tv U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN July 11, 2019 11:59am-2:00pm EDT
committee, and the five-minute rules that allows members of this committee to ask important questions to important witnesses here. i think it's a travesty and i look forwardle to supporting those 11 that get the opportunity to speak and i would yield my time to any republican member. i yield my time to mr. gaetz of florida. mr. gaetz: i thank the gentleman for yielding. having heard the concern of my colleagues who won't have the opportunity to ask questions, i wonder if there is a way for us to work together to maybe solve that. mr. chairman, would the chairman entertain a request -- would the chairman be likely to entertain a request of to perhaps go from a five-minute rule to a three-minute rule so we could get more members involved in the questioning? >> you can watch the rest of this house judiciary committee meeting on our website. c-span.org. right now we'll go live to the floor of the u.s. house where today members will be debating amendments to the 2020 defense programs and policy bill. also we'd like to let you know
that tomorrow the house will take up a 9/11 victims compensation bill. live coverage of the u.s. house here on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, doctor george s. dillard from peachtree city christian church. the chaplain: let us pray, our father, god of abraham, issac and jacob, the great i am, the maker of heaven and earth, let it be known today that you are god and your servants do all things in the command of leading through your word through your son, jesus christ. hear me, lord. hear me, so that these people will know that you, lord, our god, and that you call them to
turn their hearts to you. drive out the device i have ones. rebuke those who destroy the innocent, remove those in lies. give wisdom, strength and courage to those who seek unity, protect the innocent and love the truth. lead us to be a people who seek freedom, liberty and justice for all. and let all god's people say, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, thejournal stands approved. pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from iowa, mr. loebsack. lobby lobby -- mr. loebsack: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it
stands, one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and ustice for all. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from georgia, mr. ferguson, is recognized for one inute. mr. ferguson: mr. speaker, i rise today to honor dr. george dillard whose leadership and guidance have made him a valuable member of our community in the third district of it georgia in peachtree city. this is the second he's joined me here in the nation's capital to pray for the members of the house, representatives, and we are extremely grateful that he did just that. georgia's been a vitally important part of the third district for over 25 years. since he and his family moved to peachtree city to serve at the peachtree city christian church where he still serves to this day. george has been married to his wife since 1988. they have three children, one grandchild, and george and his
family do live in testimony peachtree city, georgia. this is not a -- there is not a week that goes by where george isn't a visible and part of the community. the love he's shown his parishioners and neighbors is unparalleled and i'm honored to have him here with me today as he prays for our nation. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair will entertain up to 15 further requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize iowa state school's second annual pride camp. this week-long event invites lgbtq youth and allies from across iowa to participate in a sirm camp where they have the opportunity to learn new skills, connect with their
peers, share their experiences, and grow as individuals while also having fun. this year over 100 lgbtq youth from across the state will attend camp bright. mr. loebsack: despite it being only the second year. this truly shows the importance of programs like camp pride and i'm proud iowa is a leader in the fight for acceptance and equality for everyone. i want to extend my sincerest thanks to iowa safe schools for creating this wonderful opportunity and for all their efforts advocating for iowa's lgbtq youth. this work in developing -- their work in developing a safe and inclusive summer camp is making a difference in the lives of so many iowans. young iowans. i am honored to recognize them here today. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.
>> thank you, mr. speaker. two minutes i offered to the ndaa were adopted. the first addresses shared responsibility for the world security. the united states is the most powerful nation on the planet and so must remain. but our allies must pull their weight on global security efforts. it's not just americans who benefit from peace after all. for instance, is it fair for economic powerhouse germany to spend only 1.35% of its overall g.d.p. toward nato defense in the coming years? i don't think so. we should examine the contributions of germany and our other allies. my amendment simply requires the department of defense to report the annual defense spending of each nato and non-nato allies. my second amendment afirments the critical importance to the u.s.-israel relationship. since its founding over 50 years ago, israel has been an enormously important strategic part nemplet given the significant challenges our nation currently faces in the middle east, the u.s.-israel
relationships remains vital. i thank armed services committee chairman smith and ranking member thornberry for working with me on these amendments. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, on september 11, 2001, as millions of americans watched in horror, our country was attacked. mr. higins: thousands of people core -- mr. higgins: thousands of people stepped up and left their homes and families and responded to nation in need. among them were dozens of new yorkers is. john of the fire department who injured his leg in the rubble and continues to suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder. jennifer who is reminded every day of her five assignments to ground zero with the new york state police, following a breast cancer diagnosis in 2015. and my friend, david, who bravely faced cancer last year as a result of his 9/11 service
with the new york state national guard. for them and others the pain and consequences of this attack are as real today as they were 18 years ago. we must act urgently to make 9/11 victim compensation fund permanent. these men, women, and families were there for our country in our time of need, and now we must be there for them and-n their time of need. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to honor the life of vera delaney who passed away july 5. last november i was able to recognize her on the floor here for her retirement and how much she meant to our community. for more than 30 years she served the community through perfect position as county clerk and election commissioner, as well as various other volunteer capacities. throughout her public service her diligent worked maintained
