Hoyer: Conference Report for the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2016 Undermines Our National Security

WASHINGTON, DC - House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer (MD) spoke on the House Floor today in opposition to the conference report for the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2016. Below is a transcript of his remarks and a link to the video:

Click here to watch the video. 

“This is my 35th year in the Congress of the United States. I don't know that I voted against, prior to this year, either a defense appropriation bill or defense authorization bill. I will vote against this bill. I regret that I will vote against this bill because I regret that we have not gotten ourselves on a fiscally sound path in a bipartisan way that makes this country more secure, not only on the national defense side, but secure on the domestic side as well.

“I rise in opposition, Mr. Speaker, to this conference report, which I believe does a disservice to our men and women in uniform and undermines our national security. I do not believe this is the Chairman's fault. I want to make that very clear. The Chairman has been dealt a hand, and he's trying to play the best hand he can, and I understand that. I agree, fully, however, with the Ranking Member with his concerns in opposition to this bill not because most of its substance but because of the adverse impact it has on so much else.

“This continues the Republicans' sequester sneak-around strategy. And what do I mean by that? My Republican colleagues historically since I have been here talk about spending money. What they don't like to do is pay for things. That's, of course, what we do in taxes –  national security, education, health care, law enforcement. You have to pay for it, and if you want to put a level of doing something, you need to pay for that or you pass it along to the next generation. This sequester sneak-around strategy of blowing through their own defense spending cap by misusing emergency Overseas Contingency Operations funding for nonemergency base defense spending. That's why the Pentagon is opposed to this. That's why the Joint Chiefs believe this is bad fiscal policy for the military.

“Our military planners and [Defense] Secretary Carter made clear such an approach to funding undermines the Pentagon's long-term planning process, which is based on multiyear budgets and predictable funding streams. Unfortunately, the fiscal policies of the leadership of this House over the last six years have been anything but predictable. We avoided a shutdown of government yesterday, notwithstanding the fact 151 of my Republican colleagues voted not to fund government today. Only Democrats ensured the fact that we kept the government opened. Ninety-one Republicans voted with us, but that was far less than half of their caucus.

“This proposal undermines the chances for a bipartisan budget agreement to replace the sequester before the CR we passed yesterday expires on December 11. One-hundred and fifty-one Republicans voted even against keeping government open for a short period of time, approximately two months. This approach, including this bill, also harms fundamental national security priorities by characterizing core defense items as part of contingency operations. That is not true. It is not fiscally helpful. This includes the Iron Dome missile defense programs and all other U.S.-Israel joint missile defense programs that helps Israel protect civilians from Hamas and Hezbollah rockets.

“Unfortunately, this report continues to prevent the Administration from closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, which remains a recruiting tool for terrorists and undermines America’s role as a beacon of constitutional rights and freedoms around the world. Meanwhile, we are spending $2.4 million per detainee every year for those we hold in Guantanamo.

“The Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee opposes this bill, strongly, as do Members of that Committee. The president has already made it clear he's going to veto this bill –  not because he's against national security, and, ironically, Republicans have come to the number that the president proposed. There's a difference. The president paid for his number. He didn't pass it along to our children. We must recognize this conference report for what it is, a vehicle for partisan messaging and an instrument for breaking with the Murray-Ryan principle of parity in defense and nondefense sequester relief. It's not a bill that makes America safer and a stronger force for justice around the world. Therefore, I’ll oppose it.

“I thank my friend, Mr. Smith, once again for his work trying to improve this bill in Committee, on this Floor, and in conference. And for his untiring work in support of the men and women in our nation's armed services. And I thank the Chairman of the Committee for the same thing. He was dealt a bad hand. I understand the hand he has to play. It's not good for our country. I urge my colleagues to vote no.”