Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2014

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will prevent the completion of the two most strategic initiatives funded by the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund--the Northeast and Southeast Power Systems--and limit the lasting counterinsurgency effects intended by the AIF program. Available, reliable power promotes jobs and economic development, which increases stability and reduces insurgency and insurgent influence.

Mr. Chairman, Kandahar Province has been a primary focus for AIF investment. Of all the areas in Afghanistan, none is more important to the future of the Afghan Government or to the Taliban insurgency than this province--the Taliban's birthplace, location of its former capital, and spiritual heart.

AIF projects support the ``Build'' phase of the Shape, Clear, Hold, Build counterinsurgency strategy and are a critical component of the integrated civil/military campaign that sets the conditions for Afghanistan's decade of transformation beyond 2014.

Power distribution is currently provided through 12 provinces, serving 10 million Afghans. And Mr. Chairman, let me just remind you that we just passed an amendment that already cuts this account by $79 million. This amendment cuts more funds than are left in the account.

According to DOD, the lack of reliable electricity is the single greatest impediment to Afghanistan's economic growth, and thereby the stability necessary to support drawdown and transition.

Significant work on five of the seven power projects is in its beginning stages and is unlikely to be completed until well after the NATO mission ends in 2014. If project goals are set and not achieved, both the U.S. and Afghan Governments can lose the populace's support. It's for these reasons that we remain in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Chairman, let's remind ourselves the Afghan Infrastructure Fund is aimed at providing water, power, and transportation projects, and more recently to increase the electricity supply throughout but, specifically in southern Afghanistan, to light shops and power factories and to construct provincial justice centers around the country.

It is clear that remaining projects could take 12 to 24 months to complete. A lot of work has already taken place, in particular on the seven power projects in its beginning stages; and as I said in the previous amendment, unlikely to be completed until well after the NATO mission ends in 2014. If these goals are not met, then a lot of great investment and a lot of good work will have gone for naught.

We remain in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

If the ranking member would like to speak on behalf, then I would be happy to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Chairman, the intent of the amendment's sponsor is to reduce the Afghanistan National Security Force's Fund by over $550 million in order to limit the purchase of Mi-17 helicopters.

I am pleased that my friend from Colorado at least acknowledged that he was not going to argue with the purpose of the helicopters and the need for the helicopters, because as we all know, a properly trained and equipped Afghanistan National Security Force is the safest and quickest path for our forces to leave Afghanistan. Reducing funding from this account will only inhibit our ability to achieve the goal.

The amount that the amendment seeks to cut, over $550 million, is for the purchase of 30 Mi-17 helicopters that were purchased with fiscal year 2012 funds, and Congress was later notified of the Secretary of Defense's intent to exercise the purchase on April 1 of 2013.

Mr. Chairman, the reduction of funds is being taken from a prior year allocation, or a prior year appropriation, which makes this amendment just simply a punitive amendment to this year's funding.

I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Chairman, the Afghan National Security Forces include both the Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police. It has been one of the United States' top priorities since operations began in Afghanistan in 2001.

The purpose of the Afghan National Security Force development program is to grow the capacity and the capability of the Afghan National Security Forces in line with international agreements. This year's request totals $7.7 billion. The request is further delineated into the categories of Defense Forces, Interior Forces, and Detainee Operations. Included within the categories is the base request for operations and sustainment to conduct day-to-day operations, totaling just over $5 billion, and an additional $2.6 billion for the enablers, which my friend refers to in his comments from the well.

The gentleman says, if I heard him correctly, that we don't know what these enablers are. We do know what these enablers are, and people who have backgrounds in security or in the military would understand the importance of howitzers or of night vision devices or of regional military hospitals, training, logistics, and maintenance expenses, and a host of other associated items that we refer to in this legislation as ``enablers.''

The Department of Defense has taken steps to right-size the funding needed to support the needs of the Afghan National Security Forces. The core request is, indeed, the right amount. Calendar year 2014, Mr. Chairman, will be the last year that a large U.S. troop concentration will be in Afghanistan. In the years to follow, the Afghan National Security Forces will be there as the frontline force, thus helping to protect the U.S. and NATO troops against our foes.

With that, I remain opposed to the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WOMACK. In reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I would just simply say that we have the list. On the list are, certainly, items that would go to the very core of the capability of the Afghan National Security Forces in order for them to be able to protect themselves and to be able to protect us as we continue to prepare for leaving that theater of operation. So I am strongly opposed to the gentleman's amendment.

At this time, in my having no further comments, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source