the integrity of our local elections and assisted the efficient operations of our county. her outstanding efforts across the community were recently acknowledged when she was presented the community volunteer award for public service. mr. smith: vera was well-known in our community for her years of official service, humble demeanor, dedication to family, and her smile always lit up the room. her devotion to the nebraska cornhuskers and chicago cubs were only surpassed by her devotion to her family and community as a whole. throughout her long long and prosperous life she touched countless others. in passing we celebrate her life and keep her family and friends in our prayers. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. it >> thank you, mr. speaker. my district in rochester, new york, has the second highest rate of childhood poverty in america. children in poverty face
overwhelming barriers to academic success because it's impossible to learn when you are hungry or suffering from family trauma. these barriers are exacerbated in the summer when children lose access to educational opportunities causing them to fall further and further behind academically. low-income children lose two or more months of reading achievement every summer and by the fifth grade children without summer learning opportunities are two years behind their peers. students need a safe, stable place to learn over the summer. that's why i'm so proud to have introduced legislation to help close the achievement gap and reduce food insecurity. the summer meals and learning lack help fund summer reading programs at schools that already serve as summer meal sites, providing the support and stability at-risk youth need to grow and thrive. every child deserves the opportunity to achieve their goals. it is my hope that this legislation will help students pay stay on the path to success. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from montana seek
recognition? mr. gianforte: unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. gianforte: mr. speaker, i rise today to thank the members of the house armed services committee for their hard work on this year's national defense authorization act. maelstrom air force base is home to the 341 stth missile wing which maintains and operates 1/3 of the u.s. icbm force. service members there protect our country, but the base can do more to keep america safe and secure. with some work, the base's runway can once again host flying missions. i want to especially thank and recognize mr. turner of ohio. we worked on a measure that could reform the basing process to focus on improving existing facilities like mall strom instead of building new ones. this bill begins the process of including mall strom in future air force basing decisions to
host aircraft and potentially increasing the number of men and women serving there. appreciate the montana defense alliance for their advocacy and all the service member at maelstrom and elsewhere who keep our country safe. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one inute. >> mr. speaker, i rise to congratulate my constituent and royal oak city manager, don johnson, on his retirement after 14 years with the great city of royal oak. don started his city manager right at the height of the great recession. mr. levin: to hear him tell it the city was flat broke.
royal oak was facing huge he revenue shortfalls and michigan families were hurting. but in the years since, he has helped royal oak turn around and become one of the most desirable places to live and visit. royal oak saw a jump of $10 million in revenue in 10 years. truly an outstanding accomplishment for the people of royal oak and a testament to don's hard work. i thank don for his years of service and wish him the very best in his next chapter. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, congress should strive for democrats and republicans in washington to truly work together. when the military surviving spouses equity act reached 365 bipartisan co-sponsors, i was grateful to share the good
news. this is a remarkable over 80% of congress. house democrats had the ability to bring the military surviving spouses equity act to repeal the widows tax to the floor tomorrow. instead, democrat leadership has diverted a vote by tacking it on to a flawed and hyper part zab bill without notice late at night which they know will not receive support on both sides of the aisle. this is heartbreaking for the 65,000 military widows in america. however, it's not too late to do the right thing and keep this as a stand alone bipartisan bill. i encourage our colleagues across the aisle to put h.r. 553 on the consensus calendar. together we can give service members and their families the recognition they deserve. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend.
the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. > thank you. mr. speaker, i rise today to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for voting to include my amendment to the ndaa which will allow our armed services to aid small farmers across the country. mr. delgado: two weeks ago the usda released their district data for the ag census and reported in my district, new york's 19th congressional district, 96% of the farms there are small family farms. during our most recent in district work period, i visited small farms back home in montgomery county and learned more about their work with organizations to help veterans gain the skills needed to transition to jobs in agriculture. today the house passed my amendment which requires report fundraiser certain defense agencies on programs, policies, and practices relating to small farms, farms owned by new and beginning farmers, veteran
farmers, and minority farmers in order to better understand how much the armed forces are working with small farms to supply fee service members w this data congress and defense agencies can work together to expand opportunity for our small family farmers. i thank my colleagues for being with me on this important issue. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable, the speaker house of representatives, madam, punt to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on july 11, 2019 at 11:00 a.m., at the senate passed, senate 1811. gned sincere -- signed
sincerely, cheryl l. johnson. >> i ask unanimous consent that the committee of judiciary be discharged from h.r. 962 born alive survivors protection act and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: under guidelines consistently should as recorded in section 956 of the house rules and manual, the chair is constrained not to entertain the request unless it has been cleared by the bipartisan floor and committee leps. -- leps. the speaker pro tempore: the -- leaps. -- leaderships. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is not recognized for debate.
