
     date referred to in paragraph (3), the Secretary of Defense 
     shall conduct a review to--
       (A) assess the ability of covered GPS devices to receive 
     signals from Global Positioning System satellites without 
     widespread harmful interference; and
       (B) determine if commercial communications services are 
     causing or will cause widespread harmful interference with 
     covered GPS devices.
       (2) Notice to congress.--
       (A) Notice.--If the Secretary of Defense determines during 
     a review under paragraph (1) that commercial communications 
     services are causing or will cause widespread harmful 
     interference with covered GPS devices, the Secretary shall 
     promptly submit to the congressional defense committees 
     notice of such interference.
       (B) Contents.--The notice required under subparagraph (A) 
     shall include--
       (i) a list and description of the covered GPS devices that 
     are being or expected to be interfered with by commercial 
     communications services;
       (ii) a description of the source of, and the entity causing 
     or expect to cause, the interference with such receivers;
       (iii) a description of the manner in which such source or 
     such entity is causing or expected to cause such 
     interference;
       (iv) a description of the magnitude of harm caused or 
     expected to be caused by such interference;
       (v) a description of the duration of and the conditions and 
     circumstances under which such interference is occurring or 
     expected to occur;
       (vi) a description of the impact of such interference on 
     the national security interests of the United States; and
       (vii) a description of the plans of the Secretary to 
     address, alleviate, or mitigate such interference, including 
     the cost of such plans.
       (C) Form.--The notice required under subparagraph (A) shall 
     be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a 
     classified annex.
       (3) Termination date.--The date referred to in this 
     paragraph is the earlier of--
       (A) the date that is two years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act; or
       (B) the date on which the Secretary--
       (i) determines that commercial communications services are 
     not causing any widespread harmful interference with covered 
     GPS devices; and
       (ii) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense 
     committees notice of the determination made under clause (i).
       (c) Covered GPS Device Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``covered GPS device'' means a Global Position System device 
     of the Department of Defense.
       (d) Conforming Repeal.--Section 911 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81; 
     125 Stat. 1534) is repealed.


           amendment no. 43 offered by mr. carter of georgia

       Page 269, line 7, insert ``including small business 
     pharmacies,'' after ``retail pharmacy,''.


         amendment no. 44 offered by mrs. comstock of virginia

       At the end of subtitle D of title VII add the following:

     SEC. __. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE STUDIES ON PREVENTING THE 
                   DIVERSION OF OPIOID MEDICATIONS.

       (a) Studies.--With respect to programs of the Department of 
     Defense that dispense drugs to patients, the Secretary of 
     Defense (referred to in this section as the ``Secretary'') 
     shall study the feasibility, the effectiveness in preventing 
     the diversion of opioid medications, and the cost-
     effectiveness of--
       (1) requiring that such programs, in appropriate cases, 
     dispense opioid medications in vials using affordable 
     technologies designed to prevent access to the medications by 
     anyone other than the intended patient, such as a vial with a 
     locking-cap closure mechanism; and
       (2) the Secretary providing education on the risks of 
     opioid medications to individuals for whom such medications 
     are prescribed, and to their families, with special 
     consideration given to raising awareness among adolescents on 
     such risks.
       (b) Feedback.--In conducting the studies under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall seek feedback (on a confidential 
     basis when appropriate) from the individuals and entities 
     involved in the studies.
       (c) Report to Congress.--Not later than one year after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 
     to the Congress a report on the results of the studies 
     conducted under subsection (a).


          amendment no. 46 offered by mr. lamborn of colorado

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

     SEC. 810A. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ENHANCED TRANSFER OF 
                   TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPED AT DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   LABORATORIES.

       Section 801(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 127 Stat. 804; 10 
     U.S.C. 2514 note) is amended by striking ``2017'' and 
     inserting ``2021''.


        amendment no. 47 offered by mr. jenkins of west virginia

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

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

       (a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 1404 for drug interdiction and 
     counter-drug activities, as specified in the corresponding 
     funding table in section 4501, for drug interdiction and 
     counter-drug activities, Defense-wide is hereby increased by 
     $30,000,000 (to be used in support of the National Guard 
     counter-drug programs).
       (b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D--
       (1) the amount authorized to be appropriated for in section 
     101 for procurement, as specified in the corresponding 
     funding table in section 4101, for Aircraft Procurement, 
     Navy, for Common Ground Equipment (Line 064), is hereby 
     reduced by $20,000,000; and
       (2) the amount authorized to be appropriated in section 201 
     for research, development, test, and evaluation, as specified 
     in

[[Page 6616]]

     the corresponding funding table in section 4201, for advanced 
     component development and prototypes, Advanced Innovative 
     Technologies (Line 095) is hereby reduced by $10,000,000.


        amendment no. 50 offered by mr. guinta of new hampshire

       Page 372, after line 8, insert the following:

     SEC. 1014. FUNDING FOR COUNTER NARCOTICS OPERATIONS.

       (a) Increase.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated for drug interdiction and counterdrug 
     activities, Defense-wide, as specified in the corresponding 
     funding table in section 4501 is hereby increased by 
     $3,000,000.
       (b) Offset.--Notwithstanding the amounts set forth in the 
     funding tables in division D, the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated for operation and maintenance, as specified in 
     the corresponding funding table in section 4301, for 
     administration and servicewide activities, Defense Logistics 
     Agency (Line 160) is hereby reduced by $3,000,000.


          amendment no. 51 offered by mr. walberg of michigan

       Page 372, after line 8, insert the following:

     SEC. 1014. REPORT ON EFFORTS OF UNITED STATES SOUTHERN 
                   COMMAND OPERATION TO DETECT AND MONITOR DRUG 
                   TRAFFICKING.

       The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report 
     on the effectiveness of the United States Southern Command 
     Operation to limit threats to the national security of the 
     United States by detecting and monitoring drug trafficking, 
     specifically heroin and fentanyl.


       amendment no. 54 offered by mrs. ellmers of north carolina

       At the end of subtitle F of title X (page 423, before line 
     4), add the following new section:

     SEC. 1070. QUARTERLY REPORTS ON PARACHUTE JUMPS CONDUCTED AT 
                   FORT BRAGG AND POPE ARMY AIRFIELD AND AIR FORCE 
                   SUPPORT FOR SUCH JUMPS.

       (a) Report Required.--Until January 31, 2020, the Secretary 
     of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Army shall submit 
     to the Committees on Armed Services of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate quarterly reports--
       (1) specifying the number of parachute jumps conducted at 
     Fort Bragg and Pope Army Airfield, North Carolina, during the 
     three-month period covered by the report; and
       (2) describing and evaluating the level of air support 
     provided by the Air Force for those jumps.
       (b) Joint Airborne Air Transportability Training 
     Contracts.--As part of each report submitted under subsection 
     (a), the Secretaries shall specifically provide the 
     following:
       (1) The number of Joint Airborne Air Transportability 
     Training contracts requested during the three-month period 
     covered by the report by all units located at Fort Bragg and 
     Pope Army Airfield.
       (2) The number of Joint Airborne Air Transportability 
     Training contracts validated during the three-month period 
     covered by the report for units located at Fort Bragg and 
     Pope Army Airfield.
       (3) The number of Joint Airborne Air Transportability 
     Training contracts not validated during the three-month 
     period covered by the report for units located at Fort Bragg 
     and Pope Army Airfield.
       (4) In the case of each Joint Airborne Air Transportability 
     Training contract identified pursuant to paragraph (3), the 
     reason the contract was not validated.


          amendment no. 64 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

       Page 462, after line 13, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 1098. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES NORTHERN 
                   COMMAND PREPAREDNESS.

        It is the sense of the Congress that--
       (1) the United States Northern Command plays a crucial role 
     in providing additional response capability to State and 
     local governments in domestic disaster relief and consequence 
     management operations;
       (2) the United States Northern Command must continue to 
     build upon its current efforts to develop command strategies, 
     leadership training, and response plans to effectively work 
     with civil authorities when acting as the lead agency or a 
     supporting agency; and
       (3) the United States Northern Command should leverage 
     whenever possible training and management expertise that 
     resides within the Department of Defense, other Federal 
     agencies, State and local governments, and private sector 
     businesses and academic institutions to enhance--
       (A) its defense support to civil authorities and incidence 
     management missions;
       (B) relationships with other entities involved in disaster 
     response; and
       (C) its ability to respond to unforeseen events.


            amendment no. 65 offered by mr. lewis of georgia

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

     SEC. 1098. COST OF WARS.

       The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the 
     Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service and the Director 
     of the Bureau of Economic Analysis, shall post on the public 
     Web site of the Department of Defense the costs, including 
     the relevant legacy costs, to each American taxpayer of each 
     of the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.


            amendment no. 66 offered by ms. bordallo of guam

       Page 462, after line 13, insert the following:

     SEC. 1098. WORKFORCE ISSUES FOR RELOCATION OF MARINES TO 
                   GUAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 6(b) of the Joint Resolution 
     entitled ``A Joint Resolution to approve the `Covenant To 
     Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in 
     Political Union With the United States of America', and for 
     other purposes'', approved March 24, 1976 (48 U.S.C. 1806(b)) 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Numerical Limitations for Nonimmigrant Workers.--An 
     alien, if otherwise qualified, may seek admission to Guam or 
     to the Commonwealth during the transition program as a 
     nonimmigrant worker under section 101(a)(15)(H) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)) 
     without counting against the numerical limitations set forth 
     in section 214(g) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)). An alien, 
     if otherwise qualified, may, before October 1, 2028, be 
     admitted under section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of such Act for a 
     period of up to 3 years (which may be extended by the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security before October 1, 2028, for an 
     additional period or periods not to exceed 3 years each) to 
     perform services or labor on Guam pursuant to any agreement 
     entered into by a prime contractor or subcontractor calling 
     for services or labor required for performance of the 
     contract or subcontract in direct support of all military-
     funded construction, repairs, renovation, and facilities 
     services, or to perform services or labor on Guam as a 
     health-care worker, notwithstanding the requirement of such 
     section that the service or labor be temporary. This 
     subsection does not apply to any employment to be performed 
     outside of Guam or the Commonwealth.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on the date that is 120 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act.


    amendment no. 67 offered by mr. sean patrick maloney of new york

       Page 462, after line 13, insert the following:

     SEC. 1098. REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEBT COLLECTION 
                   REGULATIONS.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall review and update 
     Department of Defense regulations to ensure such regulations 
     comply with Federal consumer protection law with respect to 
     the collection of debt.


        amendment no. 69 offered by mr. langevin of rhode island

       Page 480, before line 13, insert the following:

     SEC. 1112. PUBLIC-PRIVATE TALENT EXCHANGE.

       (a) Authority.--Chapter 81 of title 10, United States Code, 
     as amended by section 1105 of this Act, is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 1599g. Public-private talent exchange

       ``(a) Assignment Authority.--Under regulations prescribed 
     by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary may, with the 
     agreement of a private-sector organization and the consent of 
     the employee, arrange for the temporary assignment of an 
     employee to such private-sector organization, or from such 
     private-sector organization to a Department of Defense 
     organization under this section.
       ``(b) Agreements.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     provide for a written agreement among the Department of 
     Defense, the private-sector organization, and the employee 
     concerned regarding the terms and conditions of the 
     employee's assignment under this section. The agreement--
       ``(A) shall require that the employee of the Department of 
     Defense, upon completion of the assignment, will serve in the 
     Department of Defense, or elsewhere in the civil service if 
     approved by the Secretary, for a period equal to the length 
     of the assignment; and
       ``(B) shall provide that if the employee of the Department 
     of Defense or of the private-sector organization (as the case 
     may be) fails to carry out the agreement, such employee shall 
     be liable to the United States for payment of all expenses of 
     the assignment, unless that failure was for good and 
     sufficient reason, as determined by the Secretary of Defense.
       ``(2) An amount for which an employee is liable under 
     paragraph (1) shall be treated as a debt due the United 
     States.
       ``(3) The Secretary may waive, in whole or in part, 
     collection of a debt described in paragraph (2) based on a 
     determination that the collection would be against equity and 
     good conscience and not in the best interests of the United 
     States, after taking into account any indication of fraud, 
     misrepresentation, fault, or lack of good faith on the part 
     of the employee.
       ``(c) Termination.--An assignment under this section may, 
     at any time and for any reason, be terminated by the 
     Department of Defense or the private-sector organization 
     concerned.
       ``(d) Duration.--An assignment under this section shall be 
     for a period of not less than

[[Page 6617]]

     3 months and not more than one year, renewable up to a total 
     of 4 years. No employee of the Department of Defense may be 
     assigned under this section for more than a total of 4 years 
     inclusive of all such assignments.
       ``(e) Status of Federal Employees Assigned to Private-
     Sector Organizations.--An employee of the Department of 
     Defense who is assigned to a private-sector organization 
     under this section shall be considered, during the period of 
     assignment, to be on detail to a regular work assignment in 
     the Department for all purposes. The written agreement 
     established under subsection (b)(1) shall address the 
     specific terms and conditions related to the employee's 
     continued status as a Federal employee.
       ``(f) Terms and Conditions for Private-sector Employees.--
     An employee of a private-sector organization who is assigned 
     to a Department of Defense organization under this section--
       ``(1) shall continue to receive pay and benefits from the 
     private-sector organization from which such employee is 
     assigned and shall not receive pay or benefits from the 
     Department of Defense, except as provided in paragraph (2);
       ``(2) is deemed to be an employee of the Department of 
     Defense for the purposes of--
       ``(A) chapters 73 and 81 of title 5;
       ``(B) sections 201, 203, 205, 207, 208, 209, 603, 606, 607, 
     643, 654, 1905, and 1913 of title 18;
       ``(C) sections 1343, 1344, and 1349(b) of title 31;
       ``(D) the Federal Tort Claims Act and any other Federal 
     tort liability statute;
       ``(E) the Ethics in Government Act of 1978; and
       ``(F) chapter 21 of title 41;
       ``(3) shall not have access to any trade secrets or to any 
     other nonpublic information which is of commercial value to 
     the private-sector organization from which such employee is 
     assigned.
       ``(g) Prohibition Against Charging Certain Costs to the 
     Federal Government.--A private-sector organization may not 
     charge the Department of any other agency of the Federal 
     Government, as direct or indirect costs under a Federal 
     contract, the costs of pay or benefits paid by the 
     organization to an employee assigned to a Department 
     organization under this section for the period of the 
     assignment.
       ``(h) Considerations.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Secretary of Defense--
       ``(1) shall ensure that, of the assignments made under this 
     section each year, at least 20 percent are from small 
     business concerns (as defined by section 3703(e)(2)(A) of 
     title 5);
       ``(2) shall take into consideration the question of how 
     assignments under this section might best be used to help 
     meet the needs of the Department of Defense with respect to 
     the training of employees; and
       ``(3) shall take into consideration, where applicable, 
     areas of particular private sector expertise, such as 
     cybersecurity.''.
       (b) Table of Sections Amendment.--The table of sections at 
     the beginning of such chapter, as amended by section 1105 of 
     this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``1599g. Public-private talent exchange.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Moulton) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from North Carolina (Mrs. Ellmers).
  Mrs. ELLMERS of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, this amendment does one 
thing: it maintains oversight and accountability of the Air Force. This 
will ensure that the Air Force follows through on their promise of 
providing adequate air support to ensure there is no negative impact on 
the readiness of Fort Bragg paratroopers.
  I have said this is a terrible decision, and today's amendment is 
about holding the Air Force accountable. It will require the Secretary 
of the Army and the Air Force to evaluate and to report the levels of 
air support provided to Fort Bragg by the Air Force. As the 
Representative of Fort Bragg, this will allow me to monitor jump 
numbers and ensure military readiness is not jeopardized in any way, 
shape, or form.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I want to, first of all, thank my HASC 
colleague across the aisle, ETC Chairman Wilson from the great State of 
South Carolina, for working with me on this bipartisan amendment to 
expand talent exchange authorities within the DOD.
  This amendment addresses a key challenge facing the Department, which 
is competition with the private sector to recruit and retain highly 
skilled talent.
  As we understand right now, it is exceptionally competitive in, for 
example, the IT and cybersecurity fields. We need to be able to retain, 
attract, and recruit the best and the brightest in this field, 
particularly because salaries are very high and it is very difficult in 
many ways for the DOD to compete in this space.
  While we are very grateful, of course, for those who devote their 
lives to a military career, not everyone will give 20 or 30 years of 
their lives to the U.S. military. But there is certainly no shortage of 
patriotism across the private sector, and dedicating several months or 
years of their lives to our national security is certainly a worthy 
endeavor.
  This also gives DOD employees exposure to cutting-edge operational 
techniques and best practices across a wide array of disciplines, while 
giving private sector employees insight into how the Department 
operates.
  Mr. Chairman, we must ensure that we are recruiting the best and the 
brightest in order to uphold our national defenses.
  This amendment has been sought after by the DOD. Again, there is 
bipartisan support on this amendment. It gives great flexibility to the 
Department to be able to work to bring in people of great talent from 
the private sector for a period of time. Again, it also allows the DOD 
to have our men and women in uniform go to the private sector for a 
time and learn best practices and what cutting-edge techniques and 
capabilities are happening in the private sector.
  So this is a good, commonsense amendment, and I urge my colleagues to 
support it.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).
  Mr. CARTER of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his 
leadership in this very important endeavor.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment package, 
which includes my amendment that clarifies that the pilot program for 
prescription drug acquisition costs regarding TRICARE pharmacy benefits 
will also include small business pharmacies.
  Currently, the pilot program helps extend discounts to TRICARE 
beneficiaries for prescription drugs filled at retail pharmacies. My 
amendment simply clarifies that small business pharmacies are retail 
pharmacies and will be included in this pilot program.
  In many cases around the country, people are unlimited when it comes 
to which pharmacy they can have their preparations filled at. With this 
amendment, we can ensure all pharmacies, both large and small 
retailers, will be included in this pilot program.
  I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment package.
  Mr MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to refer back to an amendment 
that was in the previous en bloc that dealt with the special immigrant 
visas.
  I want to express my appreciation to the committee, the chairman, the 
ranking member, and to the staff. This is a complicated issue. It is in 
your bill, but it is not entirely within your jurisdiction. And there 
has been an ebb and flow. It has been something that I have, as you 
know, been working on for a decade, and that is for the United States 
to keep faith with the people in Afghanistan who made the mission 
possible--the people who literally risked their lives as guides, 
construction workers, interpreters, and truck drivers--the men and 
women who made it possible for us to succeed.
  It isn't just the Department of Defense. There are men and women who 
worked with the State Department and USAID, which are an important part 
of our activities in those countries. Those foreign nationals are every 
bit at risk as somebody who is guiding our troops in the field.
  I appreciate your willingness to put in the en bloc amendment a 
little bit of flexibility. I hope it is not the last word, because we 
need to think seriously about what we do for the people who work on 
base, people who work for

[[Page 6618]]

the State Department, and the people who work for USAID so that we are 
able to make sure that we have an adequate number of visas and that we 
don't have an arbitrarily short period of time because the pipeline has 
been hopelessly complex and flawed.
  We have been working with the bureaucracy in trying to make it work 
better, but that is an ongoing struggle. And the fact is, there are 
different people with different committees who have different 
orientations.
  I hope that this en bloc amendment is just the start and that we can 
continue working with the chairman, with the minority party, with the 
staff, and with the advocates and various people who are committed to 
making sure that we do right by the people who are at risk now of being 
killed, murdered, tortured, and having family members killed.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hudson).
  Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Speaker, North Carolina is a proud, strong military 
State. We are proud of the men and women who answer the call and risk 
their lives to protect us. I never, ever want them to be in a fair 
fight. I want them to always have the tools, the equipment, and the 
training needed to dominate and destroy the enemy. That is why I filed 
an amendment with my colleague, Renee Ellmers, to protect training of 
paratroopers at Fort Bragg, the epicenter of the universe.
  As you may know, the Air Force has moved forward with plans to 
deactivate the 440th Airlift Wing. This deactivation puts these young 
paratroopers, and indeed our very national security, at risk, as 
evidenced by the failure of the Air Force to meet current training 
requirements.
  For the sake of our national security, this amendment is absolutely 
critical to hold the Air Force accountable and to ensure our rapid 
reaction forces are prepared for deployment at a moment's notice.
  I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the bipartisan 
amendment I have co-written with my colleague, Judge Ted Poe of Texas.
  The amendment, which is part of the en bloc amendments, endorses an 
ongoing effort at the Defense Security Cooperation Agency to develop a 
comprehensive framework for the assessment, monitoring, and evaluation 
of security cooperation activities of the Department of Defense. It 
follows a related monitoring evaluation amendment Judge Poe and I 
offered to the NDAA for FY 2016 and the committee retained, gratefully, 
in the 2017 bill.
  Security cooperation with foreign security forces builds valuable 
international partnerships and enhances the ability of our partners to 
carry out joint military operations and enhances American security 
while it is at it. However, few requirements are placed on these 
programs to measure the impact of funding provided to our foreign 
security partners. Looking at efficacy, does it work?
  Judge Poe and I have led the effort to apply assessment, monitoring, 
and evaluation leading principles to U.S. foreign assistance 
administered by the State Department, USAID, and other Federal 
agencies.
  Last year, the House of Representatives passed our bill, the Foreign 
Aid Transparency and Accountability, H.R. 3766. We should have a 
similar expectation of accountability for our security cooperation 
programs as well.
  I welcome the committee's bipartisan efforts to begin to reform, 
consolidate, and modify the more than 120 security cooperation 
authorities Congress has provided DOD over the years.
  Notably, the underlying bill strengthens country-by-country reporting 
requirements for security cooperation and begins to reorganize security 
cooperation authorities into one coherent separate section of title X 
of the U.S. Code.
  Furthermore, the Senate is advancing an NDAA bill that requires DOD 
to produce an annual budget justification for security cooperation 
funding.
  There is obviously significant demand, Mr. Chairman, for more 
transparency and accountability in terms of U.S. security cooperation. 
Our amendment is consistent with that demand, and it builds on the 
great work done by the committee in this area to define clear 
objectives and metrics for security cooperation.
  I want to thank the chairman, the ranking member, and both committee 
staffs, minority and majority, for their excellent work and for their 
bipartisan approach to this and so many other issues in the bill.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Guinta).
  Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to the 
National Defense Authorization Act, and I want to thank the chairman 
for including it in the en bloc package.
  My amendment increases funding for U.S. NORTHCOM's Joint Task Force 
North by $3 million to assist with its counternarcotics operations.
  As part of my work as the chair of the Task Force to Combat the 
Heroin Epidemic, I traveled to the Mexican border earlier this spring 
to investigate sources of illegal fentanyl and heroin coming into the 
country. There I learned and had the opportunity to meet with the 
commanding officers at the Joint Task Force North, the joint service 
command that supports Federal law enforcement agencies with resources 
to identify and interdict criminal activities conducted within the 
United States and its borders.
  My goal is to ensure that Joint Task Force North receives the funding 
necessary to continue their counternarcotics efforts.
  Again, I want to thank the chairman and the Armed Services Committee 
for their work on the underlying bill, and I urge my colleagues to 
support the amendment.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, again, I thank the distinguished 
gentleman, and I also thank the chairman of the full committee, the 
ranking member of the full committee, and the subcommittee chairs as 
well.
  I serve on the Homeland Security Committee, and I am constantly aware 
of the overlapping duties and responsibilities, Mr. Chairman, of the 
United States military, which has its confinement in certain areas, but 
also working to secure the homeland.
  The Jackson Lee amendment No. 64 in en bloc amendment No. 4 makes an 
important contribution to the bill by improving the effectiveness of 
U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, in fulfilling its critical mission 
of protecting the U.S. homeland in the event of war and to provide 
support to local, State, and Federal authorities in times of national 
emergency.
  Specifically, here is what my amendment does. It develops and has in 
place a leadership strategy that will strengthen and foster necessary 
institutional and interpersonal relationships with State and local 
governments. The backbone of securing the homeland is engaging State 
and local governments. Also, to develop an instructional program to 
train key personnel how to lead effectively in the event of a disaster 
when they do not have command authority to dictate actions.

