tv [untitled] CSPAN June 24, 2009 8:00pm-8:30pm EDT
investment and use of geothermal energy. we also made some commonsense decisions regarding our fighter aircraft fleet. as a committee, working in a bipartisan manner, we setaside the rhetoric and took into account current and future threats to balance the force. we sustained the current operational fleet, we supported additional f-22's requested by our combatant commanders, we maintained robust f-35 funding, and provided additional flexibility for the air force to fill the impending fighter gap with less expensive but quite capable 4.5 generation fighters. . i congratulate the chairman and ranking member and i encourage my colleagues to support it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the the gentleman from from florida has 15 1/2 minutes remaining and the gentlewoman from maine has 171/4 minutes.
mr. diaz-balart: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from illinois, mrs. biggert. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to this rule. i offered an amendment on monday to address an injustice against the members of our armed services that were shut out from consideration by this rule. briefly, my amendment would have given an across the board pay raise of 5% to our military personnel. according to estimates made by the congressional research service, the pay gap between military personnel and civilians is 3%. given that the cost of living increase for 2010 is 2.9%, my amendment is an important first step to addressing this problem, particularly due to the recession, but really at any time it is unacceptable our men and women in uniform receive
less than civilian counterparts. i was in afghanistan and had the opportunity to see firsthand the professionalism and the commitment of our troops, what service they render to us. why are they being treated this way? and i received assurances from the parliamentarian that my amendment was in order and the congressional budget office said it complies with all pay-go requirements. i can't understand why they would deny our troops to an up or down vote or at least a debate that would -- that would at least bring out the issues. if we have time to debate an amendment that would require a study of the number of subcontractors used by the department of defense, we should time to debate giving our troops a fair wage. this is the second time i have offered this amendment to increase the pay of our troops and second time it has been denied. i urge my colleagues to oppose this rule.
and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentlewoman from maine. ms. pingree: i yield two minutes to the the gentleman from ohio, member of the committee on armed services, mr. driehaus. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. driehaus: thank you, mr. speaker and thank you for this opportunity. there has been much talk about fiscal responsibility on the floor of this house. and i come to the floor to support the rule and support the bill. and i support it because of the inclusion of the joint stryke fighter program. when we talk about the program, it is through competition that we achieve fiscal responsibility. since fiscal year 2006, $2.5 billion has been provided for the development of the joint stryke fighter program. and last month, president obama signed the recquistions reform act into law. this supported an increased use of competition in defense procurement.
the expected cost of the primary joint stryke fighter propulsion system has increased by $1.8 billion while the competitive engine program has not experienced any cost growth at all. in fact, the contractor has indicated a willingness to negotiate on fixed price terms for the remaining development and production of the competitive engine. we know the competition works. when we look at the f-15 and f-16 in the 1970's, we found that the great engine war brought lower prices, better engines, better competition, more reliability. we have the same thing today with the joint stryke fighter. and in this bill, we have included the competitive engine program which is critical to the success of the joint stryke fighter engines. i urge you to support the rule, because with it becomes enhanced contractor responsiveness,
technological innovation, improved readiness and morrow bus industrial base for the united states. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield three minutes to the distinguished the gentleman from georgia, dr. broun. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. diaz-balart: yield three minutes to the distinguished the gentleman from texas, mr. conaway. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. conaway: i'm go to go oppose this rule and ask my colleagues to op it based on what's not in it. the amendment i presented yesterday was not made in order and the members of this house will not be allowed to take a stance on a very important issue that colleagues on the other end of the building that senators have taken a stance on to oppose, the release of the detainee photographs. the president of the united states has said listening to his field commanders and general
