▶ 0:09:04Audio check. One, two. Mic check.
▶ 0:27:43The committee will come to order. I ask unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to declare recess at any time without objection or so ordered. Without objection, members have five legislative days within which to submit written statements to be made part of the record on the measure under consideration today. So ordered pursuant to committee rule 17, recorded votes on any measure or matter before the committee today may be conducted by electronic device.
▶ 0:28:12The overhead monitors will show the votes of members as they are cast. At the conclusion of the vote, the clerk shall secure the record uh the votes cast and report them to the committee. The chair reserves the right to request a roll call vote by the clerk in lie of electronic voting at his discretion. Pursuant to committee rule 17 and in consultation with the ranking member, we have uh we will postpone recorded votes on amendments until a later time.
▶ 0:28:40It is the chair's intention to operate under the five-minute rule. Today the committee will mark up the committee print providing for reconciliation pursuant to H Conres 14 the concurrent resolution on budget uh on the budget for fiscal year 2025. Uh today we mark up our recommendations for reconciliation pursuant to the concurrent resolution on FY25 budget. This is a historic day.
▶ 0:29:08Never before has had the opportunity to use reconciliation to make a generational investment in our national security. But we do today. The bill before us provides $150 billion in mandatory funding to modernize our military, revitalize the defense industrial base, and improve quality of life for our service members. The time for this level of investment is long overdue.
▶ 0:29:37It is clear we are no longer deterring our adversaries. The threats we face today from China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea and others are much more serious and challenging than we have ever faced before. China is outpacing us in the development and deployment of critical capabilities needed to succeed on future battlefields.
▶ 0:30:01We've let our defense industrial base atrophy to the point where I fear we could no longer sustain a prolonged conflict. And it all stems from chronic underinvestment in our national security. Defense spending is not keeping up with inflation. In fact, we are currently at the lowest level of defense spending as a percentage of GDP since before World War II. That's unacceptable and it must change.
▶ 0:30:27If we want to restore American deterrence and ensure peace through strength, we must get back to at least 4% of GDP spending. The 150 billion in mandatory funding we are providing today will expand benefits and significantly improve housing for our service members and their families. build new infrastructure and expand capacity in our public private uh shipyards, military depots, munitions plants, nuclear facilities, and supply chains throughout the defense industrial base.
▶ 0:30:58Expand domestic production and refining of rare earth and critical minerals vital to our defense supply chain. Construct new battle force ships, fighter aircraft, and ground systems. Develop and deploy the capability we need for Golden Dome Missile Defense Shield. restore America's arsenal of munitions from small caliber ammunition to hypersonic missiles and long range torpedoes.
▶ 0:31:23Fully fund military exercises and spare parts to ensure we can fight tonight, build the infrastructure and capability we need to successfully conduct military operations in the Western Pacific and fund DoD support of border activities because border security is national security. There's one more thing that this bill does that I think is very important. It forces the department to start building future American defense now.
▶ 0:31:49It invests billions to accelerate deployment of new lowcost attritable autonomous systems. These unmanned air, surface, and underwater systems are the key to victory on future battlefields. I'm pleased we are making such significant investment in them today. This bill will begin implementing President Trump's peace through strength agenda. It's a long way to go. It's a goes a long way toward restoring American deterrence and building the ready, capable, and lethal fighting force President Trump promised.
▶ 0:32:18I urge all members to support it. The chair now yields to the distinguished ranking member, my friend from Washington, Mr. Smith, for any opening statement he may have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity. There's no question that the Department of Defense has needs, and there's also no qu question that we as a country face threats. I think the chairman did a decent job of outlining those threats. Um, basically you've got China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and various terrorist groups that have all sort of agreed on one thing.
▶ 0:32:48They want the US to be weaker. Um, and that is a problem for our country. I think it's also a problem for the world. And we need to figure out how to meet those threats. But there are two huge problems with this bill. First of all, it is part of the larger reconciliation bill. It's part of the Republican budget for the next 10 years. And one of the biggest things to remember about this budget is it increases the debt and the deficit. And this is part of that overall effort.
▶ 0:33:16And I say that because you will hear a lot of Republicans talking about how problematic the debt and the deficit are. And I've actually they've actually given some pretty good speeches talking about the challenges that that's going to face for our country um and for future generations. and then they're all going to go out there and vote for a budget to increase the debt.
▶ 0:33:37I I want you to all think about that as you hear these speeches and these passionate um appeals to our sense of fiscal responsibility all to vote for a budget to increase the debt. And as something someone said to me this weekend was actually talking about Democrats and how we support programs and how important those programs are, but we don't support them enough to ask the American people to be willing to pay for them. Well, it's exactly what the Republicans are doing today.
▶ 0:34:04If in fact getting that defense budget to 4% or whatever number is that important, then you should be willing to ask the American people to pay for it. Instead, this budget cuts taxes by anywhere between 4.5 trillion and 9 trillion depending on how they choose to do the math at the end of this drives up our debt. We're once again saying to the American people, this is important, but not important enough to actually pay for it.
▶ 0:34:29So the budget itself is a huge problem and you really can't support the additional 150 billion for defense if you don't support the overall reconciliation bill because that's what this is and the overall reconciliation bill I firmly believe is a disaster for this country because the one thing it does do is it cuts a variety of different programs that are important for working people in this country.
▶ 0:34:52Medicaid being uh the chief amongst them, but also NIH, CDC, whole bunch of things that are really crucial to the guts of this country are going to be cut and again all to drive up the debt and deficit to pay for tax cuts for people who don't really need them. So the budget itself is a huge problem. But the second big problem here is we're giving $150 billion to this Pentagon, to Secretary Hegath and President Trump.
▶ 0:35:19They have not even begun to prove that there is a chance in hell that they will spend this money intelligently, efficiently, and effectively. Secretary Hegsth has proven himself to be completely incapable of doing the job of Secretary of Defense.
▶ 0:35:36Now clearly we can start with the signal gate thing that everybody knows about that basically he shared on a commercial chat application which included a reporter intimate details sensitive details of an attack plan prior to it being carried out. Now that's pretty bad. We have a lot of new members of this committee and I'm sure the new members of this committee remember that the first week they were on this committee they were taught about sensitive classified information and how not to share it.
▶ 0:36:04something that the Secretary of Defense doesn't even understand. Now, that's bad. But worse is the reaction to it was what? That's not a problem. So, they're just going to keep doing it. And they have kept doing it. A number of other chats have been exposed. The the secretary's personal cell phone number on which he engages in these chats is accessible to anybody on the planet and and they're not going to do anything about it.
▶ 0:36:29That level of incompetence doesn't make anyone feel better about their ability to spend $20, much less $150 billion. And then what are we three months, two and a half months into his job, he's already got five former employees who have left who have talked about the chaos going on inside of the Pentagon. You know, months in hell, I think was one of the description. a secretary of defense who is focused on his image and stopping leakers instead of doing his job.
▶ 0:36:59And pause and appreciate the irony. He wants to stop leakers, then he ought to go ahead and just look in the mirror. All right? Because he's the one who leaked all of this information. So the Pentagon is being very poorly run. I see no evidence that they're going to try to get any better. And and what are they focused on? They're focused on a culture war. They are banning hundreds of books and banning words.
▶ 0:37:23You know, I cited this example earlier, but briefly the Anola Gay was scrubbed from all the Department of Defense websites because they wanted to get rid of the word gay throughout the Pentagon because, you know, nothing screams national security more than making sure nobody says gay anywhere within the Department of Defense. And that's but the tip of the iceberg. They banned a book on Jackie Robinson.
▶ 0:37:45They've gone through all of this effort that's got nothing to do with making the Pentagon more efficient and more effective, more lethal, meeting our defense needs. It is all a distraction from actually running the place in any sort of efficient and effective way. And the secretary dismisses this as, oh, these are just disgruntled former employees. These are people he hired and not two years ago, four weeks ago.
▶ 0:38:10If you get that many disgruntled employees that quick, maybe you need to pause for a moment and think about your management style because it isn't working out particularly well for anybody. What they're not doing is they're not focusing on ways to make the Pentagon more efficient and more effective like this committee is. And I want to compliment the chairman. We got really strong bipartisan plans to go after the regulations, the requirements, all of the things that make acquisition and procurement so problematic. This committee is going to work on that.
▶ 0:38:40The D the Pentagon's going to work on making sure that nobody says the word gay. All right, that that that's not particularly helpful. And then what is the overlying strategy behind all of this? There is no strategy. We we don't even have the FY26 budget yet. As of last night, they hadn't even given us the execution instructions for the rest of the FY25 budget. So, we don't know what they plan to do. we're going to throw another $150 billion dollars at them and hope that they figure it out.
▶ 0:39:08And then the other big problem with the strategy of course is in a world where we face those adversaries that I think the chairman did a very good job of describing, we have decided that we're going to go it alone. We're going to put tariffs on everybody. Sorry, everybody but Russia. I should should make that clear. So, we're going to alienate everybody. We're going to attack our alliances. We're going to threaten to invade Greenland going after Denmark. We're going to threaten to annex Canada. We're going to threaten to invade Panama.
▶ 0:39:36We're going to act like we have the right to take over the Gaza Strip. And then we're going to stand up to the rest of the world and say, "Follow us because we're the leaders of the free world." That is the strategy that we are being asked to throw $150 billion into. I don't think we should. I think we should make the Pentagon more efficient, more effective, and then we can lay out an actual strategy. But this budget is terrible.
▶ 0:40:03The Pentagon has no intention of being efficient and effective, and therefore I cannot support throwing another $150 billion that I absolutely guarantee you will not be well spent. I yield back. I thank the chairman for the time. I thank the ranking member. I now call up the committee print providing for reconciliation pursuant to H Conrad 14, the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2025.
▶ 0:40:28I understand that a copy of the committee reprint has been made available and distributed to member offices on Sunday, April 27th. Without objection, the first reading of the committee print is dispensed with. Without objection, the committee print shall be considered as read and open to amendment at any point. I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute. I understand that a copy has been made available distributed to member offices on Sunday, April 27th.
▶ 0:40:52Without objection, the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read for purposes of amendment and shall be open to amendment at any time. The amendment adds language to clarify the window of availability for funds provided in this title. Is there any discussion on the amendment and the nature of a substitute or the underlying committee print?
▶ 0:41:17We will now consider uh log number 4698 by Mr. Smith. For what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? I have an amendment at the desk. Mr. Chairman, will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading of the amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes a gentleman for the purpose of explaining his amendment. Thank you. I explained part of this in my opening statement.
▶ 0:41:40This is an amendment that fences 75% of the money in it until the Pentagon gives us a plan for how they're going to conduct operational security going forward. Basically, until they explain to us how they are fixing the problem with signal and a variety of different other problems with within the Pentagon. Um, as we have described, I think this is a major issue and the real shocking thing is the Pentagon hasn't done anything about it. By and large, Congress hasn't done anything about it. there is an inspector general report um that is going on.
▶ 0:42:09Now, let's keep in mind that the Department of Defense doesn't have an official inspector general because President Trump fired him. Um that's one thing I left out of my opening statement which I'm going to include here. The other thing the Pentagon do is doing is firing incredibly capable competent people because they are looking for loyalists, not capable, competent people. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was fired. The head of NSA and cyber security was fired.
▶ 0:42:36That insistence on loyalty also leads to a less competent Pentagon as we have seen with key people being fired. But this amendment is focused on getting an explanation from the Pentagon about what they are going to do to make sure that they do a better job of protecting operational security. A and keep in mind how important this is.
▶ 0:42:56A couple hours before a mission was carried out on a commercial application with a reporter on the line, they were talking about specific targets, specific launch times, and specific ordinance that was going to be sent to those targets. That gives the adversary a heads up on those attacks and places our troops at risk. We ought to have an explanation of this. And also something that not a lot of people are aware of.
▶ 0:43:23I introduced a resolution of inquiry on this issue which is normally what the minority party can do you know to basically express their opinion if the majority party is isn't agreeing with them and we get a vote on it. It has to come into committee. We have to deal with it. Well the rule that we passed yesterday shut off resolutions of inquiry.
▶ 0:43:42So the majority party is so afraid of having any conversation about this or dealing with it that they took what is basically an unprecedented step of denying the minority party their access to even a resolution of inquiry. I say basically because it was shut off during COVID for different reasons. But that level of not being willing to address this very serious issue is deeply troubling.
▶ 0:44:07This gives us another opportunity to try to force the Pentagon and the majority party to do what it should do, which is exercise our oversight of the Pentagon and say, "Hey, you're not supposed to be sharing this type of sensitive information on a commercial application. Certainly not when you've inadvertently added a reporter to the group chat." That's what we're trying to do here. And you know, I just if a Democratic administration had done this, whatever that Secretary of Defense was, the Republicans would have impeached him a long time ago.
▶ 0:44:37Um the fact that we just act like nothing to see here, this is acceptable, I think is not acceptable. I think we should pay attention to this. This amendment gives us the opportunity to do that. I yield Um I understand the ranking members concern uh about operational security, but this amendment does gut the bill. Uh it would require the secretary to certify he has some technical mechanism to prevent leaking any classified information which does not exist at this time.
▶ 0:45:05It would prohibit the expenditure of 75% or $112 billion from this title until this impossible certification was signed. I urge members to oppose the amendment. Is there any other discussion? Mr. Ryan of New York. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to excuse me.
▶ 0:45:26Uh I want to again thank the ranking member for introducing this and say for the record to all my colleagues, this is the first time in this administration 100 days in that we've even had a chance in front of the public to raise these issues of grave national security as it relates to the clear and now multiple instances of leaking of classified information.
▶ 0:45:52I just wanted to add two specific points to what the ranking member I think very powerfully said. One, despite denials and and I would actually say outright lies by the administration, these leaks unequivocally put lives of US soldiers, our constituents, soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and guardians at risk. That has to be said.
▶ 0:46:19and and and to me that is clearly not a partisan issue although sadly it is seems to be coming one. The second thing that I think is important to say the secretary and I think his first few days said accountability is back at Pentagon. That was secretary Hegsth himself. Accountability is back at the Pentagon. Where is the accountability?
▶ 0:46:44All of us heard from colleagues of ours uh that are still in uniform in a nonpartisan way saying some variation of what I said to myself when I first heard this. If I having a top secret clearance when I was in uniform had done anything in this realm, I would have been charged under the uniform code of military justice, lost my clearance and potentially actually serve time rightfully so in a military penitentiary under the code of uniform military justice.
▶ 0:47:14That is accountability that is American and patriotic and nonpartisan. and the fact that this is the first opportunity that we've had to do this, which ironically, as as the ranking member said, is happening when we're being asked to put a huge amount of additional resources and funding into the team, is unacceptable. I think any of of my 800,000 constituents would find that not a partisan issue, but one in which they would urge us to demand that accountability. That is all that this amendment does.
▶ 0:47:44Uh and I strongly encourage my colleagues uh throughout this room to to take a breath from the moment we're in of the partisanship which we all deal with and understand and acknowledge that for those who have raised their right hand and taken this oath at the bare minimum we owe them this level of accountability. Thank you Mr. Chair and I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize Mr. Whitesides of California. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
▶ 0:48:13Uh over the past recess, I joined several colleagues on a bipartisan congressional delegation to the Middle East. While we were there, we had the opportunity to meet with the brave men and women of our armed forces who are on the front lines of the fight against the Houthi attacks of thei on the United States and our allies. I'm talking about the leaders and service members who carried out the strikes in Yemen in late March. The strikes our Secretary of Defense so cavalerely discussed over an unclassified commercial messaging app.
▶ 0:48:41We all know that the Houthis are receiving arms and intelligence from Iran. And we know that Iran has effective offensive cyber capabilities. And we know that the capabilities they're receiving are real threats to our cyber security and our own military assets. It shouldn't need saying these missions require highlevel OPSAC and infosc. Our service members in SenCom working against the Houthi threat are the best of the best and they deserve the best from our leadership.
▶ 0:49:08Quote, "Do as I say, not as I do." unquote isn't going to cut it. This amendment isn't punitive. It isn't political. It's a simple statement that we in Congress are dedicated to making sure that our national security leaders are taking the same steps to keep our nation secure that they expect of the men and women on the ground. If we're being honest with ourselves, this amendment would be a no-brainer. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Gentleman yields back.
▶ 0:49:38Chair and I recognize Mr. Vinman of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, um this, uh last week during the district work period, I opened a um new office and I was able to greet um one of my constituents who was the mother of an F-18 pilot that was flying over the skies of Yemen um during that mission.
▶ 0:50:02And I will tell you the level of anger from that constituent was was palpable. And that is the level of anger that's felt across many of the tens of thousands of veterans that I represent in my district and the tens of thousands of active duty personnel across the three military installations. What the secretary of defense did was something that we expect privates to know better.
▶ 0:50:32It was basic OBSEACE and this is somebody at the top of the pyramid. And so I find it particularly outrageous that um the secretary coming in talking about uh that there will be um totally lacks any accountability and incapable of accepting responsibility for this.
▶ 0:50:50So, as a as a former prosecutor, as a judge advocate, uh these are the types of cases that we would have had charges on soldiers uh within weeks, whether you're a private or a general, you would have been relieved for this type of activity. And is it is frankly unacceptable. And I agree with my my colleague from New York, Mr. Ryan, that um this being the first opportunity to talk about this publicly um is is unacceptable. We need to maintain good order and discipline.
▶ 0:51:19We need to think about the effect this has on the troops. Uh and we're hearing on a regular basis about the dysfunction at the Pentagon that that percolates throughout the force. And uh Mr. Chairman, we need to restore accountability.
▶ 0:51:34And this is a common sense measure that the ranking member is introducing to restore accountability, good order, and discipline and some faith and confidence not only from the service members that put their lives on the line, including that F-18 pilot, but also amongst the family members that are back home and support those personnel. So, this is common sense measure. I urge my colleagues to support it. Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 0:52:04gentleman yields back. Chair, I recognize Miss Jacobs of California. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And to build on the the comments of my colleagues, if any rank and file service member had shared details like this about specific weapons or the timing of an imminent US strike, they wouldn't just be fired, they would be court marshaled. And that would happen for far less egregious mistakes. In fact, you can get a bad conduct discharge just for leaving classified information on your desk.
▶ 0:52:34But this wasn't even a mistake. This was deliberate. It was intentional to send this message on a commercial platform. And it was reckless. It was reckless with operational details and reckless with our service members lives and reckless with the trust that our service members instill in us. I represent the largest military community in the Every day when I'm home, I have to look our service members and their families in the eyes and tell them I am doing everything I can to keep them safe.
▶ 0:53:03How can any of us look them in the eyes right now if we don't hold Secretary Hexath accountable for the danger that he put our service members in by so recklessly disclosing this classified information? We can't sweep this under the rug. We can't pretend like it didn't happen or chalk it up to a simple mistake. We now know there have been at least two improper conversations about attack plans on Signal, but have there been more? Are there others still in use?
▶ 0:53:33We know Secretary Hegs downloaded Signal on his computer and circumvented the Pentagon security measures. Have others done this, too? We need to know these answers and so many more. And we need to put guard rails in place to prevent a breach like this from happening again. So, to me, this is a common sense, simple amendment. and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand up for our service members and vote yes. I yield back. Gentle lady years back, gentle lady from New Jersey, Miss Cheryl's recognized.
▶ 0:54:03Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I learned how to properly handle classified information when I was a teenager at the US Naval Academy. I used that training again as a Russian policy officer in the Navy. So, I'll start with the obvious. If Secretary Hegsth believed a word he said about turning our military into a meritocracy, he would have sent in his resignation weeks ago.
▶ 0:54:26His decision to send strike plans and multiple unsecured signal checks with his wife, his brother, his personal attorney, and a reporter could have killed American service members. And he did so while at least one signal member was in the Kreblin. But I'm not surprised by his complete disregard for our national security and the safety of our men and women in uniform. From his views on women in combat to his willingness to bend the knee to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, we knew exactly who Trump was picking.
▶ 0:54:56It's why I strongly opposed his nomination from the very beginning. But I will say that I'm deeply disappointed that has taken till this moment for us to even bring this up. An investigation by this committee is long overdue because every single individual in this room knows that the information Hexath shared on Signal was classified.
▶ 0:55:18Every member of the House Armed Services Committee knows without a doubt that the timing, schedule, and composition of operations are absolutely classified. Every individual in this room knows that peak headsets use of signal could have gotten American service members killed. So even if you haven't served in uniform, you know how to handle classified information by virtue of sitting on this very committee.