                              {time}  1830

  In addition, NORTHCOM, which was established in 2002 in the aftermath 
of the 9/11 attacks, is to bring the capabilities and the resources of 
the U.S. military to the assistance the American people during a 
catastrophic disaster like war or a pandemic outbreak of diseases, such 
as Ebola, Zika, SARS, or influenza; major earthquakes, floods, and 
natural disasters; or terrorist attacks.
  I live in the Gulf Coast, and I am well familiar with hurricanes, 
enormous rains that we have just experienced, needing to bring to bear 
moving large numbers of people, housing large numbers of people.
  And then this morning I spent time after time of dealing with the 
Zika virus, which, again, our southern Gulf Coast region may be the 
epicenter.

[[Page 6619]]

  Let me quote, for example, a quote from a renowned professor, Leonard 
Marcus, out of Harvard. What we are trying to do is: ``Effective 
emergency preparedness and response requires leadership that can 
accomplish perceptive coordination and communication amongst diverse 
agencies . . .''
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Holding). The time of the gentlewoman has 
expired.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. The challenge is, as we learned from 9/11, 
``operating within their specified scope of authority, preparedness 
leaders in characteristic bureaucratic fashion often serve to bolster 
the profile and import of their own organization, thereby creating a 
silo effect . . .''
  So let me speak as that Homeland Security member and the person who 
has been engaged in the crises or disasters in my own community. When 
we collaborate we work better together. When we develop relationships, 
we work better together.
  Let me just offer a moment of personal privilege as someone speaking 
about relationships. This bill has many good elements in it, and I am 
propelled and committed to diversity and respecting all people.
  I am saddened by the language that the Russell amendment has dealing 
with the LGBT, and I am saddened that the Dent amendment was not 
allowed in. We need to build on collaborating with all people to secure 
America and to make a better military.
  I thank the gentleman for the support of my amendment in the en bloc.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in support of En Bloc Amendment Number 4 to H.R. 
4909, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, 
offered by Chairman Thornberry.
  I want to express my thanks and appreciation to Chairman Thornberry 
and Ranking Member Smith, and their colleagues on the Armed Services 
Committee for their work thank on this bill and their devotion to the 
men and women of the Armed Forces.
  I also thank Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter of the 
Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64, 
which is included in En Bloc Amendment Number 4.
  Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64 makes an important contribution to 
the bill by improving the effectiveness of the Northern Command 
(``NORTHCOM'') in fulfilling its critical mission of protecting the 
U.S. homeland in event of war and to provide support to local, state, 
and federal authorities in times of national emergency.
  Specifically, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64 encourages NORTHCOM to:
  1. Develop and has in place a leadership strategy that will 
strengthen and foster necessary institutional and interpersonal 
relationships with state and local governments; and
  2. Develop an instructional program to train key personnel how to 
lead effectively in the event of a disaster when they do not have 
command authority to dictate actions.
  A mission critical function of NORTHCOM, which was established in 
2002 in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks is to bring the capabilities 
and the resources of the U.S. military to the assistance of the 
American people during a catastrophic disaster like war, a pandemic 
outbreak of diseases such Ebola, Zika, Sars, or influenza; major 
earthquakes, floods, and natural disasters; or terrorist attacks like 
those occurring on September 11, 2001 and at the Boston Marathon on 
April 15, 2013.
  NORTHCOM leaders will be much more effective in saving lives, 
protecting assets, and enhancing resilience after the disaster has 
occurred if they are trained in the techniques of effective engagement 
with civilian leadership.
  Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64 will help ensure that such training 
will be available.
  Mr. Chair, let me explain why this type of training--commonly 
referred to as ``Resilience'' training is very important.
  As stated in a highly influential journal article by Professor 
Leonard Marcus and his colleagues at Harvard's National Public 
Leadership Initiative, ``effective emergency preparedness and response 
requires leadership that can accomplish perceptive coordination and 
communication amongst diverse agencies and sectors.'' (Leonard J. 
Marcus, Barry C. Dorn, and Joseph M. Henderson, Meta-Leadership and 
National Emergency Preparedness: A Model to Build Government 
Connectivity, in Biosecurity And Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, 
Practice, And Science Volume 4, Number 2, 2006).
  The challenge is, as we learned from the
9/11 Commission, operating within their specified scope of authority, 
preparedness leaders in characteristic bureaucratic fashion often serve 
to bolster the profile and import of their own organization, thereby 
creating a silo effect that interferes with effective system wide 
planning and response.
  Resilience training seeks to equip preparedness leaders overcome this 
obstacle of ``traditional silo thinking by teaching ``meta-
leadership,'' a new type of overarching leadership that intentionally 
connects the purposes and work of different organizations or 
organizational units.
  Meta-leadership training enables leaders to provide guidance, 
direction, and momentum across organizational lines that develop into a 
shared course of action and a commonality of purpose among people and 
agencies that are doing what may appear to be very different work.
  Meta-leaders have the skill and training to imaginatively and 
effectively leverage system assets, information, and capacities, which 
a particularly critical function for organizations with emergency 
preparedness responsibilities like responding to terrorist attacks, 
natural disasters, or pandemic outbreaks of infectious diseases like 
the Ebola and the Zika Virus, which may disproportionately affect 
persons in the Gulf Coast region, including my congressional district 
in Houston, Texas.
  As a senior and charter member of the Homeland Security Committee, 
and the Ranking Member of Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, 
Homeland Security, and Investigations, I have spent the better part of 
the last decade and a half working to craft policies and provide the 
resources, personnel, equipment, and funding needed to protect the 
security of our homeland and the American people.
  Jackson Lee Amendment Number 64 will help ensure that those 
responsible for providing leadership in times of national emergency 
have the skills and training to prevent, mitigate, or recover from any 
major catastrophe, disaster, or tragedy that could befall our nation.
  I urge my colleagues to support En Bloc Amendment Number 64 and thank 
the Chairman and Ranking Member for including Jackson Lee Amendment 
Number 64 in this important measure.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of two amendments I 
offered to this year's National Defense Authorization Act.
  The amendment we are currently considering requires the DOD to report 
on the effectiveness of efforts to detect and monitor drug trafficking, 
specifically heroin and fentanyl, which is devastating my home State of 
Michigan and the entire country.
  The United States Southern Command is already doing important work to 
interdict drug runners and provide needed training to counternarcotic 
teams in Central America.
  My amendment would help quantify those efforts and see what more can 
be done to combat the heroin and fentanyl coming from this region.
  The second bipartisan amendment, which we will consider later today, 
requires DOD to verify it has sufficient access to Afghan accounts to 
guarantee effective audits.
  It is important that our military has access to financial information 
to protect U.S. funds from waste, fraud, and abuse, and ensure taxpayer 
resources are being spent effectively.
  I appreciate these amendments being included en bloc. I urge the 
support of my colleagues.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).
  Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, and I 
thank the chairman for including it in the next en bloc amendment, one 
that brings accountability to countries granting consent to Russian 
naval vessels calling into port.
  The aggressive posture and actions of the Russian Federation over the 
last few years has profoundly changed the global landscape. Russia has 
invaded Crimea, and currently still occupies that region. And Russia 
directly intervened militarily to shore up the Assad regime in Syria.
  The common thread that runs through these two interventions is that

[[Page 6620]]

of warm water ports for the Russian navy. Crimea's port in Sevastopol 
and Syria's port of Tartus provide Russia with access to the warm 
waters of the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, waters that are 
essential to Russia's reach of aggression.
  Despite these aggressive actions, some countries are accommodating 
the Russian navy by allowing warships and submarines to call into their 
ports.
  Spain, although a cherished NATO ally, grants Russia access to the 
ports in its enclaves across the strategically important Strait of 
Gibraltar, where the United Kingdom has a Permanent Joint Operating 
Base that hosts U.S. ships.
  Furthermore, Greece and Malta have hosted Russian warships last year. 
The recent high-profile visits to Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua by 
Russia's navy in recent years are also cause for concern.
  Mr. Chairman, governments across the globe should be isolating the 
Russian navy, not accommodating it.
  The Russian navy must constantly compete with geographic and 
strategic disadvantages of lacking access to warm blue waters of the 
world, but these disadvantages are forfeited when we lack a cohesive, 
unified effort to deny Russian vessels the ability to call into foreign 
ports.
  With the inclusion of this amendment, the Secretary of Defense will 
have to report to Congress and, thus, the American people on these 
instances. And I hope governments will think twice before offering up 
their ports to Putin's navy.
  I urge support of the underlying bill as well.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Illinois, (Mr. Kinzinger).
  Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of 
amendment No. 74 in the en bloc, the Blumenauer Special Immigrant Visa 
amendment. I just want to speak to the program broadly and quickly.
  In Afghanistan, countless people put their lives on the line to serve 
as translators, basically being the middle person between American 
troops and the population we are trying to secure.
  Now, we promised them opportunity to come into the United States, but 
this process has been bogged down by bureaucracy. In fact, many have 
been in this process for years, and still in the first steps because of 
the bureaucracy on this.
  Unfortunately, today, actually, many Afghans are being killed every 
day by the Taliban, by ISIS, by al Qaeda, as a result of having worked 
with us.
  I want to thank Representative Moulton and Representative Blumenauer 
for their work on this. This is a bipartisan issue, and one that I 
think we ought to take very seriously, keeping our commitment to those 
that help us, because there will be a war again some day, and we ought 
to be able to maintain the trust of the population we are there to 
secure.
  So I thank Mr. Blumenauer for putting this amendment in, and I thank 
the chairman for accepting it.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chair, I just think it is important to pause for a second and 
just think about what has just happened here. We have had a package of 
amendments that have been discussed, about an equal number of 
Republicans and Democrats. They have talked about very important issues 
and contributions that they have made, but if a Member then votes 
against final passage of the bill, the contributions are nullified.
  And I think it is just important to step back and just reiterate that 
all of us have provisions in this bill we agree with and disagree with. 
We place different values on different parts of the bill. But what has 
happened before is that Members have put aside some personal 
differences and still paid attention to the larger purpose of the bill, 
which is to support the men and women who serve our country. I hope 
that can happen again.
  However proud Members may be of the various provisions--and there are 
a lot of good provisions from both sides of the aisle--however proud 
they may be of those, if you don't support the final bill, you are not 
accomplishing very much.
  I hope Members not only will support this en bloc package, but the 
final measure.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


      Amendments En Bloc No. 5 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 5 consisting of amendment Nos. 55, 56, 57, 58, 
60, 61, 62, 68, 70, 74, 77, and 82 printed in House Report 114-571, 
offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:


            amendment no. 55 offered by mr. gosar of arizona

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

     SEC. 1070. BRIEFING ON REAL PROPERTY INVENTORY.

       (a) Briefing Required.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall brief the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
     Representatives on the status of the Installation Geospatial 
     Information and Services of the Department of Defense as it 
     relates to the real property inventory of the Department, and 
     the extent to which the Department has made use of the 
     cadastral geographic information systems-based real property 
     inventory.
       (b) Matters Covered.--The briefing required by subsection 
     (a) shall, at a minimum, cover the following:
       (1) The status of current policies of the Department 
     governing real property inventories and the use of geospatial 
     information systems, the status of real property inventory in 
     relation to the financial improvement and audit readiness 
     efforts of the Department, and the status of implementation 
     of Department of Defense Instruction 8130.01, Installation 
     Geospatial Information and Services (IGI&S).
       (2) The extent to which the Department is coordinating with 
     the Federal Geographic Data Committee, other Federal 
     agencies, and State and local governments, and how existing 
     Department standards and common protocols ensure that the 
     interoperability of geospatial information complies with 
     section 216 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-
     347; 44 U.S.C. 3501 note) and Executive Orders 12906 and 
     13327.
       (3) The existing real property inventories systems or any 
     components of any cadastre currently authorized by law or 
     conducted by the Department of Defense, the statutory 
     authorization for such inventories or components, and the 
     amount expended by the Federal Government for each such 
     activity in fiscal year 2015.
       (4) A discussion of the Department's ability to make this 
     information publicly available on the Internet in a 
     graphically geo-enabled and searchable format, and how the 
     Department plans to prevent the disclosure of any parcel or 
     parcels of land, any buildings or facilities on any such 
     parcel, or any information related to any such parcel, 
     building, or facility, if such disclosure would impair or 
     jeopardize the national security or homeland defense of the 
     United States.
       (5) Any additional topics identified by the Secretary.


          amendment no. 56 offered by mr. russell of oklahoma

       Page 423, after line 3, insert the following:

     SEC. 1071. REPORT ON ADJUSTMENT AND DIVERSIFICATION 
                   ASSISTANCE.

       Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a 
     briefing on the adjustment and diversification assistance 
     authorized by subsections (b) and (c) of section 2391 of 
     title 10, United States Code. Such briefing shall include 
     each of the following:
       (1) A description of the activities and programs currently 
     being conducted under subsections (b)(1) and (c) of such 
     section, including a list of the recipients of grants, and 
     amount received by each recipient, of such activities and 
     programs in each of the five most recent fiscal years.
       (2) For each of the five fiscal years preceding the fiscal 
     year during which the briefing is conducted, separate 
     estimates of the funding the Department of Defense has 
     directed to activities under each of clauses (A) through (E) 
     of paragraph (1) of subsection (b) and under subsection (c) 
     of such section and the recipients of such funding.

[[Page 6621]]




         amendment no. 57 offered by mr. pitts of pennsylvania

       Page 542, after line 6, insert before ``Such'' the 
     following: ``The number and type of transient Russian naval 
     vessels that have utilized ports of the country.''.
       Page 542, line 8, insert before ``and'' the following: ``, 
     including the use of ports of such country by transient 
     Russian naval vessels,''.


             amendment no. 58 offered by mr. young of iowa

       Insert at the end of subtitle F of title X the following:

     SEC. 1070. BRIEFING ON THE PROTECTION OF PERSONALLY 
                   IDENTIFYING INFORMATION OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED 
                   FORCES.

       Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the 
     congressional defense committees a briefing on the efforts of 
     the Department of Defense to protect the personally 
     identifiable information of members of the Armed Forces and 
     their families, and of employees of the Department of 
     Defense, which shall include--
       (1) current and planned initiatives to protect the 
     personally identifying information of members of the Armed 
     Forces and their families, and employees of the Department of 
     Defense;
       (2) the challenges encountered in carrying out the 
     activities described in paragraph (1); and
       (3) any trends related to fraudulent activity that targets 
     the personally identifying information of members of the 
     Armed Forces or their families, or employees of the 
     Department of Defense.


      amendment no. 60 offered by mr. fitzpatrick of pennsylvania

       Page 462, after line 13, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 1098. IMPORTANCE OF ROLE PLAYED BY WOMEN IN WORLD WAR 
                   II.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) National Rosie the Riveter Day is a collective national 
     effort to raise awareness of the 16 million women working 
     during World War II.
       (2) Americans have chosen to honor female workers who 
     contributed on the home front during World War II.
       (3) These women left their homes to work or volunteer full-
     time in factories, farms, shipyards, airplane factories, 
     banks, and other institutions in support of the military 
     overseas.
       (4) These women worked with the USO and Red Cross, drove 
     trucks, riveted airplane parts, collected critical materials, 
     rolled bandages, and served on rationing boards.
       (5) It is fitting and proper to recognize and preserve the 
     history and legacy of working women, including volunteer 
     women, during World War II to promote cooperation and 
     fellowship among such women and their descendants.
       (6) These women and their descendants wish to further the 
     advancement of patriotic ideas, excellence in the workplace, 
     and loyalty to the United States of America.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--Congress acknowledges the important 
     role played by women in World War II.


           amendment no. 61 offered by mr. forbes of virginia

       At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following:

     SEC. 1098. RECOVERY OF EXCESS RIFLES, AMMUNITION, AND PARTS 
                   GRANTED TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND TRANSFER TO 
                   CERTAIN PERSONS.

       (a) Recovery.--Subchapter II of chapter 407 of title 36, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     40728A the following new section:

     ``Sec. 40728B. Recovery of excess rifles, ammunition, and 
       parts granted to foreign countries and transfer to certain 
       persons

       ``(a) Authority to Recover.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2) 
     and subsection (b), the Secretary of the Army may acquire 
     from any person any rifle, ammunition, repair parts, or other 
     supplies described in section 40731(a) of this title which 
     were--
       ``(A) provided to any country on a grant basis under the 
     conditions imposed by section 505 of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2314) that became excess to the needs 
     of such country; and
       ``(B) lawfully acquired by such person.
       ``(2) The Secretary of the Army may not acquire anything 
     under paragraph (1) except for transfer to a person in the 
     United States under subsection (c).
       ``(3) The Secretary of the Army may accept rifles, 
     ammunition, repair parts, or other supplies under paragraph 
     (1) notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31.
       ``(b) Cost of Recovery.--The Secretary of the Army may not 
     acquire anything under subsection (a) if the United States 
     would incur any cost for such acquisition.
       ``(c) Availability for Transfer.--Any rifles, ammunition, 
     repair parts, or supplies acquired under subsection (a) shall 
     be available for transfer in the United States to the person 
     from whom acquired if such person--
       ``(1) is licensed as a manufacturer, importer, or dealer 
     pursuant to section 923(a) of title 18; and
       ``(2) uses an ammunition depot of the Army that is an 
     eligible facility for receipt of any rifles, ammunition, 
     repair parts, or supplies under this paragraph.
       ``(d) Contracts.--Notwithstanding subsection (k) of section 
     2304 of title 10, the Secretary may enter into such contracts 
     or cooperative agreements on a sole source basis pursuant to 
     paragraphs (4) and (5) of subsection (c) of such section to 
     carry out this section.
       ``(e) AECA.--Transfers authorized under this section may 
     only be made in accordance with applicable provisions of the 
     Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).
       ``(f) Rifle Defined.--In this section, the term `rifle' has 
     the meaning given such term in section 921 of title 18.''.
       (b) Sale.--Section 40732 of such title is amended--
       (1) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Sales by Other Persons.--A person who receives a 
     rifle or any ammunition, repair parts, or supplies under 
     section 40728B(c) of this title may sell, at fair market 
     value, such rifle, ammunition, repair parts, or supplies. 
     With respect to rifles other than caliber .22 rimfire and 
     caliber .30 rifles, the seller shall obtain a license as a 
     dealer in rifles and abide by all requirements imposed on 
     persons licensed under chapter 44 of title 18, including 
     maintaining acquisition and disposition records, and 
     conducting background checks.''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), in the heading, by inserting ``by 
     the Corporation'' after ``Limitation on Sales''.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 407 of such title is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 40728A the 
     following new item:

``40728B. Recovery of excess rifles, ammunition, and parts granted to 
              foreign countries and transfer to certain persons.''.


            amendment no. 62 offered by mr. young of indiana

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

     SEC. 1098. PROJECT MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Deputy Director for Management.--
       (1) Additional functions.--Section 503 of title 31, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Program and Project Management.--
       ``(1) Requirement.--Subject to the direction and approval 
     of the Director, the Deputy Director for Management or a 
     designee shall--
       ``(A) adopt governmentwide standards, policies, and 
     guidelines for program and project management for executive 
     agencies;
       ``(B) oversee implementation of program and project 
     management for the standards, policies, and guidelines 
     established under subparagraph (A);
       ``(C) chair the Program Management Policy Council 
     established under section 1126(b);
       ``(D) establish standards and policies for executive 
     agencies, consistent with widely accepted standards for 
     program and project management planning and delivery;
       ``(E) engage with the private sector to identify best 
     practices in program and project management that would 
     improve Federal program and project management;
       ``(F) conduct portfolio reviews to address programs 
     identified as high risk by the Government Accountability 
     Office;
       ``(G) not less than annually, conduct portfolio reviews of 
     agency programs in coordination with Project Management 
     Improvement Officers designated under section 1126(a)(1) to 
     assess the quality and effectiveness of program management; 
     and
       ``(H) establish a 5-year strategic plan for program and 
     project management.
       ``(2) Application to department of defense.--Paragraph (1) 
     shall not apply to the Department of Defense to the extent 
     that the provisions of that paragraph are substantially 
     similar to or duplicative of--
       ``(A) the provisions of chapter 87 of title 10; or
       ``(B) policy, guidance, or instruction of the Department 
     related to program management.''.
       (2) Deadline for standards, policies, and guidelines.--Not 
     later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of 
     Management and Budget shall issue the standards, policies, 
     and guidelines required under section 503(c) of title 31, 
     United States Code, as added by paragraph (1).
       (3) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date on 
     which the standards, policies, and guidelines are issued 
     under paragraph (2), the Deputy Director for Management of 
     the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the 
     Program Management Policy Council established under section 
     1126(b) of title 31, United States Code, as added by 
     subsection (b)(1), and the Director of the Office of 
     Management and Budget, shall issue any regulations as are 
     necessary to implement the requirements of section 503(c) of 
     title 31, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1).
       (b) Program Management Improvement Officers and Program 
     Management Policy Council.--

[[Page 6622]]

       (1) Amendment.--Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 1126. Program Management Improvement Officers and 
       Program Management Policy Council

       ``(a) Program Management Improvement Officers.--
       ``(1) Designation.--The head of each agency described in 
     section 901(b) shall designate a senior executive of the 
     agency as the Program Management Improvement Officer of the 
     agency.
       ``(2) Functions.--The Program Management Improvement 
     Officer of an agency designated under paragraph (1) shall--
       ``(A) implement program management policies established by 
     the agency under section 503(c); and
       ``(B) develop a strategy for enhancing the role of program 
     managers within the agency that includes the following:
       ``(i) Enhanced training and educational opportunities for 
     program managers that shall include--

       ``(I) training in the relevant competencies encompassed 
     with program and project manager within the private sector 
     for program managers; and
       ``(II) training that emphasizes cost containment for large 
     projects and programs.

