Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE. Madam Chair, I strongly oppose this bill which is blatantly counterproductive to U.S. interests in our strategic competition with China. Nearly identical legislation was marked up in the Foreign Affairs Committee last year with unanimous and vigorous opposition from Democrats.

This measure would undermine one of our key advantages in the competition with China: soft power. Instead of investing in bolstering this advantage, my Republican colleagues are bent on undermining one of our biggest cultural strengths, American artists, storytellers, and filmmakers.

This bill is a knee-jerk reaction to the perennial tension inherent in our relationship with China of when our openness meets closed societies and anti-democratic governments.

In these cases, do we say the problem is the openness and not the actions of the government seeking to erode it?

Do we respond by trying to effectively ban our companies from those markets and decimate their ability to operate there?

The majority frames competition with China as an ideological battle, yet they wage this competition by trampling over the very principles that uphold the system they purport to defend. When we start viewing our strengths as weaknesses because they don't look like our competitors', then we start to become the very thing we are working to oppose.

Nevertheless, most concerning about this amendment is that it helps the CCP achieve exactly what it wants. It wants to cut its citizens off from the outside world and have them consume ``Wolf Warrior 2'' instead of ``Mission Impossible.''

Why would we aid the CCP in its goal of removing American cultural influence on its people by urging Hollywood to stop showing its films in China?

In addition, why would we not want to actively support and aid an industry that is sharing American stories with the people of China?

In trying to be anti-China, this bill somehow becomes pro-CCP.

Forcing U.S. companies out of the Chinese film market only benefits state-sponsored Chinese studios whose propaganda will have a monopoly on the Chinese audience. It will eliminate one of the most powerful mechanisms for illuminating the weaknesses of the PRC's authoritarian model and showcasing the appeal of openness, democracy, human rights, and freedom of expression, not to mention the thousands of American actors, writers, and production workers in my district whose livelihoods will be caught in the crosshairs of this legislation which impacts my constituents more than anyone else.

Hollywood is about telling stories that showcase our promise and open doors for empathic thought, and they are pretty good at it, so why would we tie their hands?

We should be working to help American films reach Chinese audiences on freer and fairer terms, not working to punish and shut down our own industries and disadvantage our workers.

Therefore, Madam Chair, I strongly oppose this measure, I urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE. Mr. Chair, I echo opposition to this amendment.

As a member of the Transatlantic Legislators' Dialogue and the Foreign Affairs Committee, I consistently encourage and push our NATO allies to get to the 2 percent goal on defense spending. It should be the floor.

Nevertheless, this amendment looks to gut our support for NATO immediately and goes against what we, the United States, stand for.

Just last week, we cut sessions short so that Democrats and Republicans could go to France to commemorate the 80th anniversary of D-day. Planes, trains, and automobiles were used to get there. Why? Because D-day is antithetical to isolationism and is a lasting example of a successful, important partnership with a core key member of NATO.

No victories happen without help.

This amendment calls for an isolationist approach at a time when we need our friends more than ever. Many NATO countries are over the 2 percent, and many recognize the need to contribute more. This amendment gives Moscow what it wants, it gives China what it wants, and it gives the isolationist strain in the United States what it wants.

History continues to show us that this approach does not work, it will not keep us safe, and it will not keep us free.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source