Process, making sure that when we are making changes to our military members lives, that it is this body and his bodys worst responsibility that we are there to make sure we are providing the oversight to see if the changes that we made are doing what we intended them to do. And this deals with the commissary. Many in this committee might know, but our colleagues might not know, that is the Grocery Store and the military. Is nothing predictable in the military and it is very stressful. Grocery shopping should not be stressful. Is not a business. It is a benefit to the tune of about 300 per family member. Haveof those same families people working at the commissary. And the money from the commissary goes back into morale , welfare, recreation, and things to make military life improve. What we are doing, to be clear on this is, we are changing the way the commissarys work. Suggestion and i ask you to think of this from a. Oldiers perspective the mandate was to modernize the military, the volunteer force. Nowhere in their mandate in fact, it was explicit it was about cost savings. If we can modernize and provide our forces with what we promised and save money, that should be the goal. But it should not be predicated on the moneysaving first, then delivering to the troops, and improving quality of life. I am not saying that the changes to the commissary will not be just what we need, save money, modernize, and give the troops what they want. That is possible, but we wont know and we wont get another say in it. We are going to implement this and keep in mind, changes to retirement pay, changes to the changes to. I. Bill, try care, changes to copays, all of those things are coming down without being digested and without a mechanism in there for costs to be arbitrated. So, what this amendment says is, monthsd longer than six to evaluate the changes we are going to make and then have them come back here and report, what are the effects of that that we dont come back in a few years and say, morales better, families are spending more, we have a retention problem, none of that may happen. But i am not willing to risk it and send this thing out the door lets hope it works. My heard somebody else they earlier, hope is not a planners strategy. To support our military family, give them some certainty. Let them know that their members of congress are going to watch that we keep the authority to out of this, not of bureaucratic dod. With that, i yield back my time. The gentleman from nevada is recognized. And you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate the concerns. We have had a lot appearing in this subcommittee regarding this issue. And you are right. I believe it went too far too fast. The provision we put in place, it has safeguards necessary to make sure congress does have oversight, which is why we added the provisions after each milestone is being met. Mentioned wasou to modernize the commissary operations. It has come down to three basic practices that are going to be required to do that. One is conversion to Nonappropriated Funds. Dod to come back to congress and submit their findings prior to moving forward with every milestone. That way, congress has the ability to review what they are about to implement and if we decide it is not right, to intervene and stop it. We put in place the safeguards for the current appropriated workforce, appropriated workforce, to make sure that nobody who is currently working at the commissary of the converted involuntarily or see any change or decrease in their paper benefits. He tried to make sure that we took all current employees and protected them, while giving dod the ability to move forward in modernizing the commissary benefit, while decreasing reliance on appropriated funds. If we dont, this will truly impact every Service Members access to commissary. The only option will be to start closing commissary, changing hours of operation, or changing days of operation. We take all of that into consideration. We felt this was the best way to allow dod to move forward, to modernize the benefit, to maintain access, and sure savings, makes her that the benefit is valued by the beneficiary and put in place the safeguards, so we do have visibility and the ability to impact any changes that may come down that we dont like and protect the current workforce. I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. Davis . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I really want to identify with the comments of my colleague on this one. We are grandfathering in individuals, employees into their positions. I think this is one of those typical moves where it is so hard to make change, but we work through this and to delay it now, to basically stall what we are doing, to require us to come back again and legislate this after two years, i think we are going to be able to monitor this pretty well and it is by virtue of that that i think we can move forward on this and we really have got the buy in as a result of these awful way that it is proceeded. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Orif i can yield to myself just a second. Just for a little context here. We have faced numerous proposals, especially from the other side of the capitol to privatize commissaries. And i have no doubt that is going to let up. And so, i think the hope. Is that we can put commissaries on a selfsustaining basis, so they can stand on their own two feet eventually and deflect this effort to basically do away with them. I think that part of the underlying goal of where we are trying to get, as both of the chair and Ranking Member of the subcommittee have a set the commission made some recommendations, but they did not think there were enough safeguards in that. So, they have added the safeguards, but they have got to prove the changes in the commissary do not reduce the benefits to the consumers of the commissaries and every person who works at the commissary is , benefits, as long as they are there, so there are no voluntary changes at all. The only other thing i would add is, we always have a chance to go back and fix something. Ndaa, we canl always go back and fix it, but i do think it is important to