Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2020

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I thank Ranking Member Granger and Chairwoman Lowey both for their leadership and expertise throughout this process.

I also acknowledge the work of Chairman Visclosky. Mr. Chair, I am grateful for Mr. Visclosky's dedication to our U.S. servicemembers and our national security and for his willingness to listen and work with us to put together this bill. I very much appreciate the bipartisan way in which the gentleman has managed the Defense Subcommittee. It has been an honor to work with him, and I look forward to finishing our work on time.

There is a lot of good work in this bill. However, the United States faces an increasingly challenging geopolitical landscape, one that requires a strong U.S. military to help maintain global peace and stability.

While we have been at war in the Middle East for nearly two decades, other regions of the world have been watching us and chipping away at our military superiority. Unfortunately, the funding levels recommended in this bill are inadequate to enable us to address the needs of our military and maintain our superiority over our adversaries.

The fiscal year 2020 Defense bill before the House today includes $622 billion in base funding and another $68 billion in overseas contingency operations, or OCO, funding, for a total of $690 billion. The amount is roughly $8 billion less than the request.

This funding level is not adequate to address the myriad of issues that we face around the world, including from an increasingly aggressive Russia. Just last week, a Russian destroyer came dangerously and recklessly close to one of our vessels in the Philippine Sea.

Shortchanging defense funding would send the wrong message to our adversaries. Let's be clear: We do not want a fair fight. Funding the Department to ensure our advantage against any threat is the best deterrent to war.

In addition to the low funding levels in the bill, it includes a number of troubling provisions adopted in committee, including a new restriction on the Department's ability to provide lawful assistance to other agencies in combating the real crisis on our southern border.

We cannot continue to ignore the reality along our southern border. The sheer numbers of people coming across our borders, in the hundreds of thousands, now require the use of military bases to house migrants.

The situation is untenable, and the Congress must update our immigration laws to make the process more rational and enforceable. Restricting the President's ability to address the crisis will only make the problem worse and put more people at risk as they embark on a dangerous journey.

I am also concerned with the language striking the Authorization for Use of Military Force. This provision would repeal the current authorization 240 days after enactment. This is a serious topic that needs to be debated by the authorizing committees. Including this language in an appropriations bill with little debate and no committee hearings or witnesses is not the correct way to address this matter. Broadcasting to our enemies the stop date of any military operation is reckless and irresponsible.

Then there is the issue of numbers. In divided government, bipartisanship is essential. Unfortunately, until we reach agreement on the top-line spending levels that the President will also support, I remain concerned that the Defense funding bill will be crafted in an environment in which we have no budgetary certainty. Without a top-line budget agreement, and a 2-year deal with the House, the Senate, and the White House to relieve the budget caps put in place by the Budget Control Act, we are not making spending decisions based in reality.

If we cannot come to an agreement on a budget caps deal, we face sequestration in the coming year. The impacts would reverse all the progress on readiness and modernization we have achieved over the last 2 years. Sequestration would cut $20 billion from the Navy and $29 billion from the Air Force, and it would stop 100 Army programs.

We need all the parties to come together at the table now to make the tough but critical budget decisions. We know all too well how devastating budgetary ambiguity and continuing resolutions can be for defense planning and the real-world impact it has on training, readiness, and quality-of-life issues. That is a recipe for disaster for both our military and the American people.

That is why I cannot support this bill at this time. I want to work with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to develop bills for fiscal year 2020 that meet our Nation's defense and border security priorities in a fiscally responsible manner.

Given the chairman's nature, I am sure that he will be an able partner and leader in any effort to strike a budget agreement and certainly happy to help avert sequestration.

Finally, I thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work. I appreciate their diligence.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source