▶ 0:55:43We host any hearing with classified information in secure rooms, without our phones, and without messaging apps like Signal. Which is why I think it's frankly as nine that the majority on this committee has refused to hold any sort of investigatory hearing into Hegath's behavior.
▶ 0:56:01So the next time the majority tries to tell you they support our troops or they care about our national security, remember that they continue to defend a Secretary of Defense who is a clear and present danger to every single American in uniform. Thank you and I yield back. Gentle yields back. Seeing no other members, Mr.
▶ 0:56:21Chairman, gentleman's Uh I want everyone in the committee to think back for a second that was here a year ago and imagine if we were having this discussion on a markup a year ago and this amendment was being offered. We would shake our heads and say why would anyone offer an amendment like this? Well, we now know why we have to offer an amendment like this and it was the performance of the Secretary of Defense and what we knew at the outset.
▶ 0:56:49I also remember in the last year so many people on the other side of the aisle here did to took great umbrage and thought it was a reason for the secretary of defense to to resign because he was going in for colon surgery or cancer surgery of some kind and he alerted some staff but not everyone and that that was a reason that created such a danger to our security that they said the secretary of defense should resign.
▶ 0:57:15Then uh the difference too was the secretary of defense came to this committee and apologized and said he shouldn't have done it that way and took accountability. There's no accountability here whatsoever. But I want to deal with one other aspect that hasn't been touched on. I don't believe the showing the importance of this amendment. Number one uh is the risk it poses to our own servicemen and women. But also uh think about the purpose of this amendment in terms of our allies that we share intelligence with.
▶ 0:57:46Uh can you honestly think that we have the same level of of assuredness with our allies that they'll share intelligence knowing what occurred with Secretary Hexith and this amendment would go a long ways to secure uh that trust to rebuild that back to make sure that Congress has their back in terms of keeping intelligence that they share secure.
▶ 0:58:11So that is just another reason why I support this amendment and and I think this is an amendment that everyone should send a strong message on and it really should be bipartisan and it should be overwhelming. We'd be doing ourselves a great service as a country. We'd we'd be doing a great service to our allies who've risked their service people side by side, shoulder-to-shoulder with us as well and make sure that we're doing the most we can, most importantly to protect our own serving servicemen and women.
▶ 0:58:41I yield back. Gentlemen yields back. Does any other member seek recognition on Mr. Smith's amendment? Seeing none, if there's no further debate on the question occurs on amendment offered by Mr. Smith. So many as in favor will say I.
▶ 0:58:56I so many as opposed will say no opinion the chair nos have it um a recorded vote is is ordered this recorded vote will be postponed until a time we will now consider log number 4684 by Mr. Ryan for what purposes the gentleman seek recognition uh Mr. Mr.
▶ 0:59:24Chairman, I have an amendment at the Uh will the clerk distribute the please? Without objection, the reading and amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes a gentleman from New York uh to explain his amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This will be somewhat of a continuation of the discussion we just had, but I think an important distinction. Again, this amendment is foundationally about accountability.
▶ 0:59:49It goes beyond the scope of just the funds we're discussing and the programs we're discussing as it relates to this $150 billion uh piece of reconciliation and gets closer to the heart of accountability that I believe is required and necessary uh when it comes to the complete failures not only of the Secretary of Defense but the truly chaotic situation uh at the Pentagon.
▶ 1:00:13We have to be clear and owe it to the American people about what is happening and again do all that we can with the tools that we have to drive accountability. That is what this amendment is about. I want to take a moment to again hit as many of my colleagues said what is happening factually in reality with no spin uh at the Pentagon.
▶ 1:00:34We've heard it multiple confirmed leaks of classified information clearly putting lives at several waves of mass firings at an unprecedented level of competent, committed patriots to make room for cronies, several of whom have already, as we heard, been pushed out. Very importantly, in the first week, the firing of the independent inspector general, another one of the few tools that we have for accountability, who is no longer there.
▶ 1:01:03And if you don't have to take my word for it, you can listen to senior Trump and Hegsth appointees about what is happening in terms of the chaos. Some of the some of the quotes that I think get uh succinctly to the point written in an op-ed last week, quote, total chaos, quote, full-blown meltdown.
▶ 1:01:28quote, "In short, the building is in disarray under Hegs leadership. These are not Democrats or partisans. In fact, these were political appointees of this administration." Another uh political appointee who had the courage to speak out in a podcast uh last week that I commend all my colleagues to see, quote, "Leaks have consumed the team." He estimated 50% of the secretary's day is dealing with these issues.
▶ 1:01:58Given the scope of risks around the world, that is unacceptable. In the face of this unprecedented chaos at the Pentagon, there's been zero accountability from the administration. In fact, from the White House podium to the Pentagon press briefing to national TV, they have deceived and flat out lied about what has happened and the consequences.
▶ 1:02:21This bill related to the supplemental is asking us to essentially add more fuel to what has tragically become, I believe, a dumpster fire situation at the Pentagon. And I say that having served in this great department and with great reverence to those wearing the uniform that it pains me to say that.
▶ 1:02:41And I think it's important to say, as many of my colleagues said previously, everyone in this room, in their heart, especially those that served in uniform, knows this. At least one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and I give him great credit for that, has been willing to speak up publicly and say that. I would welcome any of my colleagues sitting here today to join in this debate. They didn't join in debate about the last amendment. I would invite them to join in this debate.
▶ 1:03:12But instead, we've requested a hearing, as you heard, denied. We've requested an investigation, denied. And there's not even an inspector general to do one, by the way. As the ranking member said, we've requested a resolution of denied. So, we have very few choices to drive accountability on behalf of our constituents and especially those men and women in uniform.
▶ 1:03:36So, I'm uh in this amendment invoking a rule that I know uh some might say is controversial. I think is frankly necessary. The Holman rule that would uh until we can get some accountability by the Secretary of Defense ensure that none of our taxpayer dollars, hard-earned money by my constituents would go to add more to the chaos uh and hopefully as a lever of accountability.
▶ 1:04:01And I just want to quickly with the remaining 30 seconds I have pre-but what I'm sure if my colleagues weigh in would be their argument that this is a problematic approach to take under the Holman rule. It's been used 58 times in the last 100 in the last Congress, the 118th Congress.
▶ 1:04:1958 times to drive accountability under the Biden administration of Secretary of Defense, of Secretary Haland, of Secretary Buddhajed, of Secretary Blinken, Secretary Morcus, multiple other senior uh Biden administration appointees. So, the president is there. We owe the people accountability and uh I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Gentlemen, yields back. Um, this amendment really accomplishes nothing. It does not change any policy, practice, or outcome.
▶ 1:04:47In fact, it denigrates the same public-minded individuals that the other side has claimed to support in recent weeks. I urge all members to oppose it. Are there any other members that wish like to speak on the amendment? Who miss Strickland's recognized? Thank you, Chairman Rogers. I'm going to support this amendment by my colleague Pat Ryan. And I want to reiterate something that he pointed out.
▶ 1:05:18Every person who serves on this committee does so because we are dedicated to protecting and defending our homeland, our national security, our security abroad, and especially those people who are serving. The fact that Secretary Hegsth is still employed is a joke. And what is more appalling to me is your conspicuous silence. At some point, you have to speak up for the American people. At some point, you have to speak up and show that you're a true patriot.
▶ 1:05:47Your silence speak volumes. I yield back, Mr. Chair. Uh, gentle lady yields back. Any further There's no further debate. The question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Ryan. So, me in favor will say I. I. Those opposed, no. No. opinion chairs and those have it. A recorded vote um is ordered. The recorded vote will be postponed until a later time.
▶ 1:06:28We will now consider number 4680 by Mr. Ryan. For what purposes the gentleman seek recognition? I have an amendment at the desk at the desk, Mr. Chair. Clerk will distribute the amendment. Without objection, reading amendments. Dispense with the chair recognizes gentleman for the purpose of explaining his amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'm sorry to be the third third time here. I promise this is the the last. Um this I'll just give a brief explanation.
▶ 1:06:55I this is one that doesn't require I think again common sense and doesn't require significant explanation. This amendment specifically prevents the department from obligating funds or entering into a contract with any entity or company that has a member of their senior leadership team of that company serving as a special government employee.
▶ 1:07:15Uh, I think this is clearly again a a a nonpartisan recognition of avoiding conflicts of interest, especially when we're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars of American taxpayer funds that we en ensure, especially again in the wake of not having an independent oversight of the inspector general, that there's a clear way to ensure the American people there's no corruption.
▶ 1:07:40Unfortunately, in the first 100 days of the administration, we have seen unparalleled corruption uh in particular around Mr. Musk, who's put in charge essentially of the budgets of the very departments that pay him and in fact have made him one of the richest humans in the history of humankind while also getting access to information in some cases classified at least as proposed that materially benefits himself and his companies.
▶ 1:08:10This is all happening, by the way, while other committees across the capital are proposing massive cuts, including $880 billion of healthc care cuts to the Medicaid program that in my district of 800,000 people, over 200,000 people rely on, including over 100,000 children. So again, the amendment is intended to provide oversight and accountability and ensure that no special government employee, in particular Mr.
▶ 1:08:38Musk can uh put in place fraud, abuse, or waste of hard-earned taxpayer dollars. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I yield back. Gentlemen yields back. Gentle lady from New Jersey is Mer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh Mr. Chairman, I'm going to support this because we've seen all kinds of corruption problems from Elon Musk, especially a special government employee, and there is simply no oversight here.
▶ 1:09:05Uh he attempted to force the State Department to buy cyber trucks until that was caught and stopped. He's trying to move a billion dollars and over a billion dollar contract away from Verizon to his own Starlink companies, firing anyone capable of oversight who might hold him accountable for his violations of labor rights at his companies, which would cost him money. So I think this is a very good amendment to make sure we have some level of oversight into the corruption and can end it.
▶ 1:09:33So I will be supporting this amendment and I encourage all my colleagues to do so. Gentle lady yields back. Chair and I recognize the ranking member. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support this amendment, but I also want to let people know this is about accountability and oversight at the Pentagon. That is what we are concerned about and it is tied directly to the $150 billion because this this whole process here is to give the Pentagon another $150 billion. And one question you need to ask is, is that money going to be spent well?
▶ 1:10:02Are we going to have an efficient and effective use of that dollars? You know, I think if you want to begin to get to fiscal responsibility, that's one thing that you need to do. And I say this in every single group that ever asks me for money. What are you doing with the money that you currently have? And remember, it's a $900 billion budget that the Pentagon has to play around with. It's not like they got nothing. So, what are they doing with it? Is it being done in an accountable and efficient way?
▶ 1:10:30And if the answer to that question is no, if you're worried about where that $900 billion is being spent, then the last thing in the world you want to do is just give them another $150 billion without any accountability or oversight. And that's what we're doing. So you may think this is all just, you know, petty little piece here, piece there. This is the Pentagon that we are giving $150 billion dollars to. And I guess I would ask for my Republican colleagues, you know, think of it this way.
▶ 1:11:00It's like if you had an area in the country, which we do have, that has spent billions of dollars trying to deal with the homelessness problem and it's only gone up traditionally. How would you all react if we came up to you and said, "Hey, they don't have enough money. Let's give them another five billion and see what happens." You would ask, "What are you doing with the billions of dollars that you've already spent?" A question which I have asked back in my own community that I'm worried about. But for the Pentagon, those rules don't apply.
▶ 1:11:27For the Pentagon, we don't care if you have any accountability or oversight. We're just going to fling the money at you and hope for the best. Certainly, you have all the problems with Secretary Hegsth we've talked about. But what Mr. Ryan is talking about is Elon Musk who is walking throughout the federal government cutting programs, firing people, and also redirecting money. There are all kinds of contracts that he has for Starlink, for SpaceX, for Tesla, for all of his company. And we're just letting him walk in.
▶ 1:11:55He he sat in on the interview for the Secretary of Air Force, uh, on whether or not he's going to be hired. And the Air Force, that is the place where a ton of money goes to his companies. And everyone just sort of shrugs and goes, "No big deal. Can we just have a minimum of accountability and oversight, which is what we're supposed to do here? Forget the partisanship for the moment. Don't you want the Pentagon to spend money? Well, do you just want to give them more money?
▶ 1:12:24Or is there any part of this that's like, hey, maybe you should run the place better so that the money we sent you actually is well spent. That is the conversation we're trying to have. No, we will have that conversation in a few weeks or a couple of months or whenever it is when we do the NDAA.
▶ 1:12:41But you're since you're flinging another $150 billion dollars at them before we have that conversation, before they've even submitted an FY26 budget, before they've even executed or told us how they're going to execute the FY25 budget. This is the exact opposite of fiscal responsibility and being conservative for that matter. Let's stand up for efficiency and effectiveness and accountability. It's what Mr.
▶ 1:13:07Ryan's amendment tries to do and what the amendments that we put before you today just about top to bottom try to do. That's what we're trying to get this committee to focus on. I yield back. Gentlemen yields back. This amendment is overly broad with no defined terms and may have unintended consequences. Further, this amendment would only apply to funds made available by this legislation and would not impact the other $150 billion in already appropriated funding for DoD, does not offer any limitations on the DoD's activities.
▶ 1:13:38I urge all members to oppose it. With that, I recognize Mr. Vinman of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The reality is our national security and basic freedoms are under threat. People are scared and for good reason. And much of the intentional harm caused across the country and within federal agencies can be traced back to Mr. Elon Musk, an unelected billionaire given never before seen access to government information. As a former ethics lawyer on the National Security Council, this trend of money equating to government access must not become the norm.
▶ 1:14:08This amendment will put necessary safeguards in place. Look, we're talking about a basic fundamental issue. We want people serving in government that will put the interests of the American people and service members above and ahead of themselves. In this case, we have an unreconcilable conflict of interest. When I worked in the White House working with senior officials in in the first Trump administration, those officials actually took this responsibility seriously. They recused themselves.
▶ 1:14:36That is not the case here with this particular unelected special government employee. And there are lines in this bill that actually can go directly to funding his company. So that is a conflict of in of interest that is unreconcilable. And this makes a common sense. This takes a common sense step to make sure that the interests of the American people and service members are ahead of financial benefit and I urge my colleagues to vote for it. Thank you.
▶ 1:15:05Gentleman yields back. Any further discussion on the amendment? Seeing none, so many are in favor will say I. Oh, the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Ryan log number 4680. U so many in favor will say I. I those opposed. No. No. Opinion of the chair the nose have it. The recorded vote is ordered. Uh this recorded vote will be postponed until a time.
▶ 1:15:34We now consider log number 4694 by Ms. Hulahan. For what purpose does the gentleoman seek recognition? Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will please distribute the amendment. Without objection, the reading of the amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes a gentle lady for the purpose of explaining her amendment. So, this should be pretty short and so as a result, I'll actually read the amendment itself. Child care and school civilians.
▶ 1:15:58None of the funds may be used to terminate appropriated and nonappropriated child care workers employed by military child devel child development centers or employees of the department of defense education activity or DODIA unless the employee was not performing or engaged in misconduct and for whom these issues were documented for the record. So this amendment my amendment is very very straightforward and honestly should be supported by all members of this committee.
▶ 1:16:25It would simply ensure that none of these funds in this bill are used to terminate any childare workers or DODIA employees unless of course they've been engaged in some sort of documented misconduct. The Department of Defense of course runs the largest employer sponsored child care system in the United States employing nearly 23,000 workers and serving over 200,000 children.
▶ 1:16:48A significant portion, an estimated 75% of these workers are actually married to service work members themselves and of course face frequent locations relocations due to their spouse's deployment. Factors like lengthy onboarding processes, increased numbers of children with behavioral issues and difficulties attracting and retaining employees in such a tight labor market have contributed to the challenges in finding a very good child care workforce.
▶ 1:17:14So we must ensure that childare workers are not at risk and continue to serve those who serve us. We already have lost too many civilian workers that will impact direct care. We cannot afford to lose more to doge or to irresponsible behavior of dollars spent recklessly. Similarly, DODIA employs around 15,000 people including teachers and other staff who serve over 71,000 students.
▶ 1:17:39Among the agency's probationary employees were hundreds of teachers who worked for DODIA. Thankfully, teachers were exempt, but unfortunately many took the fork in the road anyhow. And that's why my conversations last week in preparation for tomorrow's subsequent milpers hearing on this issue. I have learned that these kinds of fork in the road decisions have caused issues in some cases closures of child care centers. Again, this is a very simple and very straightforward and very common sense amendment.
▶ 1:18:10If our colleagues on the other side of the aisle truly say that they support our men and women in uniform and their families, they will vote yes on this amendment. Thank you. I yield back the balance of my time. Gentle lady yields back. and the office of p personnel and readiness has already published guidance that the deferred retirement program also known uh as the employee buyout program and other doge efforts will not apply to DODIA or child care center employees.
▶ 1:18:38This amendment which would only apply to funds made available by this legislation and would not impact the other $850 billion in appropriated funding for the DoD does not offer any real protection for these employees. I urge all members to oppose it. Anybody else wish to speak to the amendment? Gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Cor. Thank you. Uh thank you uh Mr. Chairman and again I uh rise in strong support of uh Miss Hulahan's amendment.
▶ 1:19:02Uh again want to remind the members uh about the great work that she and Congressman Bacon did uh in the last Congress in terms of quality of life improvements. Um this issue of uh the child development centers on military installations um is something that is again from coast to coast. I have a a Navy base in my district with about 7 to 8,000 sailors.
▶ 1:19:23Um this was the number one issue in terms of town halls that were held on the base there is the fact that they uh again have waiting lists and the reason they have waiting lists is because they have inadequate staffing to to make sure that um these military kids um are going to get cared for. Uh in my case it's uh for families where um sailors are on deployment uh in communicado for anywhere from three to six months at a time.
▶ 1:19:48The um amendment, I think, is focused on the fact that there is a I think just uh non-stop campaign of um demoralization and um really almost um insulting um federal civilian employees in the Department of Defense. And I I realize there was a carveout that the chairman mentioned, but the fact of the matter is is this is happening uh throughout the department.
▶ 1:20:12And I think it's really important for us as a committee to just make absolutely sure um that um people are not going to get rifted. They're not going to be subject to the what have the five things you've done over the last week memos that are still going out uh as we sit here today across the the workforce.
▶ 1:20:30Um and and really uh really we should be focused on expanding the the workforce so that u military families are going to have adequate safe highquality child care which is really been the standard within this system. But as I said it's just its capacity is not where it should be in terms of making sure that every military family um has uh the confidence and reassurance that their kids are being taken care of uh like most working families out there in this country.
▶ 1:20:59So again, I strongly support the amendment and urge my colleagues to vote yes. Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes Miss Cheryl from New Jersey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I'm going to support this amendment. As a mother of four, I can tell you that we are facing a child care crisis in this country and more than half of our state's child care costs are more than instate college tuition and actually finding care is nearly impossible. For military families, these challenges are even more acute.
▶ 1:21:30As of this time last year, 9,000 children were waiting on monthsl long wait lists for child care. Without access to militaryrun providers, service members and their families have to cobble together care and threats like these to child care and Speaker Johnson's refusal to allow proxy voting for new mothers start to result in an attack on our families.
▶ 1:21:53That's why this this can really take a large hit to military finances, either having to pay for expensive care in the community or having a spouse leave their job to care for their child. We have seen reports that this administration's actions have caused disruptions to the department's child care system, which is already facing staffing shortages and long wait lists. This is entirely unacceptable.
▶ 1:22:17Having access to militaryrun child care programs is essential to our military readiness because family challenges are a major reason while ser why service members choose not to reinlist. At a time where our military is facing major recruitment and retention challenges, we need to be making life easier and less expensive for our military families, not harder. This amendment will protect child care workers who are serving our service members and their children from Trump and Musk's reckless cuts. Thank you. And I yield back.
▶ 1:22:47Gentle lady yields back. Chair and I recognize gentle lady from California, Miss Jacobs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nearly 40% of our service members have kids. 70% of those kids are under 12. And we also have a nationwide child care crisis. And it's even worse for our service members who work irregular hours, move often, and are usually far away from their families and support systems. So, it's even more important that they have access to reliable, safe, quality, and affordable childare.
▶ 1:23:17In San Diego alone, where I represent, the child care wait list has been up to 4,000 spots long in recent years. And when our service members can't find or afford afford childare, that means they're more likely to be stressed or unfocused at work, threatening our readiness. Military child care is a national security issue. We've already heard really concerning rumors about cuts to programs like Head Start and other really important programs that support families who need childare across this country.