       ``(ii) Mentoring of current and future program managers by 
     experienced senior executives and program managers within the 
     agency.
       ``(iii) Improved career paths and career opportunities for 
     program managers.
       ``(iv) A plan to encourage the recruitment and retention of 
     highly qualified individuals to serve as program managers.
       ``(v) Improved means of collecting and disseminating best 
     practices and lessons learned to enhance program management 
     across the agency.
       ``(vi) Common templates and tools to support improved data 
     gathering and analysis for program management and oversight 
     purposes.
       ``(3) Application to department of defense.--This 
     subsection shall not apply to the Department of Defense to 
     the extent that the provisions of this subsection are 
     substantially similar to or duplicative of the provisions of 
     chapter 87 of title 10. For purposes of paragraph (1), the 
     Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
     Logistics (or a designee of the Under Secretary) shall be 
     considered the Program Management Improvement Officer.
       ``(b) Program Management Policy Council.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Office of 
     Management and Budget a council to be known as the `Program 
     Management Policy Council' (in this subsection referred to as 
     the `Council').
       ``(2) Purpose and functions.--The Council shall act as the 
     principal interagency forum for improving agency practices 
     related to program and project management. The Council 
     shall--
       ``(A) advise and assist the Deputy Director for Management 
     of the Office of Management and Budget;
       ``(B) review programs identified as high risk by the 
     General Accountability Office and make recommendations for 
     actions to be taken by the Deputy Director for Management of 
     the Office of Management and Budget or a designee;
       ``(C) discuss topics of importance to the workforce, 
     including--
       ``(i) career development and workforce development needs;
       ``(ii) policy to support continuous improvement in program 
     and project management; and
       ``(iii) major challenges across agencies in managing 
     programs;
       ``(D) advise on the development and applicability of 
     standards governmentwide for program management transparency; 
     and
       ``(E) review the information published on the website of 
     the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to section 1122.
       ``(3) Membership.--
       ``(A) Composition.--The Council shall be composed of the 
     following members:
       ``(i) Five members from the Office of Management and Budget 
     as follows:

       ``(I) The Deputy Director for Management.
       ``(II) The Administrator of the Office of Electronic 
     Government.
       ``(III) The Administrator of Federal Procurement Policy.
       ``(IV) The Controller of the Office of Federal Financial 
     Management.
       ``(V) The Director of the Office of Performance and 
     Personnel Management.

       ``(ii) The Program Management Improvement Officer from each 
     agency described in section 901(b).
       ``(iii) Other individuals as determined appropriate by the 
     Chairperson.
       ``(B) Chairperson and vice chairperson.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Deputy Director for Management of 
     the Office of Management and Budget shall be the Chairperson 
     of the Council. A Vice Chairperson shall be elected by the 
     members and shall serve a term of not more than 1 year.
       ``(ii) Duties.--The Chairperson shall preside at the 
     meetings of the Council, determine the agenda of the Council, 
     direct the work of the Council, and establish and direct 
     subgroups of the Council as appropriate.
       ``(4) Meetings.--The Council shall meet not less than twice 
     per fiscal year and may meet at the call of the Chairperson 
     or a majority of the members of the Council.
       ``(5) Support.--The head of each agency with a Project 
     Management Improvement Officer serving on the Council shall 
     provide administrative support to the Council, as 
     appropriate, at the request of the Chairperson.
       ``(6) Committee duration.--Section 14(a)(2) of the Federal 
     Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the 
     Council.''.
       (2) Report required.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of 
     Management and Budget, in consultation with each Program 
     Management Improvement Officer designated under section 
     1126(a)(1) of title 31, United States Code, shall submit to 
     Congress a report containing the strategy developed under 
     section 1126(a)(2)(B) of such title, as added by paragraph 
     (1).
       (c) Program and Project Management Personnel Standards.--
       (1) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``agency'' 
     means each agency described in section 901(b) of title 31, 
     United States Code, other than the Department of Defense.
       (2) Regulations required.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date on which the standards, policies, and guidelines are 
     issued under section 503(c) of title 31, United States Code, 
     as added by subsection (a)(1), the Director of the Office of 
     Personnel Management, in consultation with the Director of 
     the Office of Management and Budget, shall issue regulations 
     that--
       (A) identify key skills and competencies needed for a 
     program and project manager in an agency;
       (B) establish a new job series, or update and improve an 
     existing job series, for program and project management 
     within an agency; and
       (C) establish a new career path for program and project 
     managers within an agency.
       (d) GAO Report on Effectiveness of Policies on Program and 
     Project Management.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Government Accountability Office 
     shall issue, in conjunction with the High Risk list of the 
     Government Accountability Office, a report examining the 
     effectiveness of the following on improving Federal program 
     and project management:
       (1) The standards, policies, and guidelines for program and 
     project management issued under section 503(c) of title 31, 
     United States Code, as added by subsection (a)(1).
       (2) The 5-year strategic plan established under section 
     503(c)(1)(H) of title 31, United States Code, as added by 
     subsection (a)(1).
       (3) Program Management Improvement Officers designated 
     under section 1126(a)(1) of title 31, United States Code, as 
     added by subsection (b)(1).
       (4) The Program Management Policy Council established under 
     section 1126(b)(1) of title 31, United States Code, as added 
     by subsection (b)(1).


            amendment no. 68 offered by mr. young of alaska

       In section 1101--
       (1) in subsection (a), insert ``or as a military technician 
     (dual status)'' after ``Base''; and
       (2) amend subsection (c) to read as follows:
       (c) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``defense industrial base facility'' means any 
     Department of Defense depot, arsenal, or shipyard located 
     within the United States; and
       (2) the term ``military technician (dual status)'' has the 
     meaning given such term in section 10216 of title 10, United 
     States Code.


          amendment no. 70 offered by mr. connolly of virginia

       At the end of subtitle A of title XII, add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING AN ASSESSMENT, 
                   MONITORING, AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK FOR 
                   SECURITY COOPERATION.

       It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) the Secretary of Defense should develop and maintain an 
     assessment, monitoring, and evaluation framework for security 
     cooperation with foreign countries to ensure accountability 
     and foster implementation of best practices; and
       (2) such framework--
       (A) should be consistent with interagency approaches and 
     existing best practices;
       (B) should be sufficiently resourced and appropriately 
     placed within the Department of Defense to enable the 
     rigorous examination and measurement of security cooperation 
     efforts towards meeting stated objectives and outcomes; and
       (C) should be used to inform security cooperation planning, 
     policies, and resource decisions as well as ensure the 
     effectiveness and efficiency of security cooperation efforts.


          amendment no. 74 offered by mr. blumenauer of oregon

       Beginning on page 503, strike line 16 through page 504, 
     line 11, and insert the following:
       (a) Aliens Described.--Section 602(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the 
     Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note) is 
     amended to read as follows:

       ``(I)(aa) by, or on behalf of, the United States 
     Government, in the case of an alien

[[Page 6623]]

     submitting an application for Chief of Mission approval 
     pursuant to subparagraph (D) before the date of the enactment 
     of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2017; or
       ``(bb) in the case of an alien submitting an application 
     for Chief of Mission approval pursuant to subparagraph (D) on 
     or after the date of the enactment of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, in a capacity that 
     required the alien--

       ``(AA) to serve as an interpreter or translator for 
     personnel of the Department of State or the United States 
     Agency for International Development in Afghanistan while 
     traveling away from United States embassies or consulates 
     with such personnel;
       ``(BB) to serve as an interpreter or translator for United 
     States military personnel in Afghanistan while traveling off-
     base with such personnel; or
       ``(CC) to perform sensitive and trusted activities for 
     United States military personnel stationed in Afghanistan; 
     or''.


            amendment no. 77 offered by mr. welch of vermont

       At the end of subtitle B of title XII, add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. MODIFICATION TO SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON ENHANCING 
                   SECURITY AND STABILITY IN AFGHANISTAN.

       Subsection (b) of section 1225 of the Carl Levin and Howard 
     P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291; 128 Stat. 3550), as 
     amended by section 1213 of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92; 129 Stat. 1045), 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(8) Afghan personnel and pay system.--A description of 
     the status of the implementation of the Afghan Personnel and 
     Pay System (APPS) at the Afghan Ministry of Interior and the 
     Afghan Ministry of Defense for personnel funds provided 
     through the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund, including a 
     description of the following:
       ``(A) The expected completion date of installation and full 
     implementation and utilization of the APPS.
       ``(B) If installation of the APPS is complete at one, or 
     both, ministries, the extent to which the APPS is being 
     utilized to distribute personnel funds to the Afghan National 
     Army and Afghan National Police.
       ``(C) If installation of the APPS is not complete at one, 
     or both, ministries, or full implementation and utilization 
     of the APPS has not been achieved at one, or both, 
     ministries, an explanation of any delays, any expected 
     obstacles, and any additional support that may be needed for 
     installation or full implementation and utilization.
       ``(D) Any examples of intentional delay or obstruction by 
     members of the Government of Afghanistan, to include one, or 
     both, ministries, or any sub-unit thereof, to installing or 
     fully implementing or utilizing the APPS.
       ``(E) If the APPS is fully implemented at one, or both, 
     ministries, the identified cost savings to date, due to the 
     elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse at the ministry 
     compared to the previous payroll system. If the APPS is not 
     fully implemented at one, or both, ministries, the expected 
     cost savings due to the elimination of waste, fraud, and 
     abuse at the ministry once the APPS is fully implemented.
       ``(F) If the APPS is not fully implemented, what steps the 
     United States and Afghanistan are taking to mitigate waste, 
     fraud, and abuse in the disbursement of personnel funds 
     provided through the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.''.


          amendment no. 82 offered by mr. kilmer of washington

       Page 545, after line 22, insert the following:
       ``(22) A description of the People's Republic of China's 
     military and nonmilitary activities in the South China 
     Sea.''.
       At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. REDESIGNATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF SOUTH CHINA SEA 
                   INITIATIVE.

       (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that the United States should continue supporting the efforts 
     to the Southeast Asian nations to strengthen their maritime 
     security capacity, domain awareness, and integration of their 
     capabilities.
       (b) Redesignation as Southeast Asia Maritime Security 
     Initiative.--Subsection (a)(2) of section 1263 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 
     (Public Law 114-92; 129 Stat. 1073; 10 U.S.C. 2282 note) is 
     amended by striking ``the `South China Sea Initiative''' and 
     inserting ``the `Southeast Asia Maritime Security 
     Initiative'''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--The heading of such section is 
     amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 1263. SOUTHEAST ASIA MARITIME SECURITY INITIATIVE.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Moulton) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), the distinguished chair of 
our Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities.
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. I thank Chairman Thornberry for his 
leadership of peace through strength.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of amendment No. 69, a 
bipartisan amendment submitted with Ranking Member Jim Langevin.
  As we reach to secure cyberspace and protect American families from 
new and emerging threats while encouraging innovation, we turn to the 
mutual benefit that public-private partnerships provide industry 
employees and Department of Defense personnel.
  We have seen the success of public-private partnerships already in 
the IT field. This amendment will provide an opportunity to expand the 
benefits of the talent exchange to all components of the Department of 
Defense.
  The benefits to the military are clear. These partnerships provide 
the ability for fresh talent and concepts from outside the government 
sector.
  The private sector benefits as well by having the flexibility to gain 
a unique insight into how the government operates and engage in public 
service creating jobs.
  This bipartisan amendment promotes choice and opportunity that will 
benefit America's workers and the defense community. Actually, the 
collaboration will benefit all American families. Therefore, I urge my 
colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Peters).
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support two amendments that we 
have in the en bloc, the first on veteran hiring, a sense of Congress 
amendment.
  I rise to support a simple, but important effort that everyone in 
this Chamber can agree on. My amendment adds to this bill a sense of 
Congress that the Department of Defense should seek ways to maximize 
the number of veterans employed to build military construction 
projects.
  We are talking about good jobs here that can help our veterans make 
the transition to civilian life. In places like San Diego, we have 
already had a number of contractors employing highly skilled veterans 
to do this work.
  Many Members of this Chamber, on both sides of the aisle, champion 
the cause of hiring veterans. It is a policy we have incentivized the 
private sector to implement.
  I hope Members will support this amendment and join in showing that 
our military readiness can be built by those who know personally how 
important that readiness is when fighting for our freedom.
  I also want to speak on integrated missile defense. Mr. Chairman, 
Iran is a chief sponsor of international terrorism, and regularly 
threatens to obliterate Israel, our most important ally in the region.
  Those who supported agreement last year to keep Iran from obtaining a 
nuclear weapon understood that the JCPOA does not eliminate all of 
Iran's threats to the United States and our partners in the Middle 
East.
  My amendment would take further steps to support our allies in the 
region and crack down on Iranian aggression.
  By vocalizing our support for working with Israel, the Gulf 
Cooperation Council, Jordan, and Egypt, to build an integrated missile 
defense system, we can build off of the successes of Israel's existing 
missile defense network.
  I support the funding authorizations included in this year's defense 
budget that will continue to support Israel's missile defense program. 
Through a smart, targeted approach with our partners, we can continue 
to counter Iranian aggression and promote security.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).
  Mr. CARTER of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment package, 
which includes my amendment that ensures the safety of Naval Submarine 
Base Kings Bay.
  Home to the Atlantic ballistic missile submarine fleet, Kings Bay's 
contributions to national security and to

[[Page 6624]]

the nuclear deterrence capabilities of the U.S. fleet cannot be 
overstated.
  Just south of the installation is a low-use general aviation airport 
called St. Mary's Airport. The flight lines for their airport take 
civilian aircraft right over the base, raising a number of security 
concerns for the installation and for the weapons packages stored 
there.
  The dangers this poses to our nuclear stockpile is glaring, and this 
amendment is the first step in remedying that situation. This amendment 
would allow for the relocation of the St. Mary's Airport service due to 
national security concerns posed to Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay.
  This amendment has been a major priority for the Navy, and provides 
much-needed changes to security concerns that have been persistent for 
a number of years.
  With this amendment, we can protect our nuclear submarines while 
providing new economic opportunities.
  I encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
  MR. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Ruiz).
  Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, the 
Counter Iran Maritime Initiative.

                              {time}  1845

  Iran is a serious risk to our national security. We must remain 
vigilant. We must protect our troops and our allies in the Middle East. 
This amendment will help stop illegal arms shipments from Iran to 
terrorists and protect our national security. My amendment will help 
keep American troops and our allies in the region, including Israel, 
safe.
  It authorizes our military to provide training, equipment, supplies, 
and military construction to nations along the Persian Gulf, the 
Arabian Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea.
  I am glad that there is broad, bipartisan consensus on the need for 
this amendment so that we can keep our troops safe and shore up the 
safety of our allies in the region.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam).
  Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to tell you briefly about the Roskam amendment, 
which requires the President to provide Congress with a comprehensive 
report on Iran's usage of commercial aircraft for military and 
terrorist activity. You say to yourself, Mr. Chairman: Why do we need 
this? Why is this important?
  Here is why. There is an important American company that is actively 
talking to the Iranians about the possibility of selling aircraft to 
them.
  Here is the problem with that. Everybody--everybody--agrees that the 
Iranians are the world's largest state sponsor of terror; and 
therefore, it goes that if you give them something that is useful for 
military purposes--that is, aircraft--it is fungible, and it can be 
used for any purpose. The notion that the Iranians are going to use 
Boeing aircraft, for example, simply to transport people on vacation 
back and forth within Iran is profoundly naive.
  So what this amendment does is it puts the aircraft industry on 
notice and it puts the Iranians on notice that we are very interested 
in what they are doing with commercial aircraft, for what purpose.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, thanks again to the Armed Services 
Committee for making in order with the Rules Committee my three 
amendments that I have discussed today, two that I have already 
discussed, and this one that I will now bring to my colleagues' 
attention.
  Today, walking out of the bush of Nigeria, it was determined that 
another Chibok girl has been found, discovered, or fled. The debate is 
whether or not the military forces of Nigeria helped her out. What we 
do know is that she was missing for 2 years, along with the 200-plus 
girls that were taken. Fifty-seven of them escaped in the immediacy of 
the hours, and six of them died, and this young woman has now come out 
2 years later.
  Families are suffering, and Boko Haram has become one of the most 
vile and most vicious terrorist groups in the world. They are 
affiliated with ISIS, ISIL, but they have, if you will, no conformity 
to any protocol but killing. They have burned and killed Muslims and 
Christians alike, schools, homes, mosques, and churches. They have 
decapitated people. They have sent 8-year-olds with bombs strapped to 
their bodies to kill.
  So my amendment is very straightforward.
  As I do this, let me say that a number of you have joined 
Congresswoman Frederica Wilson week after week wearing red to bring the 
girls home. She joined me, and we traveled together within weeks of the 
girls being taken in 2014. We confronted families, saw the pain, saw 
women with slashed throats that had healed, and we saw the leaders of 
government who then were somewhat, if you will, challenged about this 
task.
  So my amendment is one that deals with collaboration. It is a sense 
of Congress that provides for condemning the ongoing violence, 
expresses its support for the Nigerian people, and calls on the 
President to support Nigeria, Lake Chad Basin, and the international 
community to ensure accountability for crimes against humanity.
  It also asks for the initiative that we can engage the Department of 
Defense to assist the Government of Nigeria and countries in the Lake 
Chad Basin to develop capacities to deploy and destroy Boko Haram, 
obviously with the use of possible security forces, recognizing the 
Leahy amendment, but also with technology.
  Lives are still in the midst. Lives are still not being provided for.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Womack). The time of the gentlewoman has 
expired.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 1 
minute.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I am asking that we collaborate with 
the forces in Nigeria and the forces that have been part of the 
multinational task force to be able to have a strategy that deals with 
Boko Haram.
  This report can be critical in our efforts to empower and complement 
the efforts of the Multinational Joint Task Force as well as the 
commitment espoused at the recent Lake Chad Basin Regional Security 
Summit.
  So I would say that we have to recognize that we now have an 
individual. This young woman can give us the intelligence. I am 
concerned that these girls cannot be rescued now. This is partly asking 
President Buhari of Nigeria to join in with this information--this new 
information, the collaboration that, hopefully, as we move through this 
legislation, ongoing, right now--to rescue those girls and also support 
the idea of a special envoy to focus on the dangers in the Lake Chad 
Basin region.
  Let me compliment the African command. I met many of them when I was 
in Nigeria. I think it is an excellent command among all the other 
commands. They can be dynamic in their work.
  My resolution, my amendment, my sense of Congress, is to give us 
focus to bring back the girls and save these girls. We have the 
information. Bring back these girls.
  Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Thornberry, Ranking Member Adam Smith and 
the Rules Committee for making in order and including Jackson Lee 
Amendment Number 99 and including it in En Bloc Amendment Number 8 to 
the ``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017.''
  This is the third of 3 Jackson Lee amendments made in order by the 
House Rules Committee.
  Jackson Lee Amendment Number 99, calls for a report on efforts to 
combat Boko Haram in Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin.
  In the wake of the Rules Committee making this Amendment in order, I 
hold in my hand an article entitled ``#BringBackOurGirls: Chibok Victim 
Found in Nigeria After 2 Years, Activist Says.''
  Two years after her captivity, we learn that a 19 year Chibok school 
girl named Ameina Nkeki was found Tuesday by the Civilian JTF vigilante 
group, which fights alongside the Nigerian military, in a village near 
the Sambisa Forest.

