Officers to Communications Technicians to officer carrying the nuclear football. Time, those people are spending money, meals at the resort, parking at the resort, golf carts to follow the president around at the resort. Maybe even rooms at the resort. Because the president refused to the vest himself of his business interests, that money is left to be held at his property of the first place. And thats how like a conflict of interest. This is not just a hypothetical. Meetings party been held that maralago. Since february, i have been tried to figure out whether department of defense dollars are finding their way to the president s pocket through government expenditures at trump properties. I asked secretary mattis and deford earlier this month. Although we have not been provided definitive answers, pentagon officials have not ruled out that the president is profiting on taxpayer funds. This amendment would prohibit the department of defense from paying expenses at property owned or operated by the president or an immediate Family Member if those payments would result in a net profit. The president has a choice of any number of governmental properties at which he can host meetings, such as camp david. Meetingss have held with dignitaries at other private parties with no issue of conflict. The constitution is clear. No public official should be using their office to make a profit. This situation should be alarming to all of us who represent ourselves as stewards of the taxpayer money and i urge us all to take action against these abuses and vote for this amendment. I yield back. The gentleman from texas, mr. Conway. We have been considering meaty issues for the past seven hours or 10 hours. This is not one of those. Sponsorpoint out to the that secret service has been building a security fence around the private property of former president barack obama. A chainlink fence, razor wire, and ross and her block would have done the job of protecting the compound, which my guess is the secret service spent a lot more money than that, making sure that fence sit with the rest of the duck or in the circumstances of that community. That is on private property. When president obama sells that property and all of that taxpayer pay for funding will in order to his benefit. The election is over. During the that, eight years of president obamas tenure, many on our side wind and grabbed about the president s many vacations to Marthas Vineyard and hawaii and others. The truth of the matter is that those are inane subject matters. We serve on other committees together and i respect her, but this quite frankly is embarrassing to have this kind of Committee Like this. It is a gotcha kind of thing and i would urge my colleagues to resume only vote no on this issue that basically tries to relitigate this last election. Ofthe president has conflict interest, than there are entities in the federal government to deal with a better than the department of defense and better than the system. I would urge a no vote for this illadvised amendment. I yield back. Of course the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california. The nose have it. I request a rollcall vote. A rollcall is requested. That will be postponed. Next, mr. Ohalloran and. I have a memo on the table. The gentleman is recognized for five minutes. I am offering an amendment that i believe strengthens responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars in president ial travel. The air force has professionally and honorably carried out president ial airlift. We must continue to support our airmen who support this proud mission. However, we l it to those airmen to make sure that dod staff and resources provided by the american taxpayer are not being exploited for personal gain in potentially diverting valuable dollars in the purpose of protecting National Security appeared according to the new york times, President Trump spent 44 days, roughly a month and a half, in total of his presidency, traveling to and staying at a property he owns. Tripsseveral of these have included official state business, they include several rounds of golf and other unofficial business. This committee ought to be concerned while conducting appropriate oversight over the cost to dod for these lavish trips as well as ensuring transparency. It is not limited to the current president. The gao estimated that a day trip by president obama to illinois and florida, a visit that included official and unofficial Business Activities ago fense 2. 8 million alone. As a private citizen, i supported these efforts. I believe the American Public has a right to know how their taxpayer tax dollars were being spent. Now as a member of this committee, i am more concerned about the nature and degree to which valuable resources are being spent to subsidize travel habits. Thats why i sent i sent a letter to secretary mattis requesting more information on how much a dod has spent to date of President Trumps travels. In response to my later to my letter, i received two week ago, it reported the total cost for movement of the president and required equipment from generate 20th to may 18 of this year was 15 million in excess 15 million. Amendment sense limi requires reporting on a quarterly basis to support a president ial travel. These reports must include information about any cost incurred for travel to properties owned or operated by the president or immediate family. It does not say they can or cannot go to those locations or any other location. Whether a democrat or republican is president , the historical increase in travel in recent years, including by President Trump and president obama, warrants closer oversight by congress, including by the communities with the committees with jurisdiction. Representatives gallego, walton, sheaporter, and resin for their support of my minute. On behalf of american taxpayers, i urge my colleagues to approve the amendment. I deserve the balance of my time. Mr. Ohalloran, you would yield back my right . I reserve your we dont reserve. Thank you. Then i yield. [laughter] i have a substitute amendment at the desk. The clerk will distribute the substitute amendment. The gentleman from alabama is recognized for five minutes. I