The chair notes the presence of a quorum. Committee meets today to consider and mark up h. R. 2010, the National Defense authorization act for fiscal year 2018. For 55 straight years, under congresses and president s of both parties, and annual ndaa has been signed into law. Im certain that this you will be no different. The members of this committee have an overwhelming commitment to the duty placed on us by the constitution to support the men and women who serve our nation in the military. Every member of this committee has contributed to this legislation. Committee member suggested 1531 separate legislative provisions for consideration in the marks. Over 330 amendments were filed for today. But members also contributed by asking thoughtful questions at our briefings and hearings, by traveling to visit our troops at home and overseas, by sharing their personal experiences and insights, and by talking with one another about how to solve problems. And so first i want to express my appreciation to each of the members and to our staffs for your work, so far come in developing this years ndaa. This is a team effort, and i think its safe to say theres nothing else like it these days in congress. And i want to especially express appreciation to the Ranking Member, because is spirit of working together, even when and especially when we have different views, keeping in mind the security of the nation, is something that also is not common in congress but essential if we are to fulfill our duties. We began our hearings this you look at the state of the world and the nature of the threats we face. We went on to examine the state of our military after years of continuing resolutions in the budget control act. What we heard was alarming, and that was also reflected in secretary mattis testimony before us on june 12. I was struck by this paragraph of his testimony, quote, four years later i returned to the department and i have been shocked by what ive seen with our readiness to fight. For all the heartache caused by the loss of our troops during these wars, no any in the field has done more harm to the readiness of our military then sequestration know in any we both sustain our ability to meet americas commitments abroad because our troops have historically shouldered a much greater burden. End quote. This fy 2018 ndaa take significant steps towards repairing and rebuilding our military are continuing to reform the pentagon to make it more agile and capable in supporting our war fighters. Last fall i asked the Committee Staff to develop a plan to put our military on a better track to repair our planes and ships, to fill out our formations and to accelerate the development of new Innovative Systems and technologies. The conclusion was that we need a base Defense Budget of 640 billion in fy 18, steady growth thereafter. Today we will mark up a bill totaling 631. 5 billion or base requirements, and 65 billion for the overseas Contingency Operations account. Its the compromise to get all of the relevant house committees on the same page. The goal is not only to find the fence adequately this year, but to establish significant predictable growth in future years. I recognize that are a number of legislative steps to go before final authorization and appropriation bills are sent to the president and before changes are made in the bca caps. I also believe that time that place even more burdens on our troops is over. Its important to remind us all where we have been on defense spending in recent years from 20102015 total defense spending was cut 22 in constant dollars. Today even after the trump supplemental request was signed into law, fy 17 defense spending is 18 lower than it was in 2010 measured in constant dollars. And remember 2010, the year where measuring against, was before russia invaded crimea, before china built island in the South China Sea, before any of us had ever heard of isis, and certainly before north korea embarked on its crash missile program. The administration sent us a Budget Proposal for 603 billion, about 5 above current spending, and about 3 above the amount that the Obama Administration had proposed for fy 18. Their proposal would cut Missile Defense below current spending, cut shipbuilding accounts, at no additional soldiers to the army, et cetera, et cetera. While secretary mattis and general dunford testified that they support the administrations request, of course they also testified that they supported every one of the unfunded requirements submitted by the services. And so if you look at the difference between what the administration submitted and what is in the market before us today, it is that we find 21 billion of the 31 billion in unfunded requirements, plus we start moving toward the 350 ship navy with an extra 6 billion and shipbuilding. I think its important for us to remember also that under article section eight of the constitution its our responsibility to raise and support provide and maintain the military forces of the United States. Naturally where interested in the executive suggestion but its our job to decide. We all have responsibilities outside this room related to larger budget issues of taxes and spending, as i mentioned there many moving pieces to the broader budget picture that will develop over the year. But for today, and for our responsibilities as the House Armed Services committee, its important for us i think you put down this marker for what we need for National Defense. At the same time we continue reforms, the two driving priority of this bill as far as im concerned our rebuild and reform come some of the most significant reforms on subcommittee barks such as reform of the management of space and reform of the oversight of Cyber Operations. The cherry moon smart concludes another of acquisition reform focusing on online marketplace is that affect humans playing for service contracts, consistent across an intellectual property as well as data transparency. I introduced this bill more than a month ago, have gotten a number of suggestions, some criticism, and occasionally a little, even although prospective been some suggestions come some changes in the language from what i introduced at are reflected in this market as result of that feedback. I think as a whole these reforms will make a substantial difference. Let me just mention a few of the highlights of the bill. Chairman dunford made the point that Americas Center of gravity is our alliances. Provisions in this bill worked to strengthen our alliances in europe, in asia, in the middle east and elsewhere here it supports tried again. It supports increased in strength as requested by the army, air force and navy. Fully funds the pay raise to which the statutory formula says our troops are entitled. It tries to assist military spouses in being able to practice their vocation as they are forced to move from duty station to duty station. At significant funding to depots and other accounts to accelerate the repair of our weapons and equipment. And it makes some progress in repairing or tearing down old facilities that have long been neglected. Finally the bill supports the administrations request for the fight against terrorists in afghanistan, iraq, syria and elsewhere, but, of course, there are more questions that need to be answered and oversight conducted about the future course of those conflicts. Finally, before we weighed off into the details of this bill i want to offer a little historical perspective. I suspect most of us have not heard of robert paterson, he was the undersecretary of war during world war ii turkey was a lawyer, a Federal District court and civil court of appeals judge but he left the bench and 9040 to go to the war department. As one person described it, he oversaw all fronts of Domestic Production from laces for the gis issues to the production of the atomic bomb. He died tragically in a plane crash in 1952, but just three years ago some private memoirs of his were published, and there are two provisions come to paragraphs that really jumped out at me that he wrote about that apply to us. Judge patterson wrote the will of the nation is the final determinant of policy, the leaders of our arme armed forces cannot secure our safety less than nation wills it to be safe. Unfortunately up to the time of pearl harbor, our will was divided and uncertain. We had to constantly compromise between what technically we knew we needed and what had seemed likely the nation would grant as. Those compromises came close to being disastrous. The other paragraph, the breathtaking display of power with which we close hostilities in europe must not allow us to forget that we had a terribly close call at the start. Nor can we forget, for to forget that it took nearly five years from the moment when danger threatened until we reached the pinnacle of our strength in the field. Destiny was generous of time, more generous than we deserved. We cannot count on such generosity again. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a solemn duty. Its not abstract. Its real and concrete. Its a matter of life and death. Its a matter of our nation security. And as we go about our Business Today and possibly tonight, im confident that we will keep that solemn duty to the men and women who serve, and to our nation foremost in our minds. I yielded to the Ranking Member. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to begin by agreeing with you on the great work of the members of this committee and of the staff. And i think your summary of many of the things that are in the bill is an excellent example of some of that great work that was done. Certainly in the area of space particular. Ive worked quite a bit with chairman rogers and Ranking Member carper on different aspects, dentist any of the space court, gadgets understand how space is any futures reflective against our policy role as a committee. Its not just up to the white house and executive branch did so with mentor does. We tried a lot of policy that makes enormous difference in making us safer. Similarly, a past chairman, what was then the terrorism subcommittee, i want to thank them for their great work on focusing on that incredibly important part of hybrid cyber special forces defense, which is become so much a part of what we have to do, whether its facing isis are facing information, disinformation campaigns of russia. There is great work throughout this bill. I also agree with the chairman the necessity of passing it as were done i think 75 straight years, sorry i missed missed the point, 86 straight years, important for those policy reasons we make the policy that helps move us forward in a a positive direction in terms of National Security. There are two significant challenges before us better do want to mention, and at the outset is not the fault of this Committee Picked this committee has done a great job of trying to work on understanding what our National Security threats and the best to meet them. Number one is what the chairman led with, thats the money. We have in this bill 696 million, which include the oco in terms of defense spending. Unfortunately what we do not have in the house or the senate is a budget resolution. The first time in the entire time ive been in this congress that we reached this late date and we dont have a budget resolution. And the reason we dont have a budget resolution is because we cannot come to agreement on how to spend the money. But more important than that the reason is, as always, it seems we have vastly overpromise what were going to deliver versus what we actually have the funds to deliver the if youre keeping track of everything, we are very similar with the shortfalls in the Armed Services and the shortfalls within the military. We fired for the last six months a parade of generals and think tanks talking about all the shortfalls with a bunch of different places. Many of which i agree with, not all but many i do