[[Page 6625]]

  Nkeki had a baby with her and told the militia members she had 
escaped from Boko Haram captivity.
  Indeed, just last night right before presenting before the Rules 
Committee on this Amendment, I met with a remarkable couple whose name 
I do not want to mention in order not to place their lives in danger.
  This couple, through their NGO, helped in the rescue, recovery and 
reintegration of over 10 Chibok girls.
  Because of their remarkable work, the girls are now able to continue 
to pursue their education. Unfortunately, the lives of these good 
Samaritans are now in jeopardy.
  I plan to do everything in my power to make sure that they and the 
persons they seek to empower are not harmed.
  This is why I have introduced the bipartisan measure H. Res. 528--
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the 
Victims of the Terror Protection Fund.
  And this is why I am working on a measure related to a Special Envoy 
on Boko Haram to the Lake Chad Basin.
  Support for this Amendment is timely as it is:
  1. Strongly condemns the ongoing violence and the systematic gross 
human rights violations against the people of Nigeria and the Lake Chad 
Basin carried out by Boko Haram;
  2. Expresses support for the people of Nigeria and the Lake Chad 
Basin who wish to live in a peaceful, economically prosperous, and 
democratic region;
  3. Calls on the President to support Nigerian, Lake Chad Basin, and 
International Community efforts to ensure accountability for crimes 
against humanity committed by Boko Haram against the people of Nigeria 
and the Lake Chad Basin, particularly young girls kidnapped from Chibok 
and other internally displaced persons affected by the actions of Boko 
Haram;
  Additionally, the Report calls that no later than 90 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, the 
Secretary of State, and the Attorney General shall jointly submit to 
Congress a report on efforts to combat Boko Haram in Nigeria and the 
Lake Chad Basin;
  Among others, the report shall also include the following elements:
  1. A description of initiatives undertaken by the Department of 
Defense to assist the Government of Nigeria and countries in the Lake 
Chad Basin to develop capacities to deploy special forces to combat 
Boko Haram;
  2. A description of United States' activities to enhance the capacity 
of Nigeria and the countries in the Lake Chad Basin to investigate and 
prosecute human rights violations perpetrated against the people of 
Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin by Boko Haram, al-Qaeda affiliates, and 
other terrorist organizations to promote respect for rule of law in 
Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin;
  3. This report can be critical in our efforts to empower and 
complement the efforts of the Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) as 
well as the commitments espoused at the recent Lake Chad Basin Regional 
Security Summit.
  Mr. Chair, the U.S. war on terror has been waged for over a decade 
and the lesson is clear that our adversaries adapt very quickly because 
they are not constrained by geographic limitations.
  In the beginning it was only Al Qaeda--now the list includes Al 
Shabaab, Boko Haram which last year affiliated itself with ISIS/ISIL.
  Indeed, the data on persons affected by violent extremism is 
staggering.
  There are now more than 2.2 million Nigerians, and over 450,000 
internally-displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees in neighboring 
Cameroon, Chad and Niger.
  An estimated 4.2 million people in the Lake Chad Basin region face 
water and food security crises, including 800,000 in Nigeria's northern 
Borno and Yobe states, Nigeria, where an estimated 184 children a day 
risk starvation without the immediate provision of emergency food 
assistance.
  Boko Haram continues to claim responsibility for atrocious and 
targeted violence ranging from burnings, kidnappings and killings of 
civilians and school children, such as the Chibok girls and a suicide 
bombing of the United Nations building in Abuja on August 26, 2011, 
that killed 21 people and injured dozens more, many of them aid workers 
supporting development projects across Nigeria.
  Half of persons displaced are children.
  I continue to commend the tireless efforts of the United Nations, 
United States officials, Regional Leaders, Civil Society Organizations, 
Community Groups and good Samaritans who have helped to support efforts 
of combatting Boko Haram and securing peace and security in Nigeria and 
the Lake Chad Basin.
  Through this Amendment, we will establish our strong support and 
commitment for the protection and empowerment of the peoples of Nigeria 
and the Lake Chad Basin who continue to face the threat of terrorism 
and violent extremism from Syria to Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin 
which covers Cameroon, Niger, Nigeria, Chad and everywhere in between.
  As terrorist craft new strategies to threaten our homeland and harm 
our allies, it is in the U.S. security interest to double our 
counterterrorism efforts that identify, engage and empower people who 
are victimized by terrorist groups like Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, Al 
Qaeda and ISIS in Africa and Pakistan.
  For this reason, our military must adapt as quickly and as seamlessly 
as our adversaries in empowering our allies.
  Our message must be clear: the United States must expand its capacity 
to meet the terrorist threat where it emerges whether here in the 
homeland or abroad.
  The Nuremberg trials were essential in bringing to justice war 
criminals who committed acts of barbarism against civilians and 
military personnel during World War II, but a critical component of 
bringing war criminals to justice is the gathering and preservation of 
evidence.
  No person whether they travel to a battle field and later return to 
their native country or live in the region where they commit acts of 
terrors should rest well because they believe that no one will come to 
seek justice on behalf of the millions of lives destroyed.
  Our message must be clear: terrorism will not thrive on our watch.
  I ask for your support of this Amendment.

                             [May 18, 2016]

   #BringBackOurGirls: Chibok Victim Found in Nigeria After 2 Years, 
                             Activist Says

                          (By Alexander Smith)

       The mass kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls by Boko Haram from 
     the Nigerian town of Chibok in April 2014 ignited an 
     international outcry. The ensuing #BringBackOurGirls campaign 
     was backed by the likes of Michelle Obama, while the U.S. and 
     other countries sent military assistance.
       A handful of the kidnapped girls managed to escape early on 
     but most were never found.
       Both Nigeria's military and the #BringBackOurGirls campaign 
     said Wednesday that one of the girls was now in safe hands--
     but gave conflicting information on the circumstances and her 
     identity.
       Bukky Shonibare, one of the strategic team members of the 
     #BringBackOurGirls campaign, told NBC News that a 19-year-old 
     named Ameina Nkeki was found Tuesday by the Civilian JTF 
     vigilante group, which fights alongside the Nigerian 
     military, in a village near the Sambisa Forest.
       Nkeki had a baby with her and told the militia members she 
     had escaped from Boko Haram captivity, Shonibare said, noting 
     that the details of the girl's escape were not immediately 
     clear.
       This is a major, major breakthrough--this is the 
     breakthrough we've been waiting for,'' she said.
       Nkeki was taken to a military base in Damboa before being 
     brought to her mother and her former high-school head 
     teacher--both of whom positively confirmed her identify, 
     according to Shonibare.
       The activists are ``100 percent sure that this was one of 
     the Chibok girls,'' Shonibare added.
       Col. Sani Usman, a spokesman for the Nigerian Army, 
     confirmed via WhatsApp message that one of the kidnapped 
     Chibok girls had been recovered.
       He added in a statement that the girl was ``rescued'' by 
     ``our troops'' near Damboa. It was not immediately clear if 
     he was referring to his soldiers or the JTF.
       Usman's statement also identified the girl as Falmata 
     Mbalala--which did not correspond to the name given by 
     Shonibare and the Bring Back Our Girls movement.
       Both Usman and Shonibare insisted they had the correct name 
     for the young woman. NBC News was not immediately able to 
     reconcile the differing accounts.
       While the Chibok Girls drew the most international 
     attention, an estimated 2,000-plus women and girls have been 
     abducted during Boko Haram's violent campaign in Nigeria. 
     Chibok may not even be the largest group to be kidnapped, 
     with Human Rights Watch reporting that some 400 people were 
     taken from the town of Damasak last year.
       The army gave details of a large-scale operation against 
     Boko Haram on Tuesday--the day the young woman was reportedly 
     found--in Sambisa forest.
       The military said troops killed 15 Boko Haram fighters 
     after coming under heavy fire in the area of Alafa.
       Troops also rescued 41 hostages--mainly women and children 
     the military added in a statement.
       While Nigeria's government has publicly touted an 
     aggressive campaign to beat back Boko Haram, its failure to 
     find the girls has drawn criticism.
       The news comes one day after the president's wife, Aisha 
     Buhari, presented ``symbolic'' checks to the mothers of the 
     missing girls.


[[Page 6626]]

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate Chairman 
Thornberry's acceptance of my amendments No. 100 and No. 125. The first 
recognizes the heroic efforts of the Pakistani doctor, Dr. Afridi, who 
helped us bring to justice Osama bin Laden, the prime mover in the 
massacre of 3,000 Americans on 9/11.
  Dr. Afridi is a courageous hero who enabled us to destroy this 
terrorist monster. He continues to languish in a Pakistani dungeon. 
This amendment was adopted by the House during consideration of past 
defense authorization acts but was stripped out during conference 
negotiations with the Senate. This is a shameful slap in the face to 
Dr. Afridi and other heroic friends around the world who put themselves 
at risk to stand up with us.
  Who will trust us? Who will stand with us if we betray our friends 
like this? It is time to end this irrational support that we give to 
Pakistan. It is only prudent that we increase--which is another one of 
the amendments I talk about today--certification required to release 
American military or economic aid to Pakistan.
  It behooves us not to finance Pakistan's brutal suppression of ethnic 
groups and religious minorities like the Baloch and the Sindhis who are 
under attack today simply for seeking their political and religious 
freedom.
  I would ask my colleagues to join with me and to stand also with the 
people around the world. Send a message: If you stand with the United 
States, we will not forget you; we will stand with you. The people of 
the United States and the United States Congress stand tall with you 
and appreciate that you have risked your lives in a way that saved 
American lives.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers, and so I urge 
adoption of the en bloc amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support 
of the bipartisan amendment with Congressman Seth Moulton, No. 95, that 
would increase transparency and accountability--in addition to 
promoting peace through strength.
  In the past few months, the Tehran regime has repeatedly pushed the 
boundaries of the dangerous Iran deal and on United Nations Security 
Council resolutions. Since January, the Iranian regime has tested at 
least two intercontinental ballistic missiles, including one that had 
the writing ``Israel should be wiped off the Earth,'' written in 
Hebrew. These ICBMs have the ability to reach Israel and other allies 
in the Middle East from southeastern Europe to India.
  Sadly, the American people have not received satisfactory answers 
about why the actions by Iran are without repercussions. This amendment 
will require a quick and clear response: Why or why not did the ICBM 
tests violate international agreements, and what response the 
administration will take.
  This bipartisan amendment will hold the administration accountable 
and require a timely and thorough report on our response to hostile 
actions.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote in support.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Holding).
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by thanking both Chairman 
Thornberry and Chairman Royce for their assistance in helping to craft 
this amendment, and also let me thank Ranking Member Engel and Dr. 
Bera, who joined Chairman Royce as original cosponsors.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment truly is a testament to the broad, 
bipartisan support for the U.S.-India relationship here in Congress. 
Our agreement is straightforward. It seeks to promote greater defense 
trade and encourage additional military cooperation between the United 
States and India.
  I believe that by requiring our government to take actions such as 
strengthening the Defense Technology and Trade Initiative and 
encouraging combined military planning with India, we can make certain 
that the U.S.-India defense relationship endures.
  Mr. Chairman, given the dynamic nature of the Indo-Pacific region and 
its importance to our own national security and future economic growth, 
now is the time to build on recent successes and propel the U.S.-India 
strategic partnership forward.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of Amendment Number 
70.
  I want to thank Representative Connolly for his good work on this 
amendment.
  DOD is one of the last agencies that implement most of our foreign 
aid to come up with an evaluation policy. USAID has one. The State 
Department has one. The Millennium Challenge Corporation has one. But 
not DOD.
  Evaluations do not just trace how money is spent. Evaluations help us 
figure out if the money is achieving its intended outcome. Is it 
working? Is it making a lasting difference?
  The good news is that the DOD is working on an evaluation policy now. 
But just because they are working on it doesn't mean it will get done. 
We all know what bureaucrats can do if given the time.
  Amendment Number 70 makes it clear that Congress supports a strong 
evaluation policy.
  We should be doing rigorous evaluation on all our foreign aid because 
Americans deserve to know how their money is being spent. And that's 
just the way it is.
  Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Chair, this amendment includes my 
provision expressing Congress's strong support of the United States' 
continued leadership in one of the world's most important 
partnerships--The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). President 
Obama has called NATO ``the most successful alliance in human 
history.'' That's because NATO is rooted in the bedrock principle of 
collective defense--that we are stronger together than we are apart. 
This principle is built on the common values of the 28 members--
democracy, freedom, and self-government.
  Today, more than 18,000 troops are promoting these values in six NATO 
operations. From assisting Afghan security forces to defending against 
Russian expansionism, NATO is instrumental in advancing global security 
and democracy. I've been privileged to help represent the United States 
at the NATO Parliamentary Assembly for the past three years, where I 
engage with lawmakers from our NATO partners on today's pressing 
security challenges.
  Some have called NATO obsolete. They are wrong. NATO could not be 
more relevant today given the dynamic threats we and our allies face. 
The United States' continued leadership is key to NATO's ability to 
address the evolving threats of the 21st century. I urge adoption of 
the amendment.
  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer a bipartisan 
amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2017. I am proud to have my colleagues, Representatives Sam Johnson of 
Texas and Dan Lipinski of Illinois, supporting this amendment. Our 
amendment seeks to expand access to on-the-job training programs for 
service members transitioning out of the military. Specifically, the 
amendment directs the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and 
Readiness to study the success of the relatively new Department of 
Defense (DOD) program known as Job Training, Employment Skills 
Training, Apprenticeships, and Internships, or JTEST-AI, which is an 
initiative pursuant to DOD Instruction No. 1322.29. The amendment also 
requires the Undersecretary to issue guidance to unit commanders 
encouraging them to allow more service members separating from the 
armed forces to participate in a JTEST-AI initiative--provided, of 
course, that unit readiness is not impaired.
  One particular initiative formed pursuant to JTEST-AI is the 
SkillBridge Initiative. Although SkillBridge and all other JTEST-AI 
initiatives are still nascent, they are already showing promising 
results. According to preliminary DOD statistics, more than 4,500 
service members have successfully participated in SkillBridge training; 
there are approximately 40 programs currently in operation; and almost 
all graduates have received jobs as a result of participation in these 
initiatives. In fact, 18 SkillBridge training programs have a hiring 
rate of 100 percent of graduates, and another 8 programs have a hiring 
rate of more than 85 percent.
  Organizations participating in these programs span every sector of 
the workforce.

[[Page 6627]]

Sponsoring entities include private companies, labor unions, and even 
government agencies. These programs are popular with transitioning 
service members, and currently there are more applications from service 
members than can be accommodated. Our amendment simply seeks to have 
DOD conduct a comprehensive study so that the initiatives may be 
improved and access may be expanded, as appropriate.
  Our outgoing service members have skill sets that are unique but that 
can easily be honed and adapted to a certain field or application if 
given access to on-the-job training. Given the sacrifices our women and 
men in uniform have made for us all, we should strive to make their 
transition to civilian life as smooth and successful as possible.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment designed to 
help our transitioning service members gain meaningful employment.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, today I rise to support a simple, but 
important effort that everyone in this chamber can agree on.
  My amendment adds to this bill a Sense of Congress that when 
practical and cost-effective, the DoD should seek ways to maximize the 
number of veterans employed to build military construction projects.
  Many members of this chamber, on both sides of the aisle, have stood 
on this floor and championed the cause of hiring veterans.
  It's a policy that we've incentivized private corporations to do, and 
criticized employers for not doing it, or doing improperly.
  It makes sense that if we are going to be good stewards of tax 
dollars, that we should encourage that money is used to hire veterans.
  We're talking about good jobs here--jobs that take valuable skills, 
determined initiative, and produce pride in a job well done.
  This is not intended to add any burden to the DoD or their military 
construction projects, but it's a reminder that oftentimes, we have 
skilled veteran laborers that live near these projects and are ideal 
candidates for the job.
  If Congress is going to continue its efforts to support our veterans 
as they transition out of the military and back into the civilian 
world, then voting in favor of this amendment is a no brainer.
  Support this amendment and join me in showing that our military 
readiness can often best be built by those who know how important that 
readiness is when fighting for our freedom.
  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer a bipartisan 
amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2017. My amendment seeks to protect our children and teens from access 
to opioids in hopes of reducing the number of individuals we see 
addicted to heroin and other drugs.
  This amendment directs the Secretary of Defense to study the 
feasibility and effectiveness of dispensing opioid medications in vials 
using affordable technologies designed to prevent access to stored 
medications by anyone other than the intended patient.
  Today, our prescription pill bottles use what are generally referred 
to as ``child-resistant'' standards but today's teens have remarkably 
easy access to pain medications that are stronger and more addictive 
than those of the past.
  It is not unusual for today's youth to find these opioids in the 
medicine cabinets of family members or friends. Technologies like 
locking prescription vials (LPVs) are already on the market and are a 
cheap efficient way to reduce the likelihood that our children and 
teens start down the path to addiction.
  The implementation of child-resistant standards generated a 45 
percent reduction in mortality rates. It is my hope that a feasibility 
study conducted by the Department of Defense would show additional 
benefits stemming from the implementation of more advanced LPVs.
  I urge my colleagues to protect our youth from this epidemic and 
support my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia). The question is on the 
amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


      Amendments En Bloc No. 6 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc consisting of amendment Nos. 71, 72, 73, 75, 76, 
78, 79, 88, 89, 90, 91, and 92 printed in House Report 114-571, offered 
by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:


           amendment no. 71 offered by mr. rooney of florida

       At the end of subtitle A of title XII, add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON THE PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR 
                   ASSISTANCE TO UNITS OF FOREIGN SECURITY FORCES 
                   THAT HAVE COMMITTED A GROSS VIOLATION OF HUMAN 
                   RIGHTS.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 60 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to the congressional defense committees a report on 
     its implementation of section 294 of title 10, United States 
     Code (relating to prohibition on use of funds for assistance 
     to units of foreign security forces that have committed a 
     gross violation of human rights).
       (b) Matters to Be Included.--The report required under 
     subsection (a) shall contain the following:
       (1) A detailed description of the policies and procedures 
     governing the manner in which Department of Defense personnel 
     identify and report information on gross violations of human 
     rights and how such information is shared with personnel 
     responsible for implementing the prohibition in subsection 
     (a)(1) of section 294 of title 10, United States Code.
       (2) The funding expended in fiscal years 2015 and 2016 for 
     purposes of implementing section 294 of title 10, United 
     States Code, including any relevant training of personnel, 
     and a description of the titles, roles, and responsibilities 
     of the personnel responsible for reviewing credible 
     information relating to human rights violations and the 
     personnel responsible for making decisions regarding the 
     implementation of the prohibition in subsection (a)(1) of 
     such section 294.
       (3) An addendum that includes any findings or 
     recommendations included in any report issued by a Federal 
     Inspector General related to the implementation of section 
     294 of title 10, United States Code, and, as appropriate, the 
     Department of Defense's response to such findings or 
     recommendations.
       (4) Any other matters the Secretary determines is 
     appropriate.
       (c) Form.--The report required under subsection (a) shall 
     be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a 
     classified annex.


              amendment no. 72 offered by mr. poe of texas

       Page 497, line 11, strike ``and'' at the end.
       Page 497, line 16, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
       Page 497, after line 16, insert the following:
       (4) Pakistan has shown progress in arresting and 
     prosecuting Haqqani network senior leaders and mid-level 
     operatives.


       amendment no. 73 offered by mr. rohrabacher of california

       Page 497, line 11, strike ``and''.
       Page 497, line 16, strike the period at the end and insert 
     ``; and''.
       Page 497, after line 16, insert the following:
       (4) Pakistan is not using its military or any funds or 
     equipment provided by the United States to persecute minority 
     groups seeking political or religious freedom, including the 
     Balochi, Sindhi, and Hazara ethnic groups and minority 
     religious groups, including Christian, Hindu, and Ahmadiyya 
     Muslim.


       amendment no. 75 offered by mr. rohrabacher of california

       At the end of subtitle B of title XII, add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO DR. SHAKIL AFRIDI.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The attacks of September 11, 2001, killed approximately 
     3,000 people, most of whom were Americans, but also included 
     hundreds of individuals with foreign citizenships, nearly 350 
     New York Fire Department personnel, and about 50 law 
     enforcement officers.
       (2) Downed United Airlines flight 93 was reportedly 
     intended, under the control of the al-Qaeda high-jackers, to 
     crash into the White House or the Capitol in an attempt to 
     kill the President of the United States or Members of the 
     United States Congress.
       (3) The September 11, 2001, attacks were largely planned 
     and carried out by the al-Qaeda terrorist network led by 
     Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al Zawahiri, after which 
     Osama bin Laden enjoyed safe haven in Pakistan from where he 
     continued to plot deadly attacks against the United States 
     and the world.
       (4) The United States has obligated nearly $30 billion 
     between 2002 and 2014 in United States taxpayer money for 
     security and economic aid to Pakistan.
       (5) The United States very generously and swiftly responded 
     to the 2005 Kashmir Earthquake in Pakistan with more than 
     $200 million in emergency aid and the support of several 
     United States military aircraft, approximately 1,000 United 
     States military personnel, including medical specialists, 
     thousands of tents, blankets, water containers and a variety 
     of other emergency equipment.
       (6) The United States again generously and swiftly 
     contributed approximately $150 million in emergency aid to 
     Pakistan following the 2010 Pakistan flood, in addition to 
     the

[[Page 6628]]

     service of nearly twenty United States military helicopters, 
     their flight crews, and other resources to assist the 
     Pakistan Army's relief efforts.
       (7) The United States continues to work tirelessly to 
     support Pakistan's economic development, including millions 
     of dollars allocated towards the development of Pakistan's 
     energy infrastructure, health services and education system.
       (8) The United States and Pakistan continue to have many 
     critical shared interests, both economic and security 
     related, which could be the foundation for a positive and 
     mutually beneficial partnership.
       (9) Dr. Shakil Afridi, a Pakistani physician, is a hero to 
     whom the people of the United States, Pakistan and the world 
     owe a debt of gratitude for his help in finally locating 
     Osama bin Laden before more innocent American, Pakistani and 
     other lives were lost to this terrorist leader.
       (10) Pakistan, the United States and the international 
     community had failed for nearly 10 years following attacks of 
     September 11, 2001, to locate and bring Osama bin Laden, who 
     continued to kill innocent civilians in the Middle East, 
     Asia, Europe, Africa and the United States, to justice 
     without the help of Dr. Afridi.
       (11) The Government of Pakistan's imprisonment of Dr. 
     Afridi presents a serious and growing impediment to the 
     United States' bilateral relations with Pakistan.
       (12) The Government of Pakistan has leveled and allowed 
     baseless charges against Dr. Afridi in a politically 
     motivated, spurious legal process.
       (13) Dr. Afridi is currently imprisoned by the Government 
     of Pakistan, a deplorable and unconscionable situation which 
     calls into question Pakistan's actual commitment to 
     countering terrorism and undermines the notion that Pakistan 
     is a true ally in the struggle against terrorism.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     Dr. Shakil Afridi is an international hero and that the 
     Government of Pakistan should release him immediately from 
     prison.


          amendment no. 76 offered by mr. walberg of michigan

       At the end of subtitle B of title XII (page 504, after line 
     25), add the following:

     SEC. 1217. REPORT ON ACCESS TO FINANCIAL RECORDS OF THE 
                   GOVERNMENT OF AFGHANISTAN TO AUDIT THE USE OF 
                   FUNDS FOR ASSISTANCE FOR AFGHANISTAN.