petraeus that the release of these photographs would work and be used as a recruiting tool and used by president ahmadinejad to turn the pro-democracy protests in his country away from protests against ahmadinejad and towards america. there is a body of photographs taken between september 1, 2001 and january 2, 2009 and have no business being released in the public arena. we need a legislative fix that would prevent the release of these photographs and my amendment mirrored up with an exact replica in the senate would allow these photographs to be protected properly. the amendment would have protected for three years on a rolling three-year basis these photographs certified by the secretary of defense that they would, in fact, be used as recruiting tools and could be used to incite violence against american troops. there is no good reason to
release these photographs. i wish the rules committee would have allowed this debate as our colleagues from massachusetts said last night, the way the rules committee works, why are we afraid to have this debate. it is unanimous that they believe these photographs should be protected. the president has come out saying it is appropriate to protect these photographs. and we aren't talking about forever, but three years at a time to protect these photographs. i'm disappointed that the rules committee failed to allow the members of this body to express their will as opposed to the will of the chairman of the committee and maybe a couple of others who in their judgment believe that these photographs should, in fact, be released and the consequences that the courts have said that they recognize the validity of the consequences that are set forth in general petraeus' comments as well as general odierno's comments to the courts. the other side believes it is better to have these photographs
used as recruitment tools for al qaeda as well as the other uses they will be put to. it's unfortunate the rules committee, led by the chairman ruled this way and in consequence, i will be voting against this rule and ask my colleagues to vote likewise. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from from maine. ms. pingree: i yield three minutes to the the gentlewoman from california, ms. woolsey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. woolsey: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you for the time from the rules committee. i rise today to support my colleague, chairman barney frank. i am equally or even more disappointed than he is that his amendment on the f-22 funding was not made in order for the defense authorization debate. there is absolutely no need for additional funding for this flawed program. the cold war is over.
the existing 187 f-22 planes have already cost the united states a total of $65.1 billion. and while this bill only includes $369 million for advanced procurement, the total amount for 12 additional f-22's will run $2 billion. think what we can do with $2 billion in the united states of america. we have schools that are in need. we have a health care system that's broken. we have to move on with our global warming program. $2 billion would help any one of those issues. the f-22 has never been used in iraq or afghanistan. it is absolutely not necessary
or useful in counterinsurgency operations. the existing 187 that we have right now is actually adequate for any single contingency that could happen in the united states of america, both civilian and military leadership of the pentagon support ending production at 187, including the president of the united states. the idea that this house will not have a chance to have a full debate on chairman frank's amendment is unacceptable. and this rule is truly flawed. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield three minutes to my friend, the distinguished the gentleman from georgia, dr. broun. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes.
mr. broun: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise today in adamant opposition to this rule. this is one of many rules -- they do nothing but censor our side from being able to put forth amendments that make sense, that cut the size of the federal government, that cut the size of the huge growth in federal spending. now, under the constitution, national defense should be and must be the major function of the federal government. we have to have a strong national federal defense. and we have to have experts tell us how that comes about. we need to have the experts tell us what defense systems are needed, such as the f-22. prior speaker was talking about how it's not needed and how the funds could be utilized for social programs. but i disagree.
national defense should and must be the major function of the federal government. we need to fund our defense, because we have people around this world, countries as well as the terrorists who want to destroy what this country stands for. so we need to fund missile defense. we need to fund the f-22. we need to fund those defense programs as well as the research and development that's absolutely critical to make sure we stay a sovereign and secure nation. but also, many republican amendments were submitted. in fact, i submitted some myself. but the majority decided to stifle our ability being able to bring those amendments to the floor, to talk about things that members of congress think are very important on this rule in this bill. but we were hushed. our voices were quieted. why?