agree with. We also have a very strong call from many 4000 budget with a 20 20 trillion debt at the deficit to 7700. A number of members are on other committees, just about every of the committee you go to has a very similar list of needs and concerns, whether you talk about nih funding, transportation infrastructure, education, housing. Theres a laundry list of things. Ive come across a committee where their opinion is gone, youre giving us too much money, please stop. So we have this desire for a whole lot more resources than we actually have. The reason the budget resolution cant pass is there are not 218 votes for any budget resolution because there will be some number of people who will object and say it spends too much. There are many members who support the budget control act, want to keep it in place, would not want to lift that. And that by the weigh way is re. If the money that we have in this bill is to become law, the house and the senate will have to agree, and the president , to lift the budget caps. And there are many members who are unwilling to do that. Ironically, there are also a lot of numbers if you were not spending enough money in a bunch of different areas. So we have basically not been honest with the American People about the choices that we face. In october 1 is coming, and that is when this all comes to a head come when all of these promises that dont add up leave us in a very bad place. So while we mark this bill up, 696 billion, it is highly unlikely that at the end of this process we are going to 696 billion. Because first of all the house has been unwilling to vote for that budget resolution. Again the house has to vote to lift the budget caps. That alone is a significant lot but, of course, as always the even larger block is in the senate. It requires 60 votes in the senate to lift the budget caps. The budget cap number for this committee is 549 billion. That doesnt count oco which is 65, 70 billion but our base bill is 621 billion. As the chairman has noted there are a lot of things we feel are not find it within a 621 billion. Imagine where its that if we have to stumble all the way back to 549 billion which is whats going to happen if we dont vote to raise the budget caps. And in the senate they have a concern about other issues, and i was get myself in trouble when i do that on this committee because i know on this committee and i agree our primary responsibility is the funding of the military at our National Security. But there are other needs in this country and ive been told that the one thing does have anything to do with the other. But president trumps budget made it absolutely clear that thats not true. President trumps budget plus of defense by 54 billion to get us up to the 603 billion level and cut all other nondefense discretionary by exactly 54 billion. So the one thing very much it does have to do with the other, and included among staff was a 30 cut in the state department. When were talking about a National Security challenges that we face, and we need, and the need for the military response, theres an incredible need for increased diplomacy. We are looking at a 30 cut. If you look at the afghanistanpakistan working group in the state department which was just disbanded, we are renting at the number of troops apparent that we will send to afghanistan while getting rid of the one group of people that was supposed to be planning a strategy. The senate is very unlikely to accept that, the house is very unlikely to accept that level of cats. So we have to figure out that budget piece and i think the quote from mr. Patterson were spot on. The reason we didnt do it is we dont want to do it, its tough, its hard make choices, to decide what were going to cut. It is way past time that we make those choices. Personally i believe we need more revenue. I think the National Security needs that event outline and that it grown dramatically since 2010 are very real. I think the infrastructure needs in this country are very real and i think it is shameful we are not willing to provide the revenue to support what we say is so important to us. But if open to other ideas. What isnt going to work is what were doing in this bill. This isnt going to work, okay . We are not just going to after seven months of not doing it raised the budget caps. There is going to be some sort of agreement that recognizes the challenges i just outlined. Right now we are hoping, doing this, we hoping that between now and october 1 some have that at the moment is completely blocked, completely everything is going to emerge thats going to enable us to do this. We need to get past that. We need to actually on us and look at the money we have, and if we are committed to funding all of the shortfalls that were going to talk about today, then actually provide the money. Because absent a budget resolution what we are doing here today old emily does not have the force of law. And the second point i think is fairly important, six months into it we do not have a National Security strategy from the white house. All of the challenges that event outline we have heard about, but how they come together . How do we decide course were not going to have enough money to do everything we want to do. If you were to be keeping track of the various pieces that can be forced to testify before the shortfalls and Defense Budget, and attempted to add up what was that we would need, i dont know what that number is, but its way about 700 billion to meet all of those needs. In fact, one of the most disturbing conversations i had in the last several months was with the office of net assessment and which of the outlining again a as a chairman did all of the shortfalls that we have and then they said we had a strategy in 2012, we do not have enough money to fund that strategy. So i asked them how short are you . He looked at me kind of audits are reputed, how much money would you need to actually meet our national he had no idea. He had no answer. How can you have no answer to how much money you need and simply key thing that you need more . Thats not a strategy, and it matters in terms of the decisions that we make. Because just one quick stab at you, we apparently fired roughly three times as many missiles under the Trump Administration as we were firing under the Obama Administration primarily industry and iraq and yemen and somalia, and that may well be necessary. That may will be a comforting something. We dont know what exactly because redmond told a strategy. At the same time you cut the pay, commander is concerned about how he is going to Deter North Korea and china. The amount of missiles we have kind of matters so while we are part of all these over there should be think about the broader judge except that we dont have one. The only tiny little glimmer of hope that we go can was about te weeks ago when general dunford came up and gave us the broad outlines of a strategy that is not yet been filed to on, the choices amongst all these different threads have not been made so it was just a tiny, tiny little sip of water after six months in the desert. When you do a lot more on coming up with a strategy if were going to adequately provide for the men and women who serve this country. We dont know how much money and we dont know what the strategy is. Those are two significant problems. We are working through it on this committee but regrettably we cant do it alone. We need the house and the senate to make this happen here for all the good work we have done if we cannot resolve the budget issue, if we cannot come up with a comprehensive strategy that makes choices, then we will ultimately be right back where we have been for the last six years, crs, shortterm fixes. We dont even have from the white house a fiveyear defense plan. Because they dont want to look at that far because the money is and what he wanted to be. Weve never had that situation that i can remember of not having it. You want to plan, build some stability into our, you sort of have to plan for longer than one. As we are working through all the amendments i think we need to make sure we keep those issues in mind and i just want to close, not as well read as the chairman, i dont have quotes from famous ashes go to people, i will just one from general dunford who during this briefing he gave us two weeks ago use one of my favorite quotes, where he said basically we are out of money, its time to think. And i think that the first part of that is acknowledged. We have not yet started the thinking part in any great artist. We continue to focus on isolated issues. We need more ships, more planes, we need more nuclear weapons. We need more in space. We have not thought probably about a strategy about how to best use that money. Because the matter what happens, personally the path we are on right now is 549 unless something changes. And that would be disastrous, i will totally agree. But even if that doesnt happen we are going to have to make choices. We are not going to have enough money to find everything that we will hear about in the next however many hours, that we dont have enough money for. You got to get smart, make choices, develop a strategy. I hope in addition to the good work that were doing on the policy we can deal with those two overarching challenges that frankly threaten that could work in a way that is not been threaten during my time. With that i yield back and look forward to the market and working with the rest of the committee, and i want to thank the chairman again for his leadership in point this committee together and working in a bipartisan way. I yield back. Let me start with a few announcements. The order of consideration for todays markup will follow our subcommittee structure. We will begin first with the subject matter of the falls under the gestation of the subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities. And then move to the subcommittee on Tactical Air Land forces from the subcommittee on seapower and Projection Forces, the subcommittee on readiness, the subcommittee on military personnel, subcommittee on Strategic Forces and finally if the member has an amendment that of all the jurisdiction of other committees before he or she offers the member the member must have a letter from the Respective Committee chair indicating their waiver of the right of referral. The same requirement applied before including any provision in the underlying mark. This approach has been the practice of the committee for many years so that we can proceed directly to the house floor without our building referred to other committees. Also it is at the practice of the committee that the amendments involving additional spending should identify suitable offsets. Members must offer an image that could result in a point of order against the bill on the house floor during its consideration. I also want to remind all Committee Members that we will not permit any earmarks in the ndaa for fiscal year 2018. It is the germans in tension to operate under a fiveminute rule in order to allow all interested members opportunity to speak in an orderly manner chairman enzi intent to do if we get there in the night and theres unanimous consent, sometimes five minutes gets reduced a bit but we are going to start out with the fiveminute rule. Asking rents can sit on the five legislative days within which to submit statements into the record. Without objection, so ordered. After consultation with mr. Smith i ask unanimous consent the provisions contained in the reports of the subcommittees and the chairmans mark which includes both committee provisions he considered for the purposes of this markup at the original text of h. R. 2810 and that these provisions be considered as having been read and that the bill be open to amendment at any point. Without objection is so ordered. Asking in this consent that shoulyouauthorized to declare rt any time. Without objection. Two less administrative