▶ 1:23:46We need to make sure that as those cuts are being contemplated, they're not looking at the military child development centers or DODIA and they're not firing childcare workers unless it's for just cause. And if there is a carveout, like the chairman has said, then my Republican colleagues should have no problem supporting this common sense amendment and protecting our employees and support military quality of life efforts. So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and support our mil military families. I yield back.
▶ 1:24:16Are there any other members wishing to speak on this amendment? Seeing none, uh who uh the question occurs on the amendment offered by Miss Hulahan of log number 4694. So many are in favor will say I. Those opposed say no. Opinion chair and those have it. Chairman like a recorded vote. A recorded vote is ordered. This recorded vote will be postponed until a later time.
▶ 1:24:46We will now consider log number 4695 by Mi Miss Strickland. For what purposes gentleoman seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I seek recognition to offer my amendment. I'm offer I'm sorry. Go ahead. Does the gentle lady have an amendment at the desk? Yes. Will the clerk uh please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading of the amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes gentleoman for the purpose of explaining her amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 1:25:13I'm offering an amendment that will protect the Department of Defense's ability to provide health care for service members and their families. My amendment seeks to limit the termination of civilian health care healthc care providers provided by the DoD. Our uniform leadership has made clear in hearing after hearing before this committee that lethality and readiness are directly linked to service member quality of life. I had the honor of serving on the bipartisan quality of life panel and healthc care is a big issue.
▶ 1:25:43Today, patients at military treatment facilities often have to wait weeks for routine care. At military hospitals across the nation, resources and providers are so limited that beneficiaries are redirected off base where weight times stretch even further. This is intolerable for those seeking specialty care, including mental health and even pregnancy and postpartum support services. These health care needs cannot wait just so President Trump can claim he may have saved a few bucks.
▶ 1:26:12The last 100 days have seen crippling attacks on our civil servants. This workforce that has resulted in decreased military readiness and worsening outcomes for those in uniform. Led by Elon Musk, who's unaccountable and gleefully implemented by Secretary of Defense Pete Hgsth, multiple rounds of layoffs and terminations are already hurting our armed forces and making federal service a less attractive option for our most talented health care professionals.
▶ 1:26:40This sloppily executed deferred resignation program and reduction in forced layoffs have resulted in little to no savings while sowing chaos and upending lives. No one here is going to argue against eliminating government waste and doing it efficiently, but you use a scalpel, not a chainsaw. What's also unacceptable is doing this in a way that hurts our dedicated health care providers, our service members, and basically the United States of America.
▶ 1:27:07Despite the alleged concern about an unst unsustainable budget, today this committee is considering and debating how to spend an additional $150 billion. I encourage my colleagues to use this opportunity, commit to improving health care access and outcomes for our service members and their families and provide some stability and predictability for our providers.
▶ 1:27:29We cannot lose sight that this entire partisan process unfolding today is in service of giving the wealthiest Americans trillions of dollars in tax cuts paid for on the backs of hardworking families and those who are serving us. The least we can do is ensure our military personnel receives the best level of care possible. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on my amendment and guarantee access to providers and military treatment facilities. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Chair recognizes himself.
▶ 1:27:59Uh the office of personnel readiness has already published guidance that the deferred retirement program, also known as the employee buy program. Is this the right? uh and other DOE uh efforts will not apply to deal do D do D do D do D do D do D do D do D do D do D do D do D do D or childare uh center employees this amendment which would only apply to funds made available by this legislation would not impact the other $850 billion in appropriated funding for the DoD does not offer any real protection for these employees I draw members to pose the amendment anybody any other member wish to see speak
▶ 1:28:29on this amendment I'm clarity Mr. Sheriff, so was that about child care or healthcare providers? That was about healthcare worker firings. It's the same same points. Any any other member wish to speak to amendment? Seeing none, uh there's no further debate. Question occurs on the amendment offered by Miss Strickland, uh log number 4695. So many in favor will say I. I. Those opposed, no.
▶ 1:28:59Finish here. The nos have it. Recorded vote is ordered. The recorded vote will be postponed until a later We will now consider log number 4700 by Mr. Vinman of Virginia. For what purposes a gentleman from Virginia seek recognition? Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading and amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes gentleman from Virginia for the purpose of explaining his amendment.
▶ 1:29:29Thank you, Mr. chair. After serving in the army as a paratrooper, infantry officer, and JAG, I had the opportunity to serve as an ethics lawyer on the National Security Council. I worked with the Department of Defense IG's and all department IG's on a regular basis uh at the White House. Our independent inspectors general are skilled professionals across all agencies. They deserve a critical they serve a critical role including investigating waste, fraud, abuse, and abuse and misconduct.
▶ 1:29:57How do we ensure that these funds are spent appropriately if we don't have an independent inspector general that can uh serve in that position without fear of being fired uh for making the political overseers unhappy. The second point is this amendment serves to protect those who conduct a vital investigation of of DoD.
▶ 1:30:18It will help ensure loyalty to the administration is not the determination for retention and prevention and further decimate the essential uh workforce of of the inspector general. Importantly, Congress has recently asked the IG to investigate the use of unclassified networks like Signal to discuss sensitive and classified information. I think one important thing to note is that um the IG does not have jurisdiction to investigate anything outside of Department of Defense.
▶ 1:30:48So in any event uh the OIG investigation will be incomplete as to the the full extent of the security breach that occurred at the White House National Security Council. This directly impacts uh this amendment directly impacts the Secretary of Defense as he shared information about military operations on the signal chat. Overall, it's an it's important to maintain a fully staffed OIG office to maintain oversight over DoD's operations and leadership.
▶ 1:31:17This amendment would ensure that the IG cannot be fired again for political or personal reasons, allowing them to do their job without fear or favor, as has been historically the case up till this point. We know IG personnel are at risk given the firings of their leadership in January. We also know that civilians are being targeted for cuts and this administration rewards loyalty and subservience over facts.
▶ 1:31:42I urge every member of this committee to put the American people and service members above political partisanship and loyalty. I urge you to support the mission of DoD and vote yes on this amendment. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Um the U chair believes this amendment would not really accomplish anything since the amendment only pertains to funds provided by this title. The DoD can still use any other appropriated funds to make staffing decisions. I urge members to oppose the amendment.
▶ 1:32:13Does any other member wish to speak to this amendment? Miss Cheryl of New Jersey is recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Trump administration's immediate firings of inspectors general, particularly within the DoD is not only illegal, but it's also a blatant attempt to silence independent oversight. By removing the IGs, the administration is ensuring that there is no one left to hold Hegsth and the department accountable for fraud, waste, and abuse. This is not about improving government.
▶ 1:32:41This is about eroding transparency and giving Musk and Hegsth free passes to do whatever they want. It's dangerous for our national security and it's dangerous for our service members. And sadly, this is a pattern across the Trump administration. Reducing oversight so that Trump can line the pockets of his billionaire buddies. We've seen it time and again. Trump rigs the system. He installs his campaign donors like Elon Musk and top roles.
▶ 1:33:09They manufacture a problem, remove IGs and other career officials who may hold them accountable, and then reward government contracts to businesses where they have a financial interest. It's self-dealing. It's inappropriate and it's illegal.
▶ 1:33:26That's why earlier this year, I called on Inspectors General at eight federal agencies to investigate Elon Musk and DOA's actions, identify his conflicts of interest, and ensure that an unelected billionaire isn't stealing New Jersey families hard-earned tax dollars to further enrich himself and his companies. For Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Pete Hegsth, it's never been about combating waste, fraud, and abuse.
▶ 1:33:50And it's never been about service to country, which is why I strongly support this amendment to protect Inspector General oversight at the Department of Defense. Thank you, and I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Chair recognizes gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 1:34:08Um, I think it's important that we recognize that this administration has stated that they want to emphasize transparency and accountability and prevent waste and fraud.
▶ 1:34:23But these are the very employees whose job it is to ensure that there is transparency, accountability, and to um out situations involving waste and fraud. The Trump administration fired multiple inspectors generals in January, including the Department of Defense.
▶ 1:34:48There's an acting IG, our inspector general general right now who had been working in the inspector general's office for years. And so this amendment is about accountability. It's this amendment is transparency and I urge my Republican colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back. Gentleman yields back.
▶ 1:35:12Is there any further discussion on this Seeing none, um the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Vinman. So many in favor will say I. Those opposed, no. Opinion chair and nos have it. Yes, m would like a recorded vote. Recorded vote is ordered. This recorded vote will be postponed until a later time.
▶ 1:35:37We will now consider log number 4697 by Miss Elfreth. For what purposes the gentleoman seek recognition? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment at the desk. Uh will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading amendment is dispensed with. The chair recognizes gentleoman for uh for the purpose of explaining her amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 1:36:01protecting history and accurately telling the stories, the victories and the struggles, the successes and the hard fought fought progress of our great nation's military and service members is critical to our national security. And further, the destruction of knowledge on the basis of partisan disagreement is unacceptable and dangerous. The amendment at the desk is simple. It requires a panel of experts to review all artifacts and documents flagged for destruction and censorship.
▶ 1:36:28And to ensure critical congressional oversight, the members of this panel who represent the historians of each armed forces, the Society for Military History in the company of military historians must notify Congress of any destruction or censorship. A military that looks like our country and receives an education that teaches the accurate history of our nation is critical to our national security and ability to influence strong democratic principles abroad.
▶ 1:36:53Yet, as we've seen under Secretary Hexus's guidance, the DoD has removed images and stories of historical events and heroes. We all read the headlines of photographs of Jackie Robinson, who served in the military during World War II and before he broke the color barrier in baseball, were removed from the DoD website. Articles and images highlighting the accomplishments of the Navajo code talkers who fought in the Pacific Island campaign were removed.
▶ 1:37:18Photographs of Air Force uh Colonel Jeannie Levit, the first female fighter pilot and the first woman who passed the Marine infantry training and of World War II women in air service pilots were all removed. Uh as the ranking member mentioned, pictures of the Inola Gay, the plane that dropped the atomic bomb in Japan were removed simply because it contained the word gay. And at the US Naval Academy in Maryland's third district, we have seen nearly 400 books from their libraries uh that explored themes of race, gender, and diversity removed.
▶ 1:37:49Maya Angelou's I Know Why the Cage Bird Sings was removed. Yet Adolf Hitler's mind comps. The fact that Secretary Hexith is spending precious time, energy, and resources on erasing the history and diversity of our great nation instead of on critical readiness or taking seriously the handling of sensitive national security information only serves to set us back. If soldiers and sailors don't learn from history, they are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.
▶ 1:38:14I ask for unanimous support to prohibit the destruction of censorship of text unless previously reviewed by experts. I urge support for this amendment and yield back the balance of my time. Thank you, Mr. Gentle lady yields back. Gentle lady from New Jersey, Miss Cheryl's Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm a Naval Academy graduate. I'm deeply proud of my alma mater, and I'm even more proud that some of my children want to step up and serve as well. It's where I learn leadership.
▶ 1:38:43It's where I swore my first oath to the Constitution of the United States. But right now, I'm disgusted. I'm disgusted by how Donald Trump and Pete Hgsth are using our servicemies and the Department of Defense to put push their white Christian nationalist agenda. He's taken I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou off the library shelves, but left two copies of Adolf Hitler's Minecom in the library. Just consider that for a minute.
▶ 1:39:12Midshipman can now read the anti-semitic manifesto of one of history's most evil men. But, God forbid they read the autobiography of a black woman recounting her lived experience. Hegath's orders forced the academy to remove a display highlighting the service of Jewish women before he came to visit. But Hegath and Trump's censorship reaches far beyond the Naval Academy. Over the past few months, they've deleted thousands of pages off of the DoD's website.
▶ 1:39:43These pages have taught the history of trailblazing service members like the Tuskiggee Airmen, the Navajo Code Talkers, Jackie Robinson, Major General Jeannie Leit, our first female fighter pilot, and thousands more. But let me be clear, these are Americans who signed up to give their lives for this country, even when this country did not give them the rights and freedoms that they deserved. Diversity and inclusion have never been a detriment to our military, our government, or our society.
▶ 1:40:12But policies of uniformity and exclusion certainly have. Black history is American history. Women's history is American history. Native American history, yes, it's American history. And erasing stories like this not only is a disgrace to the service of many people, but it will make our fighting forces and our nation weaker as a whole.
▶ 1:40:35It's why I'm supporting this amendment to prevent Pete Hegsth and Donald Trump from bending and erasing history to push their white Christian nationalist agenda. I will tell you why the caged bird sings. It sings for freedom. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Chair recognizes himself. Um the amendment is unnecessary because federal law already requires the federal records to be retained in an appropriate manner. Furthermore, this amendment would only apply to funds made available by this legislation.
▶ 1:41:04would not limit the other $850 billion in appropriated funding it already exists for the DoD. Therefore, it does not offer any additional protection for the records and I urge all members to oppose this amendment and we now recognize the gentle from Hawaii, Mr. Mr. Cota. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I rise in strong support of this amendment. Last month, the Army removed information on the history of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team and 100th Infantry Battalion from its website.
▶ 1:41:32Despite facing extraordinary adversity from a nation that questioned their loyalty, the Japanese American volunteers of the 442nd, the 100th Battalion, and the Military Intelligence Service served with honor and distinction in World War II. The 442nd and 100th would go on to become the most decorated military unit in our nation's history for its size and length of service. They fought bravely and with distinction in Italy and the mountains of France and famously fought to rescue the lost battalion in of Texas.
▶ 1:42:01And in 1945, they helped break through the Gothic line and liberate Italy just days before victory in Europe. The Army's decision came as a shocking slap in the face to the hundreds of thousands of descendants, Americans who had personal and family ties with these brave men of the 442, the 100th, and the MIS. Folks like me, my grandfather served in the MIS, and my uncles served in the 442nd and the 100th.
▶ 1:42:26The Army did this to comply with an executive order and secretarial order targeting so-called radical diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. And so with one thoughtless, stupid click of a button, they tried to purge this from history. What a disgrace to these Japanese American service members and frankly to all service members. Yes, they were radical. Radical in their courage, their selflessness, their go forb broke bravery and above all their patriotism to a country that saw them as the enemy.
▶ 1:42:57How could actually this be anything more American? President Truman said it himself when he presented them a citation. And you fought not only the enemy, but you fought prejudice. And you have won. Keep up that fight and we will continue to win to make this great republic stand for just what the Constitution says it stands for, the welfare of all the people all the time.
▶ 1:43:19Decades later, in signing restitution for wartime internment of Japanese Americans, President Reagan recalled his own remarks about the 442nd as a young actor. Blood that is soaked into the sands of a beach is all of one color. America stands unique in the world. The only country not founded on race but on a way and ideal not in spite of but because of our polygot background. We have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.
▶ 1:43:47It's true that the army republished a new version of the page with framing in alignment with the executive order about Japanese American veterans in World War II only after significant backlash including from veterans groups. But this incident shows just how shallow this administration's anti-dei ideology really is. There is no depth of understanding or appreciation for our country's history and its amazing complexities and nuance.
▶ 1:44:13There's just doing word searches or tossing out anything that involves anyone who isn't straight, white, and male. It would be laughably stupid if it weren't so deeply offensive and harmful to real people, including our veterans and service members, their families who suffered and sacrificed alongside of them. As these individuals who have given so much for their country, this amendment should not be necessary.
▶ 1:44:41The story of our NY soldiers and so many others is the story of America. Our leaders should have a basic respect for history and the values and principles not to engage in digital book burning or other reckless purges on ideological grounds. Yet here we are because this Pentagon has shown that it'll do just that. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I yield back. Gentlemen yields back. Chair recognizes Mr. Deluio of Pennsylvania. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 1:45:10Uh, I want to add my voice to the serious concerns I and others have about efforts to rip books and ban books from the library at the United States Naval Academy. I'm a proud graduate of the Naval Academy. Uh, I will remind my colleagues here, the motto of the Naval Academy, and I'm going to butcher the Latin, but as Excencia Trident, which means from knowledge, sea power. Our maritime and sea power comes from the knowledge of our officers. And the midshipman who are being trained at the Naval Academy are also being educated.
▶ 1:45:39These are adults who are going to be trusted with a sacred responsibility to lead Marines and sailors in harm's way. They can read a book. And the fact that the banning of books extends to, as my colleague from New Jersey mentioned, myAngelou's writings, but not Hitler's, tells you what's going on here. It's indefensible.
▶ 1:45:58And again, the mission of the Naval Academy, which all midshipman memorize at some point, includes this important fact and this important point that the graduates who are there, the midshipman who are there when they graduate are being prepared, quote, to assume the highest responsibilities of command, citizenship, and government. It is all three of those things. You don't ban books and hide them from adults who are going to lead Marines and sailors in harm's way. I think we need action.
▶ 1:46:27and this committee and the board of visitors of the Naval Academy to undo the damage of this administration. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize Mr. Vinman of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and guardians and marines along with their families selfless self selflessly sacrifice for the nation every day. They put their lives on the line to defend fundamental freedoms including free speech.
▶ 1:46:53We have a solemn duty to ensure to ensure that they that these service members and their families enjoy these rights. With three military installations in my district, I see how families benefit when we prioritize investing in good quality education. I'm proud to have visited all three installations and my team attended a Quanico school board meeting and heard directly from families on these priorities. One consistent topic was freedom of speech.
▶ 1:47:18Erasing history, limiting what books our kids in schools have access to, and making the jobs of America's teachers harder is no way to legislate. Service members in my district are now part of a suit to ensure that their children ensure receive the rights, the fundamental rights that they have fought to protect and serve this country for. We must support them.
▶ 1:47:39This one has me particularly fired up because um this affects a fundamental right not only of service members but also of our children. And so I encourage my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from California, Mr. Gary Mindy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank my for talking on this issue.
▶ 1:48:08Uh over the um Easter break, I came across a video in the History Channel. It was the early days of the Nazi regime. It started with book burning, the purging of ideologies that were objectionable to the Nazi government.
▶ 1:48:38I want us just to take a moment and consider what is happening. This issue of banning books, removing books is similar to burning books in a very real way.
▶ 1:48:53It's similar to purging false or inappropriate or ideologies from our history, from our education systems, and indeed from our perhaps to align all of us in what Trump and his team would consider to be ideologies.
▶ 1:49:16This issue is but one of many, many things that are going on in the first 100 days of this administration. If we were to step back and look at all of those actions, we would be profoundly concerned about the direction that the United States government is taking us. Removing books from libraries because they are an inappropriate ideology.
▶ 1:49:47What is an appropriate then? What is it that we are to learn? What is it that our children are to learn? Not history, not the encounters of races and people in the United States and around world. This is really an important issue.
▶ 1:50:12It crystallizes in my mind what I saw in that History Channel report of the 1930s in Germany. And then where did it go from there?
▶ 1:50:29We should all of us ponder exactly what is happening in the broad context of the 100 days of this administration and the path on which we are being forced to follow. I would say that we object to that force and this amendment would do that. I urge an I vote.
▶ 1:50:59Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize Miss Hulahan from Pennsylvania. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um many of my colleagues have already said much of what needs to be said, but I thought I would add um a personal anecdote. When I was a little girl, my father said, "History is w written by the winners." I'm pretty sure he heard that from somewhere else. Uh but he uh in addition to being a graduate with a degree in history and a master's degree in political science is also a survivor of the Holocaust.
▶ 1:51:28Was born into war the war world war II in 1942. In addition, he's also a more than 20 year uh member of the of the Navy. He served an honorable amazing career as an aviator. In addition to the items that my colleagues have already me mentioned, here are some other things that have been erased in the last 100 days.
▶ 1:51:51Holocaust survivor stories, September 11th remembrance stories, cancer awareness health stories inexplicably, suicide prevention stories worrisomely, and the contributions of all people such as our members of the LGBTQ community, people of color, and other people who are not part of what would be considered the white mainstream America. Our history matters. We all matter.
▶ 1:52:20History is written by the people for the people and we should be ashamed of not supporting an amendment such as this. To restrict our speech, to restrict our thoughts, to pick winners on ideology is simply and literally unamerican. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote I on this very, very important amendment. Thank you and I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair not recognize Miss Strickland of Washington.
▶ 1:52:50Thank you, chairman. I seek recognition to speak on this amendment. Gentle is recognized. Thank you, sir. Our nation is stronger when our military includes everyone. Inclusion is not a bad word. And when we are talking about censorship, we are demoralizing and dehumanizing the very people who chose to wear the uniform. More than 40% of service members identify as minorities. And the most recruitable adults in 2027 will be people of color.