because we have a steam roller of socialism that is being forced down the throat of the american people. we try to stop the outrageous spending. we try on our side to have fiscally responsible government, not only in defense spending but also all across the board. we have an energy tax that's being proposed just this week that's going to cost jobs. so it will put people out of work. it will raise the cost of food, medicines and goods and services in this nation. and unfortunately, over and over again, we have seen this majority, the leadership of this congress prevent republican proposals to be brought to this floor to be debated, to be presented to the american public for public examination and for us to be able to debate them. but we have been crensored and
it's wrong. the american public need to stand up and say no. and i'm very adamantly -- very adamantly encourage my colleagues to say no to this rule. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from from maine. ms. pingree: i yield three minutes to the the gentlewoman from from california, ms. harman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. ms. harman: i rise in support of the rule and the underlying bill and commend chairman skelton and ranking member mckeon for moving another unanimous bipartisan authorization bill out of their committee. as a former member of the house armed services committee, i admire the bipartisan way in which the committee operates. my aerospace district is thankful, too. thanks to susan davis and her staff for working with me on an issue of paramount importance, the epidemic of rape and sexual
assault in the military. mr. speaker, the mathis shocking. women who serve in the u.s. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in iraq. only 317 out of the 2,763 subjects investigated during fiscal year 2008 were referred to courts marshall. that is 11%, a figure below prosecution rates where 40% arrested for rape are prosecuted. d.o.d. must close the gaps and remove obstacles to legal enforcement. effective investigation and prosecution are the keys to turning this epidemic around by drawing bright red lines around unacceptable conduct. this bill has language that i offered along with mike turner. i thank him for his hard work. our provision calls for investigation and prosecu
sexual assault and rape cases and determine any deficiencies. it requires d.o.d. provide a sexual assault prevention plan. this would include action plans for reducing the number of sacksal assaults and timelines for implementation of the program. d.o.d. would be required to develop a mechanism to measure the if he cantiveness of its prevention program. while our bill, this bill is commendable and good steps towards eliminating rapists in the ranks, i believe we can do even more. we must build up these efforts and insist on real accountability from the chain of command and a major step toward eradicating rape in the military is making sure that blue-on-blue attacks are punished. this is a force protection issue, a moral issue. congress and d.o.d. must do better. and when our colleague john mchugh becomes army secretary, i urge him to pursue the issue and
the impressive i am strong campaign initiated by his predecessor. i yield back the balance of my time and urge a aye vote on the rule and legislation. and i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield to the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona. mr. flake: i rise in opposition to this rule. this body at this time sits under a cloud. we have investigations from the justice department and an investigation by our own ethics committee into the intersection between campaign contributions and earmarks. more specifically earmarks that go to for-profit companies. sole source contracts, no-bid contracts. that's what earmarks basically are that are going to in particular defense contractors. and then contributions come back from individuals who represent those groups and lobbyist who is represent those groups.
so-called circular fundraising. that's being investigated as i mentioned by the justice department and our own ethics committee. and yet this rule will set in motion a process by which we will approve more than 300 n. this bill alone, 300 earmarks no-bid contracts, for private companies. for-profit companies. again in this legislation if this rule is approved this legislation will provide more than 600 earmarks, more than half of which, over 300 of which represent no-bid contracts to private companies. we simply cannot continue to do this, mr. speaker. i offered an amendment that would prohibit members from giving earmarks or no-bid contracts to their campaign contributors. that earmark was not -- that amendment was not ruled in order. it should have been. we should as a body decide that we cannot continue this practice. we need to remove the cloud that hangs over this body that
rains on republicans and democrats alike. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from maine. ms. pingree: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes to the gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i read this evening with interest the president of the united states has threatened to veto the defense bill if the additional funding exists for f-22 fighter planes. mr. speaker, the president is absolutely right. the real problem today is that opportunity to vote against those unnecessary planes are not allowed in this rule. in the end, we have to stop spending more and start spending smarter. i was extremely disappointed to learn that the administration's recommendation to halt the f-22 program was overridden. 187 f-22 raptor fighter jets is
not enough? the raptor has not even been deployed to iraq or afghanistan , our two largest military fronts. while i'm not an expert on defense procurement, our defense secretary, robert gates, is. so i tend to believe him when he said that the notion of not buying 60 more f-22's imperils the national security of the united states is, quote, completely nonsense. we are far and away the most superior air force in the world. why would we pour billions more into an area where we already dominate and continue to support aircraft that is not suited to the current battlefields in which we fight? we have to invest in low-tech equipment such as unmanned droughns which are effective in those areas of con-- conflict. always remember every defense dollar spent to bolster an area where we dominate is a dollar we don't have to spend to take
care of our soldiers, strengthen our force, and improve in areas where we may be vulnerable and our 10e8ders -- soldiers may be vulnerable. again we have to simply stop spending more and start spending smarter. our soldiers deserve it. the taxpayers deserve it. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida has 6 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. diaz-balart: i ask my friend if she has additional speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from maine. ms. pingree: i have no remaining speakers. i reserve the balance of my time. mr. diaz-balart: i thank my friend and thank you, mr. speaker, for your courtesy. i want to thank all who have come to participate in this debate. this legislation enjoys extraordinarierly wide extraordinarily wide bipartisan support. it's unfortunate that the rule
that brings it to the floor is not fair. as i pointed out it makes about 2/3 of the amendments that were introduced to the rules committee from the majority party in order and only about 1/3 of the amendments made by -- presented or introduced, proposed for debate by members of the minority party. that's not fair. and it maintains a pattern we have seen deepened, augmented significantly in a very worrisome way in the appropriations process. wherefwherefore the first time the bills are being brought forth, the appropriations bills are being brought to the floor under restrictive rules and that's -- we have had significant debate but that's something that's also unfair and unfortunate.