items. As you can tell one of the big changes this year on these laptops that are in front of you. We have gone back and looked at the tape of previous markups, and in each of the last two years it has taken a total of one and a half hours of Committee Time to pass out amendments. It has added an hour because i i usually start debate before we get finally passed out, it has added an hour to our markup time. So with the assistance of the house, they have low dose of these laptops, and so loaned us they will be electronically distributed and i think that will save us time. It will also either way say the Committee Budget more than 10,000 in copying costs. But heres the deal. If anybody has any challenges in operating these laptops, they are very smart people in around the perimeter who can help. And if it gets desperate, ms. Stefanik and miss murphy at both offer to help members to operate these laptops. So im serious, if something doesnt pull up, if youre having trouble, then just let somebody know. We want this to work for members but we have never done it before. So thats number one. Number two, unlike other committees, we have our markup in open session. I think that has worked well for us. I just want to remind everybody, if there is an occasion on an amendment where we need to go into closed session, we can do that. What it needs is were going to pick up, go over to the House Visitor Center to the basement where we have a room reserved that has already been swept, and we can have that classify discussion over there. Obviously thats a significant disruption, that we are ready to go if that becomes necessary. I just think its helpful for members before you come to have that in mind before you venture into classified matters. And obviously in all debate, members need to strictly keep the comments on an unclassified level. Final thing, my intention is to press on. Were supposed to have votes around 1 151 30. My hope is is to press on until that point where we can have a combination lunch, boat break vote. We will have sandwiches i think provided about that time, and then we will have another set of votes around fourish. And we will keep going until we have completed the mark, hopefully not too late into the evening. Okay. Committee will now receive the report of the subcommittee on emerging threats into the boat. In consultation with the Ranking Member, we will postpone all reported votes on the amendments to this particular subCommittee Mark until consideration of all amendments to the subcommittee marquess concluded. The chair recognizes the chair of the subcommittee the gentleman from new york ms. Stefanik for any comment she would like to make. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I am very pleased to present today our subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities portion of the fy 18 National Defense authorization act. I would like to begin by thanking all of the members of the subcommittee and the full committee for the active and energetic participation in the hearings, briefings and congressional delegations that we have held during the past several months. Weve taken a hard look at some very important issues within the subcommittee jurisdiction and we have done so in a truly collaborative and bipartisan manner. For the hard work i think each of my colleagues on the committee. The emergent executable subCommittee Mark this year focus heavily on providing for stronger cyber warfare capabilities, safeguarded technological superiority, enabling our special Operations Forces around the globe, providing resources and authorities to counterterrorism and Unconventional Warfare threats, and energizing programs and activities that counter the threat of weapons of mass destruction. I am especially proud of what the subcommittee has been able to achieve this year in the areas of cyber warfare and Cyber Operations. Our emphasis on cyber carries three broad themes. First, the marked increase congressional oversight and Cyber Operations by including h. R. 2807, bill introduced by myself, Ranking Member langevin, chairman thornberry and Ranking Member smith that will ensure congress is kept fully informed of sensitive military Cyber Operations. Second, we bolster International Partnerships for cyber warfare to counter aggressive adversaries such as russia, china and north korea. This includes support for our nato partners and those within the asiapacific region to not only enhance partner Cyber Capabilities and information sharing but also to counter and mitigate adversarial propaganda effort and Information Warfare campaign. And third, the market continues to build and enhance our own u. S. Cyber warfare capabilities and activities principally within u. S. Cyber command but also across the services and within the intelligence community. Including resiliency of department of Defense Networks and Weapon Systems and supply chains. The mark before members of the also reinforces counterterrorism and Unconventional Warfare capabilities by fully resourcing you a special operation commands programs and activities, including ongoing efforts in iraq, syria, afghanistan, yemen, somalia and eastern europe. It strengthens congressional oversight of ongoing ct and Unconventional Warfare operations and programs including various intelligence activities. To provide for the families of special Operations Forces we grant Permanent Authority Family Support programs within u. S. Special operations command, a Proven Program that now merits to ensure continued support for families and the force. The mark supports Defense Innovation to ensure technological superiority and overmatch for our war fighters against current and future threats. We also include provisions that would advance Hypersonic Weapons research, development and transitional efforts within the department. Before proceeding i would like to take a moment to extend my gratitude to our Ranking Member congressman jim langevin of rhode island. Jim, it is but a true pleasure working with you on all these important issues and of the four to continuing our bipartisan efforts together. I would like to think the Committee Staff who have worked so tirelessly on this mark including staff lead pete, professional Staff Members have been in lindsay, our clerk and our fellow doctor mark. Thank you, chairman, thornberry and dont forget discussing our emerging threats and capabilities subCommittee Mark this morning. With that i get back the remainder of my time. The chairman of recognizes the Ranking Member of the subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities, that judgment from rhode island, mr. Link event. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Before you begin to want to congratulate chairman thornberry and Ranking Member smith for the Committee Mark that is set before us today. I know that how hard you to work together. Let me especially thank chairwoman stefanik for the subCommittee Mark that were taking up at this type is been a pleasure working with you over this year. It has been a strong bipartisan cooperation and as a result with accomplishment great deal and again a great deal to be proud of this mark. Although there are many provisions of note in the interest of time i will just highlight a few. First and foremost on the special pleas with a language that chairwoman stefanik and working with chairman thornberry and ranking them smith to establish a mechanism for oversight of sensitive Cyber Operations. Clearly cybersecurity has forever changed modern warfare and we will never have modern warfare again without some type of Cyber Component to it. Its important we have the right policies and procedures in place to make sure that we are leveraging and utilizing this capability most effectively possible. As i mentioned, last week the subCommittee Mark oversight of sensitive operations in other domains is a core function of the subcommittee and we are now well poised to pave the way for overseeing the operations in cyberspace. This mark also contains provisions to increase collaboration in cyberspace, in other domains to counter russian information operation. For example, weve authorize funding for natos cooperative Cyber Defense center of excellence. Having recently visited estonia, i believe our return on investment would be invaluable to unilateral and partner Cyber Operations, training and policy development. Russian aggression in cyber must be addressed headon, given their activities both at home and abroad. Clearly we have seen them meddling in our elections and the elections of other western democracies. I dont expect that their activities in this area are going to diminish anytime soon. In fact, they will likely become more aggressive. So the mark also contains, includes funding for natos strategic an medications and of excellence to address propaganda campaigns. However theres always more we can do and i want to recognize Ranking Member smith efforts to the end including his recent bill which i was proud to cosponsor. Clearly, the mark is strong in the cyber fraud. In addition to fully funny you cyber command, it has additional funding for weapons system cyber assessments. Getting a handle on vulnerabilities in Department Assets is vital and i would be very please with innovative approaches to discover and remediate these flaws, particularly the ongoing bounty programs quality of the successful hack that and come program. Just for clarity, the hacked the Pentagon Program is a good thing this time was sponsored by the department and we learned a lot and discovered many of all abilities a as a result of that program. Im hoping that other departments and agencies in our government will look to the pentagons successful hack the Pentagon Program and mimic its intent and activities to discover vulnerabilities. I would point out this is a great indication of a publicprivate partnership. Additionally, the bill strengthens u. S. Cyber posture, u. S. Posture for cyber by investing in the workforce of our country. So the matter what the pulses are that we have place, without the right people to execute those policies were going to be behind the eight ball and woefully under resourced. So were taking steps to close that gap. We did it last year with the language i had in the mark that made it easier for the pentagon to bring in talent from the private sector for a period of time and also for the pentagon to detail people to the private sector to learn best practices. So this year includes legislation that i introduced earlier this year in collaboration with senator kaine to reinvent a great the department of Defense Cyber scholarship program. This program is very similar to the Program Sponsored by department of Homeland Security and National Science foundation, cyber scholarship program, and its again a good model and look forward to the pentagon reinvigorating their program in this area. The mark also fully fund science and Technology Efforts across the department as well as other initiatives aimed at bolstering innovation. These if not, are there any amendments to the subcommittee report . Gentlelady from new york. Mr. Chairman can ask unanimous consent on block consisting of amendments worked in approved with the minority. If the clerk will praise distribute the en bloc amendment and we will make sure it works. You got it . Without objection the amendments are considered as red. The gentlelady from new york is recognized for five minutes. On block package number one is comprised of the following amendment 012 by mr. Larson to enhance Cloud Computing capabilities. Amendment 025 by mr. Man board directing a brief on remediation. Amendment 097 are won by ms. , directing report on the committees. Amendment 098 by ms. , accountability and special Operation Forces. Amendment 112 r. One by mr. Larson on the Electronic Warfare modernization pilot program. Directing review of personnel and nonconventional assisted recovery. Amendment 232 by ms. Rosen regarding progress in meeting section 1642 of fy 17 relating to u. S. Cyber command. 