▶ 1:53:19And make no mistake, you must be qualified to serve. The two are not mutually exclusive. The fact is this, the military is an employer. And when the economy is strong and unemployment is down, the military has to compete for talent just like every other employer. Telling people that they don't belong will only worsen our recruiting issues. And while the president may be attempting to crash the economy and to erase people, we should not stand for it. Serving in the military does not mean that you give up your rights.
▶ 1:53:48Serving in the military does not mean that you should be made to feel that you don't belong somewhere. My father served in a segregated army. And when Truman desegregated it, it was not popular. In today's terms, some people in this room might say it's woke, but it was the right thing to do for the country and our national security. Secretary Heg says and Elon Musk's attempts to erase very recent and painful parts of history might make them feel better, but it does nothing to make us more safe as a nation.
▶ 1:54:17You can't erase the reality of history. And to this day, we have women, people of color, and other minorities breaking barriers and serving in the military. And we must recognize it is the right thing to do. Not because it's morally right, because it makes us more safer. It makes us a stronger military. It's an unfortunate reality that minority service members face worse treatment in the military justice system, that black and Hispanic service members were more likely than their white counterparts to face criminal investigation in court marshal.
▶ 1:54:47It's also unfortunate that too many service members and their families have had to be relocated because of racism or anti-LGBTQ harassment. And my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in their stunned silence don't even care about this. My colleagues would rather coddle white supremacists and extremists than support the service members and their families of all hues who represent the best of us.
▶ 1:55:09And unlike some countries that try to bury the worst parts of history, our country, in order to form a more perfect union as we progress, openly learns the mistakes of our past. It is 2025, people. It is time to act like we understand the present and the future, but not ignore our past. That is something we should uplift and embrace. But unfortunately, this Secretary of Defense has chosen to erase history and ignore reality, and we should all be ashamed of ourselves if we don't support this amendment.
▶ 1:55:38I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this, and I yield back, Mr. Chair. Gentle lady yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Molton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. So many of my colleagues have already spoken eloquently on this amendment. We've heard about how important f free speech is, how foundational that value is to the United States of America.
▶ 1:56:00We've talked about some of the frightening memories of the Third Reich and the striking similarities that this practice has to what occurred in Germany in the 1930s. But I would just like to ask two questions that I haven't heard asked The first is what is Pete Hegsth just so afraid of? I mean, we know he's afraid of his own staff. He's been firing all the people he recently hired left and right.
▶ 1:56:29But is he now so afraid of Maya Angelou that he has to ban her books from Academy shelves? We've got two distinguished general officers on this committee. I commend them for even just being here when most of their colleagues have chosen to leave the room and avoid the debate.
▶ 1:56:54But I wonder under General Bergman's command or under General Bacon's command, did they ever feel it necessary to ban books, to limit discussion, to say, "I'm so afraid of what my soldiers or marines or airmen read that we should just outlaw those books." So what is Secretary Hegsth so afraid of?
▶ 1:57:17And the second question is why does Secretary Hegsth work so hard with the help of his president with the help of Elon Musk to remake the American military in the image of the Chinese military of the Russian army because this is what China and Russia do. They ban books.
▶ 1:57:38They try to create They're so concerned about free thought because it's a threat to their regimes that they do this stuff. I have had the privilege of serving with many honorable young men and women who were educated at the milit at the US military academy at West Point or the US Naval Academy in Annapolis.
▶ 1:58:05In my experience, they were smart. They're thinkers and they are brave. We need American leadership at the Secretary of Defense that is brave, that is not afraid, that doesn't try to make us look like Russia or China. We need leadership that is principled and brave and American. We don't seem to have that today.
▶ 1:58:36Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Bale. As a uh professor in criminal justice, I used to give my students a an analogy and it would involve a crime that was being committed and I wouldn't put any identifiers on it. And I would give them that give them that question and ask them, well, how should we proceed?
▶ 1:59:04And the underlying question was who do you identify with? Do you do you naturally see yourself as the one who committed the crime or do you naturally see yourself as the person uh the police officer or what have you. And sometimes without thinking um students would identify and think that think that in that analogy they were the one committing the crime or what have you. And I and I give that analogy here for a reason.
▶ 1:59:32Um, when I think of Jackie Robinson, who fought for this country, who dealt with all kinds of abuses um that many of us could never um with withstand? I asked many of my colleagues today, who do you identify with?
▶ 1:59:54the folks that were keeping him out of Major League Baseball and calling him every name but a child of God, or do you see yourself as Branch Ricky, who played a piv pivotal role in breaking the color barrier, who strategically signed Jackie Robinson so that this process of integrating Major League Baseball could
▶ 2:00:25began. So I ask if we are if we won't in if we can't include Jackie Robinson in our American history, does that also include Branch Ricky? Does that also include other white Americans who stood in support of civil rights who died and bled for CI civil rights?
▶ 2:00:49Um, so I think it's how you view yourselves in these his in this history is how we move forward on amendments such as this. And I'll close saying Maya Angelo is a St. Louis native from my district. She wrote about, she was a poet who about the humanity and dignity of all people.
▶ 2:01:19And the fact that a book on her would be removed while a book on Hitler would remain is is not what what what this country is about and is and it is not what our values are about. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Does any other member wish to speak on this amendment? Seeing none, uh the question occurs on the amendment offered by Miss Elfre. So many is in favor will say I.
▶ 2:01:49I. Those opposed say no. Opinion chair and those have it. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote. Recorded vote is ordered. This recorded o vote will be postponed until a later time. We now will consider log number 4690 by Mr. Ryan. For what purpose does a gentleman from New York seek recognition? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment at the desk. Clerk will please distribute the amendment without objection to reading and amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes the gentleman for the for the purpose of explaining his amendment.
▶ 2:02:19Thank you, Mr. Chair. This amendment is straightforward, bipartisan, and builds on what we heard uh earlier the other month in our posture hearings. specifically focuses on uh preventing what has been proposed in a very dangerous way, the elimination or consolidation of two of our combatant commands uh Northcom, Northern Command and Southcom, Southern Command.
▶ 2:02:41As we started to learn about this, again through uh good press reporting, not through any transparency provided by the administration, um the original report uh from CNN explained a fairly unprecedented proposal uh fired off to consolidate these commands. Um, and I want to acknowledge specifically and thank uh both our chair as well as the Senate Armed Services Committee Chair U.
▶ 2:03:09Senator Wicker who specifically spoke out against uh if not the merits at least and I think in a very important way the the process and the importance of this happening um by with and through the Congress. They specifically said in a joint statement, "We are very concerned about reports that claim DoD is considering unilateral changes on major strategy issues." They went on to say, quote, "We will not accept significant changes to our warf fighting structure that are made without a rigorous
▶ 2:03:39inter agency process, coordination with combatant commanders and the joint staff, and collaboration with Congress." Uh yet when I asked this question of the uh the gentleman who's performing the duties of ASD Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs, Mr.
▶ 2:03:58Leonardo, at our hearing last month, it was a a pathetic nonresponse that not only failed to answer on the merits, but didn't acknowledge that in a in a in a bipartisan bicameal way, these were serious concerns that merit a wholesome discussion. and essentially the issue was uh glossed over and and moved on in hopes that we would would not revisit it.
▶ 2:04:24Therefore, given that the department is asking for, as the ranking member said, a significant amount of under another $150 billion, I think it's especially critical that we raise this. Now, I just want to uh share four brief substantive points on this. In closing, combining Northcom and Southcom would detract from major and critical counterdrug and counter narcotics mission which we all know is vital to our local communities.
▶ 2:04:54And there's a clear mandate in a from the American people to if anything ramp up those efforts. Further would dilute the homeland defense and nuclear deterrence and use use missions uh of the commands. Third, Southcom and Northcom's missions, I think we can all acknowledge, are too different and important to risk one falling through the cracks given the myriad of threats we face face.
▶ 2:05:16And finally, recent reports that indicate Southcom in particular is at risk of consolidation into Northcom are especially concerning given Southcom's critical and effective, highly effective counterdugrug and counter narcotics mission, which would almost certainly be negatively affected by such a consolidation. So, I urge all my colleagues um to heed the wise words of both Hask and SAS chairs and to support this amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I yield back.
▶ 2:05:46Uh the gentleman yields back and chair recognizes himself. I understand the gentleman's concern as he and as he noted, I share it and have been very public about that, but this policy debate should be considered in the FY NDAA 20 in the FY26 NDA process. I it cannot adequately be addressed during reconciliation. Further, this amendment would only prevent funding from this title. The DoD would still be free to use other appropriated funds for this purpose. Therefore, this amendment would have no practical effect.
▶ 2:06:14I urge all members to oppose the amendment. Does anybody else wish to speak on this amendment? Mr. Courtney of Connecticut. Thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman. And I want to begin by, uh, joining Mr. Ryan, in terms of thanking you and uh Senator Wicker for publicly speaking out against this uh really hairbrain um notion that these two commands uh that have existed um apart for so many years be uh consolidated diluting uh actually both missions um if that were ever to
▶ 2:06:44uh to happen. And I um you know certainly recognize that um this is a debate that could be brought up during NDAA this year um based on the batting average the last few years. Final enactment of NDA usually takes place around Christmas and I think you know obviously that's an eternity from now in terms of the way this administration has been moving at mock speed um with really little heed to uh Congress. So I think u bringing this forward this amendment by Mr.
▶ 2:07:12Ryan actually makes a lot of sense in terms of us uh debating it and hopefully passing it as part of um this bill. Anyone who listened to the posture hearings uh that just took place with Admiral um Holy from Southcom and General Guillat from uh Northern Command could see vividly um the fact that they are totally up to their ears in terms of you know huge challenges that uh require I think their uh undivided attention and also that the the commands uh need
▶ 2:07:42to be able to focus uh and continue to focus uh again on day-to-day threats. In the case of General Guillot, again he described both issues and in the air and also sea and undersea with Russian submarine sordies that are going into the northern Atlantic region. Um and uh and and obviously the the issue of of deterrence particularly nuclear deterrence is something that Northcom deals with literally 247 every day.
▶ 2:08:10Amal Haly again is doing great work as as Mr. Brian said, you know, I think is also um, you know, working 24/7 in terms of different types of threats. So there there really is just no rationale that justifies consolidating um, these two commands. As long as we're on the subject of deterrence, and again, I appreciated the chairman's comments about that in his opening remarks.
▶ 2:08:31You know, one item which is included um or missing from this measure which is kind of shocking is the fact that there is not a penny for the number one deterrence program in the Navy which is the uh just the Colombia class program. There's not a single red scent for that program which is a DX program. That is the highest priority in terms of the the Navy's hierarchy of ship building programs. Uh we have an existing fleet of SSBNs.
▶ 2:09:00uh the oldest USS Ohio is 44 years old. The whole life is going to be is giving out um on those old submarines and we have been prioritizing whether it's been in CRS, appropriations, NDAAS going back really 15 years in terms of making sure that we don't lose sight of the fact that we've got to get these um new class Colombias uh launched as soon as possible.
▶ 2:09:24And so, um, it's just baffling to me, you know, how that was left out in terms of, um, this this package there. There's just no question if you look at the cost of Colombia and the downward pressure that that puts on the ship building accounts year in and year out. And we've been talking about this since Randy Forbes and Jean Taylor, you know, talking about it.
▶ 2:09:46And the fact that again it was not included in this p package is just totally baffling uh to me because I know and we all know talking to Navy leadership over the last few years or so this is the number one program because we we cannot allow the you know non-stop patrols that take place with um an arm of our uh nuclear triad that carries 70% of the warheads to to lapse.
▶ 2:10:13And and again, I I just um raise that point as we again get closer to final action on this bill that um you know, not having the normal process which Mr. Smith talked about at the outset, jumping ahead of the FY26 budget that's come over has kind of left us sort of trying to guess, you know, what what's the plan here in terms of critical programs like Colombia. I yield Thank the gentleman uh on two of his points.
▶ 2:10:42One, I'm cautiously optimistic that um we are going to be able to get the NDA done before December of this year given the changes at the other end of the capital. As you know, historically the House Armed Services uh committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee have been ready with their conference reports uh far beyond or or far earlier in the year than December, but we've just been frustrated at getting it to the floor this year.
▶ 2:11:09I'm I'm optimistic we're going to get there earlier and and I share your concerns about uh spending uh on the Columbia class, but we do spend on the Virginia class, which we hope will take pressure off the Columbia class funding in the regular NDA spending. So, but you make very valid points. Uh with that, I recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Whitesides. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sounds like we have a bipartisan agreement actually on the underlying substance of this. Um, over the past several months, each of us have had in-depth conversations with the senior leadership of Northcom and Southcom.
▶ 2:11:38And I think we can all agree that both commands have pressing threats to address critical counterdrug missions, novel and advanced threats from adversaries in space and the increased threat that climate change poses to our homeland. But we all, I think, can also agree that each command has its own specific capabilities, areas of expertise, and institutional knowledge. They work handinand glove to protect our homeland and advance US security is interests in our hemisphere. But here's the key. They complement one another. They work together, not on top of each other.
▶ 2:12:08I don't need to tell anyone on this committee that now is decidedly not the time to distract Southcom from its vital counterdrug mission. Don't need to tell anyone on this committee that now is decidedly not the time to distract Northcom from its crucial NORAD mission. I would be remiss if I didn't mention that Northcom is critical to also protecting our homeland from catastrophic natural disasters.
▶ 2:12:30In Southern California, which I represent, we're still reeling from the brutal wildfires that cost us over two dozen lives and cause billions of dollars in damage to people's livelihoods and homes. Those fires would have been significantly worse if it wasn't for NORAD and programs like Fire Guard. And for those of us who have worked on the wildfire crisis for years, we know that we will undoubtedly face more and worsening fires in the future. Now, plain and simple is not the time to cause chaos at these crucial uh cocoms.
▶ 2:12:59I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and I yield back. Thank you, Chairman. Gentleman yields back. Any further discussion on this amendment? Uh question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Ryan, log number 4690. All those in favor will say I. I. Those opposed, no. Opinion of the chair, the nos have it. Chairman, I request a recorded vote. Recorded vote is ordered. This recorded vote is postponed until a later time.
▶ 2:13:29We will now consider log number 4693 by Miss Cheryl. For what purpose does a gentleoman from New Jersey seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading of this amendment is dispensed with. The chair recognizes the gentle lady from New Jersey for the purpose of explaining her amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment is very simple. It would prohibit any funds from this act from going towards combining or eliminating the US European and US African commands.
▶ 2:13:58According to news reports last month, the Department of Defense is considering doing just that. I think members of this committee on both sides of the aisle would agree that this would be a disaster for our military, hurting readiness, reducing our ability to respond to threats, and empowering our adversaries. As you said in a statement in March, Mr. Chairman, quote, "US combatant commands are the tip of the American war fighting spear.
▶ 2:14:23Therefore, we are very concerned about reports that claim DoD is considering unilateral changes on major strategic issues. Such moves risk undermining American deterrence around the globe. That's why I've introduced this amendment today. Yukon is responsible for deterring and if necessary fighting a war against Russia and Europe. The mission in Africa is vastly different. So combining the two commands guarantees that our military would focus less on that threat from Russia.
▶ 2:14:53I served at Sinasnavier in Yukon and worked on Russian issues while in the Navy, so I know just how serious the threat is. Russia is waging a massive unprovoked war in Ukraine today. And if they are not defeated, then this will not be the last of Russia's aggression in Europe. As President Trump continues to bend the need of Vladimir Putin, it's critical that we stand in the breach in continuing to keep our focus on protecting our interest and our allies interest.
▶ 2:15:22Maintaining the independence of Yukon is also critical to ensuring that we can cooperate with our NATO allies who would be a decisive part of any fight against Russia. That's why it was so concerning to see reports last month that the Trump administration is also considering relinquishing the Yukon commander position as the supreme allied commander of Europe, the military leader of NATO forces during a war in Europe.
▶ 2:15:47The US transatlantic alliance has been the bedrock of American national security since the beginning of the Cold War. It deterred Soviet aggression for decades and helped establish a peaceful Europe. Some of our brightest leaders spent decades building and maintaining the transatlantic alliance because they recognized just how important it was. President Trump chose to throw away decades of military cooperation with Europe in a matter of months in favor of kissing up to a dictator.
▶ 2:16:16In 1988, Ronald Reagan said, quote, "The Atlantic Alliance is the core of America's foreign policy and of America's own security. If our fellow democracies are not secure, we cannot be secure. If you are threatened, we're threatened. If you're not at peace, we cannot be at peace." But instead of recognizing the importance of decades of American leadership, Trump seated American leadership in Europe.
▶ 2:16:40In February this year, Secretary Hegsth called complete Ukrainian independence from Russia an quote unrealistic objective and a goal. So abandoning our European allies would mean abandoning one of our greatest sources of security and strength, our strategic partnerships. We cannot abandon Europe and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you and I yield back. Gentle lady yields back and chair recognizes himself.
▶ 2:17:09Uh I understand the gentle lady's concern and as she noted I have been very public that I am violently opposed to the merger of Yukcom and ARICOM and we'll we'll be um continuing to express that as we move forward. But this is a policy debate that should be considered during the FY26 and DAA process. It cannot adequately be uh addressed in reconciliation. Further this amendment would only prevent the use of funding from this title. DoD would still be free to use other appropriated funds for that purpose.
▶ 2:17:38Therefore, this amendment would have no practical effect. And I urge all members to oppose the amendment. Before I go to the next member, I would like to point out that there is lunch is available for all members in the anti- room if you'd like to partake. And with that, the chair recognizes a gentle lady from California, Miss Jacobs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to my colleague colleague, Representative Cheryl, for introducing this very important amendment. It's clear that this administration wants to drastically cut down our engagement on the African continent.
▶ 2:18:09From early reports of attempts to cut the African Affairs Bureau, proposals to significantly downsize our diplomatic footprint on the continent, and reports that DoD now wants to combine African severely underestimates the importance of the African continent for the future. The African continent is the youngest in the world where over 1.5 billion people live. that will double by 2070. This region is where the most population growth will happen in the next 50 years.
▶ 2:18:40So, Africa represents the future generations who will continue to lead and solve the world's challenges. The challenges experienced in Europe and Africa are incredibly different. They require distinct expertise and levels of attention. Our security presence on the continent on the African continent should not be the tip of the spear. That should be our diplomatic and development footprint.
▶ 2:19:05But Yukcom subsuming ARICOM and slashing our expertise on the continent across the US government will only hurt the US in the long run and sends a clear message to our African partners that the US no longer values them. That leaves the US with fewer partners and allies and ultimately makes us less safe.
▶ 2:19:24And while this amendment won't be able to prohibit all funds from being used, only the ones in this bill, sending a strong bipartisan message by adopting this amendment, will be an important signal to this administration and to our partners in Europe and Africa that we do care. So with that, I urge all of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to uh vote yes on this amendment. And Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Chair now recognize a gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Bindamman. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 2:19:54So this is not this is not a hard issue in my mind. this this amendment addresses a critical issue which is really the uh retreat of the United States from its role around the world uh in Europe and Africa and um following on the heels of the reorganization of the department of state. This is this turns Africa into a conservation of force type operation.
▶ 2:20:24Um and given the reasons that my colleague uh from California just mentioned about the growth potential in that continent, it it just doesn't make any sense. And so I think we need to apply a little bit of common sense here. Um Yukon is still a critical region for us. There is a major fight. the largest land war uh since World War II is taking place on the European continent.
▶ 2:20:50And so this idea of consolidating of of removing resources from the continent um is nonsensical. It actually plays into the hands of our adversaries. I think uh my colleagues on the other side would recognize that uh the Russian government is not our friend.
▶ 2:21:07the Russian government among the uh um the Chinese, the uh North Koreans, the Iranians are a a group of governments that are fundamentally aligned against us and um withdrawing is is a terrible idea.
▶ 2:21:24I urge my members on the other side to recognize that our interests in Europe with our NATO allies still uh the greatest alliance that this world has ever seen uh remains paramount and that we uh ensure that the current fight that we win the current fight which is what we we have in in Ukraine and in Yukon uh postures us so we are prepared for the next fight potentially in the Pacific.
▶ 2:21:51If we don't win this one, we are we're set up to lose the the next one. Thank you. I yield back. I agree wholeheartedly with that comment and I look forward to working with Miss Cheryl, my buddy Miss Jacobs, and Mr. Vinman and the NDAA markup to make sure we don't let that happen. So, with that, is there any other discussion on this amendment? Uh, there's no further debate on the question occurs on the amendment uh by Miss Cheryl. So many are in favor will say I. I. Those opposed?
