Water Resources Development Act of 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. First, let me thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I know they are conscientious and committed to our national defense and security and to the men and women who make it possible. I have listened to their speeches on the floor, and but for some political analyses, I would agree with their motives to make sure we adequately and promptly fund the defense of our country. There is no question about it.

Secondly, I might say that I know a little bit about this bill. I am the ranking Democrat on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, and in the previous Congress I served as chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. And I am lucky because I have by my side a Republican Senator, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, who currently chairs the committee. I can tell you that from start to finish, Thad Cochran, Republican, and Dick Durbin, Democrat, have agreed on this bill and what is included in this bill. We have worked it out to the satisfaction of not only our own staff and the people we worked with but with the Pentagon as well. We have put together a very good, solid, defensible bill, and the point my colleague made demonstrates that. When it was called on in the full Appropriations Committee, there was unanimous support for it. Within the four corners of the bill, there is no controversy. The only question before us now is when it will be called for passage.

I take to heart the efforts by the Senator from Colorado--along with his colleagues--today to suggest that we should do this sooner rather than later. I might try to explain for a moment, if I may, why the feeling is that we can't do it at this moment in time.

This is the biggest single discretionary spending bill in our Nation's budget. Sixty percent of the Federal budget flows through this bill to support the Department of Defense and intelligence activities. It is the Monster of the Midway, as we say in Chicago. It is the most important bill in size, at least, when it comes to our appropriations, but it is not the only bill. As the Senator knows, there are 11 other appropriations bills. What we are trying to do--and I believe we will achieve this--is have an agreement on the entire budget.

When we reached a budget agreement with President Obama and the Republican leaders in Congress, we said that we were going to fund any increases in the Department of Defense and match them with increases in nondefense spending. That has been basically the rule of the road from the start, and so there is a reluctance to allow one bill, the Department of Defense appropriations bill, to jump out ahead of others until we have this global agreement on the budget.

The Senator and his colleagues made a good point: What is more important than the defense of this Nation? What is more important than national security? The honest answer is that there is nothing more important. Doesn't the first line say ``provide for the common defense'' in terms of our responsibility?

There are also important things in the nondefense budget. I am sure the Senator from Colorado would be the first to stand up and say that we need to adequately fund the Federal Bureau of Investigation. They work night and day to keep America safe. They are not included in this Defense bill. They are in another appropriations bill which is still unresolved. I think the Senator would probably agree with me that the Department of Homeland Security is a very important agency when it comes to safety in our airports, our families getting on airplanes, and people crossing our border. The appropriation for that Department is not included in this bill.

The point I am trying to make is that when it comes to the security of this Nation, it is not just the Department of Defense; it is primarily and initially that Department. And what we need to do is make sure we have adequately funded the entire budget of this country. Can we do it? Yes, we can, and we must.

The short-term spending bill--the continuing resolution that Democrats and Republicans have done many times before--won't disadvantage the Department of Defense. By the second week of December, I believe in good faith we can work out our differences and come up with spending bills across the board for every agency--medical research, food inspection, things that everyone counts on. But to jump ahead and say that we will just take the biggest appropriations bill and put it aside and go ahead and finish that one, as the Senator has suggested with his unanimous consent request, really doesn't take into consideration that we have an obligation across the government to do our job not just with one bill but with all of the appropriations bills.

I believe in this bill. I voted for this bill. I worked on this bill. As much time as my colleague may have put into his research when preparing for his floor speech, I will match it with the time I put into this bill to make sure it was written right. I want to make sure it is passed with a budget that is fair for this country and done in a bipartisan way that we will all be proud of--not just the men and women in uniform but everyone in the United States who is served by our efforts.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source