297 by ms. Stefanik for Information Service providers. Amendment 298 by ms. Stefanik with security and stability strategy for somalia. Is there any further discussion on the en bloc package . If not, the question is on the amendments offered by the gentleman from new york on block. All those in favor say aye. Although suppose they know. The ayes have it. The amendment is adopted. Are there further amendment to this portion of the mark . Gentlelady from new york. Mr. Chairman ask unanimous consent to call upon but package number two consisting of amendments worked in approved with the minority. Without objection so ordered. The clerk will please distribute the second en bloc amendment without objection the amendments considered as red or digital it is recognized to claim the amendment. On my package number two comprised of the following. Amendment 004 r. One directing report on Chemical Biological radiological and Nuclear Response framework. Amendment 013 are won by mr. Larson directing a briefing on emerging counter unmanned aerial system technologies. 062 and mr. Wilson regarding support to the Global Engagement center. Amendment 111 by mr. Larson directing a briefing on improving response to weapons of mass destruction. Amendment one to seven by ms. Murphy to modify reporting requirements within title x section 127 e. Amendment 192 by dr. Winn struck with nonlethal weapons for european contingencies. Amendment 225 by mr. Whitman requesting a briefing on automated testing tools. Amendment 230 by ms. Nix aly directing report on consolidation plans for network security. Amendment 296 by ms. Tranter regarding authorization for the improvised defeat funds. Amendment 306 by mr. Walls with a report on 501 c 3 operations. Any further discussion on block package number two . Gentleman from South Carolina is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the en bloc package. Recently weve experienced a disturbing trend as states and terrorist organizations wrecked and sponsor propaganda and information activities. As the former chairman of the subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities being ably succeeded rideshare release stefanik of new york, i appreciate the emerging threats posed by the information environment and the role it will play in managing future conflicts. Im especially concerned about propaganda efforts by the Islamic State of iraq and lavon. I lavon. Isis, isil comment use their expensive Digital Network to promote violent extreme messaging in an effort to improve resources and western nations. Sadly leading to the proliferation of cowardly homegrown terrorist murderers. The Global Engagement center managed to the state department established the basic framework here in the United States to be competitive in the new frontier in cyberoperations into combat state and nonstate actors. Increasing the propaganda and disinformation threats on United States and our allies have increased from state and nonstate actors and threatened military and diplomatic targets. Car propaganda increasingly becoming a critical component of our National Security and we should seek to coordinate efforts between the state and defense. This bipartisan amendment introduced a congressman of rhode island would directly state the secretary of defense to reap the committee by 152018 about the opportunities to increase dod and military support and integration with the Global Engagement center and maximize its input. Mr. Chairman, i urge the passage of the en bloc passage amendment. Further discussion on the en bloc package . If not, the question is on the amendments offered by the gentlelady from new york on block. All those in favor say aye. All those in favor say no. The ayes have it in the amendments are adopted. Are there other amendment on the subcommittee report . The gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition . Yes, mr. Chairman. The gentleman from massachusetts is recognized to offer an amendment. The clerk would disturb you i present the gentleman wants to offer the amendment. Esca mr. Chairman. At the clerk would distribute the amendment. But how fast i went. The gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to speak to my amendment on the table cosponsored by representatives Brad Wenstrup of ohio to establish the congressional charter for the spirit of america. The spirit of america is a Nonprofit Organization that fights humanitarian economic assistance in response to local needs identified by deployed u. S. Troops. A congressional charter for spirit of america will stabilize of u. S. Service members and improve security by permanently removing legal ambiguity there frequently prevents commanders from utilizing this is in for spirit of america appeared the charter will enable the department of defense at its discretion to utilize donated assistance for spirit of america in support of u. S. Missions abroad. The charter will not place and responsibility as a requirement on dod, nor will he get spirit of america and a special rights or privileges. Theres no impact whatsoever to the dod budget in the charter will not exclude organizations from supporting dod missions. Spirit of america is that the ball over the world, working alongside armed forces, often in Close Partnership with special Operations Forces. For example, to help defeat isis chemistry of america responded to need identified by u. S. Special Operations Forces by providing metal detectors to their patchwork of partners. Metal detectors are being used to find roadside bombs come and save lives and limbs of passion murder civilians and american soldiers. On the serious side, to help build goodwill and trust between u. S. Special Operation Forces and local civilians, spirit of america have a hostile yousef and isis a fighting position and provided critical medical services could resume. In europe, u. S. Army europe and the ambassador to spirit of america assisted in establishing which meets the information to war aggression by russia. The u. S. Special Operations Forces need in the field and i found beneficial with regulations and governments ongoing mission. This is partially addressed by 2010 centcom regulation driven by general Madison Dunford and commanders to send tom had made clear the spirit of americas ability to work on the ground with a broader Legal Foundation Still Necessary which is why the charter so important. The remaining jurisdictional issues at hand so i will be withdrawing this amendment, but i hope we can get this clarified upon the Floor Consideration of the bill. In closing, let me quote general mattis who in 2011 said i think spirit of americas venture capital. On a very personal level spirit of americas incredibly effective at making us more effective. I would draw the amendment in yield to mr. Winn struck ohio. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise in support to create spirit of america is a privately funded nonprofit Nonpartisan Organization that provides assistance in response to local needs identified to u. S. Troops and diplomats. This will remove the legal regulatory roadblocks currently prevent with the spirit of america. This will enable us to demonstrate the goodwill and no impact on the dod budget. I can tell you firsthand when i deployed philanthropic americans sent me hygiene projects, School Supplies and other items and really enhance our mission. Were still working through jurisdiction issues but i encourage you to support this amendment on the floor. Thank you and i yield back. The gentleman from massachusetts has withdrawn his amendment. Are there further amendments to the subCommittee Mark . Gentleman from california. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I have it at the desk. At the clerk would electronically distribute the gentlemans amendment in the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I will wait i use an ipad. Mr. Chairman, this is pretty simple. For some reason oversight and government reform has jurisdiction in which they will not waive even though it involves us putting a space robot into space. This is the thing darpa has given to a Canadian Company, not u. S. Company even know theyre capable of doing this. Companies have paid with private funds so they can do this. This is not a Canadian Company has from darpa and i think thats wrong. Keep in the u. S. The argument that the Canadian Company wont be seen as the military service and its like a United Nations space robot i think is sort of baloney. Other countries know what we are putting into space and where the u. S. Company with u. S. Taxpayer dollars to do this. The amendments on my laptop. I withdraw my amendment. The amendment is withdrawn. Are there further amendments to the subCommittee Mark . If not, the chair recognizes the gentlelady from new york, mr. Entry for the purpose of offered emotion. Mr. Chairman and move to adopt a set of airport on emerging threats and capabilities as amended. Questions from the gentlelady of new york, all those in favor say aye. Those opposed say no. The ayes have it. A quorum being present. The motion is adopted. The committee will now receive the report of the subcommittee on plan forces pursuant to Committee Rule 17 in consultation with the Ranking Member will postpone any reported votes on the amendments to the particular subCommittee Mark until consideration of all amendment to the subCommittee Mark has concluded. The chairman of the subcommittee from ohio, mr. Turner. Thank you, mr. Chairman. They have that tactical plan Committee Mark. I will give a few highlights. I want to thank all the members of the subcommittee for their help in a bipartisan spirit in which we have worked. This addresses the priorities of the members on both sides of the aisle. Throughout this years process, the committee has repeatedly heard that the total forces strained and they continue to do more with less. Lacking capability and capacity that they need to address current and future threats and the increased risk incurred in Meeting Mission requirements. During subcommittee hearing figured out air and land forces continue to face significant challenges in rebuilding full Spectrum Readiness from years of deferred modernization funding. Significant hat despite the fact that overall threats have worsened. The army is a fully modernizing all of their Army Brigade Teams by 2035. I want to repeat that again. 2035. That is a problem. The vice chief of staff as the air force has become the smallest oldest equipped administrative force across the full spectrum of operations is the services inception. And turn them into untrue military service have 30 billion in unfunded requirements for fiscal year 2018 alone. Lets think of that turn, unfunded requirements. These are not unfunded wishes. These are unfunded requirements. We are concern resources are insufficient to meet the current strategy much less address emerging threats and requirements. It is within that context the strong leadership and guidance for chairman barberi that we built this remark. I thank the chairman for his work to build the budget number and we are using today. Two weeks ago we heard testimony from secretary mattis and general dunford again over at 30 billion in unfunded requirements for fiscal year 2018. They responsibly determine what is executable and have recommended that we include 12. 