▶ 2:22:21No. No. Can you chair the nose have it? Mr. Chairman, request recorded vote. Recorded vote is ordered. This recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. We now consider log number 4696 by Miss Goodlander. For what purpose does a gentle lady from New Hampshire seek recognition? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment without objection? The reading of this amendment dispensed with. The chair now recognizes the gentle lady for the purpose of explaining her amendment.
▶ 2:22:52Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am offering this very straightforward one-s sentence amendment today on a topic that I really believe is crucial to our national security and military readiness, to our economic security, and to the basic trust of the American people on which our democracy depends. and that is an amendment designed to bring about something that is long overdue, a full and independent audit of the Pentagon.
▶ 2:23:20So on this point, I want to I want to say hot off the press is a GAO testimony delivered this morning that points to some basic facts. The Department of Defense's spending makes up almost half of the federal government's total discretionary spending and DoD's physical assets make up about 82% of the f federal government's total physical assets. So that's that's that's no small thing.
▶ 2:23:47Nevertheless, the Department of Defense is the only federal department that has not actually obtained a clean audit. And this is this has been a problem, Mr. Mr. Chairman, for 30 years now, um it's it's a problem that has united this committee for for many years on a bipartisan basis. I think we can all agree that a basic function of any organization that expects the public trust is is is to be able to produce a clean audit.
▶ 2:24:15So, we reaffirm this basic idea that's been long been enshrined in law um in the in the FY2024 National Defense Authorization Act, which created a clear statutory deadline of December 31st, 2028 for the Department of Defense to achieve an auto an unmodified audit opinion. So, I strongly support that deadline. I know many of my colleagues do um across the committee and I want to make sure that the Department of Defense does, too.
▶ 2:24:42You know, the bill that we're considering today spends a lot of money, $150 billion. That's 10 times the state of New Hampshire's bianial budget. I'd also point out that it's $50 billion above the amount that was directed to this committee under H under the budget resolution that was passed last month. Um I read every bill that we vote on and to me the instructions are clear. Um we're $50 billion above what was instructed to this committee.
▶ 2:25:10So, I'm offering what is, as I said, a straightforward one-s sentence amendment that would simply require the Department of Defense before it it is able to spend the final 50 billion additional dollars to do what it's already required to do by law and it has failed to do by under the law for the last several decades, and that's to pass an independent audit. To me, Mr. Chairman, this is about basic government oversight. It's about accountability.
▶ 2:25:38If if you want to talk about cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, isn't ensuring a clean audit a top priority? If you want to know whether we're wasting money, an audit is going to help us do just that. We got to be making decisions that are grounded in fact, and the Pentagon has got to be held to account. So, I really look forward to working on a bipartisan basis, as this committee always has, uh, to to advance this important and simple goal.
▶ 2:26:06I really believe that our our military readiness and national security depend on it. Our economic security depends on it and so does the public's trust which our democracy depends upon. So with that I yield back and thank you Mr. Chairman. I think the gentle lady shields yields back and I recognize myself. I support uh her efforts to help the department achieve a clean audit.
▶ 2:26:26That's why this bill includes over $300 million to replace outdated business systems with new automated systems and AI software to help the DoD finally pass an audit. Regrettably, this is still going to take a few years and under the gentle lady's amendment, the department would not be able to spend $50 billion from this bill until a clean audit happens.
▶ 2:26:47Uh this will unnecessary delay critical investment in new capabilities as well as the infrastructure and improvements in our industrial base that we need including important projects at Portsmith and Northol shipyards. I urge members to vote against this amendment or any other members that would like to speak. Miss Jacobs of California. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look, our committee is used to dealing with numbers so big that they don't seem fathomable fathomable to the average American.
▶ 2:27:15There's a good chance that we authorize over a trillion dollars worth of funding for the Defense Department this year. A trillion. And today, just today, we're talking about an authorization of an additional $150 billion for the Pentagon. At a time when many Americans are taking on debt just to buy groceries, Americans can't afford the rising costs of housing, health care, childare, and education when their paychecks aren't going up either.
▶ 2:27:42For $150 billion, we could guarantee affordable child care for every American. Or we could replace every lead pipe for America to ensure safe drinking water for everyone. Or we could hire 1.5 million elementary school teachers. But we're not doing any of those things. Instead, we're fast-tracking an authorization of $150 billion extra slush fund for war toys, including $5 billion for the military to conduct deportations.
▶ 2:28:11and handouts to the military-industrial complex when the Pentagon has failed seven consecutive audits. Seven consecutive audits. Doge got rid of USA ID in the name of waste, fraud, and abuse. Well, USAD passed 67 financial audits just in 2024. And yet, here we're being asked to give 150 billion extra dollars to an entity that has failed seven consecutive audits. It is our job to be responsible with taxpayer dollars.
▶ 2:28:41We should have a full accounting of what these funds are used for so we can assess whether these programs are useful and efficient and strengthen our national security or not. But we haven't done that. So that's why I encourage everyone to support this amendment that incentivizes the Pentagon to actually complete an audit. I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Is there anybody else that would like to speak on this amendment? Seeing none um the question occurs on the amendment offered by Miss Goodlander.
▶ 2:29:10Uh so many is there in favor will say I. Those opposed no. Opinion the chair the nose have it. Miss Goodlander. Do you want a recorded vote? Recorded vote has requested. A recorded vote is ordered.
▶ 2:29:36Uh the recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. We now consider log number 4688 by Mr. Courtourtney of Connecticut. For what purpose is a gentleman from Connecticut seek recognition? I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, a reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The chair now recognizes a gentleman from Connecticut for the purpose of explaining his amendment. Sure. Um, so, uh, Mr.
▶ 2:30:04Chairman, this amendment, which is quite straightforward, would require the Secretary of Defense to certify to congressional defense committees that no activities carried out by the Department in cons in consultation or coordination with the Department of Government Efficiency or Doge will have a negative impact on the readiness of the department, nor result in the elimination of positions or programs, termination of RDT activities, or the limitation or pausing of hiring. until that certification, not more than 100 billion of these funds may be expended or obligated.
▶ 2:30:34Again, the the purpose of this amendment is to just recognize the um really um pathetic and and disappointing results of Doge uh activities which promised the American people a lot.
▶ 2:30:48Going back to the campaign, um we'll recall that President Trump and Elon Musk when they were barnstorming around the country were promising $2 trillion of savings uh that would be uh immediately recognized by um Elon Musk and the the tech bros going through uh all the agencies of the government. On January 30th uh after um inauguration where I think some of the reality started to sink in during transition, they reduced that promise to $1 trillion.
▶ 2:31:17A few weeks ago before the the cabinet, Mr. Musk uh came in and said, "Well, we're we're going to achieve $150 billion dollars of uh of savings." And again, this chart sort of shows the declining um performance of Doge uh since uh the campaign. Out of that 150 billion, despite the promises of transparency and the wall of receipts that Mr. Musk promised, $92 billion were completely unitemized.
▶ 2:31:43there wasn't a slight slightest indication of where that savings was coming from. And then the the remaining balance of $62 billion, uh media outlets uh again went through the wall of receipts and found that in many cases those quote unquote savings were in fact programs that had been terminated or canceled in the prior administration or were double counted or just inaccurately uh represented. So now we have a situation where Doge is aimed its sites at the Department of Defense.
▶ 2:32:13And again the the concern I think which this amendment reflects um is not um just sort of um overinking or uh imagined. Uh in February Doge fired hundreds of staff at the National Nuclear Security Administration who were responsible for maintenance and oversight of nuclear programs including the handling of our arsenal of nuclear warheads.
▶ 2:32:35Uh again, it took frantic phone calls from members of Congress who were like saying, "What the hell are you doing?" to have them actually reverse that order. And it's still not clear whether or not these incredibly highly trained, experienced employees have actually all returned to the job.
▶ 2:32:51Um we also uh in February saw where uh Doge announced a hiring freeze uh which reached into the public shipyards and as uh Miss Goodlander knows and and people who uh represent uh public shipyards that had to be reversed because we're now in a in a time where we're trying to get the public shipyards to take on more staff and shipyard workers so that they can actually turn around uh maintenance uh availabilities.
▶ 2:33:16In the meantime, we are seeing Doge just pepper federal DoD civilian workers with uh early retirement letters, which really are veiled threats that if you don't take it, you put yourself at risk of being rifted to be part of a reduction in force with no uh retirement benefits. Uh we're also seeing the ridiculous tell me five things you've done in the last week memos that are still happening to DoD civilian employees.
▶ 2:33:44Many of these people served in the military are highly trained, are experienced, and who are doing this job because they actually care about the mission and yet they are just being constantly pummeled with these communications from the department and from Doge, you know, telling them basically that their their work is not valued and it's not important. And again, we're talking about people who provide fire and police services on military bases.
▶ 2:34:10We're talking about people who operate heavy machinery like cranes to move weapons and munitions around bases. We're talking about people again that make these bases go and make again all the other programs that we have authorized over the years in this committee. And yet indiscriminately they are being asked to to retire early or to be basically insulted with this, you know, what have you done in the last week um regime that's out there.
▶ 2:34:41So rather than risk the possibility that we're going to see uh reductions in force and and early retirements of people in critical programs like the National Nuclear Safety Administration, this amendment basically says that the secretary has to certify that none of these doge efforts um are going to affect the readiness of this country, which again the federal civilian workforce is in in is integral in terms of making sure that our country is ready to face its threats. Again, I yield back and ask for support.
▶ 2:35:13Gentleman yields back. Does any other me gentle lady from New Jersey is Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Trump administration likes to talk about how they are improving military readiness and increasing lethality. But the single greatest threat to military readiness and lethality today are Elon Musk and Doge. The civilians and contracts that Elon Musk is so recklessly slashing are fundamental to our military's readiness and the effectiveness of our war fighters.
▶ 2:35:42The civilian employees that Doge has fired and our plan and that they are planning to fire play vital roles directly supporting our combat troops. They are scientists at Pikatin Arsenal who are using their expertise to drive research and innovation in New Jersey. They're civilian intelligence analysts studying Chinese weapon systems or locating terrorists. They are training experts ensuring our service members are prepared to respond to the threats they will face overseas.
▶ 2:36:09They are engineers ensuring our service members go into combat with the most advanced and lethal technology in the world. It is reckless and it is irresponsible for the Trump administration to gut our defense civilian workforce. Any senior official supporting Doge at the DoD is derelictked in their duty and endangering the lives of our service members by potentially sending them into harm's way without the resources they need to survive. Thank you. And I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair recognizes himself.
▶ 2:36:39Um we just debated an amendment about the need to find such redundancies and inefficiencies, but now we're concerned about such efforts because the wrong people are doing it. I oppose this amendment uh that seeks to hold hostage one or one-third or $50 billion dollars of funding provided by this title to modernize our military and support our service members and their families. I urge all members to oppose the amendment. With that, I recognize my friend the ranking member. Thank Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 2:37:06I think and this is a really important point as we head towards the NDAA to contrast what the chairman is talking about with what President Trump, Pete Hegath, and Elon Musk are doing at the Pentagon. This committee in a bipartisan way is very focused on making the Pentagon more efficient and more effective. You know, getting the personnel that we need, changing the rules, regulations, requirements process, speeding up the acquisition process. 100% support that and that's what we ought to work on.
▶ 2:37:35But what I really hope on some level my Republican colleagues understand is that is not what Elon Musk and Donald Trump are doing at the Pentagon. So let's stand up against that together to get to the right place because what they are doing comes right out of project 2025 and that is specifically to terrorize and weaken the federal workforce. That is their perspective.
▶ 2:38:06Remember the federal workforce is this deep state bent on Donald Trump's destruction and therefore it must be weakened. There's nothing about that that is focused on efficiency and effectiveness. I know there's a lot of members of this committee who have run companies before. If you were trying to make a company more efficient and more effective, you really wouldn't come in and simply randomly fire as many people as possible regardless of performance reviews. You wouldn't ask, and and this is the CIA.
▶ 2:38:36I don't think they did this at DoD, but they asked every single employee at the CIA to take early retirement. Really, that that's the smart way to make the company more efficient and more effective. It doesn't make any sense in that context. It does make sense in the context of project 2025, which is to terrorize and weaken the federal workforce.
▶ 2:39:04I sincerely hope that the Republican that that's not your goal and I don't think it is. I don't think it's the goal of House Republicans to terrorize and weaken the workforce at the Pentagon. I don't. But if it's not, at some point you have to stand up to the Trump administration and Elon Musk because that is their goal.
▶ 2:39:27And this amendment is an opportunity to show that we are going to chart a different and better course which I hope we do do at some point before it is too late. I yield back. I thank the ranking member and I think we have made it very clear that we want to protect and honor um our DoD employees uh as with last year's NDAA and we intend to continue that in this year's NDAA. With that, I will recognize the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Sorenson.
▶ 2:39:57Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I speak today in support of Mr. Courtney's amendment, uh, because there is no doubt that needlessly cutting our civilian workforce will negatively affect our military readiness. And being ready is paramount to every mission our uniform service members make. But to be ready, we can't just support those on active duty. We must also support our civilian workforce that support those who are in harm's way.
▶ 2:40:24I'm con incredibly concerned about the potential for workforce cuts in my district at the historic Rock Island Arsenal. For people outside of Washington, members of Congress, we just spent two weeks at home doing the work of the people. I find I found some time to get my favorite pizza back home at a place called the Yankee Doodle of all places. Uh while there, an Army veteran propped up his stool to my right and he told me about his background and his service.
▶ 2:40:55He's proud to be Navajo from Arizona. He's one of my neighbors. He's proud to be a soldier. He's also proud to have just retired from active duty at the Rock Island Arsenal. But military stories rarely end with a retirement. He was given the chance of continuing his service as a civilian at the Rock Island Arsenal. And he said, "I love it here. I love the way of life here. The people are wonderful.
▶ 2:41:23Our mission here at the Arsenal is essential. At a time when we face all kinds of threats all across the globe, we need a strong civilian workforce that is supporting the Department of Defense and its readiness. To maintain our country's readiness, I strongly oppose civilian workforce cuts to the Rock Island Arsenal and across the Department of Defense.
▶ 2:41:46The DoD needs to assure that to assure Congress and the American people that doge cuts will never affect our country's readiness. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gentleman yields back. Does any other member wish to speak on this amendment? Seeing none um the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Courtourtney. So many is in favor will say I. Those opposed say no.
▶ 2:42:15Opinion chair the nose have it. Nose have it. Amendments not agreed to. A recorded vote is ordered. Um recorded vote re recorded vote will be postponed until later today. Uh we will now consider log number 4701 by Mr. Cisneros of California. For what purpose is the gentleman from California seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 2:42:45The clerk will please distribute the amendment. Without objection, the reading of this amendment is dispensed with. The chair now recognizes gentleman for purpose of explaining his amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks to reassert congressional oversight over the activities of the Department of Defense.
▶ 2:43:02Like many of my colleagues, I've watched with growing concern as Elon Musk does wrecks havoc across the DoD enterprise and the rest of the government as we authorizers are tasked with maintaining oversight and accountability over the Department of Defense. Yet almost every day we hear of random program cancellations, hiring freezes, layoffs, forced retirements, grant recisions, and other activities linked to Doge and their so-called efficiencies.
▶ 2:43:33And we hear about them not from DoD administration, but through social media or through our constituents whose lives have been thrown into turmoil. Our responsibility is to conduct oversight. And so so far our questions to the department have yielded insubstantial and non-existent answers and the administration seems unable to explain the row of doge and the department of defense. I know that the DoD is capable of giving thoughtful responses.
▶ 2:44:00I have sat in the witness seat in this committee room to answer questions and I have been required to reply to congressional congressional inquiries which I gladly did because that was my responsibility. That's why I'm offering this amendment. We have a responsibility to know exactly what is going on at the Pentagon. I support better efficiency in program management at the Pentagon and I know many of my colleagues do as well.
▶ 2:44:26I've been proud to support numerous efforts to the effect and I look forward to working with my colleagues in a bipartisan way in the future, but that's not what this is. At the very least, we need to understand what the relationship is between Doge and the Department of Defense. And that's what my amendment seeks to do. My amendment allows the department to access the first 100 billion of this bill's funding, but the defense department can use the the last 50 billion.
▶ 2:44:56It simply requires the department to answer some elementary oversight questions about Doge and the Department of Defense. I know my colleagues are intent on providing 150 billion to the Pentagon regardless of the fact that this legislation is built on partisanship and devastating cuts to critical programs like Medicaid and education. But at the very least, we should understand what a department not authorized by Congress is doing to the Department of Defense.
▶ 2:45:26So, I hope my colleagues can join me and support this simple step towards accountability. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. A chair recognizes himself. This amendment would delay billions of dollars in defense modernization over hand ringing exercise. Billions of dollars for everything from new drones to rocket motors to infrastructure projects, all of which are certain to touch um California.
▶ 2:45:51Trying to um tying up money for modernization, including funds for DoD audit and accounting modernization, doesn't help anything. I urge all members to vote against this amendment. With that, I recognize a gentle lady from California, Miss Jacobs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For nearly a hundred days, Elon Musk's Doge has taken a slash and burn approach to our government, and the American people have suffered the consequences.
▶ 2:46:14Doge fired and then rehired the people in charge of our nuclear security, the people tracking Ebola and bird flu, and the people working the VA crisis hotline. It's not efficient to fire people. Realize you actually need them. go track them down and try and rehire them. It's not efficient to jeopardize our public health, our national security, and people's lives. And look, Mr. Chairman, you know, no one wants us to address waste, fraud, and abuse in the Pentagon more than I do.
▶ 2:46:42We desperately need to rein in our military spending, but that's not what this is. We should be scared of the Pentagon working with Doge. We should be scared about their handling of classified information, the impact of the inevitable firings on our national security, and Elon Musk padding his government contracts even more. So, we need to know who's working with Doge, what the decision-making process is like, what methodologies they're using, and so many more.
▶ 2:47:10This amendment would create an enforcement mechanism to ensure that we are actually getting these important answers that are the responsibility of our committee to do oversight on. I urge my colleagues to support it. I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Chair and I recognize gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Bale. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I support better efficiency and program management at the Pentagon, as I know my colleagues do, and I look forward to working with my colleagues in a bipartisan way in the future.
▶ 2:47:40But that's not what this is. We don't know what support the department is providing to Doge. We don't know how Doge actions are decided or how they're considered or carried out. We don't know if any analysis is used or if there's a coherent plan behind it or how it interacts with the plans and strategies of the department. This is not accountability or efficiency. This is chaos.
▶ 2:48:10And I'd urge my colleagues to support Mr. Mr. Saro's amendment. Gentlemen, yield back. Chair and I recognize a gentle lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Hulahan. Very quickly here, it is my job. It is our job here in Congress to know what organizations like the DoD are doing. It is my job. It is our job to understand what Doge is doing with the DoD if it has to exist at all.
▶ 2:48:38And I would argue that it doesn't need to exist if we're doing our job. If that makes me a hand ringer, then I'm doing my job. I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Does any other member wish to speak on this amendment? Uh, there being no further debate, the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Cisneros. So many as are in favor, we'll say I. I. Those opposed, no. No. Opinion the chair, the nos have it. Request recorded vote. Mr. Chairman, recorded vote is ordered.
▶ 2:49:06The recorded vote will be postponed until a later We will now consider log number 4702 by Mr. Gear Mindy of California. For what purpose does a gentleman from California seek recognition? Will the clerk please distribute the amendment without objection? The reading of the amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes gentleman from California for the purpose of explaining his amendment.
▶ 2:49:31Perhaps I should start by explaining that this is not the first time that we've taken up the issue of the Sentinel, the extraordinarily expensive replacement for the Minute Man ICBM, which is now located in silos in the upper Midwest. Uh the Sentinel program has become extraordinarily expensive.
▶ 2:49:53So much so that it was faced with a non mccertie breach which basically brought the Sentinel program to a stop until such time as the Pentagon was able to answer some basic questions about is it necessary um if we're going to spend $150 billion or more likely $250 billion over the next decade or so on this. What would we not be doing?
▶ 2:50:19I was going to make that argument, but apparently that argument doesn't make any sense, which somebody found $150 billion to add to the $860 billion that we put forth in the NDAA and in the um appropriations, but nonetheless, I'll make the point. So, what we have here is another $1.5 billion dollar for the Sentinel program for risk reduction.
▶ 2:50:48H I'm not exactly sure what Rick's risk reduction is. In fact, I don't think any of us know what it is. It's just aund $1.5 billion slush fund that the Pentagon would somehow use presumably associated with the Sentinel. Uh the fact of the matter is the Sentinel is not going to go forward for some time for a variety of reasons.
