Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2017

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise to urge the House to support my bipartisan amendment to restore critical missile defense funding for next-generation investments. I want to be clear: the mark by the gentleman from New Jersey is a good mark. I support it. I just want to improve it a little.

Mr. Chairman, Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work has recently stated: ``Competitors have caught up on this regime and they're going to fire mass guided missile salvos at us . . . it doesn't have to be a kinetic solution. Hell, I don't really want a kinetic solution . . . it's got to be something else.''

Last week my subcommittee received a classified briefing by the Joint Staff on the results of the Joint Capabilities Mix Study IV. It is clear that we have to change the way we do missile defense if we expect to win in future years.

Our adversaries have not been standing still, and we can't stand still either. This amendment I offer, along with 13 colleagues on both sides of the aisle, including Mr. Langevin, Mr. Garamendi, Ms. Gabbard, Mr. Franks, and Mr. Lamborn, would simply restore the funding to the level of the President's budget for directed energy efforts in the weapons technology and technology maturation initiatives lines as well as the special programs--MDA technology line.

My amendment offsets this increase by cutting RDT&E for the KC-46 tanker program's budget request, which is not executable this year according to the GAO's recent budget fact sheet, and the Air Force does not dispute this fact. My office can share this document with any Member who has questions about the cut, which both the House and Senate NDAAs have also recommended.

Again, I strongly support the mark of the gentleman from New Jersey. I urge the House to support my bipartisan amendment to improve it and allow us the room to continue to work on this bill in the conference committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn), the vice chair of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I would just close by saying I have enormous respect for the gentleman from New Jersey. I just disagree on this particular issue.

I would like to point out the GAO language in particular for this offset that I have offered.

GAO says:

The Air Force fiscal year 2017 RDT&E budget request for the KC-46 program could be reduced by up to $140 million because fiscal year 2016 RDT&E funds are potentially in excess to program need.

So we have the money to pay for this. It is a critical national security need. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

As chairman of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, I am deeply familiar with our nuclear forces. I want to urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.

Two successive Secretaries of Defense have said that nuclear deterrence is the most important mission the Department has.

Secretary Hagel said: ``Our nuclear deterrent plays a critical role in assuring U.S. national security, and it is DOD's highest priority mission. No other capability we have is more important.''

Secretary Carter said: ``The nuclear mission is the bedrock of our security. It is what stands in the background and looms over every action this country takes on the world stage. It is the foundation for everything we do.''

The LRSO program is critical to the mission, and it must remain on schedule. The fleet of existing air-launched cruise missiles that the LRSO will replace is over 30 years old, and their reliability is rapidly declining. Projected improvements in adversary air defense will impact its effectiveness even more. Simply put, our nuclear deterrent will not be credible unless it is modernized. The funding this amendment seeks to eliminate is necessary to modernize and keep this aspect of our nuclear deterrent on schedule.

There is a clear military requirement for the LRSO, and it is a national security imperative. This requirement has been identified and documented by the military and the Obama administration.

We should not be supporting the unilateral nuclear disarmament, and we should not be supporting this amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I would like to close by saying that it is essential that we keep this modernization pace that we have got in place. Vote ``no'' on this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source