6 billion in additional funds for shortfalls in their dominance in the capabilities and capacity. A few other highlights of subCommittee Mark includes that provides authority with joint Strike Fighter manufactured materials to reduce taxpayer and significant cost savings and requires dod to provide certifications. It requires the army for its Ground Combat strategy to ensure Ground Forces are properly equipped for highend conventional combat. It works to strengthen and provide isr Investment Strategies to more effectively and efficiently meet combatant command isr commandments and the development of procurement of lighter, stronger and more dance personal protective equipment for all war fighters while also ensuring the mint entering combat rules are fully and correctly equipped. In closing i stated many times before throughout the legislative cycle the president s budget of 603 billion did not provide the military recovery for the current readiness crisis they are confronted with. I strongly support the chairmans market efforts to raise the number and give us a higher topline and i want to thank him again. Our mark recommends today for this committee 631 billion has a role to the chairmans efforts to the funding increase will be used to rebuild readiness and address military services, unfunded requirements for previously deferred modernization. While the increase is significant, we cannot afford to go any lower if we put the military back on a path for full Spectrum Readiness. I want to thank Ranking Member smiths comments because we will get to to discussion and assailed Obama Program for sequestration and the damage is done. I look forward to working with the Ranking Member repealing sequestration. Also want to thank niki tsongas for her bipartisan work and doug bush who also contributed to the bipartisan work that we have done. I guess unanimous consent that the complete statement and encourage members to support the market. Unanimous consent earlier for that to take place. The chair recognizes Ranking Member of the subcommittee, the gentlelady from massachusetts. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to thank chairman turner for his leadership in maintaining the spirit of bipartisanship that is a tradition that tactical air and land forces subcommittee. I would also like to thank professional Staff Members for all of your dedicated work to help reduce this mark. This mark represents more than 40 of the department of Defenses Research and development budget, funding critical to ensuring men and women in uniform have the most cuttingedge resources and equipment possible in order to keep them safe when defending our country. Together the subcommittee has sought to address several pressing issues facing the modernization and statement of military aircraft vehicles and other equipment platforms to be overseas. The mark also directs the Defense Department to provide specific updates and reports on a number of programs and platforms so that we can robustly conduct their oversight responsibility on behalf of the American People. As they move forward, there are still many major issues to be decided. In particular, how we fund is made spirit i want to associate myself with the remarks Ranking Member smith made at the beginning of baseball Committee Mark. The committees tradition of bipartisanship is rare in this era of government. It has allowed her committee to produce a bill that for decades has been crafted with the support of both parties to ensure military has the resources and tools they need to protect the American People and well prepared those who serve on our behalf. National security is at risk if we pursue unrealistic funding levels in this bill at the expense of other investment in our National Competitiveness and the future of our country. I look forward to continuing to work with you all to see that we provide our men and women with the resources they need to carry out their mission while taking seriously our responsibility to resolve these outstanding issues. With that, i yield back. And a further discussion of the subCommittee Mark . If not, are there any amendments to the subCommittee Mark . The chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. Mr. Chairman, en bloc package number one but working and approve of the minority. Without objections ordered. If the clerk will please distribute the en bloc package without objection the amendment is considered as rod and the gentleman from ohio is recognize. Thank you, mr. Chairman. En bloc package number one has the following. Amendment h. R. One by mr. Scott that modifies directive report language to clarify the phrase Forward Operating locations, close quote. The minute 16 by mr. Larsen directs a briefing on multifunction explosive detection technology. Amendment number 27 by mr. Lamborn requiring a briefing army wireless intercommunication systems. Amendment number 64 r1 by mr. Wilson for nextgeneration Health Monitoring systems unlike utility helicopters. Amendment 72 by mr. Orourke modifies the existing report language that addresses army Network Evaluations and joint war fighting substance. Amendment 79 r1 by mr. Knight directing secretary of the air force that the air force tests and their modern challenges. One of three by ms. Speier. Amendment 143 by mr. Bishop requirements for the alaska range. Amendment 196 by mr. Lynch event with options for the acceleration of fielding of the Information Network and omit to program for 214 amendment for mr. Kaufman and report said the oex experiment. I yield back. Is there further discussion on the en bloc package . If not the question is offered the question occurs on the amendment per mile. Those favor say aye. The ayes have it any amendments are adopted. Are there other amendments to the subCommittee Mark. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I havent amendment at the desk. The clerk will distribute the amendment appeared without objection the amendment is considered as red and the gentlelady is recognize. This amendment will be offered and what drivable prohibits funding in the coming fiscal year until the secretary of the navy certifies he has reviewed the recommendations included in the navys comprehensive review of Physiological Episodes involving t. 45 and f18 aircraft and plans have been developed in funding available to implement the numerous recommendations included in the report. I do not offer this amendment lately. I know many members support extended production of f18 aircraft and the navy has significant readiness problems and need new aircraft. I also recognize the problem of physiological events and Fighter Aircraft goes beyond the f18. Pilots have not been allowed to fly the navys t. 45 training aircraft for more than two months due to similar concerns. Just last week the air force grounded bs 35 aircraft at Luke Air Force base on concerns about similar events in those aircraft. I offer this amendment because the navys recently published report, the comprehensive review i mentioned earlier included several major findings that i think all members should be aware of as we consider f18 productions in the future. The report concluded for the first time that im aware of an in physiological events and f18 aircraft. Lives lost due to the specific problem and f18. We now know that for lives have been lost. The site visits that there have been many close calls as well. Second, the report concluded, and i quote, the integration of the onboard oxygen Generation System and the t. 45 and f18 is inadequate to consistently provide highquality breathing air. Unquote. And as a result of that conclusion, the report also recommended that the navy quote, redesigned systems as required to meet input specifications, unquote. The report also included more than 30 recommendations covering organizational t. 45 medical and other issues. The situation we now face is a difficult one. We know we need more f18 aircraft, but we also now know the navy has concluded the f18 design in the critical area of support is flawed and must be redesigned. Im going to withdraw my amendment today and hope that by the time of the passage later this year, the navy and cooperation with the many Defense Companies involved of the estate teen nt 45 will have addressed the many issues raised in the navys recent report. I also by the time the ncaa is done, we can be sure the one point it early in dollars per year authorizing for 22 new f18 will not end up procuring aircraft that have a serious builtin defect in the area of pilot life support, which is where things stand today. While you know the navy needs new planes, pilots serving on our behalf must be able to trust the design of the aircraft they are asked to fly into combat. Naval aviation is an inherently risky act vividly and they greatly admire all who serve in it. I think we owe it to them to do all we can to make sure the planes they are flying are as safe as possible. I look forward to examining this issue more in the months ahead and i ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment. At the gentlelady will withhold withdrawing for just a moment, a couple other members of of that to discuss this issue. Gentleman from ohio. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to think by Ranking Member for her work on this issue in bringing the amendment forward. What is occurring in the navy is absolutely unacceptable. We had language last year in our bill. Two of the things we put in the bill last year required a study as to whats occurring with the faa team. Nasa is working with the navy on this issue. Currently working on our part to the defense committees and the episodes go to the oxygen generating system thats absolutely critical. It also goes to the confidence of our pilot, the ability to know the system will operate and they are not putting lives at risk. We do not have confirmation, but certainly the canadian staffer worked diligently to lessen the threat and look at the reports and see what actual risks people have sustained. We called called roundtables and miss. Weve called the navy and for hearings. In this billabong we had the navy aggressively taking action to address this. Weve asked the air force to expedite research and we also have 10 million into the navys aircrew System Development program that is the same Thing Program to determine whether toxins are present. This is a serious issue. I appreciate my Ranking Member withdrawing it. We certainly know the time weve been working with the navy, the response has been sufficient and we will continue to work through and ensure we are focused on a pilot safety issue. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Gentleman from florida. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank the amendment sponsor and chairman turner for diligence on behalf of our naval pilot and the students who are training to be the next generation of naval aviators. I want to highlight the fact in this space we have had unprecedented cooperation between the navy, nasa. Weve had submarine teams brought in and the private sector, the books who manufacture the equipment in question. This could be a model, mr. Chairman Going Forward as we have Physiological Episodes which in many circumstances are a part of the type of aviation we require from our extent apparatus. With this new sense of operation its my hope we will ascertain what the root cause of these challenges are and move forward. We are at this point bringing everyone together with the smartest minds not only in the navy, not only the military, but throughout the entire apparatus federal government as a consequence of ms. Tsongas and mr. Turner and i think im greatly. I yield back. Woman from washington state. Speed thank you, mr. Chairman. I note the amendment that will withdraw in the initial section mentions the super hornet and generally describes f18 psychological episodes later. This also has a growler aircraft as well, which is a derivative of the super hornet, but the electronic aircraft based at the island station. So i just hope you continue to move forward that we include the growler in this discussion. The chairman of the subcommittee and Ranking Member are both very well aware of the issues that have migrated the growler and appreciate their attention to it. It is an issue for the growler community as well. I yield back. Thank you. Let me just add that if there is anything any of the members see this committee can do to fix this problem as fast as possible, im on board because they need to be fixed. I agree completely. The gentlelady has withdrawn her amendment. Are there other amendments to this portion or this subCommittee Mark . Asking innocent consent to paula on block number two to approve the minority. Without objection. Without objection so ordered. The clerk will please distribute the en bloc package and without objection the amendments are considered as red. Gentleman from ohio recognized. En bloc package number two comprised of the following. Number nine by mr. Scott at the briefing on Rail Technology for car buying. Amendment 34 by mr. Cook directs a briefing on the Army Acquisition strategy for the Weapon System for tactical vehicles. Amendment 49 by ms. Tsongas requires a briefing status of the integrated air and Missile Defense battle command systems. Amendment 56 requiring a detailed assessment of army efforts with counter improvised capabilities. Number 174 are won by dr. Abraham requiring cost competitive technologies that minimize this Generation Mission used to compose conventional munitions. Amendment number 205 r. One requires responses defining recommendations to the june 2017th comprehensive review on ideological episodes including tea 40 fives to be included in independent review required by section 237. Amendment 245 by self directing a briefing on softwarebased mesh networks for Ground Forces. Amendment 256 by ms. Cheney required a briefing on kappa taking technology. 