▶ 2:51:13One is the cost, but more importantly the law and this amendment simply says that it's not going to go forward until such time as milestone B has been um put forward and the Pentagon has answered all the questions required by milestone B. We've got to come to some sensible, rational understanding of what we're doing here today.
▶ 2:51:41We're adding $150 billion to the 860, and that doesn't include the classified and the nuclear pieces of this Why? And by the way, where did you find $150 billion? Well, you found it in cuts to Medicaid.
▶ 2:52:05So inhome supportive services, parents of low income in every state in every state are going to lose their medical services so that we can have $150 billion of which 1.5 billion is for risk reduction in the Sentinel program. Is that really what we want to do? Is that what we're here for?
▶ 2:52:35to slash and burn educational programs, transportation programs of all kinds, energy programs. Is that why we're toying with playing with this $150 addition to the 860 and probably closer it's over 900 actually by the time you add up all of the additional programs. Why are we doing this?
▶ 2:53:04Have we lost our minds? Have we forgotten about what we're supposed to do as make rational choices for the benefit of American $150 billion out of the mouths of children who are not going to get a school lunch program or breakfast program. That's what's happening here.
▶ 2:53:31This is a real a real situation in which we are to choices. And I would challenge anybody on this committee, Democrat or Republican, to give me a rationale why we should be reducing health care services across this nation. Why we should be reducing educational services.
▶ 2:53:52Why we should be giving billionaires an additional tax cut so that we have $150 billion slush fund for the military. We spent a whole year going through the National Defense Authorization Act, line item by line item, committee by committee, and came to the conclusion 860 billion was enough. And that was a 15 billion more than the year before. And here we are, 150 billion.
▶ 2:54:21I ask for support of this elimination of this $ 1.5 billion slush fund for the Sentinel program. Yield back. Gentleman yields back. chair recognizes himself. I appreciate my good friend from California's longstanding opposition to the Sentinel program and his determination to have this debate every year. As in every year, I have voted against his amendment and I will do so again today.
▶ 2:54:52I doubt it. I remind my colleagues of the history here. This program began under the Obama administration and continued under both President Trump and President Biden. Last year, the Biden administration certified it was essential to national security and no alternatives existed.
▶ 2:55:14The funding in this bill makes an essential investment to strengthening the program, address challenges identified by the nun mccertie review, and minimize the delay in delivering this necessary capability. My colleague from California opposes this program altogether and has offered an amendment to tie up the funding. I oppose the amendment and encourage my colleagues to vote no. Gentleman uh chair not recognizes a ranking member. Thank you. I take the chairman's point. I think it's really important what Mr.
▶ 2:55:42Garendi is doing here because one of the other issues I mean the $150 billion is spread out over 10 years. So, you know, I I I don't think it's wise for the reasons I've stated earlier, but it does point up a larger problem. We have more demand for defense department dollars than even Donald Trump is willing to put up. We just do. Program after program after program. You know, we don't have enough money for this and they're going over budget. We're not going to be able to do that. And yet we keep moving all of these programs forward.
▶ 2:56:13Even though anyone who has has an ounce of accounting sense can look at and say there is no way you're going to be able to complete all of that within a reasonable budget time frame. And in light of that world, a world of finite resources, we are going to have to make choices. And the Sentinel program is way over budget. And is it really necessary as the least survivable member of the triad to achieve our nuclear stability?
▶ 2:56:42We're going to have to save money somewhere. So if it's not here, going to have to find it somewhere else. So I would urge my colleagues particularly in light of the nun mccertie breach that has required a re-examination of this program to sincerely re-examine the program. Would we like to have this missile? Sure. Do we need to have this missile at the cost?
▶ 2:57:07That's the part of it that I hope we will take a serious look at and try to figure out some way maybe to to get it done in a more cost-effective manner or maybe to meet our nuclear security needs in a more cost-effective manner. Cost is going to become an issue uh if we don't deal with this at some point. I yield back. The ranking member makes excellent points and it goes back to my initial observation at the beginning of this hearing.
▶ 2:57:34uh if we continue to fund defense at the lowest level of spending as a percentage of GDP since before World War II, he is absolutely correct. I don't like saying that that often by the way if the chairman will yield for just one minute. Yes. Even if we funded it at 4% with you and I both know we're not going to do facing a $ 38 trillion debt um in a deficit that's growing every day.
▶ 2:57:59Even if we funded it at 4%, I still submit we wouldn't have enough money to do everything we're planning on doing. And so I hope I hope we'll look at that. Well, I'm I am not uh in agreement with that observation because I do believe we are going to get beyond the 4% by the this end of this administration. It's going to allow us to take on essential capabilities such as the triad, every leg of the triad.
▶ 2:58:24With that, I will now yield to my other friend, Miss Jacobs of California, for any question comment she has. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle like to pretend they're the party of fiscal responsibility.
▶ 2:58:38They love to go on and on about waste, fraud, and abuse when it comes to cutting services for kids, when it comes to helping poor They somehow seem to forget they care about waste, fraud, and abuse when it comes to a tax system where we want people to pay our fair their fair share and when it comes to the Pentagon's budget. But if we are suspending our disbelief and taking them at their word, fine. They are the party of fiscal responsibility.
▶ 2:59:05I would expect that we would have a broad consensus on this committee about the alarming fact that the Air Force's 100 billion dollars groundbased nuclear missile program, the Sentinel, has overrun its budget by 37%. This means an estimated future of cost of at least 130 billion and many years of delay. This is unacceptable. It's long overdue to reign in in the astronomical cost of the Sentinel program and honestly to reassess our nuclear posture in its entirety.
▶ 2:59:33Increasing our land-based nuclear forces to outnumber the PRC and Russia is an archaic strategy that doesn't match the realities of our new multipolar world. So, we shouldn't continuously throw hard-earned taxpayer dollars at this program, especially when they haven't even finished their milestone B certification. My friend, Mr. Garam Mundy's amendment is simple and common sense.
▶ 2:59:56It restricts funding for the Sentinel program until this certification is reached so that we can be thoughtful and intentional with taxpayer dollars and with our nuclear posture. I urge my colleagues to support it. I back. Are there other any other members that wish to speak on this amendment? No further debate on question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Garami. So many is in favor of his amendment. will um say I. Those opposed say no.
▶ 3:00:26No. Opinion chair the nose have it. Request recorded vote. A recorded vote is ordered. This recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. We will now consider log number 4708 by Ms. Jacobs of California. For what purpose is a gentleoman from California seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment without objection? in the reading of the amendments dispensed with. The chair now recognizes a gentle lady from California for the purpose of explaining her amendment.
▶ 3:00:56Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a really simple amendment. What it says is that no funds can be used to construct, sustain, outfit, or maintain a makeup studio for the Secretary of Defense. Secretary Hexath is more interested in concealing and covering up his mishandling of sensitive attack plans and his blemishes than strengthening our national security. We don't need a made for TV defense secretary. We don't need someone more interested in their appearance than in ensuring the safety of our service members.
▶ 3:01:25But according to a CBS news report, Secretary Hexath has ordered a new makeup studio at the Pentagon that will cost taxpayers thousands of dollars. I know my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been trying to avoid their constituents, so maybe they've forgotten. But many Americans right now can't afford to spend thousands of dollars on superficial things like this. Many Americans are taking on debt just to buy groceries. People can't afford the rising costs of housing, healthcare, childare, and education when their paychecks aren't going up either.
▶ 3:01:56These reports of the Secretary of Defense spending taxpayer dollars on a makeup studio are further proof that everything this administration is spewing about waste, fraud, abuse, and efficiency is total This is about furthering their agenda. Whether it's paying for a tax cut for billionaires or looking good on TV. This makeup studio isn't going to make Americans safer. It won't protect the lives of our service members. It won't strengthen our national security.
▶ 3:02:25Now, many of you have seen my makeup videos. I wish Congresswoman Mace was still here at this markup because I know she has. I pay for my own makeup with my own personal funds, not at taxpayer dollars. And if Secretary Hexath wants to use his personal funds on this, he should feel free to do so. I understand he made a pretty penny on Fox and Friends. But I don't think hardworking American taxpayers should shoulder the cost of Secretary Hex's personal vanity project.
▶ 3:02:54To me, this seems pretty common sense. So I urge all of my colleagues to support my amendment so that not a scent of taxpayer dollars can be spent on this makeup studio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. chair recognizes himself. The Pentagon upgraded the green room adjacent to the pre press briefing room. They moved a chair and a mirror from one room in the Pentagon to this room and installed a new light. I can't believe we're even talking about this.
▶ 3:03:20Wasting time on this takes away from the serious policy discussions about our milit our military needs and its future. Furthermore, there is no need for this amendment as the modifications are complete and even if they weren't, this amendment would do nothing to prevent the DoD from using any of the other $850 billion uh available to them to accommodate it. I urge members to oppose the amendment. Is there any other member would like to speak on this amendment?
▶ 3:03:47Seeing none, uh the question occurs on amendment offered by Miss Jacobs. Those in favor will say I. Those opposed say no. No. The chair, the nose have it. A recorded vote is ordered. This recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. Uh we will now consider log number 4692 by Mr. Molton. For what purposes, gentleman from Massachusetts seek recognition. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 3:04:16Will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading of the amendments dispenseed with the chair now recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts for the purpose of explaining his amendment. Mr. Chairman Donald Trump and Pete Hegsth have claimed that meritocracy is back at the Department of Defense. So, let me ask, is it a meritocracy to fire General QCQ Brown, possibly the single most qualified Air Force officer I have ever met?
▶ 3:04:43a man with deep Indopaccom experience, multiple prior commands at the four-star level, profound bipartisan respect, including from this committee, and replace him with a three-star retired general whose highest level of operational command was about four levels below General Brown. Is that meritocracy?
▶ 3:05:05Is it meritocracy to fire General Hawk, the commander of US Cyber Command, who served this country professionally, honorably, and apolitically for more than three 33 years because Laura Loomer, a conspiracy theorist so extreme that even, wait for it, this is hard to believe, Marjgerie Taylor Green has disavowed her statements, told Trump that she didn't him.
▶ 3:05:34Is this a meritocracy? Or is loyalty been become the substitute for merit? It certainly seems like it. Wannabe kings demand personal loyalty from their generals, but not presidents of a democracy. Our service members swear swear swore their oaths to the Constitution of the United States. And all of us who have taken that same oath know that it is sacred.
▶ 3:06:02Dismissing an officer should either be because of a failure to uphold that oath or because of a failure to carry out the duties and responsibilities of their office. These dismissals have been based on neither. They are nothing short of an attempt to politicize our military. A politicized military, a politicized general and flag officer corps is a danger to our democracy. And I don't say lightly.
▶ 3:06:30If the party in power controls the military, then democratic politics becomes an uneven playing field. Citizens can't trust that they can safely disagree with the president or his party. Can't protest him, run for office against him, or vote against him with the spectre of lethal violence against them. I know many of my Republican colleagues know what it means to feel the pressure of voting against the party or the president. And this is what Trump wants.
▶ 3:07:00It sounds more like a dictatorship than a democracy. And it can also mean chaos for our military. Can you imagine what would happen if my platoon in Iraq had responded to my orders by saying, "Oh no, Lieutenant Molton, we're Democrats and we don't agree with President Bush, so we're not going to do that." That doesn't work.
▶ 3:07:24It's untenable for our military and it's why Republicans have expressed such concern about politicization of our military. So, it's shocking to me to see them be so quiet now as it's occurring. This amendment would not interfere with the president's constitutional and democratic right to remove an officer as commander-in-chief. That is essential to civilian control of the military. But it simply forces the secretary and the president to go on the record about why.
▶ 3:07:54To just tell us why. To point to specific performance issues, actions or inactions of that officer that are caused for removal. For most of the nine generals and admirals he has fired, Trump can't even cite any mistakes they've made. In fact, he's repeatedly praised many of them and their service. I think in a democracy we ought to know why. That's all this does. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Gentlemen yields back. Chair n recognizes himself.
▶ 3:08:23Uh the president has a right under article 2 section 2 clause two of the constitution to appoint and remove officers. Current law lays out the authorities and procedures for removing officers from their positions and provides them due process. All this amendment does is hold an entire hund hold the entire $150 billion hostage until the secretary certifies that he uh that certifies that he put in place a process that defies defies the constitution.
▶ 3:08:52Regardless, it is unlikely to have any practical effect as the president or department could use other appropriated funds to remove officers if necessary. I urge members to oppose the amendment. With that, I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Vinman. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank my colleague Rep. Molton, Representative Molton for introducing this crucial amendment. It's frankly one of the most important things we're going to discuss today because military leadership should be focused on the mission and our troops ability to fight and win and not worried politics.
▶ 3:09:22whether something that they say or do would cost them their career. A fundamental element of America's military is the apolitical service that all ser service members render and it's to do what's right at all times. Do we really want to inject fear in the officer corp? Do we know what the effects of injecting politics and fear would do to the US military? How does this serve competence, accountability, and the mission?
▶ 3:09:50I served for 25 years under Democratic and Republican administrations. Our service members serve regardless of party, background, race, or creed. The indiscriminate firing of patriotic and hardworking military officers who have sacrificed for this country through numerous deployments and uh other hardships has put our nation, our national security, and our service members at risk.
▶ 3:10:14My leaders when I served, no matter their race, religion, or creed, were true American warriors focused on the mission, warf fighting, lethality, and taking care of service members and families. This administration's reckless and arbitrary removal of our top military leaders serving in key roles, removes decades of mission critical expertise, and further politicized the mil the officer corps.
▶ 3:10:36The military's top officials, including the senior legal officers, the judge advocates of services, officers responsible for upholding good order and discipline and ensuring military justice remains independent, apolitical, were also removed. As a senior officer of the United States in retired status, I know how critical these roles are to our country's interests. I know my colleagues on the Republican side understand these points as well.
▶ 3:11:01Many of them having served deployments and other hardships in long years in the service of this country. How do we honor the leaders and their decades of service, the ones that have been removed? Is it a perp walk out of a building? Is it a rushed retirement? Be out in 30 days? Because that's that's actually what I'm hearing from some of them. The current administration's fire ready aim approach is reckless and capricious.
▶ 3:11:29It has reduced our nation's readiness at a dangerous time. Our adversaries and geopolitical competitors, including the Chinese Communist Party, welcome this chaos and dysfunction. They welcome it. And you know, this is very reminiscent. And although, you know, we're talking about the loss of a job, but on the eve of World War II in in Soviet Russia, there were purges in 1937 that severely handicapped the Soviets in the leadup to World War II.
▶ 3:12:00What effect did that that purge have? The consequences of not protecting these honorable officers, not just honor for all Americans, but could very well cost Americans lives. I know we're all in agreement, frankly, about the uncertainty that we face in in the current environment and the prospects uh what what's a competition to turn into something much more serious over the coming years.
▶ 3:12:25Now is not the time not the time to be eliminating our smartest, best, and brightest for no reason whatsoever. So, I encourage my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment. Thank you. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentle lady from New Jersey, Miss Cheryl. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 3:12:49Secretary Hicksth regularly talks about how he is ending the politicization of the military, but in reality, he has done more to undermine the apolitical nature of the military than any Secretary of Defense in recent history.
▶ 3:13:04Secretary Hegsth and Donald Trump have fired some of our nation's top military leaders, including former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General CQ Brown, former Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Lisa Franketti, and a number of other three and four star generals and flag officers. They fired some of our military's most experienced, professional, and patriotic leaders. These are individuals who've devoted their lives to serving our country, are critical to our national security, and work every day to protect the men and women who serve.
▶ 3:13:35Normally, our military's top leadership serves under multiple administrations, Democrats and Republicans alike. At the beginning of a presidential term, the leaders in these positions typically stay in place. Some of the leaders fired by Trump and Hegath even served in Trump's first administration. Now Trump and Hegsth are trying to exchange career professionals for loyalists so they can use the military to carry out their personal political agenda.
▶ 3:14:02This move will threaten America's national security, show weakness to dictators worldwide, and give Donald Trump unchecked power to abuse our military. In the United States's armed forces, you swear an oath to the Constitution, not a person, not a political party. It's an oath I took for the first time at age 18 when I entered the Naval Academy and have taken numerous times throughout my career in the Navy as a federal prosecutor and now in Congress.
▶ 3:14:29So I support this amendment and encourage all of my colleagues to do the same. Thank you and I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Chair and I recognize a gentleman from New York, Mr. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 3:14:42I just want to emphasize again and the fundamental principle of not allowing these political purges uh to to continue and and add one additional point that I think is important to say even before the other uh senior officers and general officers mentioned frankly even leading up to taking office this administration went out of its way to send a a chilling and I think deeply unamerican message
▶ 3:15:12around our former chairman of the joint chiefs, Millie. Someone who at great risk to himself and his family, dedicated decades of his life, earned and was nominated for senior leadership roles only to have uh his portrait, a long a long long honored president taken down in a way that I think um frankly all of us should be ashamed by.
▶ 3:15:40And again that that trend has continued and only worsened. I I also want to ask Mr. Chair that I think it is important that as as we consider certainly the constitutional authorities of the the the commander-in-chief in article 2 that we also reiterate the article one components of of oversight of the Congress. Um and I and not asking you to respond Mr. chair, of course, but I do I don't see where the due process is um that you mentioned in in your comments.
▶ 3:16:10Uh and I think that that is important to acknowledge as well. Thank you and I yield back. Gentlemen yields back. Does any other member wish to speak on this amendment? Uh there if there's no further debate, the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Molton. So many in favor, we'll say I. I. Those opposed, no. No. Penny, chair, the nos have it. That's for recorded vote. A recorded vote is ordered. This recorded vote will be postponed until a later time.
▶ 3:16:38We will now consider log number 4707 by Miss Hulahan. For what purposes, a gentle lady from Pennsylvania seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment. Uh, will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading of this amendment is dispensed with. The chair recognizes gentleoman from Pennsylvania for the purpose of explaining her amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 3:16:59If you'd watched me here over the past six years in Congress, you know that I'm really passionate about national security, our defense, our active duty men and women, and our veterans. You know that I've worked really hard over those six plus years to provide our war fighters with everything that they need to face the threats of today and the threats of future wars to come. As a veteran and a daughter and granddaughter of veterans, that is my sacred duty and responsibility. So for that reason, today is very, very hard.
▶ 3:17:28This hearing is very hard and this vote is hard because I'm being asked to effectively vote to give a blank check to the Department of Defense. 15 billion dollars of additional money, additional investment. This kind of money in the right hands for the right purposes we may actually likely need. It is indeed a very dangerous world that we live in.
▶ 3:17:51It is my constitutional duty, however, ours in this body here in this room, to weigh and and measure where and how much money and for what purposes to allocate it. The power of the purse, it's called. And I believe to my core that money invested in defense is a very good investment. But here's my problem. As a member of this body, I also have the constitutional oversight responsibilities. I see myself in many ways as sort of a board member with responsibilities.
▶ 3:18:21And so in good conscience, I simply cannot vote to give this additional money to the DoD under its current management team. You see, the problem here is Secretary Hegsth. He has proven himself to be incompetent, to be reckless, to be paranoid, and he cannot be trusted with the responsibility of these, our precious resources, our national treasure, and the lives of our military men and women. Secretary Hegth must go.
▶ 3:18:50And until he is no longer part of the government, no longer part of the DoD, I simply cannot vote to authorize this money in good faith and in good conscience. So this amendment does just this. It solves this crisis. Until such time as this secretary is no longer threatening our national security and that of the world, this bill, this authorization of $150 billion will not be unlocked. It's as simple as that. Secretary Hegsth must go one way or the other.
▶ 3:19:21I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote yes on what I believe to be this common sense, constitutional, and fiscally responsible amendment. in your servant leader hearts here in this room. I know you know it is the only thing that we should and can respons responsibly do. I urge all of my colleagues in this room to do the right thing to vote favorably on this amendment so that we might properly fund our defense department. With that, I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Chair recognizes himself.
▶ 3:19:50Uh, this amendment prohibits the spending of any of the $150 billion in critical military modernization and service member quality of life improvements until the Secretary of Defense resigns. It would have been nice if my colleagues had felt so strongly about holding the Secretary of Defense accountable in the last administration. 13 service members lost their lives in the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal. Not one lost their job in the Pentagon.
▶ 3:20:18The Trump administration is refocusing on lethality and core DoD missions. This amendment does nothing to advance the important work. Um, this amendment is little more than partisan posturing. I urge members to oppose it. With that, I will recognize I yield back and recognize any other members. Miss Cheryl of New Jersey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Pete Hegth, in a very short time, has proven himself to be the most incompetent Secretary of Defense in recent memory.