       Not later than December 31, 2017, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress a report on the extent to which the 
     Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan has adequate 
     access to financial records of the Government of Afghanistan 
     to audit the use of funds authorized to be appropriated by 
     this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2017 for 
     assistance for Afghanistan.


        amendment no. 78 offered by mr. fortenberry of nebraska

       Page 507, line 7, strike ``and''.
       Page 507, line 11, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
       Page 507, after line 11, insert the following:
       (4) securing safe areas, including the Nineveh Plain, for 
     purposes of resettling and reintegrating ethnic and religious 
     minorities, including victims of genocide, into their 
     homelands, is a critical component of a safe, secure, and 
     sovereign Iraq.


        amendment no. 79 offered by mr. fortenberry of nebraska

       Page 510, line 24, insert ``including ethnic and religious 
     minority groups,'' after ``local security forces,''.


       amendment no. 88 offered by mr. cicilline of rhode island

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

     SEC. 12XX. OPPORTUNITIES TO EQUIP CERTAIN FOREIGN MILITARY 
                   ENTITIES.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the 
     Secretaries of the military departments and the Secretary of 
     State, shall submit to Congress a report that describes--
       (1) efforts to make United States manufacturers aware of 
     opportunities to equip foreign military entities that have 
     been approved to receive assistance from the United States; 
     and
       (2) any new plans or strategies to raise United States 
     manufacturers' awareness with respect to such opportunities.


          amendment no. 89 offered by mr. cooper of tennessee

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

     SEC. 12__. REPORTS ON INF TREATY AND OPEN SKIES TREATY.

       (a) Reports.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
     Staff shall submit to the appropriate congressional 
     committees the following reports:
       (1) A report on the Open Skies Treaty containing--
       (A) an assessment, conducted by the Chairman jointly with 
     the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State, of 
     whether and why, the Treaty remains in the national security 
     interest of the United States, including if there are 
     compliance concerns related to implementation by the Russian 
     Federation of the Treaty;
       (B) a specific plan by the Chairman jointly with the 
     Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State on remedying 
     any such compliance concerns; and
       (C) a military assessment conducted by the Chairman of such 
     compliance concerns.
       (2) A report on the INF Treaty containing--
       (A) an assessment, conducted by the Chairman jointly with 
     the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State, of 
     whether and why, the Treaty remains in the national security 
     interest of the United States, including how any ongoing 
     violation bear on the assessment if such a violation is not 
     resolved in the near-term;
       (B) a specific plan by the Chairman jointly with the 
     Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State to remedy 
     violation by the Russian Federation of the Treaty, and a 
     judgment of whether Russia intends to take the steps required 
     to establish verifiable evidence that Russia has resumed its 
     compliance with the Treaty if such non-compliance and 
     inconsistencies are not resolved by the date of the enactment 
     of this Act; and
       (C) a military assessment conducted by the Chairman of the 
     risks posed by Russia's violation of the Treaty.
       (b) Update.--Not later than February 15, 2018, the 
     Chairman, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of 
     State shall jointly submit to the appropriate congressional 
     committees an update to each report under subsection (a).
       (c) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``appropriate congressional committees'' 
     means--
       (A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; and
       (B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Foreign Relations of the Senate.
       (2) The term ``INF Treaty'' means the Treaty Between the 
     United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist 
     Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and 
     Shorter-Range Missiles, commonly referred to as the 
     Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed at 
     Washington December 8, 1987, and entered into force June 1, 
     1988.
       (3) The term ``Open Skies Treaty'' means the Treaty on Open 
     Skies, done at Helsinki March 24, 1992, and entered into 
     force January 1, 2002.


           amendment no. 90 offered by ms. frankel of florida

       At the end of subtitle E of title XII add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE ROLE OF THE UNITED 
                   STATES IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY 
                   ORGANIZATION.

       It is the sense of Congress that continued United States 
     leadership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is 
     critical to the national security of the United States.


          amendment no. 91 offered by mr. higgins of new york

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

     SEC. 12XX. AUTHORIZATION OF UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE TO 
                   ISRAEL.

       (a) In General.--The President is authorized to provide 
     assistance to Israel to improve maritime security and 
     maritime domain awareness.
       (b) Activities Supported.--Activities that may be supported 
     by assistance under subsection (a) include the following:
       (1) Procurement, maintenance, and sustainment of the 
     David's Sling Weapon System for purposes of intercepting 
     short-range missiles.
       (2) Payment of incremental expenses of Israel that are 
     incurred by Israel as the direct result of participation in a 
     bilateral or multilateral exercise of the United States Navy 
     or Coast Guard.
       (3) Visits of United States naval vessels at ports of 
     Israel.
       (4) Conduct of joint research and development for advanced 
     maritime domain awareness capabilities.
       (c) Sunset.--This section shall terminate on the date that 
     is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.


         amendment no. 92 offered by mr. ted lieu of california

       At the end of subtitle E of title XII add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS IN SUPPORT OF A DENUCLEARIZED 
                   KOREAN PENINSULA.

       It is the sense of Congress that United States foreign 
     policy should support a denuclearized Korean peninsula.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Moulton) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I have no speakers here at this point, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 6629]]


  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by thanking the chairman and the 
ranking member for including my amendment in the en bloc amendment. 
This amendment will require a report detailing plans to inform American 
manufacturers about opportunities to equip foreign militaries receiving 
U.S. assistance.
  Each year, our country provides billions of dollars to our 
international partners in military assistance to foster security 
relationships and to ensure our national security. This is a worthwhile 
investment necessary to preserve American interests abroad, but we need 
to make sure that American businesses, particularly American 
manufacturers, are given ample opportunity to compete for these 
taxpayer-funded contracts.
  My amendment helps ensure American companies are aware of what 
opportunities are available to them and to their employees. By ensuring 
more American companies are aware of these opportunities, we can 
support job growth among American companies, which in turn will support 
the overall health of our economy and our Nation's defense industrial 
base.
  Increased competition also helps ensure that our international 
partners are provided with the highest quality products available, thus 
helping to better secure their own better future and protecting our own 
national security interests.

                              {time}  1900

  The amendment simply ensures that American businesses have the 
opportunity to compete for these contracts so that as we are building 
up and securing our national security interests around the world, we 
are also strengthening American jobs, American manufacturing, and 
growing our economy.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak about a bipartisan amendment that 
passed the full Committee on Armed Services, and also had to go through 
the Foreign Affairs Committee to be approved. It calls on the 
administration to report to Congress on a comprehensive political and 
military strategy for our fight against ISIS in the Middle East.
  Mr. Chairman, we are sending troops back into Iraq today, just 7 or 8 
years after we pulled the last troops out. Many of the battles they are 
fighting have familiar names--Fallujah, Ramadi, and Haditha--battles 
that we fought and won a long time ago. But we did not have a strategy 
to ensure the peace.
  Mr. Clausewitz taught us about 200 years ago that war is an extension 
of politics.
  We have to have a political endgame for our fight in Iraq, or we will 
find ourselves continually going back there again and again. When Iraqi 
politics fail, a new terrorist group sweeps in; and American troops are 
left to pick up the mess.
  If you think about what happened when ISIS swept in from Syria and 
entered western, then northern Iraq, the Iraqi army wasn't just 
defeated by ISIS. The Iraqi Army put their weapons down and went home 
because they had lost faith in the Iraqi Government.
  We must have a long-term, comprehensive political and military 
strategy. We owe it to the troops to ensure that their efforts will not 
be in vain.
  I am proud of the bipartisan support for this amendment, both on the 
Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Affairs Committee, and I am 
especially proud that the chairman worked with me to get it adopted. I 
am glad that it is included in the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the amendments en bloc.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chair, on Sept. 22, 2011, Adm. Mike Mullen, 
then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the Senate 
Armed Services Committee that the Haqqani Network was behind the 2011 
attack on our embassy and a truck bombing that wounded more than 70 
U.S. and NATO troops. Adm. Mullen went on to say, ``The Haqqani Network 
acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence 
agency.''
  Last year, the Haqqani Network and the Taliban killed more Afghan 
civilians and troops than in any other year since the Taliban was 
toppled in 2001.
  My amendment adds a fourth condition on the aid to Pakistan. This new 
condition requires the Administration to certify that Pakistan has 
shown progress in arresting and prosecuting Haqqani Network senior 
leaders and mid-level operatives.
  This forces Pakistan to make a choice: either go after the Haqqani 
Network in a public way that it has never done before or lose hundreds 
of millions of dollars of U.S. aid.
  And that's just the way it is.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


      Amendments En Bloc No. 7 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 7 consisting of amendment Nos. 80, 81, 83, 84, 
85, 86, 87, 93, 94, 95, 96, and 97 printed in House Report 114-571, 
offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:

          amendment no. 80 offered by mr. pearce of new mexico

       At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON BUSINESS PRACTICES OF THE 
                   ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND SYRIA (ISIS).

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) For nearly two years, the Islamic State of Iraq and 
     Syria (ISIS) has capitalized on established oil production 
     facilities throughout Iraq and Syria in order to fund its 
     jihadist operations globally.
       (2) Oil production and sale represent the largest and most 
     vulnerable income factors for ISIS.
       (3) In 2015, ISIS oil sales brought in over $400,000,000 to 
     prop up the terror group's operations world-wide.
       (4) ISIS has executed a robust recruitment scheme to staff 
     and operate the oil facilities within the group's control and 
     maintained smuggling routes for the sale of that oil.
       (5) Further disrupting ISIS oil production and sale 
     structures would be minimally invasive but would effectively 
     curtail the terror group's ability to self-finance.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the United States should focus all necessary efforts in the 
     Middle East to disrupt the financing of the Islamic State of 
     Iraq and Syria (ISIS) through oil production and sale.


            amendment no. 81 offered by mr. yoho of florida

       At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following:

     SEC. 12XX. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OF MAN-PORTABLE AIR 
                   DEFENSE SYSTEMS TO ANY ENTITY IN SYRIA.

       None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act 
     or otherwise made available for the Department of Defense for 
     fiscal year 2017 may be obligated or expended to transfer or 
     facilitate the transfer of man-portable air defense systems 
     (MANPADS) to any entity in Syria.


              amendment no. 83 offered by mr. poe of texas

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

     SEC. 12_. MEASURES AGAINST PERSONS INVOLVED IN ACTIVITIES 
                   THAT VIOLATE ARMS CONTROL TREATIES OR 
                   AGREEMENTS WITH THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Imposition of Measures.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (c), on 
     and after the date that is 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the President shall impose the 
     measures described in subsection (b) with respect to--
       (A) a person the President determines--
       (i)(I) is an individual who is a citizen, national, or 
     permanent resident of a country described in paragraph (2); 
     or
       (II) is an entity organized under the laws of a country 
     described in paragraph (2); and
       (ii) has engaged in any activity that contributed to or is 
     a significant factor in the President's or the Secretary of 
     State's determination that such country is not in full 
     compliance with its obligations as further described in 
     paragraph (2); and
       (B) a person the President determines has provided material 
     support to a person described in subparagraph (A).
       (2) Country described.--A country described in this 
     paragraph is a country that

[[Page 6630]]

     the President or the Secretary of State has determined, in 
     the most recent annual report submitted to Congress pursuant 
     to section 403 of the Arms Control and Disarmament Act (22 
     U.S.C. 2593a), is not in full compliance with its obligations 
     undertaken in all arms control, nonproliferation, and 
     disarmament agreements or commitments to which the United 
     States is a participating state.
       (b) Measures Described.--
       (1) In general.--The measures to be imposed with respect to 
     a person under subsection (a) are the head of any executive 
     agency (as defined in section 133 of title 41, United States 
     Code) may not enter into, renew, or extend a contract for the 
     procurement of goods or services with the person.
       (2) Exception for major routes of supply.--The requirement 
     to impose measures under paragraph (1) shall not apply with 
     respect to any contract for the procurement of goods or 
     services along a major route of supply to a zone of active 
     combat or major contingency operation.
       (3) Requirement to revise regulations.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Federal Acquisition 
     Regulation, the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 
     Supplement, and the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost 
     Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards shall 
     be revised to implement paragraph (1)(B).
       (B) Certifications.--The revisions to the Federal 
     Acquisition Regulation under subparagraph (A) shall include a 
     requirement for a certification from each person that is a 
     prospective contractor that the person, and any person owned 
     or controlled by the person, does not engage in any activity 
     described in subsection (a)(1)(A)(ii).
       (C) Remedies.--If the head of an executive agency 
     determines that a person has submitted a false certification 
     under subparagraph (B) on or after the date on which the 
     applicable revision of the Federal Acquisition Regulation 
     required by this paragraph becomes effective--
       (i) the head of that executive agency shall terminate a 
     contract with such person or debar or suspend such person 
     from eligibility for Federal contracts for a period of not 
     less than 2 years;
       (ii) any such debarment or suspension shall be subject to 
     the procedures that apply to debarment and suspension under 
     the Federal Acquisition Regulation under subpart 9.4 of part 
     9 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations; and
       (iii) the Administrator of General Services shall include 
     on the List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and 
     Nonprocurement Programs maintained by the Administrator under 
     part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation each person that 
     is debarred, suspended, or proposed for debarment or 
     suspension by the head of an executive agency on the basis of 
     a determination of a false certification under subparagraph 
     (B).
       (4) United states person defined.--In this subsection, the 
     term ``United States person'' means--
       (A) a natural person who is a citizen or resident of the 
     United States or a national of the United States (as defined 
     in section 101(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1101(a)); and
       (B) an entity that is organized under the laws of the 
     United States or any State.
       (c) Waiver.--
       (1) In general.--The President may waive the application of 
     measures on a case-by-case basis under subsection (a) with 
     respect to a person if the President--
       (A) determines that--
       (i)(I) in the case of a person described in subsection 
     (a)(1)(A), the person did not knowingly engage in any 
     activity described in such subsection; or
       (II) in the case of a person described in subsection 
     (a)(1)(B), the person conducted or facilitated a transaction 
     or transactions with, or provided financial services to, a 
     person described in subsection (a)(1)(A) that did not 
     knowingly engage in any activity described in such 
     subsection; and
       (ii) the waiver is in the national security interest of the 
     United States; and
       (B) submits to the appropriate congressional committees a 
     report on the determination and the reasons for the 
     determination.
       (2) Form of report.--The report required by paragraph 
     (1)(B) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may 
     include a classified annex.
       (3) Appropriate congressional committees defined.--In this 
     subsection, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' 
     means--
       (A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on 
     Foreign Affairs, and the Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the House of Representatives; and
       (B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on 
     Foreign Relations, and the Select Committee on Intelligence 
     of the Senate.
       (d) Termination.--The measures imposed with respect to a 
     person under subsection (a) shall terminate on the date on 
     which the President submits to Congress a subsequent annual 
     report pursuant to section 403 of the Arms Control and 
     Disarmament Act (22 U.S.C. 2593a) that does not contain a 
     determination of the President that the country described in 
     subsection (a)(2) with respect to which the measures were 
     imposed with respect to the person is a country that is not 
     in full compliance with its obligations undertaken in all 
     arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements or 
     commitments to which the United States is a participating 
     state.


            amendment no. 84 offered by mr. pompeo of kansas

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

     SEC. 12XX. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REPORT ON COOPERATION 
                   BETWEEN IRAN AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

       (a) Report Required.--The Secretary of Defense and the 
     Secretary of State shall jointly submit to Congress a report 
     on cooperation between Iran and the Russian Federation and 
     how and to what extent such cooperation affects United States 
     national security and strategic interests.
       (b) Matters to Be Included.--The report required by 
     subsection (a) shall include the following:
       (1) How and to what extent Iran and the Russian Federation 
     cooperate on matters relating to Iran's space program, 
     including how and to what extent such cooperation strengthens 
     Iran's ballistic missile program.
       (2) How and to what extent Iran's interests and actions and 
     the Russian Federation's interests and actions overlap with 
     respect to Latin America.
       (3) A description and analysis of the intelligence-sharing 
     center established by Iran, the Russian Federation, and Syria 
     in Baghdad, Iraq and whether such center is being used for 
     purposes other than the purposes of the joint mission of such 
     countries in Syria.
       (4) A description and analysis of--
       (A) naval cooperation between Iran and the Russian 
     Federation, including joint naval exercises between the two 
     countries; and
       (B) the implications of--
       (i) an increased Russian Federation naval presence in the 
     Eastern Mediterranean; and
       (ii) an Iranian naval presence in the Persian Gulf.
       (5) A description of the increased cooperation between Iran 
     and the Russian Federation since the start of the current 
     conflict in Syria.
       (6) The steps Iran has taken to adopt the Russian 
     Federation model of hybrid warfare against potential targets 
     such as Gulf Cooperation Council states with sizeable Shiite 
     populations.
       (7) The extent of Russian Federation cooperation with 
     Hezbollah in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, including cooperation 
     with respect to training and equipping and joint operations.
       (8) A description of the weapons that have been provided by 
     the Russian Federation to Iran that have violated relevant 
     United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing an arms 
     embargo on Iran.
       (c) Submission Period.--The report required by subsection 
     (a) shall be submitted not later than 120 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, for 
     such period of time as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Act 
     remains in effect.
       (d) Form.--The report required by subsection (a) shall be 
     submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified 
     annex.


           amendment no. 85 offered by mr. roskam of illinois

       At the end of subtitle E of title XII, insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON MAINTENANCE BY ISRAEL OF A ROBUST 
                   INDEPENDENT CAPABILITY TO REMOVE EXISTENTIAL 
                   SECURITY THREATS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation 
     Act of 2012 (22 U.S.C. 8601 et seq.) established the policy 
     of the United States to support the inherent right of Israel 
     to self-defense.
       (2) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation 
     Act of 2012 expresses the sense of Congress that the 
     Government of the United States should transfer to the 
     Government of Israel defense articles and defense services.
       (3) The inherent right of Israel to self-defense 
     necessarily includes the ability to defend against threats to 
     its security and defend its vital national interests.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     Israel should be able to defend its vital national interests 
     and protect its territory and population against existential 
     threats.
       (c) Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to the 
     specified congressional committees a report that--
       (A) identifies defensive capabilities and platforms 
     requested by the Government of Israel that would contribute 
     to maintenance of Israel's defensive capability against 
     threats to its territory and population, including nuclear 
     and ballistic missile facilities in Iran, and defend its 
     vital national interests;
       (B) assesses the availability for sale or transfer of items 
     requested by the Government of Israel to maintain the 
     capability described in subparagraph (A), including the legal 
     authorities available for making such transfers; and

[[Page 6631]]

       (C) describes what steps the President is taking to 
     transfer the items described in subparagraph (B) for Israel 
     to maintain the capability described in subparagraph (A).
       (2) Form.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall be 
     submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified 
     annex if necessary.
       (3) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``specified 
     congressional committees'' means--
       (A) the congressional defense committees; and
       (B) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and 
     the Committee of Foreign Affairs of the House of 
     Representatives.


           amendment no. 86 offered by mr. roskam of illinois

       At the end of subtitle E of title XII, insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON USE BY THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAN OF 
                   COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT AND RELATED SERVICES FOR 
                   ILLICIT MILITARY OR OTHER ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and every 180 days thereafter, the 
     President, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and 
     the Secretary of State, shall submit to the congressional 
     defense committees and the Committee on Foreign Relations of 
     the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House 
     of Representatives a report on use by the Government of Iran 
     of commercial aircraft and related services for illicit 
     military or other activities during the 5-year period ending 
     of such date of enactment.
       (b) Elements of Report.--The report required under 
     subsection (a) shall include a description of the extent to 
     which--
       (1) the Government of Iran has used commercial aircraft or 
     related services to transport illicit cargo to or from Iran, 
     including military goods, weapons, military personnel, 
     military-related electronic parts and mechanical equipment, 
     and rocket or missile components;
       (2) the commercial aviation sector of Iran has provided 
     financial, material, and technological support to the Islamic 
     Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC); and
       (3) foreign governments and persons have facilitated the 
     activities described in paragraph (1), including allowing the 
     use of airports, services, or other resources.


        amendment no. 87 offered by mr. walker of north carolina

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

     SEC. 12XX. AUTHORITY TO GRANT OBSERVER STATUS TO THE MILITARY 
                   FORCES OF TAIWAN AT RIMPAC EXERCISES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense is authorized to 
     grant observer status to the military forces of Taiwan in any 
     maritime exercise known as the Rim of the Pacific Exercise.
       (b) Effective Date.--This section takes effect on the date 
     of the enactment of this Act and applies with respect to any 
     maritime exercise described in subsection (a) that begins on 
     or after such date of enactment.


            amendment no. 93 offered by mr. meng of new york

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

     SEC. 12XX. AGREEMENTS WITH FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS TO DEVELOP 
                   LAND-BASED WATER RESOURCES IN SUPPORT OF AND IN 
                   PREPARATION FOR CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.