take these steps to get the commissaries moving towards a more selfsustaining posture and think that best protects our Service Members, but also helps deflect some of the arguments that have been going on the other way. Mr. Courtney, were you seeking recognition . I was, mr. Chairman. The gentleman is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The yield to mr. Walz. You, gentlemen. I want to say i do not disagree with anything the braking member has said and the commitment to getting this right is not questioned. I want to be clear about that. My concern comes with the length of time and am i correct, mr. Chairman, that it is six months that this will come back and then they will put the changes and to affect and my question was of trying to get a little more time until the data comes back over a larger dataset. That was really the purpose of the amendment. No, the six months is the time at which they are supposed to come back with the initial plan of how the calculated out the Market Basket value, with the percentage of savings is going to be, but even after that, they have to come back to us. If they are going to go back to a nonappropriated workforce, they have to come back to us and give us an Implementation Plan at each phase that we have the ability to impact upon. If i could reclaim my time, what has our ability then, to exercise a veto power or change power on that . What is the mechanism to make sure that happens just from the reporting back before the implementation. Am i getting this right, that they come back six months later . There is a clause where they have to provide us with the information. We have 30 days to then go in and question them and ask for further information, give them further guidance. If we do nothing, they can proceed. But we have that 30 day period to impact upon what everything limitation is that they bring forward through the subcommittee process. I reclaim my time. Said, i donte i disagree on this. I guess for me, this may be this one. It is a key militant effect of what breaks the camels back. I understand the safeguards you put in and that is very much appreciated. I still think i would like to offer this up and see what people think and get a little more time, but i think the gentleman and the Ranking Member for their commitment to getting this right. I yield back. And i yield back, mr. Chairman. Im sorry, mr. Lawson. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to speak in support of mr. Waulds amendment. I hear that the home as well who have concerns about rising prices for the consumers here at the commissaries, concerns about cuts to pay and benefits for an already moderately compensated workforce at the commissaries and the concept here of congressional review of this benefit, one that is a clear benefit to military families is important. I appreciate the work of the subcommittee. It is not beyond the subcommittee. I know how difficult it is to get our work done and bring it to the entire committee, but this is something separately i also hear from folks at home. I would encourage folks to support mr. Wald. I yield back. I would like to add my support for this amendment. I think for many of us that have lived on basis overseas lived as, commissaries are very much an integral part of us being able to have connections back to our home. And anything that is going to try to put market value on some good, it is going to be by nature, it is going to be overpriced. Gets not that easy to americanmade products when you are in okinawa. Is by nature, it is going to be overpriced because it is not that easy to get the products there. I also know many of the military the department of defense have consistently been trying to get rid of the commissary system as we know it. And because of that, i dont trust that they are truly looking out for the interests of people that care about commissaries. I would like to have this check, at least available for us. Especially considering six months from now, where will we be as a country . Where will we be as a committee . We may not have the ability to be able to check, put a check on the dod. Should they make a decision that we believe would work against the best interests of our members of the Armed Services. With that, i strongly support the gentleman from minnesotas amendment. I yield back. Thank you, yield to the chairman. I think the gentlelady. I appreciate everybodys comments and concerns. I want to make sure we point out some of the things in regards to the safeties and concerns. We are going to need appropriated funds overseas, where we dont have the same opportunities that we have in the continental United States. This is not going to impact overseas commissaries. Haveso, as i mentioned, put into place the safeguards for the workforce, so that the current workforce will not be ily converted to a Nonappropriated Fund for employees. More will they see any change, they have been working on it for over a year. This gives them the authority to roll it out and then report back to us so we had the oversight necessary to make your that prices are not skyrocketing, that the beneficiaries see this as the value that it is, i do believe that if we are going to get our arms around the commissary benefit and not see closures of underused commissaries, that we need to move forward with modernizing the benefit now. I yield back. I yield back. Thank you mr. Chairman. I do appreciate the chairman of the subcommittees hard work. We Start Talking about benefits for our military, it always gives me great pause. Just because i happen i get bombarded sometimes from folks in the military. Particularly from my own family and their families. I am concerned when we Start Talking about modernization because i dont know if that is a code word for cutting benefits or if that really is about doing things more costeffective across the board. I believe that the chairman of the subcommittee is being very stored straightforward with regards to dod having to come back to him, back to the subcommittee to make sure that we are not doing something that sounds good on paper, i know it was in the movie somewhere, but then we end up hurting real people. These are men and women