▶ 3:20:46He continues to surpass his very low water mark on a daily basis and although President Trump has claimed he will eventually quote get it together, I do not believe this and so I will be supporting Miss Wilhan's amendment. Gentle lady yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Molton. Mr. Chairman, I said loud and clear and very publicly that President Biden should fire Secretary Austin.
▶ 3:21:14Now, I've heard that privately from a lot of members of this committee on the opposite side of the aisle. Only one has had the courage to say it publicly. Where's everyone else, Mr. Chairman? All of us who served know there is nobody more despised in the military than those who lead by the opposite of example, enforcing rules they don't follow themselves, and having zero accountability for their own actions and
▶ 3:21:44The White House is now claiming, get this, in defense of Pete Hegsth, that the entire Department of Defense is aligned against him. Well, that's not just a political problem. It's a full-blown national security crisis when the Secretary of Defense has lost the trust of the very military he's supposed to lead. Hegs is not capable of managing this organization. It's plainly clear he is unqualified.
▶ 3:22:15He is the most unqualified Secretary of Defense in history. He was approved by the narrowest margin of any Secretary of Defense in history. He is a danger to troops. He is himself a threat to our national security. sitting here on the Armed Services Committee as the equivalent of the board of directors for the Defense Department. We should not give him $150 billion blank check.
▶ 3:22:45Heck, I wouldn't trust him with bucks. The only two organizations with a budget that he ever has had to run, he's run into the ground. His first veterans nonprofit, Veterans for Freedom, went from revenues of $ 8.7 million at the start of his tenure to just $265,000 two years later.
▶ 3:23:11This isn't just politics, and it isn't even just incompetence. It's a serious threat to our national security. And that's why I support an honorable veteran, Miss Hulahan's amendment. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Does any other member wish to speak on Miss Hulahan's amendment? There's no further debate. The question occurs on the amendment offered by Miss Hulahan. So many are in favor. We'll say I. Those opposed, no.
▶ 3:23:41No. Opinion chair. The nos have it. Does Miss Hulahan want a recorded vote? A recorded vote is ordered. Uh, this recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. We now will consider log number 4709 by Mr. Cisneros of California. For what purpose is a gentleman from California seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading of the amendments dispensed with.
▶ 3:24:11The chair now recognizes gentleman from California for the purpose of explaining his amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment seeks to fix glaring issues for military personnel and that is ensuring our child care workers are compensated or competitively paid to match local rates at the facilities where they work and there are funds to maintain and modernize those facilities.
▶ 3:24:35I will give credit that this bill does address the fact that the many families are that many families are unable to pay for child care for many for more than one child. However, the larger problem is the lack of personnel leaving these centers understaffed, increasing the size of their weight list. And these facilities are are most of these facilities are in desperate need of repair and upgrades.
▶ 3:25:04So, I've had the honor and the privilege of kind of being able to travel and seeing visiting many of our our child development centers around not only the country, but around the world. And I would say there are facilities uh like in San Antonio where they are basically they need more more buildings, more facilities there to to take care of the children. Many of those facilities uh around the world need to modernize. They need new HVAC systems.
▶ 3:25:33They need uh funding to do just simple repairs that they're not able to do, whether it's fix the floors or put new carpet in. But I will say at the vast majority of the facilities that I visited, the biggest issue was staffing. Now, we put a lot of training into our our child development center staff. Uh there the certifications and the training that they get are well desired in the private sector. Uh and that kind of leaves them out there, right?
▶ 3:26:00So they are able to go and leave and take jobs in the private sector that leave our facilities understaffed. And so my amendment would increase child care fee assistance to 200 million, add 1.3 billion for Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Space Force child development center facility maintenance, and include 1 billion for childcare provider compensation under the Department of Defense modernization of the child development program staffing model passed in FY25
▶ 3:26:31NDAA. This is not a partisan issue. I hope my colleagues across the aisle will join me in supporting competitive pay for CDC workers and keep these centers where our service members children are cared for and maintained and modern and modernized. We need to fully staff our child development centers and that will enable to shorten the waiting list. It allow more more children to be in the child development centers and my bill will do this.
▶ 3:27:00So I do encourage my members on both side of the aisle to support this bill in support of our military families. And with that I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair not recognizes himself. This amendment would eliminate funding in this title for the nuclear armed sea launch cruise missile or Slickum. Every senior military official who's testified about this program before this committee has agreed it's needed.
▶ 3:27:25Most recently, in his appearance before the House and Senate Armed Services Committee last month, the Stratcom Commander spoke about the importance of accelerating it. The underlying bill already increases funding for the child care assistance and builds on the important work we did last year to expand it uh and improving the NDA the childare program. So, I urge members to oppose the amendment that with that I recognize the gentle lady from California, Miss Jacob. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um and with all due respect to you, Mr.
▶ 3:27:54chairman as my friend. I think we've all actually heard a lot of skepticism from our military leaders about the feasibility cost and consequences of the nuclear armed sea launch cruise missiles slickum. Vice Admiral Johnny Wolf, the director of the Navy's strategic systems program, has warned that we'll need an entirely new industrial base to achieve it and it's likely impossible on this timeline by 2034. These weapons are dangerous, unnecessary, and wasteful.
▶ 3:28:21And contrary to our deterren's first posture because both nuclear armed and conventional cruise missiles look virtually the same, which escalates the risks of misunderstandings and miscalculations that could lead to a nuclear war. And in 2021, the CBO estimated that a new slick would cost at least 10 billion through The United States already has plenty of lower yield nuclear options. So we don't need expensive slickhams that do nothing to add to our national security.
▶ 3:28:51So instead of lighting taxpayer dollars on fire, let's invest in the best asset that we have, the thing that actually keeps us safe, our service members and their families. And one of the biggest obstacles facing our military families is the lack of affordable accessible child care. In San Diego, the childcare wait list has been up to 4,000 spots long recently. For years, I've toured CDC's in San Diego and across the country.
▶ 3:29:16And everywhere I go, the workers tell me that the main issue is the inability to recruit qualified workers. In San Diego, CDC's are still not operating at full capacity because of worker shortages. That's why I was incredibly proud to have secured a provision in last year's NDIA that required DoD to finally update their compensational model, which hadn't been updated in 30 years, almost my lifetime.
▶ 3:29:41We should be funding initiatives like that to properly compensate our military childcare workers and ensure full capacity at our CDC's. This will make it easier for our service members to stay focused on their mission instead of the safety and well-being of our kids. That's why I'm proud to support this amendment to pull wasteful spending and instead make a smart, savvy, and cost-effective investment in military child care. I yield back. Gently yields back.
▶ 3:30:12Does any other member wish to speak on amendment? If there's no further debate, the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Cisneros. So many in favor will say I. I. Those opposed, no. No. opinion of the chair. The nose have it. Ask for recorded vote, please. Recorded vote is requested. Recorded vote is ordered. The recorded vote will be postponed till a later time. To give y'all a lay of the land about where we are right now, we have four amendments remaining. We're going to be called to vote at 1:30. So, here's the plan.
▶ 3:30:42We will go into recess after these we finish these four amendments and until four o'clock at which time the full committee will reconvene to start voting on each of the amendments that's been presented here today. So with that we will now call up um log number 4710 by Mr. Molton of Massachusetts. For what purposes? Gentleman from Massachusetts seek recognition. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment?
▶ 3:31:11Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The chair recognizes gentleman from Massachusetts for the purpose of explaining his amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The White House and Department of Defense have already reached out to the city of Washington, DC to plan a massive parade for Saturday, June 14th, Trump's 79th birthday. Now, we've seen this film before. Trump tried to do this in his first term, but was shut down. Estimated cost $92 million.
▶ 3:31:41Now, current law permits the administration to use operational units for a parade if they can certify no impact to readiness. We all know on this committee all too well the serious pressures on readiness today. We also should know that our troops did not sign up to march in Now, we've had parades before, military parades to celebrate our armed services.
▶ 3:32:12We've had military parades to celebrate our country. We've had military parades to celebrate our active duty troops. But, Mr. Chairman, I believe this would be the first time in our history that we hold a military parade to celebrate a draft dodger. And in fact, at a cost of about $und00 million, it would be $20 million for each of the five times that Donald Trump dodged the draft.
▶ 3:32:42Now, it so happens that the date of the parade is also the Army's 250th birthday. If the Army wants a parade for its birthday, they should have a parade. And they can absolutely have a parade using their designated ceremonial units. There's an excellent one right across the river. But operational units have a job to do to defend this country and be prepared to fight and win a conflict at a moment's notice.
▶ 3:33:07There's no reason why they should be spending weeks on drill and ceremony or learning to drive infantry fighting vehicles in perfect formation rather than training and exercising how to use them to kill our enemies. The Secretary of Defense talks about lethality, focusing on lethality. I'm not quite sure where a birthday parade fits into a focus on lethality. This isn't why our troops sign up to serve our country.
▶ 3:33:36It's not what they want to do with their time. And if we're all honest with ourselves, it's not what any of us would want to them to do with their time either. Our commander-in-chief seems to be jealous of his friends in Moscow, Beijing, and Po Pyongyang who get to watch all of their special military tolls toys roll by on their birthdays. Our troops and our taxpayers should not have to pay the price of stroking his ego. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 3:34:06Gentleman yields back. Chair not recognizes himself. Um, this amendment would prohibit the use of funds provided by the title for a parade for the Army's 250th birthday. Uh, with this bill, we are making the firstofind investments in modernizing our defense. And my colleagues are concerned about parades, not winning in outer space, not making uh expanding benefits for our service members. They want to talk about parades.
▶ 3:34:34This amendment is much is as much of a stunt as the parades would be. I also point out that the DoD could use other appropriated funds for this purpose. So the amendment really would have no functional effect. I urge members to oppose it. And with that, uh, I yield back. And does any other member wish to speak on this amendment? If there's no further debate, the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Molton. So many in favor, we'll say I. Those opposed, no. No. Apparent chair the nose have it.
▶ 3:35:04Does the member wish a recorded vote? Yes. A recorded vote is ordered. The recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. We will now consider log number 4711 by Miss Duda of Hawaii. For what purposes a gentle lady from Hawaii seek recognition? Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment without objection? The reading of amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes gentleoman for the purpose of explaining her amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 3:35:31By any objective measure, the Pentagon under Pete Hexes leadership is an unprecedented train wreck. I won't repeat all the egregious acts that have been shared multiple times over in this hearing, but I will say this, none of this is normal. None of this is right. Every new revelation exposes yet another instance of shocking and gross incompetence from the Secretary of Defense. And each time we do nothing but reward him with more money, we are complicit.
▶ 3:35:57And while Pete Hexith scour the Pentagons for leakers, hoping that each new day doesn't yield yet another horrible news story because he's clearly trying to fake it till he makes it. The American people are right there with him because it's their friends and families, their livelihoods, our national security on the line. Nothing we have seen in the past three months leads me to believe that this Secretary of Defense has the leadership and managerial skills, the judgment, or the executive temperament to run the Pentagon.
▶ 3:36:27Worse, he is normalizing a dangerous culture of practice where retribution, security breaches, firing, and attrition through intimidation is both commonplace and acceptable. It's fair to say that the mistakes he has made on the job more than justify his immediate dismissal because our service members and their families deserve better. The president of the United States deserves better. Our nation deserves better than what Pete Hgse has offered us so far.
▶ 3:36:58If President Trump refuses to hold his own Secretary of Defense accountable, even as his administration purchased thousands of federal employees who do have the skills, the judgment, and the temperament to do their jobs, then clearly Congress must step in. This amendment is simple and necessary. Secretary Heget clearly doesn't know how to do his job.
▶ 3:37:18We need to make him get his act together by putting him and his entire Senate confirm leadership team through a managerial and supervisory training program that makes clear what's right and what's wrong. This is not a radical idea, nor is this any kind of harsh punishment. Millions of Americans every day go through similar trainings on a regular basis.
▶ 3:37:40Employees who are not delivering on their job, unable to do their job, are often put on in performance improvement plans and tasked with completing these kinds of trainings so they can actually get the job done. This amendment is also about fiscal responsibility.
▶ 3:37:57We should not be giving anyone the authority to spend an additional $150 billion on top of the over $850 billion in DoD's discretionary budget with as little oversight and accountability as my Republican colleagues are proposing today. Least of all someone who has proven to be so incapable of serving as Secretary of Defense right now.
▶ 3:38:19If Republicans are going to give Secretary has this sort of virtually unchecked spending authority a blank check paid for by taxpayers taken literally from food money and Medicaid, then we should all demand oversight in who wields these funds. And we have to make sure he does his job in a way that does not compromise our national security.
▶ 3:38:44No matter what party is in charge, we all want and should demand a secretary of defense that will succeed and keep us safe. When they do, our nation is stronger and we are safer. While I will continue to have significant disagreements with this administration and their national security policy, I and countless and countless millions of Americans need, deserve, demand to know that our Secretary of Defense is willing to admit when they've made a mistake or exhibited a severe lack of judgment
▶ 3:39:14and is willing to accept corrective action and guidance on how to do their job right. To vote no is to be both complicit and approving of the gross incompetence of the secretary and is a danger to this country's national security, promoting a culture of chaos that they are establishing right now at the Pentagon. To vote no is to accept responsibility and to be culpable for Pete Heg's behavior as is unchecked. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and to vote yes.
▶ 3:39:44I yield back. General yields back. Chairman recognizes himself. This amendment requires basic security information training already prescribed by law and regulations. Everyone with a clearance is briefed on proper handling of classified information and must sign an appropriate oath. The amendment has no practical effect and seeks to hold hostage nearly $40 billion for defense modernization. I urge all members to oppose it.
▶ 3:40:08And now let's recognize Miss Hulahan of I'm speaking. I'm sorry. We're still debating the amendment. We We'll get to it. I promise you going to get a vote. But first, I have to say that I rise in support of your amendment. I think it's really, really important.
▶ 3:40:35As I've said time and time again here in this room, also in in the intel committee and other places as well, um the way that we manage information at the executive branch, in the in the the uh legislative branch, and many branches of our government at this point in time uh is is dangerous and will end up with people's lives uh ending as a result. This is a glaring problem both, as I mentioned, with the administration, but also here on Capitol Hill.
▶ 3:41:00So I very much support your concept of a performance plan which would involve also having um adequate training. Whether or not it exists clearly it hasn't made it to the secretary of defense's level yet. And I think some amount of contrition would be proper as well as some amount of acknowledgement that it would be good to have at least a refresher class on how to manage classified information. Mike Waltz um disregarded his this proper protocol as well. Um we all know what the right way to manage information is.
▶ 3:41:28all know how it is to behave as a leader and it would behoove us to require that of people like uh Secretary Hegsth in order for him to continue to be responsible for this department and also for him to be able to be continue to be responsible for his budget. I yield back. Gentle lady yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from California, Mr. Connor. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 3:41:48I rise in uh support of this amendment that we should actually have a plan to get rid of the fraud, waste, and abuse in the Pentagon before we allocate more funds. I'd like to see where where is Elon Musk? Where is Elon Musk? Because we heard from Elon Musk that 20 to30 billion just disappear in the Pentagon. We heard from Elon Musk that cost plus contracting is a gravy train.
▶ 3:42:18We heard from Elon Musk that the F-35s were the worst use of military expenditure that he knew in world history. We heard from Elon Musk that he was going to cut the defense budget. And what happened? We're adding $150 billion to the defense budget. I used to speak years ago that one day the defense budget is going to get over trillion dollars. People thought I was exaggerating. Guess what? The defense budget is now going to get over $1 trillion.
▶ 3:42:46And this time I may not be the lone no vote on this committee. People are wondering what is happening when you can't get the world's richest person to get the Pentagon to actually be accountable. So Mr.
▶ 3:43:01Chairman, my view is that if Doge has any seriousness, if they have any sense of actually cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, they would look at the Pentagon budget and bring it down before we add another $150 billion to budget. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Gentleman yields back. Does any other member wish to speak on Mr. Duda's amendment?
▶ 3:43:27So if so, if uh there's no um further debate, the question occurs on Mr. Takuda's amendment. Those are in favor, we'll say I. I. Those opposed, no. Opinion, the chair, the nose have it. A recorded vote is requested and so ordered. The recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. We will now consider log number 4712 by Mr. Vinman of Virginia. For what purposes a gentleman from Virginia seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 3:43:57Uh will the clerk please distribute the amendment without objection the reading of the amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes a gentleman from Virginia for the purpose of explaining his amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardians, and marines and their families selflessly sacrifice for the nation every day, and we have a solemn duty to ensure that they are taken care of. My district is home to three military installations with tens of thousands of active duty service members.
▶ 3:44:23Many of these members are struggling to get the child care they need or the pay and educational benefits they deserve. That's why I'm offering this amendment to invest directly into our service members quality of life. This makes improvements in military unaccompanied housing, military health care, bonuses, special pay and incentive pay, tuition assistance for service members and military spouses professional lensure. All these programs are essential to the health of our force and consequently its lethality.
▶ 3:44:50By ensuring the well-being and success of service members, we are enabling them to better focus on the their part of the defense mission. We need to attract and retain the best people, and this amendment ensures that we do that. This amendment focuses on investing in the future of our military's most important resource, its people. I ask my colleagues to join me in voting to support our service members and their families with this amendment. I'll just mention a second objection.
▶ 3:45:17This is um an amendment that puts service members and quality of life over what I call a a PET project, the Golden Dome, this bright and and shiny vanity project, which frankly I don't know what it's supposed to do. What does it accomplish? Does it defend the homeland from strategic missile attack from China or Russia? That's not clear. There has been no clear purpose provided for $25 billion in spending.
▶ 3:45:44And when you balance that against the quality of life issues I discuss and service members and their families, I will support service members and their families every time. Thank you. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes himself. This amendment would slash funding for the development of next generation missile defenses, a key component of president's golden dome concept. This amendment is just about talking points.
▶ 3:46:09The goal is to make Republicans choose between supporting the president and increasing quality of life for our service members and their families. That's a false choice. We can do both, and this bill does both. But let me say this about the president's Golden Dome effort. The homeland is no longer a sanctuary. China and Russia are building the means to carry out coercive attacks against the continental United States. We must defend our homeland.
▶ 3:46:35Doing so strengthens deterrence by reducing incentives for adversaries to carry out such strikes. It's going to take new technology to get this done and this amendment would cut funding for this very new technology. I oppose it and encourage members all my colleagues to vote no on this amendment. And with that, we will now recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Molton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 3:46:58I want to thank you for clarifying the purpose of this amendment, which is indeed to choose between supporting the president's personal agenda and supporting the troops, the family members of our troops. I also want to take the opportunity to respond to your comments about Golden Dome. Now, we've seen the power of Iron Dome in protecting our ally, Israel. So, what's not to like about Golden Dome? It's Iron Dome, but better.
▶ 3:47:27It's golden. But this could be the single most dangerous idea Trump has proposed. And I recognize that's a strong statement because there's tough competition. Anyone with a bank account is probably thinking that his brilliant tariff plans that aim to recreate the Great Depression are a worse idea. So, let me explain why this is so dangerous. We still have no idea what Golden Dome actually is.
▶ 3:47:52And there is bipartisan support for improving sensing, detecting incoming threats, which needs to happen, and for building out proven capabilities to defend bases from drones and autonomous vehicles, another so-called component of this overall protection system. That's a serious threat as well.
▶ 3:48:12But the foundation of our deterrence against strikes from Russia and China, as you mentioned, is a concept called mutually assured destruction, which means that if one side shoots a bunch of missiles at the other side, they know they're going to get a bunch of missiles in return. And that prevents either side from doing anything. It's provided strategic stability for 70 years.
▶ 3:48:36Golden Dome, as the president envisions, undermines this balance of power, which does two things. Number one, it starts a nuclear arms race because everyone will try to get around it, which of course is exactly what happened since George W. Bush. He's that president you guys all used to like before Trump decided not to uh pull us out of the anti-bballistic missile treaty. That's why the Chinese and the Russians started developing hypersonics, another novel delivery systems to get around our missile defenses.
▶ 3:49:07And number two, it increases the likelihood that Russia or China attacks us before we attack them because it will lower the thresholds for nuclear use, force them to adopt launch on warning postures, making crises faster moving and far more dangerous. We know that just in the last 70 years, we've had 13 terribly close calls with nuclear weapons.
