Washington, D.C.—U.S. Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-Calif.), the Ranking Member of the House Armed Services Committee, today provided the following statement for the record to the Rules Committee during its consideration of H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011:
“Madame Chairwoman, I appear before you alongside my friend and colleague, Chairman Ike Skelton, to ask for a rule on H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. Last Wednesday, the Committee on Armed Services reported out this bill by a unanimous vote of 59-0. Since you have a detailed summary covering many initiatives in this bill, I will only focus on a few key areas. I ask that my entire statement be included for the record.
“The defense authorization bill authorizes $567 billion in budget authority for the Fiscal Year 2011 base budget of the Department of Defense and national security programs of the Department of Energy and authorizes $193 billion in funding to support operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Global War on Terrorism.
“Foremost, it addresses many of this committee’s priorities in supporting the men and women of the Armed Forces, their spouses and families. This bill does an admirable job dealing with some of our greatest national security challenges. Addressing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, H.R. 5136 authorizes the Fiscal Year 2011 Overseas Contingency Operations.
“With respect to Afghanistan, this bill updates reporting requirements, including asking for the conditions and criteria that will be used to measure progress, instead of allowing the ticking Washington political clock to determine our end state. I am very pleased that the Chairman and our colleagues on the committee joined us in ensuring that life-saving combat enablers—such as force protection, Medical Evacuation, and Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities—are deployed in time to fully support the 30,000 additional troops scheduled to arrive in Afghanistan by this summer.
“Building on the acquisition reform act this body passed in April, this legislation takes a number of important steps on major weapons programs. We strongly believe that a $110 billion, non-competitive, sole-source, 25 year contract should not be permitted. Therefore, we strongly support the inclusion of funding to complete development of the F136 competitive engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.
“Madame Chairwoman, as Members of Congress, we owe our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines the very best available equipment, training, and support in order to provide them with the best possible tools to undertake their missions. The provisions in this bill go a considerable way in demonstrating this support, but we can—and should—improve it. Congress, and particularly the Armed Services Committees in both chambers, has the unmistakable obligation to ensure that the Department of Defense develops and deploys defensive capabilities that protect the American people, our forward-deployed forces, and our allies.
“This bill takes prudent steps to ensure we defend America from a position of strength, rather than a position of weakness. In the nuclear policy arena, this bill adopts policies that strengthen our security, not disarm it. In that regard, we are gratified that the committee adopted an amendment that our national policy should be to keep all our strategic response options open, and not foreclose use of our nuclear deterrent without regard to the potential actions of our foes. Similarly, we are pleased that the committee adopted language restricting future reductions in our nuclear forces until certain reviews and certifications are made. The committee is sending a strong message that we have grave concerns about recent changes to America’s nuclear policies.
“Likewise, our missile defense policies must support the design and deployment of a comprehensive missile defense system capable of protecting the U.S. homeland, our deployed military forces and our allies. We are pleased the committee supported a $361.6 million increase to missile defense. The legislation also states clearly that the Congress expects there to be no limitations on missile defense in Europe resulting from ratification of the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, despite Russian statements to the contrary.
“While this legislation supports the administration’s new phased adaptive approach (PAA) for missile defense in Europe, we need to ensure continued investments in and enhancements to our homeland defense capabilities. Therefore, we are disappointed that the committee rejected an amendment by Mr. Turner to maintain and refurbish a ground-based missile defense field in Alaska to increase near-term protection of the United States.
“As a nation, we owe more than our gratitude to the brave men and women in uniform and their families, past and present, for the sacrifices they make to protect our freedom. We are pleased that this legislation includes a pay rise, which is half a percentage point above the President’s request.
“A major disappointment is that once again the committee and House leadership were unable to find the mandatory spending offsets needed to eliminate the Widow’s Tax – a tax that occurs because survivors must forfeit most or all of their Survivor Benefit Plan Annuity to receive Dependency Indemnity Compensation. Nor were we able to provide for concurrent receipt of military disability retired pay and VA disability pay, as proposed by the President.