appreciate the gentlemans interest in making sure we have transparency in government. My amendment would broaden the score the scope of transparency that did that is amendment seeks but does not achieve because it is exclusively focused on the president and his immediate family. Requires a report at the time of the president s budget request on both direct and indirect travel costs to support the president am a the Vice President and all numbers of the president s cabinet. By broadening the scope of the department of defense reporting, congress can decide appropriate oversight, rather than debating the legitimacy of the president s lifestyle. Again, my substitute amendment will achieve the full transparency while the ohalloran amendment is not. I yield back. Mr. Ohalloran is recognized on the substitute amendment. I appreciate the interest in this important issue. However, the substitute amendment falls short and i must oppose it. The focus of my amendment is directed at the cost of president ial travel, including travel of the president to the president s personally owned property. Ensures proper transparency and accountability. Secondly, it clouds the clarity we are seeking by including statistics on the entire executive branch. Lastly, it limits the oversight of this committee. Quarterly reports will provide current statistics that will account which will allow for accountability of american taxpayer tax dollars. It will provide ongoing and regular transparency of the way this president and future president s conduct themselves is as good fiscal stewards. Substitutee amendment and i urge my colleagues to reject it as well. I want to support the amendment i think its important that we raise the bar and try to avoid. The initial amendment i say this respectfully to my friend from arizona. The commander in chief regardless i would know they are immense and i would reject the premise to be politicized and all have done a lot of travel to include previous with 100 that is the latitude that we give our president s. With that in mind, i support the substitute amendment and think it is a race to the bar and it is less partisan. Thank you mr. Chairman. There is no way to avoid what partisan. Ing somewhat it always goes back and forth. I want to take a brief moment to say that this is different. This is unprecedented. This is not just about how often the president travels. We have all the complaints about how often president obama played golf i will not complain about how often President Trump plays golf. What is entirely different here is that we have a president who owns a lot of properties. He owns a number of them where foreign visitors have come because the president has asked to. On more than one occasion, the president has not been shy at all insane that is being president is good for his business. There are laws in the constitution where the president is not supposed to make money off of foreign governments while he is president. Maybe some of my colleagues can tommy where i am wrong and tommy that i and just being partisan. I am simply trying to be factual. We had the government of saudi arabia come to the trump hotel and, according to documents obtained, spent 275,000 at the hotel. The president has not to vested himself from his business. He and his family are clearly making money off of that. Maralago. After he was he has hosted more than one delegation. It is not about what we as taxpayers pay for american travel. I assure you, as long as we have those he will always have that argument. Resident, a democrat the republicans will complain. If there is a republican resident, the democrats will complain. That, this isout about a president who is making money personally off of that travel, off of the foreign governments, off what the pentagon will spend. I will give mr. Conway mr. Makes spend, however that but it does not come within millions of dollars of the amount of money that has already been spent by foreign governments going directly into the hands of trumps property. There is a painfully simple solution. Put it in a blind trust. Release your tax returns. Transparent. Unfortunately, there is so much over the top. On the democrat and republican side. It all gets blurred. It is all just noise. One size criticizing the other. This is different. I have sure my republican colleagues will not have to be given this offered to tell me why it is wrong. White there is not something uniquely rhonda about a hisident profiting from familys travel and the traveler for governors. This is a problem. I know we will not address it in this bill that it is something we should address more broadly. The president can be transparent, he can release his business records, divest himself or go into blind trust as all have done before him. He has refused to do that and plunges does it us and said, nobody cares. I can do this. Right hande has been i think that is very, very dangerous. To allow any president to profit off of that president ial power is run. This wontcan i know go anywhere and we will lose, i hope we will take it more seriously than just dismissing it as normal partisan stuff. And goesnprecedented way beyond any sort of petty partisan concern. It is a concern for legitimacy and transparency for our government. I yield back. Haveain, elections consequences. And while i disagree with the results of 2009 and 2013, nonetheless we went through that. Go over theo previous election gets us nowhere. This has nothing to do with the for governments spend and whatever they come to the United States for. I would argue that is beyond the reach of this committee to require foreign governments to report to anyone with a spend coming to the United States. This will simply tell you what the government spends going to and from the property, not necessarily what they spend at the property. It is not lost on anyone that people are showing up at maralago or wherever the president goes. Whether it is a dollar five or whatever might you want to put the same. Issue is you are overly mad about it, you already understand it, it will be a campaign item three years ago for whomever is campaigning against the president but this is the House Armed Services committee. We do not oversee the federal bureau