265 by mr. Brooks that directs the briefing from the office of the secretary of Defense Strategy for transition to aircraft Afghanistan Aviation forces. Amendment 266 requires a briefing with the small turbine Industrial Base. Amendment 292 by mr. Brown required an untethered multirouter platform used for communications and intelligence operations. I yield back. Is there further discussion on the en bloc package . If not, the question occurs on the en bloc package number two offered by the gentleman from ohio. Those in favor say aye. Those not say no. The ayes have it in the amendment habit. Have it. If not, the chair recognizes mr. Turner for the purpose of offering a motion. Mr. Chairman i move to adopt the subcommittee air and land forces as amendment. Questions on the motion offered by the gentleman from ohio, say i ago. Those opposed say no. The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. The committee will not receive the report of the subcommittee and sea power Projection Forces in consultation with the Ranking Member will post on all of the recorded votes on amendments to this particular subCommittee Mark until consideration of all amendments to the subCommittee Mark has concluded. The chair recognizes the chairman of the subcommittee, mr. Witkin ferney, to the remake. Thank you, mr. Chairman. As they begin to discuss our sea power Projection Forces mark, i want to discuss the plight of our forces. While there remain the most capable force in the world, we are losing our edge both in terms of capacity and capability. Our suffering forces relying on undersea expansion that occurred in the 1980s. We will be losing 20 of our suffering for structure in the next 10 years. Despite the demand signal for the summer is increasing by 50 . Fortunately, we are the simmering production lines into shipbuilders to address this concern. Our surface for shipbuilders have production lines as well. The bottom line is industry is prepared to respond to her navys call for 355 ship navy. I asked the committee, are we prepared to watch her navy and Aviation Forces diminish in size and capability or are we prepared to answer the call . Chairman thornberrys markets clear. It is time to properly Resource Requirements for services. Its time we start to answer the call from our combatant commanders. It is time we come together and declare it the committee and we intend to reverse years of contraction and finally put our National Security on a solid footing Going Forward. As to the mark, it builds on the request by the administration and adds an additional five ships. The mark also recommends advance procurement for aircraft carriers and submarines. As to aircraft, also recommends an expansion of kc 46a, c130 variant in pa. Finally, fully funds two of the top three procurement programs in dod, including the columbia class Ballistic Missile submarine and to be 21 bomber programs. Overall, the chairmans mark points us in the right direction to deliver a 355 ship navy in the expected Projection Forces our nation so desperately needs. Also want to extend a special thanks to our Ranking Member joe courtney for his leadership in all the effort hes put forward and looking along the same lines of what we need to do to create the capability and capacity in our navy. I want to thank Staff Members who work tirelessly across the spectrum with members of the committee and even those outside to put this mark in the proper live and incorporate as much as possible of other members thoughts and ideas. I find that the Projection Forces subcommittee remains resolute in seeking Bipartisan Solutions in this mark is clear evidence to that effort. I want to thank the chairman for his support to expand the capabilities of our Projection Forces and i yield back the balance of my time. The chair recognizes the Ranking Member of the subcommittee, gentleman from connecticut. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im please to speak on behalf of the Projection Forces subcommittee this morning. I want to burst of also the chairman whitman and the tireless efforts of all members and staff assembling a market to ensure security on the season and the skies. The subcommittee Welcome New Members in a new chairman bob whitman who faced a challenging year. Nevertheless the true spirit of the subcommittee, ill work on a bipartisan manner to answer our nations priorities. Equally remarkable this was assembled an extremely compressed an accelerated timeline. This years mark takes the first statutory step to codify the multiyear call to grow americas fleet beginning in 2015 with a comprehensive strategy for maritime security. 2016 for Structure Assessment culminated in the 2017 accelerated fleet plan has become abundantly clear during todays fleet which now stands at 278 to 380foot fleet now underway is still inadequate. Rather the force Structure Assessment released by former Navy Secretary ray mavis last december after an 18 month process focused on strategic need, boosted navy ship lands to a 355 ship battle for us. Furthermore, are marked as more than codify the policy. It takes tangible steps to execute the policy beginning immediately by taking active steps to Fund Construction of a needed battle force and artillery ships. This has a clear signal to the American People come in nations Industrial Base and most importantly any potential adversary Americas Navy will continue to be todays preeminent force on, below the siege. The power markers be on the Trump Administration shocking request for may 23rd of a ships good as the chairman noted, this is over a billion dollars less than the 2017 budget that began on the prior administration. Are marked as an additional five ships to include earlybird class destroyer combat ships and Expeditionary Support base in the san antonio class in previous transport. The mark as the Projection Forces portion of the subcommittees portfolio. First to make the necessary Financial Investment to continue development of the b. 21 program to recapitalize americas bomber fleet. We operates two additional tinkerers and lastly the mark authorizes funds needed to upgrade c130 Aircraft Systems as well as large infrared countermeasure defensive systems of c17 and c5 aircraft by the air forces unfunded priorities. Additionally, authorizing the navy to enter into a block to contract for up to 13 virginia class submarines are the blocks beginning 2019 and 15 earlybird class destroyers. In regard to attacks, the mark notably he the colbert nations combat to terry harris who just a few weeks ago with 50 of the demand for attack submarine in the theater. The problem will grow as the agency size declines from todays 52 to 42 in the late 2020s they authorizing 13 submarines in the next contract with mobile to build a virginia class submarines in fiscal year 2028, 2022 in 2023. This manufacturing growth is possible for reliance on proven technology, study requirement and smart contracting methodologies with no deficiencies in our production a supplier pipeline. Members of both parties embraced the opportunity to mitigate the shortfall as the Los Angeles Class boats are required. I the effort spirit any particular importance to me we continue to spend wisely and purchasing our nation survivable nuclear deterrent, columbia class ballistic summary program. This expands authorities have been the fun to include critical common components that will be utilized on virginia class in the ford class carrier. They will be more like osco in terms of efficient cost effect of ways of funding these programs. Through these authorities, the Priority Program will not only deal to me its Critical Development construction timeline, but also realize the cost savings along the way. Im confident the mark makes wise and Timely Investments to ensure americas continuous security tomorrow. I want to conclude by thanking the incredible staff have indeed said mickey, and jodi purnell for their outstanding work. I want to recognize the chairman great support for this and associate myself with the remarks of mr. Smith. This is an important mark with the others, but we need to weekend keep our aim on the big picture, which is bad our nations needs really have to break free from the budget control act of 2011 and i look forward to working on a bipartisan basis to make sure all of americas needs are met. I yield back the balance of my time. Is there further discussion on the subCommittee Mark . If not, either amendment to the subCommittee Mark . Gentleman from massachusetts. Ive been amendment at the desk. The clerk would please distribute the amendment appeared without objection, the amendment is considered as red and the gentleman is recognized for five minutes on his amendment. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would remove funding for one lcs for the overseas Contingency Operations fund. Later said that it was revealed omb and doors a second ship which at the time was unknown or its funding would come from. Three weeks prior to the budgeting release omb director Mick Mulvaney acknowledged that quote the navy doesnt want them, end quote. Referring to the lcs. The second and third shifts the navy did not originally request are being funded from oco confines never intended to be permanent and never intended to be used for longterm shipbuilding. Moreover, the lcs Program Continues to face serious shortcomings. At the june 2017 said on Services Committee hearing chairman senator john mccain stated unequivocally one of the greatest disasters i have seen recently was the lcs. Cost overruns of more than doubled the cost of each lcs, Development Cost for the ships not exceed 6 billion and keep rising. Meanwhile he wer was fighting capabilities of the lcs including countermeasures and antisubmarines have fallen years, i repeat, years behind and remain unproven, end quote, from senator mccain. Therefore this amendment would redirect the funding one of the lcs and established accounts to find munitions shortfalls that pacom commanders have identified. In fact, on a recent coda led by chairman thornberry to east asia pacom commander admiral paris at some point of words to us at saying in singapore. He remarked and they quote a lack of munitions and a quickly we would burn through our current inventory in a conflict is what keeps me up at night, end quote. Both combatant commands of identified present needs to munitions or punishment that seem to me as a humble marine infantry officer more pressing and appropriate for this committee to find than additional ships the kobe on the natives request and did not get us closer to the frigate replacement that will correct many of the lcs shortcomings. When it asked secretary mattis before this committee to identify examples of where congressional politics interfere with his ability to provide for our National Defense this is a prime example that comes to mind. Adding these ships which according to test literally cannot survive combat has a lot more to do with parochial Congressional District politics than the needs of our sailors and our troops. And make no mistake, that supporting these kinds of congressional goggles absolutely does hurt our troops who in turn will not get the munitions and other resources that they truly need. Boondoggles. We are forcing on the navy i ship they do not want, i ship they do not need, and a ship they did not request. