William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021
Floor Speech
Mr. Speaker, first, I want to say, like all my colleagues, I mourn the passing of John Lewis. As someone said this weekend, he lived a consequential life and, I would add, one that we all admire.
Mr. Speaker, on the bill before us, I am very grateful for the kind words of Chairman Smith, as well as for the generous amendment he offered in committee related to the name of this bill and also the very generous response of all Members on both sides of the aisle.
I will confess, Mr. Speaker, that all of this naming business makes me a little uncomfortable because this bill is not about any of us. It is about the men and women who serve our Nation, their families, and American national security. As the chairman points out, that was the focus of this bill for 59 straight years. With his leadership and the leadership of Senator Reed and Senator Inhofe, I am sure that it will be number 60.
Obviously, I do not agree with everything that is in the bill, but on balance, it is a good bill. In some particular areas, it is a very good bill. I want to highlight, for example, the family resiliency and readiness provisions, thanks to good work from Mr. Kelly and Ms. Speier.
I want to highlight a number of cyber and artificial intelligence provisions, thanks to the good work of Mr. Langevin, Ms. Stefanik, Mr. Gallagher, who chaired one of the committees we set up.
A number of provisions in this bill strengthen relationships with partners and allies, and among others who have worked on this are Mr. Gallego, Mr. Crow, Ms. Cheney, and Mr. Turner. There is a lot of very good substance in this bill.
Bringing it all together, I want to credit the leadership of the chairman, not only for assembling a bill of good substance, but for passing it by a vote of 56-0 and doing so in a very, very challenging time.
I join him in applauding the staff for not just the substance but the logistics, all that is required to bring this bill to us.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I can't help but note that whenever there is a crisis in this country, we turn to the military, and we have seen that several times just within the past few months. So the thrust of this bill is to say, okay, if we are going to turn to the military in times of crisis, then we need to support them with the best training, the best equipment, the best support of all kinds that we can provide. Because they are there for us, we need to be there for them.
That is the thrust of this bill this year, as it has been in the past, and I believe it certainly deserves Members' support as we move forward.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Stefanik), the distinguished ranking member of the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Cheney), the distinguished chair of the Republican Conference, who is also a member of our committee.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I presume the chair has no further speakers and, therefore, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I want to, again, thank each and every one of the members of the House Armed Services Committee. Every one of them, Republican, Democrat, those of us who have been there a while, those who are new to the committee, have contributed to this product.
As the chairman and I were saying, the dedicated professionals who work on the committee staff have done an outstanding job, especially, I think, under these conditions this year.
I also want to thank my personal office, which has contributed in many ways to this whole effort. This has been all-hands-on-deck sort of work, and I appreciate their work as well.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to emphasize the importance of maintaining the bipartisan approach by which this bill came out of committee; 56-0 is not easy, and it is the chairman's leadership that enabled it to be so.
Now, we have some work to do. We have some amendments to go through. If some of those amendments pass, it would be very hard to maintain that approach going through. But assuming we can maintain this bipartisan approach, where nobody gets everything they want, but there is enough there and a higher purpose that holds us together so that it can come out of this House on final passage tomorrow with a similar or roughly similar vote, I think that will be very important.
It will be very important for the men and women who are serving our Nation all around the world to see that Republicans and Democrats can fight about taxes and healthcare and other things, but they can come together when it comes time to support them.
For all those military families who have been disrupted with their moves during COVID and are undergoing all sorts of inconveniences and hardships, it is very important for them to see that Republicans and Democrats can come together in Congress to support them and to advance their interests.
For allies and adversaries around the world, they need to see that, yes, we will argue with each other, and we will have a variety of differences, but when it comes to American national security, we stand together. I think if we can do that, that message alone is more important than any of the particulars of this bill.
Standing together for American national security, for the men and women who serve and their families, that is the most important thing we can do. I hope and trust that will be the result come tomorrow.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Cheney).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, near as I can tell, this is an amendment in response to a mistaken press story. We depend on nuclear deterrent as the cornerstone of our defense efforts. The nuclear weapons are aging machines. We don't understand everything that happens as they age. We have fewer of them and fewer kinds of them so that if there is a problem, it is a bigger deal.