▶ 3:49:28like the time a Russian major essentially acting like a cowboy because he completely violated his own orders that required him to launch a full strike on the US when an incoming strike was detected. He didn't do it just because he thought the warning was wrong. We're all alive as a result. Now, maybe something has changed in the world.
▶ 3:49:49Maybe something has changed technologically or strategically that would make us reconsider this theory that's provided security for 70 years of nuclear deterrence. But if that's the case, then tell us what that is before spending billions of taxpayer dollars to do something different. I mean, some may find it hard to believe that President Trump would spend billions of taxpayer money on something that he just thought was a good idea because it's something his friend has. but in gold.
▶ 3:50:19But in case you're one of those people who maybe has had his hand in the head in the sand for the past decade, let's look at where the money for Golden Dome goes in this bill. This $5.6 billion that Mr. Vivman's amendment addresses is colorless yearless money to launch a space-based missile defense system. Exactly what I'm talking about. That is strategically destabilizing. There's no defense planning here. We don't have validated operational requirements.
▶ 3:50:50We don't have a threat model. We don't know what specific missile threats the system would be designed to counter and which ones it wouldn't. We don't have agreed upon system architecture. We don't how many know how many interceptors would be deployed, where they would be deployed. We have no idea how this would be integrated with other missile defense. There's no cost analysis, which of course is the last time this idea was proposed. It was thrown out because it was cost prohibitive. We have no cost analysis for development acquisition. none of this.
▶ 3:51:18But most alarming is the lack of a of a fundamental strategic stability analysis. We should not be giving Secretary Hegsth a blank check. Honestly, giving him a slush fund might even be better in this case because doing that would race would waste taxpayer dollars while not risking taxpayer lives. This is not a debate about whether space defenses have a future.
▶ 3:51:48It's a debate about whether we proceed responsibly. That's what this amendment does. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognize a gentleman from California, Mr. Tran. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I speak in support of my colleagues amendment to increase funding for military unaccompanied housing, the defense health program, bonuses and incentive pay, and tuition assistance.
▶ 3:52:13When I enlisted in the army at 8 at 8 at age 18, it was about giving back to a country that gave me so much opportunity. I was born just months after my refugee parents were taken in by the United States after fleeing communist tyranny in Vietnam. I was a direct beneficiary of the GI Bill. It helped me go to college and eventually go on to getting my law degree to become a lawyer. Today, of course, I'm so blessed to be a member of Congress representing the people of California's 45th district.
▶ 3:52:42None of this would have been possible without the support that I earned when I was enlisted. Our military's strongest asset is its people. And by failing to support our service members, we're undermining our ability to recruit and retain the most lethal fighting force in the world. Every person in this room should be supporting increased funding for the pay and benefits that support our service members. Any action to the contrary are hypocritical and a disgrace.
▶ 3:53:09I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of this important amendment in support of our service members and their families. It's the absolute least we can do. I yield back. Does any other member wish to speak on this amendment? If there's no further debate, the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Vinman. So many is there in favor will say I. I. Those opposed, no. Pin the chair. The nose have it. Recorded votes requested. The recorded vote is ordered.
▶ 3:53:39Uh, this recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. We will now consider log number 4699 by Mr. Carbajal of California. For what purposes? A gentleman from California seek recognition. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment? Without objection, the reading of the amendments dispensed with. The chair recognizes gentleman from California for the purpose of explaining his amendment. Thank you, Mr.
▶ 3:54:07Chairman, before I speak about my amendment, let me be clear that I fundamentally oppose this reconciliation bill. I have always been supportive of the department and its mission. It is important for our national security and in our best interest. However, we need to draw the line somewhere.
▶ 3:54:28The HEXTH department does not need an additional billion, especially when there is no specific plan on how to spend it. Current hegth incompetent leadership can't even properly run a signal group without leaking classified information. From the outside looking in, the Pentagon seems to be in disarray.
▶ 3:54:52Reports from former employees appointed by the secretary himself confirm that the American people do not trust Secretary Hegsth to execute this funding in a productive way. I wouldn't trust him with $150, let alone $150 billion. He has already spent too much on makeup rooms in the Pentagon. There's also little strategy or plan behind this increase.
▶ 3:55:21It's a blank check. This administration continues to isolate the United States from the rest of the world at this point. Throwing funding at reckless Secretary Hec Seth will not solve any issues.
▶ 3:55:37It is also confusing that this increase comes at a time when the department is cancelling contracts left and right in an attempt to save Even more troubling to me is that the source of this funding is coming from cuts to other committees, two of which I serve on. Tomorrow, we'll be debate cutting $10 billion in transportation and infrastructure funding.
▶ 3:56:02And at a later date, we will debate how to cut $230 billion from agriculture programs, most of which will come from SNAP. Taking funding from essential government programs that help feed most vulnerable communities to pay for defense articles and tax cuts for the most wealthy Americans is just plain bad public policy. Not to get my amendment. It would make 300 million available for the Ukraine security assistance initiative.
▶ 3:56:32This committee has long been supportive of Ukraine and we cannot waver now. 300 million million just 2%. You heard me right. 2% just a fraction of 1% of funding we are debating here today. We should all want peace in Eastern Europe and this money will help Ukraine in the mid medium-term achieve peace through strength.
▶ 3:57:00No offset is necessary because this amendment allows for things already being done by the bill. munitions UAS advancement for instance to be completed USIA. Like many of you, I have traveled to Ukraine where I saw the destruction Russia caused and spoke with their military members. They are fighting for American values, democracy, freedom. Now is not the time to turn our backs on Ukraine.
▶ 3:57:29I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. chair now recognizes himself. Like my friend from California, I have been an outspoken and steadfast supporter of arming and training Ukrainians military. USAI funding has been included uh has been provided every year for the last nine years and I fully expect it to be included in this year's NDAA when we report it out in a couple of months. Therefore, I must oppose this amendment.
▶ 3:57:59With that, I yield to the ranking Thank you. And I thank Mr. Carval for bringing this amendment. I think this is a really important opportunity for this committee to reaffirm our support for Ukraine. And I agree with the chairman. There is incredible bipartisan support in this committee, in the House, in this Congress for Ukraine.
▶ 3:58:16Unfortunately, President Trump has done everything in his power to undermine all of that support and make it appear to the world and and most importantly to President Putin that he is getting ready, Trump is getting ready to abandon Ukraine. That has been the signal from the day he got into office, berating President Sullinski, temporarily cutting off aid, cutting off intelligence support, cutting off military assistance.
▶ 3:58:45basically refusing to say that Putin started the war, giving all of the Republican sorry, the Russian talking points. Um, did too much airtime. And and then we see President Trump this week say, you know, I'm beginning to think that that Putin really doesn't peace. Really, this is just now dawning on you.
▶ 3:59:09what everybody has been telling him for months and that fundamental misunderstanding has created the impression that the US doesn't support Ukraine. And whatever happens from this point forward, maybe President Trump and Vice President Vance figure it out, figure out that it's really important to make it clear that we're not going to abandon Ukraine in order to get to peace, in order to stop Russian's brutal attack on Ukraine. I don't know. But right now, the impression is we're walking away.
▶ 3:59:39And that impression is a huge block to forcing Putin and Russia to get to the peace table and make an agreement. That's kind of what President Trump just belatedly figured out a couple of days ago. So, I think it's important this committee now has an opportunity to say, "We're with Ukraine.
▶ 3:59:57We're going to help President Trump get to the right place, however long it took him to get there." So, I think this is an incredibly important amendment at this time that this committee should support to let the world know we're not walking away from Ukraine. We know how important that fight is, not just to Ukrainians, but to us here in the US to be in a position to deter our adversaries, all of which have come together to support Russia and Ukraine.
▶ 4:00:25China, North Korea, Iran, they're all back in Russia. So, this isn't just about what's going on in Ukraine. It is about the broader national security interests of this country and the world. Here is an opportunity to express our support for Ukraine. I strongly urge us to take it. Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize a gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 4:00:50Uh I echo our ranking members comments and also would add that you know returning from the delegation trip to the Middle East reminded me that stability is hard. Fi regimes many of many countries around the world um who are just seeking stability. It's a hard thing to do and democracy is even harder.
▶ 4:01:19And when it takes root, we must do everything that we can to support it. Just over three years ago, Russia invaded Ukraine, unleashing devastation in what was and continues to be a clear act of aggression against one of our allies and against the principles of democracy and freedom. We cannot afford to let the acts of tyranny and dictatorship win.
▶ 4:01:46While we all want a just peace and an end to the fighting, we cannot allow President Trump to give the dictator Vladimir Putin anything he wants. We must support the Ukraine security assistance initiative which not only supports Ukraine but supports our allies who have who have given equipment and support to Ukraine as well as allies continue to invest in their militaries.
▶ 4:02:15We should leverage US industry to fund that. The facts are clear. Ukraine was invaded by Russia. That's not a point of Ukraine sovereignty is under attack, which is also not a point of de debate. We must continue to support our ally Ukraine. And I'm proud to co-sponsor this amendment. Gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes a gentleman from Illinois, Mr.
▶ 4:02:45Sorenson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll get by pretty quickly here. Uh why is it so hard to oppose Russia's unprovoked and senseless war in Ukraine? Why is it so hard to understand that our commanderin-chief's disrespect to President Zilinski makes us look weak in the eyes of our own allies? His idea of diplomacy is quote, "Vladimir, stop!" in all caps on social media.
▶ 4:03:13It's a joke, but it harms our American reputation and our service members. And it's not just for our peaceloving people in Ukraine, but within our own NATO partner countries. The Ukraine flag flies on flag poles under the American flag in my own neighborhood. And my hometown of Rockford, Illinois, shares a sister city with Brovery, Ukraine, a city of 85,000 people just east of Kev.
▶ 4:03:40Over the years, many Rockfordians have traveled to Ukraine to build playgrounds for the children there. That investment in the children should never be forgotten. Also, back at home, our we're proud of the Rock Island Arsenal, which makes sure our armed forces and our Ukrainian neighbors have what they need to survive. Daily, we see news reports that China and North Korea are coming to the aid of Russia.
▶ 4:04:10Let's be clear. As their relationship grows stronger, this administration doesn't seem to care that our weakness shines bright. I urge my colleagues who share a commitment to democracy and freedom support Mr. Carbajal's amendment and stand with Ukraine. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize a gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I've spoken on the topic of Ukraine.
▶ 4:04:39um at least once today in the context of of Yukcom and Ariccom command split and and so I'm not going to reiterate my points about um the alignment of nations that stand against us. But I just want to emphasize this point that I've spoken to a number of my colleagues uh from across the aisle and I think there is strong bipartisan support for Ukraine. But when are we going to make this bipartisan support felt?
▶ 4:05:06We're really we're we're rapidly approaching a decisive point in a pivot point in our history where we get to decide where our values are where who do we stand with? Do we stand with free freedom uh free countries in Europe?
▶ 4:05:23Do we stand with a country that's defending its sovereignty from attack by uh Russians and an alignment of forces, North Koreans and Chinese with at least support against uh this western order. You know, um the the withdrawal from Afghanistan was a signific significant failure and that was owned by the Biden administration.
▶ 4:05:51Well, I will tell you if we pull back from our obligations in Ukraine, that will be a betrayal of our values, of our friends, and that will be owned squarely by this administration. There's no there's no getting away from that. We're a decisive point where we've spent trillions of dollars over the course of the last 80 years creating a rules-based order that is under assault right now.
▶ 4:06:20And um the the purpose or the the desire to save uh money in Ukraine is pennywise and pound foolish. This idea of uh not spending, you know, a few hundred million or a few billion dollars when they're defending our our our freedoms, our western values is uh is nonsensical.
▶ 4:06:43And so over the course of 14 trips to Ukraine, I've gotten a chance to see the fighting spirit of the Ukrainian people, their desire to defend their sovereignty, and we are the preferred partner, but we're not the only partner. If we pull back, the Ukrainians are not going to fold. The Europeans are going to step in, and they're not going to be able to do everything we can, but the the fighting and dying will take place.
▶ 4:07:11The only way that we can preserve our investments and and the rules-based order that we fought so hard that we fought a world war to establish is by supporting the Ukrainians in their fight against the Russians.
▶ 4:07:26And frankly, it's the way we prevent potentially a larger war where we either have boots on the ground in Europe or potentially in the South Pacific because the message that we send when we retreat, and that's what we're talking about is we're we're talking about a a betrayal and a retreat is that aggression, naked aggression, this idea of might makes right, the rules of the jungle.
▶ 4:07:50um the idea that you can't just attack a smaller neighbor and and change borders unilaterally, that goes away and that message will be heard loud and clear by our adversaries.
▶ 4:08:03And so I I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of Ukraine, not just for to prevent humanitarian disaster that's occurring there, nearly 1 million deaths uh by the service members on both sides, but also for US national security and for our values. With that, I yield. Gentleman yields back. Does any other member wish to speak on this amendment? If there's no further debate, the question occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. Carbajal.
▶ 4:08:33So many in favor will say I. I. Those opposed. No. Opinion chair. The nos have it. Recorded vote is requested and recorded vote is ordered. The recorded vote will be postponed until a later time. Pursuant to the chair's previous order, members are advised the committee will recess until 400 p.m. at which time the committee will u rapidly dispense with the remaining business including voting on all outstanding amendments.
▶ 4:08:59This committee stands in recess until 4 Good
▶ 6:23:03morning.
▶ 6:25:12Heat. Heat.
▶ 6:31:02Committee will come to order. We are now going to proceed to vote on those amendments uh where recorded vote was ordered which was all of them. Uh each member has assign has been assigned a device. It is your name on the back and it's secured to your spot on the dis. Please look on the back of your device.
▶ 6:31:29It's that little black device to your left to make sure it's the one with your name on the back. It's very important that your device remain at your seat. As the ranking member said, that's why it's Oh, you have who's Oh my gosh. All right.
▶ 6:32:00You can use three buttons to vote your vote. You vote once uh once you make it, it will appear on the monitor on the screen. We're going to go really slow on the first one uh to make sure we all have time to get it right. Uh you can change your vote by pressing a different button. Please be mindful not to change your vote by Make sure you're voting the right way on the right amendment.
▶ 6:32:28The amendment uh number was also going to be on the screen. If you do not wish to be recorded at all, do not push a button. Uh I'll hold the first vote open for a while and uh we'll proceed expeditious expeditiously thereafter. All right. The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4698 by representative Smith uh and shall now resume those proceeding. The question occurs on the amendment.
▶ 6:32:58Members will record their vote by using their assigned electronic device. The chairman will be voting no. Ranking member will be voting yes. The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote.
▶ 6:33:31Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change their vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:33:58We are now going to see the committee postponed further proceedings on log number 4684 by Representative Ryan and should now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device. The chairman will be voting no and I will be voting yes. The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote.
▶ 6:34:26Chrissy, does it help when you point it like that? Oh no, Chris broke it. Look at that. All right. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change their vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 23, the nos are 32. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:34:57Uh, the committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4680R1 by Representative Ryan and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic divi device. The chairman will vote no. Yeah, I'm wondering. You're voting no on everyone. I'm voting yes on everyone. So, I think we can just tell. All right. I will just leave it at that. The chairman will be voting no on every one of these announcements. I'll be voting yes on everyone. All right.
▶ 6:35:25The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote. Voting yes or no. Uh, does have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? Chrissy said point it. John, have all members voted? Does any members change their vote?
▶ 6:35:54The clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. Uh, the amendment is not agreed Uh the committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4694 by representative Hulahan and sh now shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device device.
▶ 6:36:20The clerk will open the machine and the members will Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change their vote? The clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26.
▶ 6:36:50The nos are 29. The amendment is not agreed to. Uh the committee postponed further proceedings on amendment number log number 4695 by Representative Strickland and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device.
▶ 6:37:06The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change their vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29.
▶ 6:37:36Uh, the amendment is not agreed to. Committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4700 by Representative Vinman and should now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote. Point it.
▶ 6:38:06All right. Have all members voted? Does a member wish to change his or her vote? Clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. The amendment is not agreed to. The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4697 by representative Elfreth uh and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device.
▶ 6:38:35Uh the clerk will open the machine and the members will vote. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:39:03Committee postpone further proceedings on amendment log number 4690R1 by Representative Ryan and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote. Have all members voted?
▶ 6:39:33Does any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. The amendment is not agreed to. The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4693 by representative Cheryl and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and members will vote.
▶ 6:40:15Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? Not. The clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. The amendment is not agreed to. The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4696 by Representative Goodlander and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device.
▶ 6:40:44The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:41:13The committee postponed further proceedings on log number 4688R1 by representative Courtney and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will report record their vote by electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and members will vote. Have all members voted?
▶ 6:41:42Does any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, yeses are 26 and no are 29. The amendment is not agreed to. The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4701R1 by representative Cisneros and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device.
▶ 6:42:10The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? Not the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26. The nos are 29. Amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:42:38Uh the committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4702 by representative Garmeny and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote.
▶ 6:43:07Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 25, the nos are 30. Amendment is not agreed to. Uh the committee postponed further proceedings on log number 4708 R1 by represent representative Jacobs. Uh the question occurs uh on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device.
▶ 6:43:37Uh the clerk will open the machine and members will vote. Have all members voted? City member wish to change his or her vote. Not the clerk will lock the machine and report the Mr.
▶ 6:44:05Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. The amendment is not agreed to. The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4692 R1 by Representative Molton and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and members will vote.
▶ 6:44:35Have all members voted? Any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. Amendment is not agreed to. The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4707 by representative Hulahan and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members shall record their vote by electronic device.
▶ 6:45:01The clerk will open the machine and members will vote. All members voted. Any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 29, the nos are 31. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:45:28Committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4709 R1 by Representative Cisneros and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device. the clerk. The clerk will lock the machine and record the uh lock the machine and the members will vote.
▶ 6:45:58All members voted. Any member wish to change his or her vote? Not the clerk will lock the machine and report the Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 29. Amendment is not agreed to. Uh the committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4710 by Representative Molton and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and members will vote.
▶ 6:46:36Have all members voted? All right. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? Not the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26 and nos are 30.
▶ 6:47:07The amendment is not agreed to. Uh the committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4711 R1 by Mr. by Ms. Duda and shall now resume those proceedings. The question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device.
▶ 6:47:24The clerk will open the machine and members will vote. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26 and nos are 30. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:47:54The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4720 4712 R1 by representative Vinman and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment, members will record their vote using their electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and members will vote.
▶ 6:48:25Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 30. The amendment is not agreed to. The committee postponed further proceedings on amendment log number 4699R1 by representative Carbajal and shall now resume those proceedings. Question occurs on the amendment. Members will record their vote by electronic device.
▶ 6:48:53The clerk will open the machine and members will vote. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? If not, the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 26, the nos are 30. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:49:20Are there any additional amendments to the amendment in the nature of a If there are no further amendments, question on agreeing to the amendment in nature of a substitute. So many as are in favor will say I. I opposed. No. No. As the eyes have it and the amendment in nature of recorder vote. Recorded vote is requested.
▶ 6:49:48The clerk will open the machine and the members will vote. And just you know on this one ranking member is voting no and the chairman is voting I member for you Have all the members voted?
▶ 6:50:17Does any member wish to change his or her vote? Not the clerk will vote uh lock the machine and report the Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 35, the nos are 21. The amendment in nature of a substitute is agreed to. Chair recognizes gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Whitman for the purpose of offering a motion. Mr.
▶ 6:50:36Chairman, I move the committee do now transmit the recommendations of this committee and all appropriate accompanying material including additional supplemental desending or minority views to the House Committee on Budget pursuant to the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2025 HCRES 14 and consistent with section 310 of the Congressional Budget and Empowerment Control Act of Question is on the motion from the gentleman from Virginia. So many as in favor will say I I oppose. No. No.
▶ 6:51:06Quorum being present. The eyes have it and the motion is agreed to and without objection a motion reconsider. Mr. We recorded vote on final. A recorded vote is requested um what? A recorded vote is ordered. Members will record their vote by electronic device. The clerk will open the machine and members will vote. The chairman will be voting I. Uh, ranking member will be voting no.
▶ 6:51:46Have all members voted? Does any member wish to change his or her vote? Not the clerk will lock the machine and report the tally. Mr. Chairman, the yeses are 35, the nos are 21. According being present, the motion is agreed to and without objection, a motion reconsider is laid upon the table. Pursuant to clause 2L of House Rule 11, all members are entitled to not less than two calendar days to file supplemental minority additional or descending views in writing.
▶ 6:52:13I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make necessary conforming technical and clerical changes to the committee print as amended without objection so ordered. If there is no further business, committee stands