it diminishes the rights of each of the members of this house. so i do think it's important we get to the debate on legislation. in this case this authorization of the armed forces legislation that enjoys such widespread bipartisan support. and so once again opposing the rule and opposing the previous question i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from maine. ms. pingree: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my friend from florida, mr. diaz-balart, for the dialogue that we have had here on the floor tonight. mr. speaker, the rule before us today will continue the open debate that was held on committee, some of which continued tonight. and further our efforts to find solutions to those pressing problems. in particular, this rule adds the text of h.r. 2990 to the underlying bill which funds a one-year expansion of concurrent receipts for retired veterans. extends retention bonuses and special pay authorities for
enlisted service members. and funds provisions in the federal retirement reform act of 2009. i'd like to thank the chair, chairman skelton, ranking member mckeon, and all my colleagues on the house armed services committee for their tireless work on this bill. i urge a yes vote on the previous question and on the rule and i yield back the balance of my time. i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes seem to have it. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 , further proceedings on this question will be postponed. pursuant to section 703-c of
the public interest declassification act of 2000, and the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair announces the speaker's appointment of the following member on the part of the house to the public interest declassification board for a term of three years. the clerk: mr. david skaggs of lamont, colora. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states, section 202-d of the national emergencies act, 50 u.s.c. 1622-d provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless prior to the anniversary date of its declaration the president publishes in the federal register and transmits to the congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. in accordance with this
provision i have sent to the federal register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency declared in executive order 134-66 of june 26, 2008, is to continue in effect beyond june 26, 2009. the current existence and risk of a proliferation of weapons usable fissile material on the korean peninsula constitute a continuing, unusual, and extraordinary threat to national security and foreign policy of the united states. for these reasons i have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency and maintain certain restrictions with respect to north korea and north korean nationals that would otherwise have been lifted in proclamation 8271 of june 26, 2008. signed, barack obama, the white house, june 24, 2009. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the committee on
2892. will the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. altmire, kindly take the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 2892 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for the department of homeland security for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2010, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose earlier today a. request for recorded vote on amendment number 1 printed in part d of house report 111-183 offered by the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake, had been postponed and the bill had been read through page 93, line 12. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed in the following order. amendment number 1 printed in part a by mr. price of north carolina. amendment number 5 printed in part b by mr. lewis of california. amendment number 8 printed in part b by mr. king of new york. amendment number 1 printed in part b by mr. bilirakis of florida. amendment number 3 printed in part b by mr. king of iowa. amendment number 2 printed in part b by mr. duncan of tennessee. amendment number 7 printed in part b by mr. poe of texas. amendment number 4 printed in part b by mr. king of iowa. amendment number 6 printed in part b by mr. neugebauer of texas. amendment number 7 printed in part c by mr. flake of arizona. amendment number 5 plinted in part c by mr. flake of arizona. amendment number 2 printed in part c by mr. flake of arizona. amendment number 1 printed in part c by mr. flake of arizona. amendment number 1 print the in part d by mr. flake of arizona. the chair will reduce to two minutes the time for any electronic vote after the first