So, what we have decided to do is to be ready to test in case we need to. That is what the $10 million in the Senate is. It is test readiness, like the diagnostic machines, the machines that dig holes in the ground to do these underground tests.
We need to be ready. The harder we make it to test, the more obstacles we put in the way of a test if needed--only if needed. But the harder we make it, the less credible our nuclear deterrent is. The less credible our nuclear deterrent is, the more our adversaries will try to take advantage of us and the more our allies will decide to develop their own nuclear weapons because they can't depend on us.
Mr. Speaker, these things are important. They have big consequences. We should not make decisions like this based on a mistaken press story.
Mr. Speaker, I urge that the amendment be rejected, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I demand the yeas and nays.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Cheney).
Mr. Speaker, somehow, somewhere, common sense has to play a role here. We have a negotiated agreement with the Taliban. Part of that agreement involves the reduction and ultimate withdrawal of U.S. troops. In return, the Taliban has promised to play a more constructive role in the country.
This amendment says we are leaving anyway, no matter what the Taliban does. It wraps up their fondest wish, puts a bow on it, and just hands it to them, betraying the brave men and women of Afghanistan who have worked and sacrificed to build a better country and worked side by side with us to prevent another terrorist attack against us.
That seems to make no sense. Why would we do such a thing?
As all the speakers have said, we all want to ultimately leave Afghanistan. We should do so in a way that is fair to our allies, fair to the people of Afghanistan, and protects American national security.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I demand the yeas and nays.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Speaker, I think this amendment reflects a basic understanding of why that underlying provision of law is there.
The Pentagon loves this amendment because they have tried before to prevent us from receiving any information about anything that is not in their budget request. They want us to rubber-stamp whatever they send over and not exercise our independent judgment.
But the Constitution says it is our responsibility to raise and support, provide and maintain the military forces of the United States. So, we take the Pentagon proposal seriously, but it doesn't mean we rubber- stamp them.
We solicit wider amounts of information, and sometimes, we have different judgment calls. Looking back over history, our judgment calls look pretty good, I would say. Sometimes within the Pentagon, there are cultural issues, parochial issues, service rivalries that shape the budget that comes to us.
We, in Congress, need that broader look. We need to hear from the combatant commanders what did not make it into the budget because then we may have a different judgment call about what should be in the budget.
Those reports help us do our job. That is why it is a matter of law that they are sent to us, and that is the reason it makes no sense to deny us the information we need to fulfill our responsibilities under the Constitution.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Cheney).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, has all the gentleman from Wisconsin's time been used?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill, as Chairman Smith pointed out a few moments ago, is consistent with the 2-year budget agreement, which was made last year.
It turns out, many of the sponsors of this amendment voted for that 2-year budget agreement. But this year, they only want to cut defense.
As my colleagues have pointed out, some accounts are exempt, and that means the real cut is not 10 percent. It is 16 percent. That 16 percent cut would have a severe effect on modernization; on the research we need to do to catch up, in many cases, with Russia and China; and especially on maintenance.
This House has been a leader in restoring our readiness and maintaining our planes, ships, and equipment. This takes us back the other way. In other words, this amendment may well cost lives.
As several of my colleagues have mentioned, while it exempts some accounts dealing with our people, other accounts are not exempt. So, this amendment results in a $216 million cut to military housing; a $470 million cut to the Department of Defense dependent education program; a $184 million cut to commissaries; $900 million to defense nuclear environmental cleanup, including a $145 million cut to the Hanford site.
But underneath it all, there is a fundamental flaw in this amendment. It says that we can cut defense without consequences. It is kind of like we can hide our head under the covers, cut defense, and assume that the threats are just going to go away. But they don't.
Those who don't share our values will step into the void. The world will grow more dangerous, and Americans and America's national security will suffer as a result. That is the fact.
History proves, time and time again, weakness begat aggression. That is what this bill tries to avoid, and I hope that, on a bipartisan basis, Members will reject this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bergman).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gonzalez).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Buck).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THORNBERRY. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for this en bloc package. I urge its support, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source