Conference Report On H.R. 2647, National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2010

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on the conference report for H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act.

The members of the House Armed Services Committee are dedicated to supporting our servicemembers and their families, and as such, this bill includes an appropriate increase in military pay and improves veterans care.

I am pleased to see that the bill makes progress towards strengthening our naval presence on the high seas. We must continue to develop the industrial base and promote shipbuilding to establish a floor, not a ceiling, of 313 ships in our Navy.

I do, though, remain troubled by the absence of a 30-year shipbuilding plan and a 30-year military aviation plan. Without these, critical perspective is lost. The bill provides a temporary waiver for the number of carriers to dip below 11, but my reservations remain. Maintaining 11 aircraft carriers is essential to maintaining our long-term naval superiority.

The strategic risk we accept in this Defense authorization bill is also of particular importance. As we consider strategic threats urgently facing our country today, it is troubling that the bill reduces missile defense funding by $1.2 billion.

This bill also includes $46 million for channel dredging at Naval Station Mayport, Florida. It is fiscally irresponsible to spend money on dredging and preparing to homeport a nuclear aircraft carrier prior to the conclusion of the Quadrennial Defense Review.

Unfortunately, the Senate also added a provision to expand the Federal jurisdiction over hate crimes. Proponents of this provision are using this national security bill to get this legislation to the President's desk through the back door, a tactic we have seen repeated over the last 9 months. This bill is about national security, not social legislation. To use the circumstances of our sons and daughters in harm's way to legislate on social issues is unconscionable. We should not use a bill in support of our servicemembers to promote social legislation. I urge my colleagues to continue in the future to work towards a better alternative.

I would like to thank my colleagues, Ranking Member McKeon and Chairman Skelton, for their work in bringing this bill to the floor. But we can do better, and we must.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source