“I know that Chairman Skelton has attempted to find the offsets, but so far, despite this House approving trillions in spending that is not offset, this body has been unable or unwilling to find the means to support widows and disabled veterans.
“With respect to the victims of the attacks at Fort Hood, we are pleased this legislation incorporates an amendment by Mr. Coffman that would provide combat zone benefits to the military and Department of Defense civilian employee victims of the Fort Hood shootings. We are, however, deeply disappointed that the committee refused to require the public release of the restricted annex to the review of the Fort Hood shootings. American citizens need to know why a U.S. Army officer chose to murder and wound defenseless soldiers and civilians.
“One of the areas where there is disagreement within our committee is detainee policy—these are differences that I believe need to be debated and given a vote within the full House. We need to keep terrorists off of our soil, not fight to get them here. We are disappointed the committee did not support our amendment that would have prevented the transfer of any Guantanamo Bay detainee to U.S. soil. I urge the committee to make in order amendments dealing with the transfer of detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba into the United States.
“Finally, for the last eight years we have asked the men and women of the Armed Forces and their families to make repeated sacrifices while serving this nation. They have unhesitatingly and selflessly responded in a magnificent manner, without hesitation putting mission and nation ahead of self and family. Now the proponents of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell want to rush a vote to the floor because they fear the votes will not be there if they wait.
“After making the continuous sacrifice of fighting two wars over the course of eight years, the men and women of our military deserve to be heard. Congress acting first is the equivalent of turning to our men and women in uniform, and their families, and saying your opinion, your views, do not count.
“Just today I have received letters from all four service chiefs. I have copies here for you to review.
“As General Schwartz writes: ‘I believe it is important, a matter of keeping faith with those currently serving in the Armed Forces, that the Secretary of Defense commissioned review be completed before there is any legislation to repeal the Don’t ask Don’t Tell law. Such action…sends an important signal to our Airmen and families that their opinion matters.’
“General Casey writes: ‘I believe that repealing the law before the completion of the review will be seen by the men and women of the Army as a reversal of our commitment to hear their views before moving forward.’ Similar views were expressed by Admiral Roughead and General Conway.
“By not making Mr. Murphy’s amendment in order, you will be keeping faith with the 2.5 million men and women in uniform and their families and saying to them that their voices do count. We owe that much to our military personnel. I strongly urge the committee not to rule in order an amendment to repeal the law before our military families can be heard.
“Should the committee, however, decide to allow consideration of a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, I would ask that my amendment, a substitute for that of Rep. Murphy’s be made in order. Not only would it ensure that Congress receives the full report of the Secretary of Defense’s Comprehensive Review—something that Rep. Murphy’s bill does not do, but it would also ensure that the review addresses important policy and legislative issues, such as the Defense of Marriage Act, that will impact readiness, morale and cohesion should the law be repealed.
“My amendment is based on the belief that Congress, not the President, nor the Secretary of Defense , nor the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, must decide to repeal section 654, title 10, US. Code.
“It reflects the view that for Congress to make a fully informed decision, the Department of Defense must provide Congress a full and complete understanding of why current law threatens or undermines readiness; whether a change in law will improve readiness; and whether a change in law is necessary to sustain future readiness.
“Finally my amendment would require the Department’s Comprehensive Review to assess whether the repeal of section 654 can take place without an amendment or repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). I believe that if section 654 is repealed without also addressing DOMA, not only will family readiness be undermined by huge disparities in benefits based on sexual orientation, but also that the military will become the cauldron of the political debate over DOMA, which will also undermine readiness.
“Madame Chairwoman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you and talk about this important national defense bill and ways in which we can improve it. I support H.R. 5136 as passed by the Armed Services Committee. Together with Chairman Skelton, I am prepared to answer any questions that you may have.”
###