of ethics. So if you have a problem with the president , i got it. I had a problem with the last one, you have a problem with this one. At this is now we should be spending our time on. This is not about defense in the country. We are the department that defense. We should be spending our time figuring out how to best defend the country. This is trying to load the system. Even my good colleague does the same thing. I have been working like a wild man to audit our own books and records. One more strike to that camel to try to come up with this whether it is annually, quarterly, whatever it is. We are going to spend in we do not have anything to compare to. We dont have a clue what president obama spent. These numbers will be meaningless except they will be used in a campaign. We should abuse the department of defense accounting system. We are without the mark. I understand you are angry at are to but there consequences. There is another election coming and there will be an appropriate time for anybody to complain about the president. All of those things arent legitimate Campaign Issues but that is not what we are doing tonight or what we should be doing. I would request and encourage all of the members to say no to both of these. Of to the important work defending this country and protecting the men and women who do that. The meaningful things. Getting away from the president ial politics this smacks of. With the gentleman yield . Mr. Larson, do you still seek recognition. Still seeko you resignation . Yes, i do. ] runting noise orry if you find that crimes this seems to ignore the constitution of the United States. Readse one, section nine, no title of new ability should begin ended by the United States and no Person Holding any office themofit or trust under shall, without the consent of congress, except any president , mru meant, office, or title of any kind whatever from any friends or foreign state. So the previous discussion concerning the role of congress totally missed the mark. In fact, we totally do have a very significant role with regard to president ial use of his facilities for the purposes. F engaging foreign governments whether those governments are involved in providing something of value to him that is something we could discuss. But clearly the meetings that took place at maralago are of interest to this committee because of who attended those meetings. The head of the chinese government. Discussionsed in without and about the relationship between the department of defense and china. Also, saudi arabia. Most recent arms sales which i believe is the jurisdiction at least in part of this amity. Said there is a very clear to his between what the president andoing at his resorts quite probably receiving an emolument or something of valuable from the foreign government. That is our business as members of congress and what to base agreements or not, apparently the issue of north korea was discussed and i would suggest that is something we have engaged and at length in this committee. So it is to the direct interest of this committee and a direct of members interest of congress and to simply blown away as if it were of no caucus consequence totally ignores the responsibilities. We had a discussion about the authorization of using force and we too often ignore that responsibility. Are we going to ignore this comment to with regard to extension with regard to section 169 . There is a clear conflict of interest and a clear violation of the emoluments clause. With the gentleman yield . Yes of course. I love that. Eloquently put. But, i have not been aware in my 12 place year of any interests i would argue that your argument must be would be better said in front of the judiciary committee. Thank you, by the way. I think of your counsel but i think reclaim my time that your argument ignores responsibility that we have individually. And therefore collectively wherever we may sit and whatever we mightt committee beyond. It brings us as members of congress the responsibility of , monetaryor not gifts or otherwise, i do not think no, im not sure what the president what president xi of china offered in the way of alsos but maybe he did offer a title to the president. In any case, going back to money and the like, read the monuments clause. It is our responsibility it is the imo humans clause. Moluments clause. Maybe we should move along, have a boat or two. Were not going to resolve this tonight. But, get moving. Theres someone waving his hand furiously. Mr. Chairman. Would like to disagree with my good friend from alabama and speak in support. Of the commonort sense of amendment of mr. O ohalloran. One, to be clear, winning the election does not give you an excuse to waste taxpayer money. , sometimes even on thursdays, he gets off with his manyrage to one of his properties. Those responsible for this transportation and getaways . Our air force. Who puts the bill for these junkets . The american taxpayer. We pay almost 200,000 for every Hour Air Force one is in operation, and today were fed 44 tribes. You want to compare that to president obamas tenure, it is not even close. Anthe past, this was expensive american taxpayer haply except a but there is never been a president who spends 40 of his time hopping from his own properties back and forth. Thecan see that across country here. This is a man who said in 2016, im going to be working for you, not have time to contemplate golf. 200 rounds of golf for donald trump after only one term in office. Due to this unethical type of travel, the very least we can do as members of this committee is to maintain visibility over the money our military is spending to make sure trump meets his teatime. One who claims to care about this will join us to support this may amendment. We have the right to oversight. We have the right to oversight and expenses of the air force. We certainly have a right when the president as abusing taxpayer money. Look at the dates. 200,000 a trip. This is about making sure there is proper oversight, right now, in keeping the public informed. Thank you and i yelled back. I would like to point out if you dont think this is politics at its worst, they are asking for indirect cost. You would spend hundreds of