       The Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the 
     Secretary of State, is authorized to enter into agreements 
     with the governments of foreign countries to develop land-
     based water resources in support of and in preparation for 
     contingency operations, including water selection, pumping, 
     purification, storage, distribution, cooling, consumption, 
     water reuse, water source intelligence, research and 
     development, training, acquisition of water support 
     equipment, and water support operations.


            amendment no. 94 offered by mr. meng of new york

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

     SEC. 12XX. EXTENSION OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ON THE USE OF 
                   CERTAIN IRANIAN SEAPORTS BY FOREIGN VESSELS AND 
                   USE OF FOREIGN AIRPORTS BY SANCTIONED IRANIAN 
                   AIR CARRIERS.

       Section 1252(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2013 (22 U.S.C. 8808(a)) is amended in the 
     matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking ``2016'' and 
     inserting ``2019''.


        amendment no. 95 offered by mr. moulton of massachusetts

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

     SEC. 12XX. NOTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF BALLISTIC MISSILE 
                   LAUNCH BY IRAN.

       (a) Notification.--The President shall notify Congress 
     within 48 hours of a suspected ballistic missile launch, 
     including a test, by Iran based on credible information 
     indicating that such a launch took place.
       (b) Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--The President shall initiate an assessment 
     within 48 hours of providing the notification described in 
     subsection (a) to determine whether a missile launch, 
     including a test, described in subsection (a) took place.
       (2) Determination and notification.--Not later than 15 days 
     after the date on which an assessment is initiated under 
     paragraph (1), the President shall determine whether Iran 
     engaged in a launch described in subsection (a) and shall 
     notify Congress of the basis for any such determination.
       (3) Affirmative determination.--If the President determines 
     under paragraph (2) that a launch described in subsection (a) 
     took place, the President shall further notify Congress of 
     the following:
       (A) An identification of entities involved in the launch.
       (B) A description of steps the President will take in 
     response to the launch, including--
       (i) imposing unilateral sanctions pursuant to Executive 
     Order 13382 (2005) or other relevant authorities against such 
     entities; or
       (ii) carrying out diplomatic efforts to impose multilateral 
     sanctions against such entities, including through adoption 
     of a United Nations Security Council resolution.


          amendment no. 96 offered by mr. peters of california

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

     SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON INTEGRATED BALLISTIC MISSILE 
                   DEFENSE SYSTEM FOR GCC PARTNER COUNTRIES, 
                   JORDAN, EGYPT, AND ISRAEL.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) Iran has conducted numerous ballistic missile tests; 
     and
       (2) such tests are in violation of United Nations Security 
     Council Resolution 2231 and unnecessarily provoke Gulf 
     Cooperation Council (GCC) partner countries and threaten 
     Israel.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the United States should encourage and enable as appropriate 
     an integrated ballistic missile defense system that links GCC 
     partner countries, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel in order assist 
     in preventing an attack by Iran against such countries.


           amendment no. 97 offered by mr. ruiz of california

       At the end of subtitle E of title XII, add the following

     SEC. 12XX. AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING TO 
                   INCREASE MARITIME SECURITY AND DOMAIN AWARENESS 
                   OF FOREIGN COUNTRIES BORDERING THE PERSIAN 
                   GULF, ARABIAN SEA, OR MEDITERRANEAN SEA.

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to authorize 
     assistance and training to increase maritime security and 
     domain awareness of foreign countries bordering the Persian 
     Gulf, the Arabian Sea, or the Mediterranean Sea in order to 
     deter and counter illicit smuggling and related maritime 
     activity by Iran, including illicit Iranian weapons 
     shipments.
       (b) Authority.--
       (1) In general.--To carry out the purpose of this section 
     as described in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense, 
     with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, is 
     authorized--
       (A) to provide training to the national military or other 
     security forces of Israel, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United 
     Arab Emirates, Oman, Kuwait, and Qatar that have among their 
     functional responsibilities maritime security missions; and
       (B) to provide training to ministry, agency, and 
     headquarters level organizations for such forces.
       (2) Designation.--The provision of assistance and training 
     under this section may be referred to as the ``Counter Iran 
     Maritime Initiative''.
       (c) Types of Training.--
       (1) Authorized elements of training.--Training provided 
     under subsection (b)(1)(A) may include the provision of de 
     minimis equipment, supplies, and small-scale military 
     construction.
       (2) Required elements of training.--Training provided under 
     subsection (b) shall include elements that promote the 
     following:
       (A) Observance of and respect for human rights and 
     fundamental freedoms.
       (B) Respect for legitimate civilian authority within the 
     country to which the assistance is provided.
       (d) Availability of Funds.--Of the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal year 2017 by section 301 and 
     available for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide 
     activities as specified in the funding table in section 4301, 
     $50,000,000 shall be available only for the provision of 
     assistance and training under subsection (b).
       (e) Cost Sharing.--
       (1) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress that, 
     given income parity among recipient countries, the Secretary 
     of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, 
     should seek, through appropriate bilateral and multilateral 
     arrangements, payments sufficient in amount to offset any 
     training costs associated with implementation of subsection 
     (b).
       (2) Cost-sharing agreement.--The Secretary of Defense, with 
     the concurrence of the Secretary of State, shall negotiate a 
     cost-sharing agreement with a recipient country regarding the 
     cost of any training provided pursuant to section (b). The 
     agreement shall set forth the terms of cost sharing that the 
     Secretary of Defense determines

[[Page 6632]]

     are necessary and appropriate, but such terms shall not be 
     less than 50 percent of the overall cost of the training.
       (3) Credit to appropriations.--The portion of such cost-
     sharing received by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to this 
     subsection may be credited towards appropriations available 
     for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities as 
     specified in the funding table in section 4301.
       (f) Notice to Congress on Training.--Not later than 15 days 
     before exercising the authority under subsection (b) with 
     respect to a recipient country, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 
     notification containing the following:
       (1) An identification of the recipient country.
       (2) A detailed justification of the program for the 
     provision of the training concerned, and its relationship to 
     United States security interests.
       (3) The budget for the program, including a timetable of 
     planned expenditures of funds to implement the program, an 
     implementation time-line for the program with milestones 
     (including anticipated delivery schedules for any assistance 
     and training under the program), the military department or 
     component responsible for management of the program, and the 
     anticipated completion date for the program.
       (4) A description of the arrangements, if any, to support 
     recipient country sustainment of any capability developed 
     pursuant to the program, and the source of funds to support 
     sustainment efforts and performance outcomes to be achieved 
     under the program beyond its completion date, if applicable.
       (5) A description of the program objectives and an 
     assessment framework to be used to develop capability and 
     performance metrics associated with operational outcomes for 
     the recipient force.
       (6) Such other matters as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate.
       (g) Definition.--In this section, the term ``appropriate 
     congressional committees'' means--
       (1) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on 
     Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on 
     Foreign Affairs, and the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives.
       (h) Termination.--Assistance and training may not be 
     provided under this section after September 30, 2020.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of this en bloc 
package.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I just want to say quickly, in the en bloc package, there was an 
amendment that was put in there having to do with our development of a 
new rocket engine and a new launch vehicle. I just want to thank 
publicly Mr. Rogers, the subcommittee chairman, who worked very closely 
with me on developing this language.
  We have got a lot of great things going on out there. There are a lot 
of American companies that are working hard to develop a new engine so 
we will no longer have to rely on the Russian engine.
  The amendment that was included allows those companies to use some of 
the money that the Air Force is providing for the development of a new 
engine, to use it also to develop a launch vehicle to go along with 
that engine. We have got, like I said, great companies like Blue Origin 
in my district, Aerojet Rocketdyne--a lot of folks working on new 
vehicles--SpaceX as well. This amendment allows the money that the Air 
Force is providing not just to go to the engine but for some of it to 
go to a launch vehicle as well. I think this will greatly reduce the 
cost of our launch costs for the Air Force, which has been a 
significantly problem recently.
  So I thank Chairman Rogers for allowing us to offer that amendment 
and for working with me on it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chair, I want to thank my good friend Mr. 
Rogers from Alabama for his work with me on this amendment.
  The Intermediate Nuclear Forces or ``INF'' Treaty places limits on 
ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 
and 5,500 kilometers.
  In 2008, the Russians tested a missile within this prohibited range 
and were caught red handed.
  But it took 3 years for the Administration to report any concern 
about Russian compliance to Congress. It took a full 6 years for the 
State Department to officially find the Russians in violation. After 
eight years, there have been no serious consequences for Russia's 
violation of the treaty.
  My amendment would prohibit government contracts with entities that 
have contributed to Russia's violation of the INF Treaty.
  Russia is not our ally, is not our friend, and we cannot take it at 
its word. Czar Putin is determined to restore Russia to its glory days. 
We must respond with strength.
  And that's just the way it is.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, Iran is a chief sponsor of international 
terrorism and regularly threatens to obliterate Israel, our most 
important ally in the region. Those who supported the agreement last 
year to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon understood that the 
JCPOA does not eliminate all of Iran's threats to the United States and 
our partners in the Middle East.
  My amendment would take further steps to support our allies in the 
region and crack down on Iranian aggression.
  By vocalizing our support for working with Israel, the Gulf 
Cooperation Council, Jordan, and Egypt to build an integrated missile 
defense system, we can build off of the success of Israel's existing 
missile defense network.
  I support the funding authorizations included in this year's defense 
budget that will continue to support Israel's missile defense program.
  Through a smart, targeted approach with our partners, we can continue 
to counter Iranian aggression and promote security. I urge my 
colleagues to support this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


      Amendments En Bloc No. 8 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 8 consisting of amendment Nos. 98, 99, 100, 
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, and 110 printed in House 
Report 114-571, offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:


     amendment no. 98 offered by ms. loretta sanchez of california

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

     SEC. 12XX. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON MILITARY RELATIONS BETWEEN 
                   VIETNAM AND THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The United States and Vietnam signed a Joint Vision 
     Statement on Defense Relations on June 1, 2015.
       (2) In October 2014, the Administration partially relaxed 
     United States restrictions on the transfer of lethal weapons 
     to Vietnam.
       (3) In 2014, the United States provided $18,000,000 in 
     maritime security assistance to Vietnam.
       (4) According to Reporters Without Borders, Vietnam ranks 
     175 out of 180 countries in press freedom, as the Government 
     of Vietnam continues to persecute citizens for practicing the 
     freedom of speech and expression.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) the United States Government should review its policy 
     on the transfer of lethal weapons to Vietnam; and
       (2) the United States Government should evaluate certain 
     human rights benchmarks when providing military assistance to 
     Vietnam.


          amendment no. 99 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

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

     SEC. 12XX. REPORT ON EFFORTS TO COMBAT BOKO HARAM IN NIGERIA 
                   AND THE LAKE CHAD BASIN.

       (a) Sense of Congress.--Congress--
       (1) strongly condemns the ongoing violence and the 
     systematic gross human rights violations against the people 
     of Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin carried out by Boko Haram;
       (2) expresses its support for the people of Nigeria and the 
     Lake Chad Basin who wish to live in a peaceful, economically 
     prosperous, and democratic region; and
       (3) calls on the President to support Nigerian, Lake Chad 
     Basin, and International Community efforts to ensure 
     accountability for crimes against humanity committed by Boko 
     Haram against the people of Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin, 
     particularly young girls kidnapped from Chibok and other 
     internally displaced persons affected by the actions of Boko 
     Haram.
       (b) Report.--

[[Page 6633]]

       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, the 
     Secretary of State, and the Attorney General shall jointly 
     submit to Congress a report on efforts to combat Boko Haram 
     in Nigeria and the Lake Chad Basin.
       (2) Elements.--The report required under paragraph (1) 
     shall include the following elements:
       (A) A description of initiatives undertaken by the 
     Department of Defense to assist the Government of Nigeria and 
     countries in the Lake Chad Basin to develop capacities to 
     deploy special forces to combat Boko Haram.
       (B) A description of United States' activities to enhance 
     the capacity of Nigeria and countries in the Lake Chad Basin 
     to investigate and prosecute human rights violations 
     perpetrated against the people of Nigeria and the Lake Chad 
     Basin by Boko Haram, al-Qaeda affiliates, and other terrorist 
     organizations to promote respect for rule of law in Nigeria 
     and the Lake Chad Basin.


       amendment no. 100 offered by mr. holding of north carolina

       At the appropriate place in title XII of division A of the 
     bill, insert the following:

     SEC. 12XX. ENHANCING DEFENSE AND SECURITY COOPERATION WITH 
                   INDIA.

       (a) Required Actions.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense and Secretary of 
     State shall jointly take such actions as may be necessary 
     to--
       (A) recognize India's status as a major defense partner of 
     the United States;
       (B) designate an individual within the Executive branch who 
     has experience in defense acquisition and technology--
       (i) to reinforce and ensure, through interagency policy 
     coordination, the success of the Framework for the United 
     States-India Defense Relationship; and
       (ii) to help resolve remaining issues impeding United 
     States-India defense trade, security cooperation, and co-
     production and co-development opportunities;
       (C) approve and facilitate the transfer of advanced 
     technology, consistent with United States conventional arms 
     transfer policy, to support combined military planning with 
     the Indian military for missions such as humanitarian 
     assistance and disaster relief, counter piracy, and maritime 
     domain awareness missions;
       (D) strengthen the effectiveness of the DTTI and the 
     durability of the Department of Defense's ``India Rapid 
     Reaction Cell'';
       (E) collaborate with the Government of India to develop 
     mutually agreeable mechanisms to verify the security of 
     defense articles and related technology, such as appropriate 
     cyber security and end use monitoring arrangements, 
     consistent with United States export control laws and policy;
       (F) promote policies that will encourage the efficient 
     review and authorization of defense sales and exports to 
     India;
       (G) encourage greater government-to-government and 
     commercial military transactions between the United States 
     and India;
       (H) support the development and alignment of India's export 
     control and procurement regimes with those of the United 
     States and multilateral control regimes; and
       (I) continue to enhance defense and security cooperation 
     with India in order to advance United States interests in the 
     South Asia and greater Indo-Pacific regions.
       (2) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary 
     of Defense and Secretary of State shall jointly submit to the 
     congressional defense committees and the Committee on Foreign 
     Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
     of the House of Representatives a report on how the United 
     States is supporting its defense relationship with India in 
     relation to the actions described in paragraph (1).
       (b) Military Planning.--The Secretary of Defense is 
     encouraged to coordinate with the Ministry of Defense for the 
     Government of India to develop combined military plans for 
     missions such as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, 
     maritime domain awareness, and other missions in the national 
     security interests of both countries.
       (c) Assessment Required.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense and Secretary of 
     State shall jointly, on an annual basis, conduct an 
     assessment of the extent to which India possesses strategic 
     operational capabilities to support military operations of 
     mutual interest between the United States and India.
       (2) Use of assessment.--The President shall ensure that the 
     assessment described in paragraph (1) is used, consistent 
     with United States conventional arms transfer policy, to 
     inform the review by the United States of sales of defense 
     articles and services to the Government of India.
       (3) Form.--The assessment described in paragraph (1) shall, 
     to the maximum extent practicable, be in classified form.


          amendment no. 101 offered by mr. smith of washington

       Page 609, line 20, strike ``or any fiscal year 
     thereafter''.
       Page 610, strike lines 8 through 15 and insert the 
     following:
       ``(3) Other purposes.--The Secretary may obligate or expend 
     not more than a total of 31 percent of the funds that are 
     authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for 
     fiscal year 2017 for the rocket propulsion system and launch 
     system investment for activities not authorized by paragraph 
     (1)(A), including for developing a launch vehicle, an upper 
     stage, a strap-on motor, or related infrastructure. The 
     Secretary may exceed such limit in fiscal year 2017 for such 
     purposes 
     if--''.
       Page 612, strike lines 4 through 12 and insert the 
     following:
       ``(3) Plan to protect government investment and assured 
     access to space.--
       ``(A) In developing the rocket propulsion system under 
     paragraph (1), and in any development conducted pursuant to 
     subsection (d)(3), the Secretary shall develop a plan to 
     protect the investment of the United States and the assured 
     access to space, including, consistent with section 2320 of 
     title 10, United States Code, and in accordance with other 
     applicable provisions of law, acquiring the rights, as 
     appropriate, for the purpose of developing alternative 
     sources of supply and manufacture in the event such 
     alternative sources are necessary and in the best interest of 
     the United States, such as in the event that a company goes 
     out of business or the system is otherwise unavailable after 
     the Federal Government has invested significant resources to 
     use and rely on such system for launch services.
       ``(B) Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2017, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     appropriate congressional committees the plan developed under 
     subparagraph (A).''.
       Page 612, strike lines 13 through 25.


        amendment no. 102 offered by mr. ted lieu of california

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

     SEC. 16__. REPORT ON USE OF SPACECRAFT ASSETS OF THE SPACE-
                   BASED INFRARED SYSTEM WIDE-FIELD-OF-VIEW 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in 
     coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, 
     shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 
     report on the feasibility of using available spacecraft 
     assets of the space-based infrared system wide-field-of-view 
     program to satisfy other mission requirements of the 
     Department of Defense or the intelligence community.
       (b) Matters Covered.--The report required by subsection (a) 
     shall include, at a minimum, the following:
       (1) An evaluation of using the space-based infrared system 
     wide-field-of-view spacecraft bus for other urgent national 
     security space priorities.
       (2) An evaluation of the cost and schedule impact, if any, 
     to the space-based infrared system wide-field-of-view program 
     if the spacecraft bus is used for another purpose.
       (c) Form.--The report required by subsection (a) shall be 
     submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a classified 
     annex if necessary to protect the national security interests 
     of the United States.
       (d) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' 
     means--
       (1) the congressional defense committees; and
       (2) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the 
     House of Representatives and the Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the Senate.


           amendment no. 103 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

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

     SEC. 16__. ASSESSMENT ON SECURITY OF INFORMATION HELD BY 
                   CLEARED DEFENSE CONTRACTORS.

       (a) Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct an 
     assessment of the sufficiency of the regulatory mechanisms of 
     the Department of Defense to secure defense information held 
     by cleared defense contractors to determine whether there are 
     any gaps that may undermine the protection of such 
     information.
       (2) Submission.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees a report on the findings of 
     the assessment conducted under paragraph (1).
       (b) Regulations.--Not later than 270 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prescribe 
     regulations that the Secretary determines appropriate to 
     improve the security of defense information held by cleared 
     defense contractors.
       (c) Cleared Defense Contractor Defined.--In this section, 
     the term ``cleared defense contractor'' has the meaning given 
     that term in section 393(e) of title 10, United States Code.


        amendment no. 104 offered by mr. meehan of pennsylvania

       At the end of subtitle C of title XVI of division A, add 
     the following new section:

[[Page 6634]]



     SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON CYBER RESILIENCY OF THE 
                   NETWORKS AND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS OF THE 
                   NATIONAL GUARD.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Army and Air National Guard personnel need to have 
     situational awareness and reliable communications during any 
     of the following events occurring in the United States:
       (A) A terrorist attack.
       (B) An intentional or unintentional release of chemical, 
     biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive 
     materials.
       (C) A natural or man-made disaster.
       (2) During such an event, it is vital that Army and Air 
     National Guard personnel are able to communicate and 
     coordinate response efforts with their own units and 
     appropriate civilian emergency response forces.
       (3) Current networks and communications systems of the 
     National Guard, including commercial wireless solutions (such 
     as mobile wireless kinetic mesh), and other systems that are 
     interoperable with the systems of civilian first responders, 
     should provide the necessary robustness, interoperability, 
     reliability, and resilience to extend needed situational 
     awareness and communications to all users and under all 
     operating conditions, including degraded communications 
     environments where infrastructure is damaged or destroyed or 
     under cyber attack or disruption.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the National Guard should be constantly seeking ways to 
     improve and expand its communications and networking 
     capabilities to provide for enhanced performance and 
     resilience in the face of cyber attacks or disruptions, as 
     well as other instances of degradation.


           amendment no. 105 offered by mr. hanna of new york

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

     SEC. 1635. REQUIREMENT FOR ARMY NATIONAL GUARD STRATEGY TO 
                   INCORPORATE CYBER PROTECTION TEAMS INTO 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CYBER MISSION FORCE.

       (a) Strategy Required.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army, 
     if the Secretary has not already done so, shall provide a 
     briefing to the congressional defense committees outlining a 
     strategy for incorporating Army National Guard cyber 
     protection teams into the Department of Defense cyber mission 
     force.
       (b) Elements of Strategy.--The strategy required by 
     subsection (a) shall include, at minimum, the following:
       (1) A timeline for incorporating Army National Guard cyber 
     protection teams into the Department of Defense cyber mission 
     force, including a timeline for receiving appropriate 
     training.
       (2) Identification of specific units to be incorporated.
       (3) An assessment of how incorporation of Army National 
     Guard cyber protection teams into the Department of Defense 
     cyber mission force might be used to enhance readiness 
     through improved individual and collective training 
     capabilities.
       (4) A status report on the Army's progress in issuing 
     additional guidance that clarifies how Army National Guard 
     cyber protection teams can support State and civil operations 
     in National Guard status under title 32, United States Code.
       (5) Other matters as considered appropriate by the 
     Secretary of the Army.


         amendment no. 106 offered by mr. peters of california

       At the end of subtitle A of title XXVIII (page 872, after 
     line 12), add the following new section:

     SEC. 2807. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON MAXIMIZING NUMBER OF VETERANS 
                   EMPLOYED ON MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

       It is the sense of Congress that, when practical and cost-
     effective, the Department of Defense should seek ways to 
     maximize the number of veterans employed on military 
     construction projects (as defined in section 2801 of title 
     10, United States Code).


           amendment no. 107 offered by mr. brat of virginia

       At the end of subtitle B of title XXVIII (page 877, after 
     line 25), add the following

     SEC. 2817. IMPROVED PROCESS FOR DISPOSAL OF DEPARTMENT OF 
                   DEFENSE SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY LOCATED OVERSEAS.

