BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, this amendment, which passed in the House NDAA last year, would ensure that base commanders follow Federal law by ensuring that only approved flags are flown on military installations.
Patriotic Americans understand that the American flag is to be revered.
Anybody who has served understands the sacrifice that has been made to keep Old Glory flying.
On military bases, it is truly sacred. It is the symbolic altar of the Nation.
During morning and evening colors, all work ceases as troops salute her raising and lowering. In battle, our forces carry her, wearing them proudly on their sleeves. She serves as the final blanket for soldiers who come home, having given and paid the last full measure.
The 2024 NDAA rightly addressed this issue by codifying an appropriate list of approved flags that uphold the honor and dignity that our military is built on.
However, there is a glaring error. A caveat built into the list gives commanders the ability to fly any flag they deem appropriate. Since President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have taken office, the woke infiltration of our military, even its highest leaders, continues to be exposed.
The embarrassment of these flags is hard to grasp: drag shows on ships and military installations; base security training teaching guards that pro-life bumper stickers were indicators of possible terrorism; and taxpayer-funded gender transition and hormone treatments that kept soldiers nondeployable or nontrainable for years. The list goes on, but the point remains.
Even still, there are senior officials and officers that refuse to mount the portraits of President Trump and Secretary Hegseth on their chain of command due to insubordination. Believe me, these individuals will not last long in our Armed Forces.
I ask you: Do you think that commanders who approved and even encouraged all of this to happen would exist or hesitate before deeming a Pride or trans flag appropriate for the month of June? Of course not, and it would likely be their idea in the first place.
Finally, I want to emphasize the power of symbolism. Symbols serve as a representation of our values, priorities, and our identity.
When a company completes a grueling training hike and sees that flag flying over their garrison, it symbolizes home, and I promise you that last mile may feel like a sprint to get to that cloth.
When a platoon returns from a patrol and reenters the wire, she symbolizes safety.
Imagine what our enemies would think of our strength and resiliency if we ever allow flags flown contrary to the principles of America.
I promise you that as much as this stands as the military standard, it also serves as deterrence to our adversaries.
Mr. Chair, therefore, I invite my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this important measure.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Chair, the only thing that was just said by our colleague across the road that I can actually agree with is inclusivity. What is more inclusive than the American flag, the flag we all honor as American patriots? The one thing that we know about the Pride flag is that it represents only one portion of those who serve. That is not called inclusivity, sir. That is called division. That is why for the first time since the previous administration took over, we have actually hit our recruitment numbers in every single branch. That is something you can't say when it comes to the last administration's efforts.
So what I look at is this: the 1777 Flag Act. The fact that we actually stand for something that unifies us, not divides us. The fact is that we need to get back to meritocracy, not division through diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Mr. Chair, this is very simple. It is a patriotic stance. The very flag which stands behind you, that stands proud in this Capitol, is the same one that sits over Presidents, over our fallen soldiers, and over our military installations. That is not division. That is not recognition of others' sexual preferences. That is the actual acknowledgment of what we fight for day in and day out as Americans.
Mr. Chair, I would say in response to the gentleman that the Pride flag does not replace the American flag. It is flown at certain times of the year. It affirms a huge portion, a significant portion of our military.
Yes, I agree the American flag is inclusive. We can also show that we can include a minority that is often disparaged.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Dexter).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Chair, to identify the fact that that flag violates our House rules by flying any other flag but the American flag.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Chair, simply not waving the flag represents--
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Chair, I want to be very clear in this. They on the other side may think we can out-pronoun our enemies, and that will keep our adversaries at bay. We can ``he,'' ``him,'' ``they,'' ``them,'' ``she,'' ``her'' all day long. That is not what makes us strong as America.
It is the flag we wear, the training we have, and the meritocracy which should always exist. I will continue to fight for every member of our Armed Services and every single person to know that it is the American flag which will fly high and proud. We will defend her against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Chairman, as my colleagues have pointed out, it is very simple. Article I, Section 8, Clauses 11 through 13, are the war powers of Congress, granted to us and given to us. It states very clearly: ``Congress shall have the power to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water.''
Yet, the key thing is that Congress shall have power, not abdicating our roles and responsibilities and not continuing endless wars that spend trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives. We need to bring the power back to Congress to ensure that it is not being abused by anyone within the executive authority, regardless of who is in the actual seat.
This is very simple, Mr. Chairman. We have abdicated and abdicated to where the Article I section of the Constitution no longer has its intended powers and purposes that it initially had. We must get that back, and I support this.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT