Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment, which would prevent funds from being used to build or rebuild anything inside the Gaza Strip.
Let me say that in a couple of simply plain ways. Americans should not be funding the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip whenever this war should come to a conclusion, which we don't have any indication of when that will be. We should not be paying to build new infrastructure within the Gaza Strip should this war come to an end--not a port, not a building, certainly not a terror tunnel that has been used, certainly not a building which could be used to house those who are held captive by the various terrorist organizations there, not just Hamas but Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, Lions' Den, and Fatah.
It is very likely that any group that should take control of the Gaza Strip following any military operations there still has ties to terrorism and still believes there should be no existence of a Jewish Israeli State.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Mr. Chair, there was an argument made by the opposition just now that what we are saying is there should be no rebuilding of Gaza. That is not what we are saying at all. Gazans can rebuild Gaza. Any other country that wants to participate in rebuilding Gaza at some point can participate.
What I am saying is not $1, not 1 ounce of gold bullion, not 1 euro, not one anything coming from the taxpayers of the United States of America. They should not be burdened with rebuilding Gaza.
Americans should not have to pay for rebuilding infrastructure in Gaza.
When do we get to rebuild American infrastructure? Why don't we prioritize that?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Madam Chair, there was an accusation just made by the opposition that we should rebuild Gaza because if it is in the interest of America to support the Israeli military, then it must, in turn, be in our interest to rebuild those that the Israeli military is fighting against. That, to me, seems very nonsensical. It seems very counterproductive, especially as much of what is being spoken of is going on in the midst of war.
Madam Chair, I ask this body of Representatives--and of course, not all Representatives are present in this room--does anybody in here want to say that Gaza is America's ally? I don't hear anybody speaking up. I have asked this question before. I have not heard anybody on the floor of the House say that Gaza is America's ally. I doubt the opposition will stand up and say that Gaza is America's ally. They are absolutely at war with one of our major and best allies anywhere across the globe.
The idea of rebuilding or building, even as we speak or in the future, our non-ally that is at war with our great ally, to me, is nonsensical, especially as our non-ally is currently holding Americans hostage and was very active and participating in killing Americans, killing Israelis, and killing others on October 7.
This didn't begin on October 7. It has gone on for years and decades, and it is not likely to end anytime soon.
Madam Chair, I say in closing that American tax dollars do not need to go to Gaza to rebuild it. American tax dollars need to stay in the United States of America for Americans. I urge support of my amendment, which would prevent any funds from going to build or rebuild anything within the Gaza Strip.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Madam Chair, as the designee of Mr. Arrington, I have an amendment at the desk.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Madam Chair, as I mentioned, I rise on behalf of my good friend, House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington to present his amendment that would prevent funds from this bill going to transport Palestinian refugees to the United States of America.
The primary mission of the Department of Defense is to ensure the defense and the security of the United States. Allocating resources to transport Palestinian refugees does not align with the mission of protecting the United States.
The Department of Defense budget is already stretched thin with numerous global commitments and responsibilities. Diverting funds and resources to humanitarian efforts outside of its core mission could undermine the readiness and the effectiveness of our Armed Forces.
The Defense budget is finite and must be prioritized towards enhancing our military capabilities, maintaining our military defense infrastructure, and supporting our servicemembers in uniform.
The transportation and resettlement of refugees involves significant logistical and financial burdens that could detract from critical defense initiatives.
According to recent reports, the U.S. military faces ongoing budgetary pressures, including modernization needs and addressing emerging threats. Any diversion of funds could exacerbate these challenges.
There are valid security concerns associated with the resettlement of refugees from conflict zones. The vetting process for refugees is thorough, yet it is not infallible. Ensuring that individuals with potential ties to terrorist organizations do not enter the United States of America is paramount.
The U.S. has a responsibility to its citizens to prevent any risk of infiltration by hostile actors. Historical precedence has shown that even with rigorous screening, security breaches can occur posing significant risks to national security.
While the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian refugees are undeniable, these should be addressed through appropriate channels, such as international aid organizations specifically designed for such purposes. These entities are better equipped and experienced in handling a refugee crisis and can operate without compromising the primary mission of the United States military.
In conclusion, the transportation of Palestinian refugees by the Department of Defense is not strategically sound, financially prudent, or a secure course of action.
I urge my colleagues to consider these points carefully and to ensure that the Defense budget remains focused on its essential purpose, which is the defense and the security of the United States of America.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Madam Chair, may inquire how much time I have remaining.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Madam Chair, it was brought up by the opposition that there are no plans as of yet--as of yet--to transport Palestinians back to the United States of America, but there was a long speech that was given outlining how this could potentially happen in the future and we shouldn't prevent it from happening.
I believe that, again, we are just on opposite sides of this issue. We should prevent this from taking place on the dime of the American taxpayer, transporting those that voted for Hamas as their popular government, and that if Hamas was not likely to be their government then it would probably be another terrorist organization such as Fatah or Palestinian Islamic Jihad or al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade or another group that is dedicated to not seeing Israel as a Jewish state, and in turn, quite dedicated to the destruction of the United States of America and our ideals.
I will go back to something, since the previous debate was brought up, that I brought up in the previous debate. I have not heard anybody in this body as of yet say that the people of Gaza are an ally of the United States of America. As such, we should stand strong, stand firm with our ally Israel, not transport our non-ally who is at war with our ally into our country, and make sure that no resources are being used to do so.
Madam Chair, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Madam Chair, I reject the idea that because we should not allow Palestinians into the United States of America that there is no hope for them.
America has a great history of addressing any problems within our country and building and rebuilding and fighting to make our own country great, and I believe that the people of any other country should work to do that within their own borders as well.
I would also encourage this body to very much remember that the term ``innocent Palestinian civilians'' is very loosely thrown around. Of course, there are innocent Palestinian civilians. However, we live in a world where so much of the media, Hamas, and others want us to believe that because somebody is under the age of 18, or over the age of 45, or a female that we should assume they are an innocent Palestinian civilian just because they are not wearing a black hood and the green bandanna of Hamas, and that is not the real world.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MAST. Madam Chair, I rise today with an urgent plea: Vote to safeguard the freedom of expression in the United States from the Chinese Communist Party.
My amendment aims to curb CCP censorship of American films. Hollywood isn't only a time capsule of American culture. However, it is a place that, quite often, takes what is going on in the world and portrays it to the entire globe for many years to come.
When the CCP demanded that the Taiwanese flag be removed from the iconic jacket that Tom Cruise's character, Maverick, wears in ``Top Gun,'' the studio initially capitulated. That was forever emblazoned in time. The studio initially capitulated on that, but eventually stood its ground and kept the flag. That was a result of patriotism. It was one of the highest grossing releases of 2022 with a list of accolades a mile long, including an Oscar.
We need more studios like that willing to put Beijing in its place.
We see that there are Uyghur Muslims held in concentration camps, and Disney decided to film the live-action version of ``Mulan'' in Xinjiang. Also, at the behest of CCP film censors, Disney changed a Tibetan character in ``Dr. Strange'' to a Celtic character. This basically profits from something that I would call being pathetic.
However, that is why I am fighting to pass this amendment, just like we did in last year's NDAA, to make sure that Hollywood tries better to show the patriotism that the United States of America has always been known for. I guess that would be the best way that I could put it: be the Hollywood that has the back of the United States of America.
If Hollywood had given dictators the ability to censor films over the past 80 years, then we would be short of many of the classics that America has come to love. We may not have the same outcomes in some of the conflicts.
So, Madam Chair, I would say if movies are one of our greatest exports, then they should represent American principles and principles that unite our country.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source