that are serving their family. It is not just them, but their family. We have Service Members living in areas that they do not get paid the same rate of wages, not just in d. C. , that the commissary is a lifeline for them. Actually them to provide for their families and do things that are necessary. I would just caution the committee, i am leaving at the end of this year, but i really do believe this committee has the best interest of our Service Members at heart. I do believe that. I am torn with regard to what is the best action. I am confident though that the chairman of the subcommittee, dr. Heck is not going to allow dod modernize at the expense of our Service Members. And with that, i yield back, mr. Chairman. Questions on the amendment. The nose have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Further amendments the gentlelady from california . Distribute thell amendment. Without objection, the amendment get is considered red and the gentlelady from california is recognized for five minutes. We just finished the discussion of the commissary. One of the most precious benefits of any g. I. When they leave the military is a g. I. Bill of rights. The g. I. Bill has such extraordinary value that we should do everything in our power to make sure that they get the biggest thing for their buck. Forprofit colleges have sworn have swarmed in and preu yed on our veterans. Billionornia, over 600 goes to College Assistance for veterans of the iraqi and afghanistan wars. Two forprofit colleges. California has imposed accountability standards by Governor Brown in 2002 and they are not eligible, many of these forprofits are not eligible fortress of grants because they do not meet these accountability standards around Graduation Rates and job placement rates. Under the current law, it is tired that 10 of their total revenues, from nonfederal sources. 90 can come from federal sources and 10 from nonfederal sources except ironically and in defensively, the g. I. Bill and d. O. T. Education funds count towards that federal funds. Doublethis has been referred and as a result it has got to be withdrawn but i really think members that we opened a responsibility to these veterans and his somehow say that this is a double referral is something we will not take. We need to take this seriously and make sure that the 10 is not eligible for g. I. Bill dollars and four dod education funds. And with that, mr. Chairman, i yield back. The gentlelady withdrew her amendment. I am sorry. I could not hear. The gentlelady withdrew her amendment, correct . There areanding is other referrals to other committees that have not waived jurisdiction so we are not able to consider this amendment. I dont know if anyone really has something they need to get in, right now. The amendment is withdrawn. The gentlelady from california, ms. Davis . Thank you mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. The staff will distribute the amendment. Without objection, the amendment is considered to be read and ms. Davis is recognized. A my amendment would strike provision that was included in the chairman sparks that would prohibit the president from changing the military pay raises as authorized in section 1009. Although i continue to support pay raises for our Service Members, i am concerned that by increasing them above the requested amount and removing the discretion of the president and our military leaders to adjust military compensation that we could be setting a dangerous precedent. Docourse the pay increases matter and they do count to our Service Members but when we are then saying there is less money available and otherranges, things. If you ask our troops, what is more important, the message from them is clear invest in our readiness, in training. Get us the parts we need to maintain our equipment. We all know that it is difficult to make these decisions but we need to give the president , this president , the next president , the authority to be flexible with the pay raise. Changesthe situation dramatically between now and january 1 of next year . This smart puts us in a so it situationputs us in a beyond the first five months. That is a concern and it should be a concern for all of us. Unfortunately, my amendment was referred to several other committees and they have not waived their jurisdiction, so i do withdraw my amendment but i hope we will Work Together to consider these points into the future. Thank you, gentlelady. The context the gentlelady makes is important. The pay is also significant as we have been discussing. Further amendments the gentleman from nevada . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Two consisting of amendments that i been worked and approved by the minority. Without objection. The staff will distribute the package. Without objection the amendments are considered to be read. The derailment from nevada is recognized for five minutes. This is comprised of the the article to implement the recommendations to assist veterans in obtaining commercial licenses. A Pilot Program to share the successes of three state programs in providing low cost and help in job placement programs. Shouldretary of defense retaliation. Amendment by ms. Sanchez the expanded Service Opportunity for women in the military. Amendment by ms. Ear which directs the dod to release public reports of substantiated misconduct. By mr. Peters which directs the secretary of the navy to review the circumstances that may have courtmartial following the explosion at the port chicago california naval magazine in july of 1984. Amendment by mr. Turner which requires a minimum confinement. T period amendment by mr. Turner to be adequately trained to meet the survivors of sexual,. Further discussion . The gentlelady from california, ms. Sanchez . I would like to thank the staff for my amendment in this package which honors the service of women in the military. ,000 women201 in the military. Servicewomen have served in iraqi freedom and enduring centennial,freedom you don and continue to serve in operation inherit result. I dont believe that there is anyone that would question the Invaluable Service that women have made to the security and defense of our nation. S