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield to mrs. Spear of california. For the discussion on the mimic the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I opposed the amendment. First of all, we have had extensive hearings in the seapower subcommittee concerning lcs, concerning the need for the right high load mix of ships come having the smallest surface combatants of the lcs, a large combatants of the destroyers, the cost associated with it, the issues with this program. The ships are being built exactly as a been specified. The issue right now is with mission modules. It would left to be put in place is mine countermeasure module. We point out in the 2016 force Structure Assessment the need for 52 Small Surface combatants, lcs is part of that. The navy is on track to select a new variant of frigate in the Small Service combatant in 2020. Producing at this level allows us to bring costs down can deliver the ships that the navy needs. We can bring down, if we take out a production with the ships and increase costs by about 10 . Also if youre to take money from this account to take away from getting to, 355 ships, ships, and you put that money towards munitions for pacom and wittmaucom you will let money s. There is money for both ucom and pacom at the Production Capacity today. This is throwing good money too bad. You cant execute this money. Theres not capacity or capability there to produce these munitions. This is feelgood stuff it if you want to make sure you get something that is usable that can be put in the hands of sailors, that we can put to sea, that we can get things done, if you want to do that less expensively, make sure we transition properly under what i think is a very thoughtful plan for the navy to get from this ship to the next generation of Small Surface combatants, then funding this additional ship gets us there. So again i speak out in adamant opposition to the amendment in what it hopes to accomplish which is money setting on the sidelines, and the capability we need today with the ships and transitioning to the next generation of Small Service combatant. The gentleman, the Ranking Member is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to speak in support of this amendment. Its example of one of talking about in my Opening Statement about is making choices in the size of the budget that we have. I enjoyed mr. Turners comment will be go back in history and some imagine that this is all president obamas fault. I guess everything is president obamas fault, not the easiest way to think of the world, but sequestration was passed with bipartisan majority in the house and the senate. Im sorry i just had to bring up the reason we did it is because the republicancontrolled house was refusing to raise the debt ceiling. So we were literally three days away from basically failing to meet our obligations. I did not vote for the budget control act but i will not criticize anyone who did when the choice basically was between that and basically stop paying our bills. So i tried in my opening remarks to not engage in that sort of partisan argument. I think we would all be better off if we recognize that the budget control act was the result of bipartisan failings and not try to relitigate whose fault it was. Its a problem it was graded bipartisan elite and he continues to be a bipartisan problem. I will also say that it isnt really the only problem and thats what ive tried to sit in my opening remarks that lets you to get rid of the budget control act lets say its gone. We still dont just magically have trillions of dollars. We still have a 20 trillion debt. Refill of a 706 billion deficit and im pretty sure as between that site and decide its the folk of the site over here who are most adamant about the fact that we need to balance the budget. So even to get rid of budget control act we do not have six, seven, eight, 900 billion to spend on defense, unless we pretty much completely eliminate all nondefense Discretionary Spending which what im trying to get us to wake up to is we have to confront this larger choice. Instead of come which is coming to the budget and thought wed all the money we want to come spend it all in defense of everything would be good. Now i know theres talk with you do something that mandatory programs, although the enthusiasm are doing something about mandatory programs is limited as i understand it, the budget, the chairman of the budget committee, chairwoman, proposed as part of giving us this 621 billion, a 50 billion cut in mandatory spending which the chairman of this committee so when a government that all balked at, 50 billion. 20 trying to fund 50 billion of mandatory savings and the majority cant even do that. All right. So it is a much larger problem than just saying we just had to get rid of the budget control act and then would be able to spend all the money we want on defense, okay . We got to look of revenue look at mandatory. We create a budget that has money is so we can pay for the things were talking about. Which brings the to this, okay . Lcs is a controversial program. I dont personally support a limited again. I think mr. Wittman made some good arguments why the lcs it is important but as mr. Moulton point it out we are not getting rid of it. The president , he put one in his budget and then after the budget was submitted, and had echoed on this what you i wont repeat, all of a sudden they said we want to come and ask where you going to get the money and they said and then eventually just found it somewhere. And then in our mark we put three. Now, is it better to have three lcs any abstract . Sure. But we are making choices here, and i complement mr. Moulton for offering up what i think is a better choice in terms of where we should spend our money. And if this is what we do in this committee, it every time we try to cut anything, and dont even get into the brac discussion, every time we tried to fund savings anywhere, no, no, no we have done that ship, that plane, this number of troops. It doesnt add up. At some point we in this committee if we are committed to supporting the military we keep claiming were committed, we have to make a choice to cut something. I keep asking the question, we heard about all the money coming in, from the pentagon people, where do you think were spending money that we shouldnt . And yes, that is the answer that i got. Well, weve had to go back and take a look at it. We have to think about it. You have to think about it . What the hell . We are way under to fund all the stuff and youre not even think about where you will find savings to get us there . So thi this is a small piece tha realized i just took mr. Mullins modest little amendment of the into a much larger argument but its an excellent example of the decisions were going to have to make as a committee if were going to fund the military one. If you want to fund readiness, take two lcs instead of three. I think this is, if we cant do this one tiny little thing then we will be in a lot of trouble in terms of funding that priorities the chairman very rightly outlined. So i cant support to the name and yield back. Gentleman from alabama is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The Small Surface combatant report called for 52 combatants. The report has not been amended by the navy. The navy clearly has stated to that report it needs these ships. In fact, admiral harris of pacom which was before the subcommittee back in april and talked about how he is presently using those ships in the South China Sea where if a visitor important part of the mission. Why produce these at three, number three per euro . We at the advil before the subcommittee a couple of months ago and he said funding three lcs ships a year is critical to maintaining cost and schedule efficiency. Those were his words. Lcs is on budget and below the cost gap. Both shipyards artificially producing the ships, the two shipyards cannot continue without funding three ships a yupik thats also the navys conclusion. Three ships that only maintains a healthy Industrial Base, because without three ships the Skilled Workforce will suffer a ten40 layoff resulting in extended production timelines and unit costs increases of ten15 which comes out to be about 50 7 50 70 million annun future ships. The labor force is not a spigot. When you turn it off you cant just turn it back on again. People go and find other jobs and go to other places. Three ships ensures the Skilled Workforce that has been built in both shipyards will remain intact and poised to produce lcs and future Small Surface combatant on time and under cost gaps in many saving the tax presented maybe that is told us we need. Three ships also ensures the proper Supplier Base remains intact and the proper Supplier Base continues to provide new and repair parts and economic order of quantities. Maintaining low costs for taxpayers as well. The navy cannot get to a 350 or 355 ship fleet requirement with at least 52 of the ships to prevent repeated testimony to that effect. Lcs fills a gap in our navies capabilities. Lcs serves as a lowcost capability in the navys goal of distributed lethality and lcs removes operational burden from large surface combatants needed for high and mission trip with regard to munitions, most munition programs have seen plusup in funding in the ndaa bill and the president s request for production lines on your capacity and more money wont make more munitions. Our mark also adds 26 million for the mark 48 torpedoes, and 9 million of the sidewinder missiles. So w were already doing a lot there. I appreciate the gentleman from massachusetts comments. Ive invited him to come to the shipyard in mobile. Invited him to come to san diego and actually ride on the ship and talk to the Commanding Officer and the other officers and the sailors on the ship, and he will learn far more than he is learned by reading reports. I recently learned that the gentleman is engaged. I know that when he has his wedding hes going to want to go on a great honeymoon period i cant think of a better honeymoon and coming to my shipyard in mobile or taking her on the ship in san diego. [laughing] so i renew my invitation to the gentleman from massachusetts. I know this will be a great time for him and his wife to do this, and i think you will learn something in the consequent. And i yield back. Gentleman from california, ms. Spear. Thank you, mr. Chairman. To my colleague of massachusetts, do not take that advice. You will be divorced by the end of the week. [laughing] im going to associate myself with the Ranking Member and with mr. Moulton. This is a disaster of a ship. And i dont know what its going to take for us to finally recognize that sometimes we have to say no to things that just dont work. In february 2011 the uss freedom, and lcs, sprung a sixinch crack in its hole that required several months worth of repairs. In june 2011 severe corrosion sideline the uss independence. In december 201 2012 the Defense Department director of Operational Test and evaluation released a report saying the lcs is not expected to be survivable and hospital combat and 500 best way to change the name Littoral Combat ship nothing is now called a frigate. In july 2013 the uss freedom was once again immobilize during a trial run. Also in july 2013 the gao urged congress to restrict the purchase of new lcs until the navy completed technical and design studies, and figured out how much it will cost to fix the vessels problems. These are very good suggestions that were unfortunately ignored. In december 2014 the second and the defense directed the navy to study ways to improve the program. However the navy doubled down on its failed strategy and prioritize cost and schedule considerations over mission requirements. In december 2015 the uss milwaukee broke down and had to be towed 40 miles after a software malfunction. That same month secretary of defense carter directed navy to cut the program which would save billions of dollars. Once again my colleagues resisted these efforts. The uss fort worth was been sidelined in january 2016 because its operator failed to follow proper maintenance procedures. In june 2016 gao recommended congress not find any lcs for 2017. So what did we do . In a string mr. Budgett did we see the gao . No, we didnt. The ndaa authorized not one, not to, but three new ships adding 1. 