       (a) Petition to Acquire Surplus Property.--2687a of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(g) Petition Process for Disposal of Overseas Surplus 
     Real Property.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall establish 
     a process by which a foreign government may request the 
     transfer of surplus real property or improvements under the 
     jurisdiction of the Department of Defense in the foreign 
     country.
       ``(2) Upon the receipt of a petition under this subsection, 
     the Secretary shall determine within 90 days whether the 
     property or improvement subject to the petition is surplus. 
     If surplus, the Secretary shall seek to enter into an 
     agreement with the foreign government within one year for the 
     disposal of the property.
       ``(3) If real property or an improvement is determined not 
     to be surplus, the Secretary shall not be obligated to 
     consider another petition involving the same property or 
     improvement for five years beginning on the date on which the 
     initial determination was made.''.
       (b) Additional Use of Department of Defense Overseas 
     Military Facility Investment Recovery Account.--Section 
     2687a(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``property disposal 
     agreement,'' after ``forces agreement,''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) military readiness programs.''.
       (c) Reporting Requirement.--Section 2687a(a) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(3) A report under paragraph (1) also shall specify the 
     following:
       ``(A) The number of petitions received under subsection (g) 
     from foreign governments requesting the transfer of surplus 
     real property or improvements under the jurisdiction of the 
     Department of Defense overseas.
       ``(B) The status of each petition, including whether 
     reviewed, denied, or granted.
       ``(C) The implementation status of each granted 
     petition.''.


           amendment no. 108 offered by mr. carter of georgia

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

     SEC. __. CLOSURE OF ST. MARYS AIRPORT.

       (a) Release of Restrictions.--Subject to subsection (b), 
     the United States, acting through the Administrator of the 
     Federal Aviation Administration, shall release the city of 
     St. Marys, Georgia, from all restrictions, conditions, and 
     limitations on the use, encumbrance, conveyance, and closure 
     of the St. Marys Airport, to the extent such restrictions, 
     conditions, and limitations are enforceable by the 
     Administrator.
       (b) Requirements for Release of Restrictions.--The 
     Administrator shall execute the release under subsection (a) 
     once all of the following occurs:
       (1) The Secretary of the Navy transfers to the Georgia 
     Department of Transportation the amounts described in 
     subsection (c) and requires as an enforceable condition on 
     such transfer that all funds transferred shall be used only 
     for airport development (as defined in section 47102 of title 
     49, United States Code) of a general aviation airport in 
     Georgia, consistent with planning efforts conducted by the 
     Administrator and the Georgia Department of Transportation.
       (2) The city of St. Marys, for consideration as provided 
     for in this section, grants to the United States, under the 
     administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary, a restrictive 
     use easement in the real property used for the St. Marys 
     Airport, as determined acceptable by the Secretary, under 
     such terms and conditions as the Secretary considers 
     necessary to protect the interests of the United States and 
     prohibiting the future use of such property for all aviation-
     related purposes and any other purposes deemed by the 
     Secretary to be incompatible with the operations, functions, 
     and missions of Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay, Georgia.
       (3) The Secretary obtains an appraisal to determine the 
     fair market value of the real property used for the St. Marys 
     Airport in the manner described in subsection (c)(1).
       (4) The Administrator fulfills the obligations under the 
     National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
     seq.) in connection with the release under subsection (a). In 
     carrying out such obligations--
       (A) the Administrator shall not assume or consider any 
     potential or proposed future redevelopment of the current St. 
     Marys airport property;
       (B) any potential new general aviation airport in Georgia 
     shall be deemed to be not connected with the release noted in 
     subsection (a) nor the closure of St. Marys Airport; and
       (C) any environmental review under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) for 
     a potential general aviation airport in Georgia shall be 
     considered through an environmental review process separate 
     and apart from the environmental review made a condition of 
     release by this section.
       (c) Transfer of Amounts Described.--The amounts described 
     in this subsection are the following:
       (1) An amount equal to the fair market value of the real 
     property of the St. Marys Airport, as determined by the 
     Secretary and concurred in by the Administrator, based on an 
     appraisal report and title documentation that--
       (A) is prepared or adopted by the Secretary, and concurred 
     in by the Administrator, not more than 180 days prior to the 
     transfer described in subsection (b)(1); and

[[Page 6635]]

       (B) meets all requirements of Federal law and the appraisal 
     and documentation standards applicable to the acquisition and 
     disposal of real property interests of the United States.
       (2) An amount equal to the unamortized portion of any 
     Federal development grants (including grants available under 
     a State block grant program established pursuant to section 
     47128 of title 49, United States Code), other than used for 
     the acquisition of land, paid to the city of St. Marys for 
     use as the St. Marys Airport.
       (3) An amount equal to the airport revenues remaining in 
     the airport account for the St. Marys Airport as of the date 
     of the enactment of this Act and as otherwise due to or 
     received by the city of St. Marys after such date of 
     enactment pursuant to sections 47107(b) and 47133 of title 
     49, United States Code.
       (d) Authorization for Transfer of Funds.--Using funds 
     available to the Department of the Navy for operation and 
     maintenance, the Secretary may pay the amounts described in 
     subsection (c) to the Georgia Department of Transportation, 
     conditioned as described in subsection (b)(1).
       (e) Additional Requirements.--
       (1) Survey.--The exact acreage and legal description of St. 
     Marys Airport shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to 
     the Secretary and concurred in by the Administrator.
       (2) Planning of general aviation airport.--Any planning 
     effort for the development of a new general aviation airport 
     in southeast Georgia using the amounts described in 
     subsection (c) shall be conducted in coordination with the 
     Secretary, and shall ensure that any such airport does not 
     encroach on the operations, functions, and missions of Naval 
     Submarine Base, Kings Bay, Georgia.
       (f) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be 
     construed to limit the applicability of--
       (1) the requirements and processes under section 46319 of 
     title 49, United States Code;
       (2) the requirements and processes under part 157 of title 
     14, Code of Federal Regulations; or
       (3) the public notice requirements under section 
     47107(h)(2) of title 49, United States Code.


         amendment no. 109 offered by mr. pearce of new mexico

       At the end of subtitle D of title XXVIII (page 904, after 
     line 22), add the following new section:

     SEC. 2839. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE 
                   JURISDICTION, PORTION OF ORGAN MOUNTAINS AREA, 
                   FILLMORE CANYON, NEW MEXICO.

       The Secretary of Defense may not transfer administrative 
     jurisdiction over the parcel of Federal land depicted as 
     ``Parcel D'' on the map entitled ``Organ Mountains Area - 
     Fillmore Canyon'' and dated April 19, 2016 from the 
     Department of Defense to the Secretary of the Interior.


          amendment no. 110 offered by mr. culberson of texas

       Page 936, after line 3, insert the following:

     SEC. 2857. BATTLESHIP PRESERVATION GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--There is hereby established within the 
     Department of the Interior a grant program for the 
     preservation of our nation's most historic battleships.
       (b) Use of Grants.--Amounts received through grants under 
     this section shall be used for the preservation of our 
     nation's most historic battleships in a manner that is self-
     sustaining and has an educational component.
       (c) Criteria for Eligibility.--To be eligible for a grant 
     under this section, an entity shall--
       (1) submit an application under procedures prescribed by 
     the Secretary;
       (2) match the amount of the grant, on a 1-to-1 basis, with 
     non-Federal assets from non-Federal sources, which may 
     include cash or durable goods and materials fairly valued as 
     determined by the Secretary;
       (3) maintain records as may be reasonably necessary to 
     fully disclose--
       (A) the amount and the disposition of the proceeds of the 
     grant;
       (B) the total cost of the project for which the grant is 
     made; and
       (C) other records as may be required by the Secretary, 
     including such records as will facilitate an effective 
     accounting for project funds; and
       (4) provide access to the Secretary for the purposes of any 
     required audit and examination of any books, documents, 
     papers, and records of the entity.
       (d) Most Historic Battleship Defined.--In this section, the 
     term ``most historic battleship'' means a battleship that 
     is--
       (1) between 75 and 115 years old;
       (2) listed on the National Historic Register; and
       (3) located within the State for which it was named.
       (e) Savings Provision.--The authorities contained in this 
     section shall be in addition to, and shall not be construed 
     to supercede or modify those contained in the National 
     Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470-470x-6).
       (f) Private Property Protection.--
       (1) In general.--No Federal funds made available to carry 
     out this section may be used to acquire any real property, or 
     any interest in any real property, without the written 
     consent of the owner (or owners) of that property or interest 
     in property.
       (2) No designation.--The authority granted by this section 
     shall not constitute a Federal designation or have any effect 
     on private property ownership.
       (g) Sunset.--The authority to make grants under this 
     section expires on September 30, 2023.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the en bloc 
amendments.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the en bloc 
amendments.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


      Amendments En Bloc No. 9 Offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I 
offer amendments en bloc.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 9 consisting of amendment Nos. 111, 112, 113, 
114, 115, 116, 117, 118, and 120 printed in House Report 114-571, 
offered by Mr. Thornberry of Texas:


        amendment no. 111 offered by mr. newhouse of washington

       Add at the end of subtitle G of title XXVIII the following 
     new section:

     SEC. 2867. REPORT ON DOCUMENTATION FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN 
                   PROPERTIES ALONG COLUMBIA RIVER, WASHINGTON, BY 
                   CORPS OF ENGINEERS.

       (a) Report on Documentation.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the 
     Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, shall submit a 
     report to Congress on the process by which the Corps of 
     Engineers acquired the properties described in subsection 
     (b), and shall include in the report the specific legal 
     documentation pursuant to which the properties were acquired.
       (b) Properties Described.--The properties described in this 
     subsection are each of the properties described in paragraph 
     (2) of section 501(i) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1996 (Public Law 104-303; 110 Stat. 3752).


      amendment no. 112 offered by mr. ben ray lujan of new mexico

       At the end of subtitle B of title XXXI of division C, 
     insert the following:

     SEC. 3126. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ACCOUNTING PRACTICES 
                   BY LABORATORY OPERATING CONTRACTORS AND PLANT 
                   OR SITE MANAGERS OF NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY 
                   ADMINISTRATION FACILITIES.

       It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Energy 
     should ensure that each laboratory operating contractor or 
     plant or site manager of a National Nuclear Security 
     Administration facility adopt generally accepted and 
     consistent accounting practices for laboratory, plant, or 
     site directed research and development.


          amendment no. 113 offered by mr. foster of illinois

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

     SEC. 31__. BRIEFING ON THE INFORMATION-INTERCHANGE OF LOW-
                   ENRICHED URANIUM.

       (a) Briefing.--Not later than 120 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, the 
     Secretary of Energy, and the Secretary of State shall provide 
     a briefing to the appropriate congressional committees on the 
     feasibility and potential benefits of a dialogue between the 
     United States and France on the use of low-enriched uranium 
     in naval reactors.
       (b) Appropriate Congressional Committees.--In this section, 
     the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means--
       (1) the congressional defense committees;
       (2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the 
     Senate;
       (3) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the 
     House of Representatives and the Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the Senate; and

[[Page 6636]]

       (4) the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources of the Senate.


         amendment no. 114 offered by mr. peters of california

       Page 1009, lines 1 through 8, amend paragraph (1) to read 
     as follows:
       ``(1) Advanced nuclear reactor.--The term `advanced nuclear 
     reactor' means--
       ``(A) a nuclear fission reactor with significant 
     improvements over the most recent generation of nuclear 
     fission reactors, which may include inherent safety features, 
     lower waste yields, greater fuel utilization, superior 
     reliability, resistance to proliferation, and increased 
     thermal efficiency; or
       ``(B) a nuclear fusion reactor.''
       Page 1014, lines 8 and 9, strike ``advanced fission reactor 
     systems, nuclear fusion systems,'' and insert ``advanced 
     nuclear reactor systems''.
       Page 1016, lines 12 and 13, strike ``fusion and advanced 
     fission experimental reactors'' and insert ``experimental 
     advanced nuclear reactors''.
       Page 1018, lines 3 and 4, strike ``next generation nuclear 
     energy technology'' and insert ``advanced nuclear reactor 
     technologies''.


          amendment no. 115 offered by mr. donovan of new york

       At the end of title XXXV add the following:

     SEC. 35__. EXPEDITED PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR 
                   TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CARDS FOR SEPARATING 
                   MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND VETERANS.

       (a) In General.--Section 70105 of title 46, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(r) Expedited Issuance for Separating Service Members.--
     The Secretary shall, using authority available under other 
     provisions of law--
       ``(1) seek to expedite processing of applications for 
     transportation security cards under this section for members 
     of the Armed Forces who are separating from active duty 
     service with a discharge other than a dishonorable discharge;
       ``(2) in consultation with the Secretary of Defense--
       ``(A) enhance efforts of the Department of Homeland 
     Security in assisting members of the Armed Forces who are 
     separating from active duty service with receiving a 
     transportation security card, including by--
       ``(i) including under the Transition Assistance Program 
     under section 1144 of title 10--

       ``(I) applications for such cards; and
       ``(II) a form by which such a member may grant the member's 
     permission for government agencies to disclose to the 
     Department of Homeland Security findings of background 
     investigations of such member, for consideration by the 
     Department in processing the member's application for a 
     transportation security card;

       ``(ii) providing opportunities for local officials of the 
     department in which the Coast Guard is operating to partner 
     with military installations for that purpose; and
       ``(iii) ensuring that such members of the Armed Forces are 
     aware of opportunities to apply for such cards;
       ``(B) seek to educate members of the Armed Forces with 
     competencies that are transferable to maritime industries 
     regarding--
       ``(i) opportunities for employment in such industries; and
       ``(ii) the requirements and qualifications for, and duties 
     associated with, transportation security cards; and
       ``(C) cooperate with other Federal agencies to expedite the 
     transfer to the Secretary the findings of relevant background 
     investigations and security clearances; and
       ``(3) issue or deny a transportation security card under 
     this section for a veteran by not later than 13 days after 
     the date of the submission of the application for the card, 
     unless there is a substantial problem with the application 
     that prevents compliance with this paragraph.''.
       (b) Reports.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for each of 
     the subsequent 2 years, the Secretary of the department in 
     which the Coast Guard is operating, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Defense, shall submit a report to the Committee 
     on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate describing and assessing the efforts of such 
     department to implement the amendment made by this section.

     SEC. 35__. TRAINING UNDER TRANSITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ON 
                   EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES ASSOCIATED WITH 
                   TRANSPORTATION SECURITY CARDS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1144(b) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(10) Acting through the Secretary of the department in 
     which the Coast Guard is operating, provide information on 
     career opportunities for employment available to members with 
     transportation security cards issued under section 70105 of 
     title 46.''.
       (b) Deadline for Implementation.--The program carried out 
     under section 1144 of title 10, United States Code, shall 
     comply with the requirements of subsection (b)(10) of such 
     section, as added by subsection (a), by not later than 180 
     days after the date of the enactment of this Act.


          amendment no. 116 offered by ms. frankel of florida

       At the end of title XXXV add the following:

     SEC. __. APPLICATION OF LAW.

       Section 4301 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) For purposes of any Federal law except the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any 
     vessel, including a foreign vessel, being repaired or 
     dismantled is deemed to be a recreational vessel, as defined 
     under section 2101(25), during such repair or dismantling, if 
     that vessel--
       ``(1) shares elements of design and construction of 
     traditional recreational vessels (as so defined); and
       ``(2) when operating is not normally engaged in a military, 
     commercial, or traditionally commercial undertaking.''.


       amendment no. 117 offered by mr. wilson of south carolina

       Page 1081, in the table of section 4102, strike ``JOINT 
     IMPROVISED-THREAT DEFEAT FUND'' both places it appears and 
     insert ``JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND''.
       Page 1085, in the table of section 4103, strike ``JOINT 
     IMPROVISED-THREAT DEFEAT FUND'' both places it appears and 
     insert ``JOINT IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE DEFEAT FUND''.


           amendment no. 118 offered by ms. meng of new york

       Page 1191, after line 7, insert the following:
       ``(F) Conspiracy to commit an offense specified in 
     subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) that is punishable under 
     section 881 of this title (article 81).''.


           amendment no. 120 offered by mr. rogers of alabama

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

     SEC. 31__. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NUCLEAR FACILITIES FROM 
                   UNMANNED AIRCRAFT.

       (a) In General.--The Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 
     2501 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 4509 the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 4510. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NUCLEAR FACILITIES FROM 
                   UNMANNED AIRCRAFT.

       ``(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Energy may take such 
     actions described in subsection (b)(1) that are necessary to 
     mitigate the threat of an unmanned aircraft system or 
     unmanned aircraft that poses an imminent threat (as defined 
     by the Secretary of Energy, in coordination with the 
     Secretary of Transportation) to the safety or security of a 
     covered facility.
       ``(b) Actions Described.--(1) The actions described in this 
     paragraph are the following:
       ``(A) Disrupt control of the unmanned aircraft system or 
     unmanned aircraft.
       ``(B) Seize and exercise control of the unmanned aircraft 
     system or unmanned aircraft.
       ``(C) Seize or otherwise confiscate the unmanned aircraft 
     system or unmanned aircraft.
       ``(D) Use reasonable force to disable or destroy the 
     unmanned aircraft system or unmanned aircraft.
       ``(2) The Secretary of Energy shall develop the actions 
     described in paragraph (1) in coordination with the Secretary 
     of Transportation, consistent with the protection of 
     information regarding sensitive defense or national security 
     capabilities.
       ``(c) Forfeiture.--(1) Any unmanned aircraft system or 
     unmanned aircraft described in subsection (a) shall be 
     subject to seizure and forfeiture to the United States.
       ``(2) The Secretary of Energy may prescribe regulations to 
     establish reasonable exceptions to paragraph (1), including 
     in cases where--
       ``(A) the operator of the unmanned aircraft system or 
     unmanned aircraft obtained the control and possession of such 
     system or aircraft illegally; or
       ``(B) the operator of the unmanned aircraft system or 
     unmanned aircraft is an employee of a common carrier acting 
     in manner described in subsection (a) without the knowledge 
     of the common carrier.
       ``(d) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Energy and 
     the Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe regulations 
     and issue guidance in the respective areas of each Secretary 
     to carry out this section.
       ``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `covered facility' means any facility that--
       ``(A) is identified by the Secretary of Energy for purposes 
     of this section;
       ``(B) is located in the United States (including the 
     territories and possessions of the United States); and
       ``(C) is owned by the United States, or contracted to the 
     United States, to store or use special nuclear material.
       ``(2) The terms `unmanned aircraft' and `unmanned aircraft 
     system' have the meaning given those terms in section 331 of 
     the

[[Page 6637]]

     FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-95; 
     49 U.S.C. 40101 note).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents for such Act 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     4509 the following new item:

``Sec. 4510. Protection of certain nuclear facilities from unmanned 
              aircraft.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  I just want to thank the chairman, and I want to thank the staff and 
the Members for putting together this piece of legislation. It is 
always a long process but I think a good process, in which we pull 
together a variety of different amendments. And, as the chairman has 
said many times, it is a bottom-up process. It starts with the Members 
offering their ideas in putting together the bill. I think, once again, 
we have done that process fairly well.
  The problem and the challenge, as I had mentioned earlier, comes from 
the budget number and the problems that we face. I know the chairman 
has said earlier, you know, we can't solve all these problems; so let's 
help the troops now.
  The problem is, it is like you have got a credit card and you say: 
wow, off in the future there may be problems, but let's just buy 
whatever we want, put it on the credit card now, and that will help 
everybody in the long run. But it doesn't. It is not helping the troops 
to pass a bill that has 6 months worth of funding for a yearlong's 
worth of overseas contingency operations, and it is not helping them to 
hope that the Budget Control Act goes away.
  The chairman mentioned that last year we had this same problem and we 
did wind up getting an agreement, and that is true. Part of the reason 
we got that agreement, however, is because we, on this side, insisted 
on that agreement and did not merely accept the defense bill that was 
offered without resolving those issues.
  And, once again, we have to insist upon that: that it does not make 
sense to have the Budget Control Act and continue to insist on spending 
more money on defense. Essentially, what the majority party wants is 
they want a Ferrari, but they only want to provide the money to pay for 
a Honda, and they keep hoping that somehow that extra money is going to 
appear. That hurts our troops.
  We have heard all of these stories about the terrible state of our 
readiness. Consistently, over the course of the last 4 years, the bill 
that has been passed in the House and the Senate has put less money 
into readiness than the President asked for. Why? Because they wanted 
to pay for a wide variety of programs, including the A-10, an important 
plane, we have heard.
  I am not saying that there is anything in this bill that you can't 
make an argument for as being important. The problem is it doesn't add 
up, and it leaves us in a position where the military is continually 
having to stare at a cliff, knowing that the money is not going to be 
there and trying to figure out how to plan through that.
  I want a more sensible process. We should fully fund the OCO and fund 
the base budget at the level that it is funded at. If we don't find 
that sufficient--and I know just about every member of the Armed 
Services Committee on the Republican side does not find that number 
sufficient--then provide the money. This isn't a matter of saying, 
well, what has that got to do with this? That has got everything to do 
with this.
  If you are not willing to provide the money to pay for these 
programs, starting them, or telling the military that they have to have 
a fixed number of members of the Army and the Marine Corps, and then 
knowing that the money isn't going to be there a year from now, is not 
helpful. We have to bring some sanity to the budget process. This bill, 
artfully, just imagines that 6 months from now, we will magically make 
up the extra money in OCO. That is a big problem that, once again, we 
need to confront.
  But just like last year, I am confident that we will come together in 
conference, we will talk about this, we will work it out, and we will 
come up with a bill. But I hope that we will start understanding the 
money a little bit better and making this actually work so that the 
bill we pass is helping the men and women of the armed services who 
serve us so well.
  So it is not about whether or not you support the troops or not; it 
is a matter of whether or not you think this bill is the best way to do 
it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
  Mr. LIPINSKI. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chair, I rise to thank Ranking Member Smith and Chairman 
Thornberry for an amendment that was included in one of the prior en 
bloc groups of amendments.
  The amendment that I joined Mr. Pompeo in offering requires the DOD 
to report to Congress on the cooperation between Iran and the Russian 
Federation and the extent to which that cooperation affects our 
national security interests.
  Even before the Iran nuclear deal, we watched Tehran and Moscow 
become closer partners, as Russia announced it would lift its ban on 
selling advanced missiles to Iran and began military cooperation with 
Iran in Syria to prop up the Assad government.
  This year, Russia and Iran have worked together to undermine U.N. 
Security Council ballistic missile resolutions and announced an $800 
million missile defense contract.
  It is imperative that we fully understand the impact of this alliance 
on our national security interests because both nations continue to be 
hostile towards the U.S. and our allies. This amendment will help do 
just that.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington has 5 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Texas has 10 minutes remaining.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of 
my time just to, again, emphasize that this is a very, very important 
piece of legislation, and it is important that we get it right. This is 
one step in the process.
  At the committee level, we worked together and got the bill out. At 
the time, I raised the concerns that I am raising now. I voted in favor 
of the bill, hoping that we would make improvements on the floor. 
Instead, we went the other way.
  We had one amendment that was supported in the committee that the 
Rules Committee stripped without allowing a vote, a rule that would 
have women sign up for the Selective Service, an amendment that was 
supported by my caucus. The Rules Committee didn't even allow us to 
have a vote on that. They just stripped it.
  On another one, on the amendment that we didn't like that was in the 
bill, they went the other way and didn't allow a vote on that to keep 
it in place. That is not a fair process.
  I will say that there are ultimately two objections to this bill and 
preface it with one thing. I think the chairman in committee has been 
very, very fair, has worked very well with Democrats, and I do 
appreciate that. The Rules Committee, on the other hand, has been the 
exact opposite. They have been completely and totally partisan in a way 
that is not in keeping with the tradition of the Armed Services 
Committee and the way we do business in a fair way: to allow members to 
have votes on amendments that are important to them. They didn't do 
that, and that made this bill even worse than it was when it came out 
of committee. I hope the Rules Committee will do better in the future. 
I don't think that is likely, but that is certainly one issue.
  The second issue is, again, the funding. If we are really going to 
provide

[[Page 6638]]

for the troops, we have to realistically look at the next 10 years and 
begin building a national security strategy that can support them, 
based on the budget that we are prepared to provide. There is no new 
revenue coming. Even if the budget caps go away, typically the way the 
budget caps go away is they are extended for another year, and 
basically we use 10-year money to pay for 1 year's worth of goods and 
services, which only puts us in a further hole.
  Lastly, I will point out those other portions of the budget. The 
defense budget has grown as a proportion of the discretionary budget. 
It is now over 55 percent of it.

                              {time}  1915

  Essentially, what the Republican party is trying to do is to spend 
all of the money on defense, and then there will be nothing left over 
for the other priorities. Those other priorities do matter, and it is 
wrong to ask: Well, what has the defense bill got to do with our 
crumbling infrastructure? What has the defense bill got to do with long 
lines at the TSA or at Homeland Security or at the Department of 
Justice or anywhere else?
  It has got everything to do with it in a year when we don't have a 
budget resolution, so we don't have set amounts of money for each bill. 
Every dollar that we put into this is taking out of the overall 
allocation and is taking from all of those other priorities.
  Yes, national security is incredibly important, but I think 
infrastructure is important as well. I think the Department of Homeland 
Security is important, as is the Department of Justice, as is the 
Department of the Treasury, which tries to stop terrorists from raising 
money. What we are doing here is refusing to pass a budget resolution, 
to put the numbers in place, and then spending all of the money on 
defense first--sorry. It is an exaggeration as it is not all of the 
money but more of the money than was agreed upon--and then what is left 
over goes to everything else. That is not a responsible way to budget. 
That is not a responsible way to provide for this country.
  For those reasons, I am going to oppose the bill. I hope, again, as 
we did last year, we will work this out in conference, come up with a 
more sensible approach, and have a bill that we can all support.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I appreciate the gentleman's comments that he believes I have tried 
to be fair with Members of the minority in constructing this bill. I 
have tried to be; although I have to say, Mr. Chair, if one leans over 
backwards to make sure Members of the minority contribute to the bill 
even to the point at which some of the provisions Members of the 
minority are interested in are opposed by Members of the majority--if 
you still try to do that and yet Members of the minority vote against 
the bill--I have got to ask myself: Why? Why do I do such things?
  Just in the past hour and a half, maybe 2 hours, we have spent time 
with basically equal numbers of Members on the Republican and 
Democratic sides in their talking about their amendments--discussing 
very important issues--but none of those issues happen without having 
the bill pass. Yet I get the feeling that, at least for some Members, 
there may always be that next bridge that we have got to get to before 
they can support the bill.
  Mr. Chair, the ranking member described my view really better than I 
did. He said that my opinion is we have to help the troops now, and 
that is exactly my view. Just think about what the alternative is: no, 
we are not going to help the troops now because we are not sure where 
the money is going to come from next year or 5 years from now or the 
next 10 years. In the meantime, while we are not sure about all of 
that, we are going to continue to let class A mishaps grow. What that 
means is more people stand in danger of losing their lives, but we are 
going to go ahead and allow that to happen because we don't know where 
the money is going to come from or we object to this provision, et 
cetera.
  It is absolutely true. My view is to help the troops now because now 
is the time that they are cannibalizing the aircraft, not getting the 
minimum number of training hours, seeing class A mishaps go up, have 
only nine B-1s that are available to fly. The statistics go on and on.
  Mr. Chair, the other point I would make is that readiness is not just 
a question of funding the operation and maintenance accounts. That is 
really what I have thought most of the time I have been here. What I 
have come to understand, however, is that you can cut end strength, you 
can cut the number of people in the military, down to the point that 
you can never get ready. I think that is part of what the Air Force is 
facing now. They have cut the number of people. We are 700 pilots 
short, and we are 4,000 maintainers short. It doesn't matter how much 
money you are putting toward them when you have only so many mechanics. 
The average experience of a mechanic in the military has dropped 
significantly just in the last 2 years. People are part of fixing 
readiness, and procurement is part of fixing readiness.
  How many times do I have to explain that you can't fix a 1979 Black 
Hawk helicopter?
  You have to get a new one. You can't replace an early 1980s F/A-18 
model. There are no more parts for it. You have to replace it with an 
F-35. That is what we do in this bill.
  Mr. Chair, I continue to be perplexed at how the funding approach 
that was good and passed by a Democratic majority in 2008, between Bush 
and Obama, is somehow unacceptable between Obama and whoever is next. 
None of us knows who is next. We don't know who is going to be the next 
President. To fully fund the readiness requirements for the whole year 
so as to deal with those problems of maintenance and training and 
people and procurement, to fully fund those and then have the new 
President take a fresh look at the deployments, seems to make sense. It 
sure made sense in 2008. I think it makes sense in 2016 as well.
  Mr. Chair, the Rules Committee made in order 180 amendments for 
consideration here on the floor. I understand not everybody's amendment 
was made in order, but it is a little hard for me to understand how 
people could complain about the process when 180 amendments were made 
in order, many by Democrats, many by Republicans. I realize not every 
amendment was made in order, but, surely, a lot of topics have been 
discussed.
  Finally, Mr. Chair, I just have to take a moment and read one of the 
amendments that some Members have complained about that was placed into 
the bill in committee by Mr. Russell of Oklahoma.
  It reads:

       Any branch or agency of the Federal Government shall 
     provide protections and exemptions consistent with section 
     702(a) and 703(e)(2) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 
     section 103(d) of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

  That is it. It is one paragraph. That is it. I don't know who is 
opposed today to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or to the Americans with 
Disabilities Act of 1990. That is the reason I just get this feeling, 
personally, that there may be those who are just looking for some 
excuse to vote against the bill. The price of that is that readiness 
problems--class A mishaps--will continue on the trend they are on.
  Absolutely. Help the troops now. I can't predict the future. I don't 
know who is going to be elected President. I don't know who is going to 
be elected to Congress. I don't know what the budget will be in future 
times, but I know what I can do now. I know what I can do today. I can 
help the troops now. You bet. Sign me up.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Chair, this amendment includes my 
resolution to express appreciation of our disabled veterans and 
recognize October 5th as an appropriate date to honor them each year. 
This coincides with the anniversary of the American Veterans Disabled 
for Life Memorial. I thank Chairman Jeff Miller for his support.
  Thankfully, my son, a U.S. Marine, returned safely from two wars. 
Regrettably, there are many veterans for whom the fight doesn't end 
when they come home.

[[Page 6639]]

  My constituent Jeff Colaiacovo is one of those people. A few months 
into his first tour in Vietnam, Jeff's tank hit a mine, exploding 
shards of metal into his eyes, blinding him. Miraculously, the doctors 
recovered his vision. Months later, a grenade hit Jeff's tank and 
flames engulfed his body. After spending months in burn units, he was 
honorably discharged. He raised a family and started a small business.
  Jeff is disabled for life. He bears the scars of duty that remind us 
of what he and many others gave to serve us. In honor of Jeff and our 
four million disabled veterans, I urge adoption of this package.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


               Amendment No. 119 Offered by Ms. Bordallo

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 119 
printed in House Report 114-571.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following:

        TITLE LXXIII--GUAM WORLD WAR II LOYALTY RECOGNITION ACT

     SEC. 7301. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Guam World War II Loyalty 
     Recognition Act''.

     SEC. 7302. RECOGNITION OF THE SUFFERING AND LOYALTY OF THE 
                   RESIDENTS OF GUAM.

       (a) Recognition of the Suffering of the Residents of 
     Guam.--The United States recognizes that, as described by the 
     Guam War Claims Review Commission, the residents of Guam, on 
     account of their United States nationality, suffered 
     unspeakable harm as a result of the occupation of Guam by 
     Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II, by 
     being subjected to death, rape, severe personal injury, 
     personal injury, forced labor, forced march, or internment.
       (b) Recognition of the Loyalty of the Residents of Guam.--
     The United States forever will be grateful to the residents 
     of Guam for their steadfast loyalty to the United States, as 
     demonstrated by the countless acts of courage they performed 
     despite the threat of death or great bodily harm they faced 
     at the hands of the Imperial Japanese military forces that 
     occupied Guam during World War II.

     SEC. 7303. GUAM WORLD WAR II CLAIMS FUND.

       (a) Establishment of Fund.--The Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall establish in the Treasury of the United States a 
     special fund (in this title referred to as the ``Claims 
     Fund'') for the payment of claims submitted by compensable 
     Guam victims and survivors of compensable Guam decedents in 
     accordance with sections 7304 and 7305.
       (b) Composition of Fund.--The Claims Fund established under 
     subsection (a) shall be composed of amounts deposited into 
     the Claims Fund under subsection (c) and any other payments 
     made available for the payment of claims under this title.
       (c) Payment of Certain Duties, Taxes, and Fees Collected 
     From Guam Deposited Into Fund.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 30 of the Organic 
     Act of Guam (48 U.S.C. 1421h), the excess of--
       (A) any amount of duties, taxes, and fees collected under 
     such section after fiscal year 2014, over
       (B) the amount of duties, taxes, and fees collected under 
     such section during fiscal year 2014,

     shall be deposited into the Claims Fund.
       (2) Application.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply after the 
     date for which the Secretary of the Treasury determines that 
     all payments required to be made under section 7304 have been 
     made.
       (d) Limitation on Payments Made From Fund.--
       (1) In general.--No payment may be made in a fiscal year 
     under section 7304 until funds are deposited into the Claims 
     Fund in such fiscal year under subsection (c).
       (2) Amounts.--For each fiscal year in which funds are 
     deposited into the Claims Fund under subsection (c), the 
     total amount of payments made in a fiscal year under section 
     7304 may not exceed the amount of funds available in the 
     Claims Fund for such fiscal year.
       (e) Deductions From Fund for Administrative Expenses.--The 
     Secretary of the Treasury shall deduct from any amounts 
     deposited into the Claims Fund an amount equal to 5 percent 
     of such amounts as reimbursement to the Federal Government 
     for expenses incurred by the Foreign Claims Settlement 
     Commission and by the Department of the Treasury in the 
     administration of this title. The amounts so deducted shall 
     be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.

     SEC. 7304. PAYMENTS FOR GUAM WORLD WAR II CLAIMS.

       (a) Payments for Death, Personal Injury, Forced Labor, 
     Forced March, and Internment.--After the Secretary of the 
     Treasury receives the certification from the Chairman of the 
     Foreign Claims Settlement Commission as required under 
     section 7305(b)(8), the Secretary of the Treasury shall make 
     payments, subject to the availably of appropriations, to 
     compensable Guam victims and survivors of a compensable Guam 
     decedents as follows:
       (1) Compensable guam victim.--Before making any payments 
     under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall make payments to 
     compensable Guam victims as follows:
       (A) In the case of a victim who has suffered an injury 
     described in subsection (c)(2)(A), $15,000.
       (B) In the case of a victim who is not described in 
     subparagraph (A), but who has suffered an injury described in 
     subsection (c)(2)(B), $12,000.
       (C) In the case of a victim who is not described in 
     subparagraph (A) or (B), but who has suffered an injury 
     described in subsection (c)(2)(C), $10,000.
       (2) Survivors of compensable guam decedents.--In the case 
     of a compensable Guam decedent, the Secretary shall pay 
     $25,000 for distribution to survivors of the decedent in 
     accordance with subsection (b). The Secretary shall make 
     payments under this paragraph only after all payments are 
     made under paragraph (1).
       (b) Distribution of Survivor Payments.--A payment made 
     under subsection (a)(2) to the survivors of a compensable 
     Guam decedent shall be distributed as follows:
       (1) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is living as of 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, but who had no living 
     children as of such date, the payment shall be made to such 
     spouse.
       (2) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is living as of 
     the date of the enactment of this Act and who had one or more 
     living children as of such date, 50 percent of the payment 
     shall be made to the spouse and 50 percent shall be made to 
     such children, to be divided among such children to the 
     greatest extent possible into equal shares.
       (3) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is not living as 
     of the date of the enactment of this Act and who had one or 
     more living children as of such date, the payment shall be 
     made to such children, to be divided among such children to 
     the greatest extent possible into equal shares.
       (4) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is not living as 
     of the date of the enactment of this Act and who had no 
     living children as of such date, but who--
       (A) had a parent who is living as of such date, the payment 
     shall be made to the parent; or
       (B) had two parents who are living as of such date, the 
     payment shall be divided equally between the parents.
       (5) In the case of a decedent whose spouse is not living as 
     of the date of the enactment of this Act, who had no living 
     children as of such date, and who had no parents who are 
     living as of such date, no payment shall be made.
       (c) Definitions.--For purposes of this title:
       (1) Compensable guam decedent.--The term ``compensable Guam 
     decedent'' means an individual determined under section 7305 
     to have been a resident of Guam who died as a result of the 
     attack and occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military 
     forces during World War II, or incident to the liberation of 
     Guam by United States military forces, and whose death would 
     have been compensable under the Guam Meritorious Claims Act 
     of 1945 (Public Law 79-224) if a timely claim had been filed 
     under the terms of such Act.
       (2) Compensable guam victim.--The term ``compensable Guam 
     victim'' means an individual who is not deceased as of the 
     date of the enactment of this Act and who is determined under 
     section 7305 to have suffered, as a result of the attack and 
     occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military forces 
     during World War II, or incident to the liberation of Guam by 
     United States military forces, any of the following:
       (A) Rape or severe personal injury (such as loss of a limb, 
     dismemberment, or paralysis).
       (B) Forced labor or a personal injury not under 
     subparagraph (A) (such as disfigurement, scarring, or burns).
       (C) Forced march, internment, or hiding to evade 
     internment.
       (3) Definitions of severe personal injuries and personal 
     injuries.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Foreign Claims Settlement 
     Commission shall promulgate regulations to specify the 
     injuries that constitute a severe personal injury or a 
     personal injury for purposes of subparagraphs (A) and (B), 
     respectively, of paragraph (2).

     SEC. 7305. ADJUDICATION.

       (a) Authority of Foreign Claims Settlement Commission.--
       (1) In general.--The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission 
     shall adjudicate claims and determine the eligibility of 
     individuals for payments under section 7304.
       (2) Rules and regulations.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Chairman of the 
     Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall publish in the 
     Federal Register such rules and regulations as may be 
     necessary to enable the

[[Page 6640]]

     Commission to carry out the functions of the Commission under 
     this title.
       (b) Claims Submitted for Payments.--
       (1) Submittal of claim.--For purposes of subsection (a)(1) 
     and subject to paragraph (2), the Foreign Claims Settlement 
     Commission may not determine an individual is eligible for a 
     payment under section 7304 unless the individual submits to 
     the Commission a claim in such manner and form and containing 
     such information as the Commission specifies.
       (2) Filing period for claims and notice.--
       (A) Filing period.--An individual filing a claim for a 
     payment under section 7304 shall file such claim not later 
     than one year after the date on which the Foreign Claims 
     Settlement Commission publishes the notice described in 
     subparagraph (B).
       (B) Notice of filing period.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Foreign Claims 
     Settlement Commission shall publish a notice of the deadline 
     for filing a claim described in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) in the Federal Register; and
       (ii) in newspaper, radio, and television media in Guam.
       (3) Adjudicatory decisions.--The decision of the Foreign 
     Claims Settlement Commission on each claim filed under this 
     title shall--
       (A) be by majority vote;
       (B) be in writing;
       (C) state the reasons for the approval or denial of the 
     claim; and
       (D) if approved, state the amount of the payment awarded 
     and the distribution, if any, to be made of the payment.
       (4) Deductions in payment.--The Foreign Claims Settlement 
     Commission shall deduct, from a payment made to a compensable 
     Guam victim or survivors of a compensable Guam decedent under 
     this section, amounts paid to such victim or survivors under 
     the Guam Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (Public Law 79-224) 
     before the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (5) Interest.--No interest shall be paid on payments made 
     by the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission under section 
     7304.
       (6) Limited compensation for provision of representational 
     services.--
       (A) Limit on compensation.--Any agreement under which an 
     individual who provided representational services to an 
     individual who filed a claim for a payment under this title 
     that provides for compensation to the individual who provided 
     such services in an amount that is more than one percent of 
     the total amount of such payment shall be unlawful and void.
       (B) Penalties.--Whoever demands or receives any 
     compensation in excess of the amount allowed under 
     subparagraph (A) shall be fined not more than $5,000 or 
     imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
       (7) Appeals and finality.--Objections and appeals of 
     decisions of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission shall 
     be to the Commission, and upon rehearing, the decision in 
     each claim shall be final, and not subject to further review 
     by any court or agency.
       (8) Certifications for payment.--After a decision approving 
     a claim becomes final, the Chairman of the Foreign Claims 
     Settlement Commission shall certify such decision to the 
     Secretary of the Treasury for authorization of a payment 
     under section 7304.
       (9) Treatment of affidavits.--For purposes of section 7304 
     and subject to paragraph (2), the Foreign Claims Settlement 
     Commission shall treat a claim that is accompanied by an 
     affidavit of an individual that attests to all of the 
     material facts required for establishing the eligibility of 
     such individual for payment under such section as 
     establishing a prima facie case of the eligibility of the 
     individual for such payment without the need for further 
     documentation, except as the Commission may otherwise 
     require. Such material facts shall include, with respect to a 
     claim for a payment made under section 7304(a), a detailed 
     description of the injury or other circumstance supporting 
     the claim involved, including the level of payment sought.
       (10) Release of related claims.--Acceptance of a payment 
     under section 7304 by an individual for a claim related to a 
     compensable Guam decedent or a compensable Guam victim shall 
     be in full satisfaction of all claims related to such 
     decedent or victim, respectively, arising under the Guam 
     Meritorious Claims Act of 1945 (Public Law 79-224), the 
     implementing regulations issued by the United States Navy 
     pursuant to such Act (Public Law 79-224), or this title.

     SEC. 7306. GRANTS PROGRAM TO MEMORIALIZE THE OCCUPATION OF 
                   GUAM DURING WORLD WAR II.

       (a) Establishment.--Subject to subsection (b), the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall establish a grant program 
     under which the Secretary shall award grants for research, 
     educational, and media activities for purposes of 
     appropriately illuminating and interpreting the causes and 
     circumstances of the occupation of Guam during World War II 
     and other similar occupations during the war that--
       (1) memorialize the events surrounding such occupation; or
       (2) honor the loyalty of the people of Guam during such 
     occupation.
       (b) Eligibility.--The Secretary of the Interior may not 
     award a grant under subsection (a) unless the person seeking 
     the grant submits an application to the Secretary for such 
     grant, in such time, manner, and form and containing such 
     information as the Secretary specifies.

     SEC. 7307. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Guam World War II Claims Payments and Adjudication.--
     For the purposes of carrying out sections 7304 and 7305, 
     there is authorized to be appropriated for any fiscal year 
     beginning after the date of enactment of this act, an amount 
     equal to the amount deposited into the Claims Fund in a 
     fiscal year under section 7303. Not more than 5 percent of 
     funds make available under this subsection shall be used for 
     administrative costs. Amounts appropriated under this section 
     may remain available until expended.
       (b) Guam World War II Grants Program.--For purposes of 
     carrying out section 7306, there are authorized to be 
     appropriated $5,000,000 for each fiscal year beginning after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 735, the gentlewoman 
from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chair, I appreciate this amendment being made in 
order.
  It is time that we bring resolution to the people of Guam and all 
U.S. citizens who have suffered under enemy occupation during World War 
II. We found an offset to address its costs, which was one of the 
problems. I look forward to adopting this amendment and working with 
the Senate during conference.
  Again, I thank very much Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith 
and Chairman Bishop for their support of this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Womack). Is there objection to the request of 
the gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the many contributions the 
gentlewoman from Guam has made to our committee as the ranking member 
on the Subcommittee on Readiness, among other capacities. I think this 
is a good amendment, and I certainly hope our Members will support it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Collins of Georgia) having assumed the chair, Mr. Womack, 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. 
4909) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2017 for military 
activities of the Department of Defense and for military construction, 
to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for 
other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________