5 billion to the budget. But theres more. In july 2016 the uss freedom yet again encountered more mechanical issues. How bad is it . This time its engine will need to be rebuilt or replaced. Most recently in august 2016 the uss coronado broke down because of an engineering problem. Every one of these lcs is have suffered from horrendous maintenance problems with the exception i believe of two. Why dont we go back to the drawing board and build a ship that will work, that wont sink, that wont lose its power and have to be towed in . Its really a disgrace. And to say it is lowcost is absolutely a canard. These maintenance problems cost us tens of millions of dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars. Meanwhile, we cant pay the windows of our military servicemembers what they deserve from their Life Insurance policies. But we can keep building 500 million ships that saint. I yield back that sink. Mr. Gallagher is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I think its a healthy debate. Its no secret to anyone that observed us that the lcs requirements have changed. The Global Environment has changed as well. Since it may be start thinking for the first time about a new service combatant dating back to the 1990s and as we take steps to continue the transition to the frigate in 2020 i look for to continue to work with all members of the committee and by calling from massachusetts who are respected mezzo to make sure we transition responsibly and effectively and we short any survivability requirements that the navy wants us to address. But let us all recognize that what the omb director says in an offhand comment does not represent the view of the u. S. Navy. Let us look instead of what the navy has actually said and what it is written. The claims let him table the navy doesnt want the ship is patently false. Deputy secretary of defense bob work off of the most thorough and honest and unsparing account of the program can click the navys getting very nearly the exact chip it asked for and in some key aspects a better ship than expected. We spent months asking the navy this very question in the seapower subcommittee. The Program Executive officer told chairman whitman and myself and everyone else that the navy needs three ships per year. They need to the production of light hot to facilitate the transaction. Lets also recognize the administration was forced to defend toppling of 603 the center them by omb that doing strategic vibration on what numbers actually need. If you look at what it said about the lcs, the lcs program is of critica a critical ports , the designed to stable, new facility on place i with the rit size qualified workforce and bow Shipyard Industry teams are in full serial production. In order to ensure each can deliver to ships per year. The lcs program is on budget and tthe congressional cost gaps. Gao was invoked. If you read the gao report which is not a friend went to the lcs, they conclude that costs simply isnt the issue. Strategically what are we talking about with the ship . Why do we need it . Why do the war fighters keep asking for it . Lcs is not only an ideal platform for which to employ Unmanned Systems which are liquid increase in importance in the future, they can simply go places where bigger ships cant. Rear admiral don gambrell, the Commander Logistics Group western pacific put it, Littoral Combat ship can go places and do things that no other american ships can. With flexible large payloads that enable easy integration with regional navys for both military and command missions. There are over 50,000 items across a broad art from the philippines, sri lanka, larger ships and only visit 50 ports across the entire territory. The lcs can dock in over thousand ports. Admiral harris, the shingle a dialogue was invoked. Later that night in a meeting with chairman thornberry, myself and many other members of his delegation, if you were not present danger to leave for no fault of your own, told us that the lcs is playing an increasing role in the pacific and they want more than. You dont want a fleet comprised entirely of lcs of course but if the navy doesnt want the ship and why are the actually expanding missions in singapore to deploy to ship simultaneously along with one of bok rain in 2018 . If the ship doesnt work what are our lives ask if mortals whited admiral harris testified before this committee a lot of offensive parties in the region and small navys become want to learn from us. They want to learn from somebody and a rather learn from us than other potential partners. Their navys are small and when a creature comes in or even a a ddg, a can overwhelm them. The lcs is the right platform to do that, also the right platform to train in areas of shallower depth. I appreciate very much my colleagues concern about the munition shortfall in key regions. I share that view but but i bee the chairmans mark already takes important steps to address these gaps. The mark riley as over 1. 5 billion above and beyond the present budget request for missiles across the services. Under chairman thornberry leadership the committee is also correctly emphasize americas entry commitment to asia and europe. So we prioritize munitions and forward presence in the asiapacific while supporting joint exercises with regional partners. We also strengthen our position in your bike transition the European Initiative which i strongly applaud. This is appropriate where it joins list of entering requirements. I think were doing things to short art munition shortfalls. I understand this is a contentious issue. Ive tried my best as a new member of this committee to listen to all sides, but more than anything else ive tried to listen to the navy. If you look with the navy has said, they want the ship, the fifth fleet wants the ship, the six fleet once a ship, the once the sugar its time to listen and continue building our fleet to meet their operational requirements. I yield, mr. Chairman. Mr. Beer monday. Mr. Bera monday. Its with respect for chairman and of the midst of the committee but this ship really doesnt sale. This ship is only principal purpose it seems the present time is to show the flag and to get us closer to 355. 355. Its a half a billion dollars over 500 million for each ship. We can surely spend that money better elsewhere. Its nice to have a ship out there in the ocean, nice to have it in the South China Sea or singapore or wherever else. Until has to be used. Assuming it actually can sale. But if it ever has to be used in a contested environment, without a doubt it isnt going to survive. And so therefore its kind of like showing the flag and nothing more. We really do need to transition to the frigate which some say can only be built at the continued build a ship the really doesnt work well. That is the lcs. So we ought to write now say enough is enough, dont build another one, use the money elsewhere, advance the frigate design which incidentally is going to be a significant improvement over the lcs design so that it actually can survive in a contested environment. And get on with it. But the Industrial Base is always a great argument to use, and by the way if we dont want to build munitions, vaporub to build an icebreaker so that we could actually do something in the arctic ocean. I know, i see my colleagues here saying they are back to the icebreaker. We are indeed. Lets do this. Why dont we swap to lcs is for one heavy icebreaker so we can actually have a u. S. Navy in the arctic which we cannot not do . Any case, the limits a good one, munitions, we clearly come we didnt have enough munitions. Somebody says the Industrial Base cant build or cannot supply more munitions, which probably tells us that particular and usher based needs to be augmented. So i support mr. Mullins amendment and im going mr. Moulton mr. Speaker, if you want more time . No. I yield back. Mr. Orourke. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I also support the judgment from massachusetts amendment. We are constantly bombarded by information about unfunded needs, capability that we need to have that we dont have today. And the projected cost that were not on a trajectory me. I heard the chairman of tactical air in land talk about the urgency of these unfunded needs and here we have a colleague who is asking us to make one of these tough decisions picky saying only one of these Littoral Combat ship at a cost of 556,382,000, those resources could be put to one of those unfunded urgent needs that we have right now. While we have these open questions and concerns about the viability and safety and seaworthiness of this program i think this is a very rational suggestion from one of our colleagues. And so i support, i urge my colleagues to join in doing so and i get the balance of my time to the gentleman from massachusetts. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, i want to address the munitions issue were some of my colleagues that that that we dont have the Production Capacity to make the munitions that we need. Whether we need to fix that capacity, thats the job that congress is your to do to get our sailors, marines, soldiers and airmen they munitions that he actually need. I am grateful, furthermore, to the gentleman from alabama for his invitation. [laughing] as you might imagine we are currently planning a wedding. Now, my lovely fiance has said that she would like a 200 person wedding. That sounds like a lot to me, but by your logic we should triple that the 600. [laughing] because undoubtedly will be able to achieve cost efficiencies as the person cost would drop. I would welcome the gentleman from alabama to take that proposal to my fine fiance. Finally, mr. Whitman said repeatedly that the navy needs this ship you can see the rest of this on defense programs and policy on our website cspan. Org. Later in the afternoon on a companion network cspan3. Here on cspan2 we will take you to the floor of the u. S. Senate. Yesterday Mitch Mcconnell told the Republican Health care bill from the floor. Today the senate will be taking up the nominee to head the White House Office of information and regulatory affairs. We are expecting confirmation vote on that tomorrow. Live coverage of u. S. Senate here on cspan2. The presiding officer the senate will come to order. The chaplain dr. Barry black will lead the senate in prayer. The chaplain let us pray. Gracious god, ruler of all nature, your strong right hand continues to sustain us. Lord, remind our lawmakers of their accountability to you. Ov
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.