the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 476 and rule 18, the chair declares in the house of the committee on the whole house in the state of the union for further consideration. will the gentleman from california, mr. peters, kindly ake the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of the bill h.r. 2500 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to authorize appropriations for military of the department of defense and for military construction to military personnel strength and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee
rose, a fourth set of en bloc amendments offered by the gentleman from washington, mr. smith, had been disposed of. the chair understands that amendment number 20 will not be offered. it is now in order to consider amendment number 21 printed in part b of house report 116-14 , for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. sherman: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 21 printed in part b of house report 116-143 offered by mr. sherman of california. the chair: the gentleman from california, mr. sherman, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. sherman: thank you. one programming note, at this point in the schedule, we were scheduled to deal with three sherman amendments, number 21,
number 21 and number 22. number 83 was included in an en bloc adopted by this house last evening. floor number 20, rules committee number 301 is not being considered at this time because it will be included in an en bloc that comes up later today. so we are now focused on number 21, rules committee number 82 and i rise in support of that amendment. on september 1, 1983, korean irlines 007 was shot down. 269 casualties including a member of this house, congressman larry macdonald. on july 17, 2014, malaysian airlines number 17 was shot down
, 298 casualties. if there's one thing this house can agree on, it is that we are opposed to shooting down especially deliberately shooting down civilian aircraft. as yet, the government of expenditure base and with respect to flights going into the airport that they envision the physical destruction of airplanes landing in that territory. this threat has been repeated several times by the officials and in times past, they have actually shot at civilian airliners going into the airport. that is why this amendment is necessary. it prohibits the transfer of defense department articles
unless the president can certify that the weapons being transferred will not threaten civilian aviation. it would be a tragedy if the civilian airliner were shot at or shot down as it landed or territory. at the if that god forbid ever happens, let it not be an american weapon. we are on notice that anti-aircraft weapons transferred to them may very well be used against civilian aircraft. that is why it is necessary for us to have this provision. after 23 years of studying these issues on the foreign affairs committee, i'm not convinced that we should transfer any weapons under any circumstances to this government until it
comes to the table and resolves the dispute. but certainly we should not having been put on notice transfer weapons that we cannot be sure will not be used to shoot down civilian aircraft. i'm pleased to have the co-sponsorship of this amendment by representatives speier, schiff and pallone. and i believe this is a necessary step because as we provide weapons to countries around the world, we should not provide anti-aircraft weapons that we believe might very well be used to shoot down civilian aircraft. i would point out that the airport is located in the epublic of arzok and
historically armenian territory that was lumped in by no less than joseph stalin in a deliberate effort to create ethnic tensions in the caucuses to the benefit of the soviet union and in an effort to punish the armenian people. the people of arzok established their independence decades ago and whatever your view, you should support this amendment unless you believe it is appropriate to shoot down civilian aircraft. i urge my colleagues to support the amendment. and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. chairman, i rise time to claim time in
opposition. i stand in opposition to the amendment offered by mr. sherman f the transfers. it actively critz to international security efforts and see their forces working along side and countering terrorism in afghanistan. and they have vital supply routes. it lies in a compromising between russia and iran. our bilateral relationship and the incredible amount of support are strong indicators of how our partnership has grown since they first gain their independence in 1991. we must not limit our ability to
provide reciprocal support in a dangerous region. putin's history of using military force against its neighbors like ukraine and georgia is using the same methods against others that counter him. the united states department of state is responsible for the review of sales and transfers of defense articles and services and they exercise this responsibility through an interagency process that assesses each possible arms transfer on a case by case basis. mr. sherman's amendment unnecessarily singles out this country by placing additional security requirement on the state department arms sales review process. the length of time this amendment would add to the review process is detrimental in the event of an attack of military superior russia against our security partner while
providing no added benefit to our bilateral relationship. this would include the lengthening of time including arms sales operating in counter terrorism operations in afghanistan. the armenian occupied territory which has undergone bitter conflict. a peaceful s sought solution to the conflict since 1992. by conditioning sales, the united states congress would tilt the united states' neutral position as a member of the m inch nsk group. by taking sides, the trust that's been built up between the s. and this country would be grateful diminished and the
conflict would degenerate further. the ndaa is not the appropriate vehicle for taking sides on a political issue nor should it be used to influence a process that clearly lies within the jurisdiction of the foreign affairs committee. this amendment is not required the department of defense already adheres to the provisions of the department of state's march, 2019 section of section 907 which specifies that assistance will not be used for offensive purposes against armenia. . i oppose this amendment which halts the positive momentum of our bilateral relationship particularly with the arrival of the u.s. ambassador in january of this year. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have had.
the amendment is agreed to. mr. wright: mr. chairman, i request a recorded vote. the chair: p pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the am offered by the gentleman from alifornia will be postponed. it is now in order to considered amendment number 23 printed in part b of house report number 116-143. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i rise to offer an amendment 23 as the designee of representative gabbard. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 23, printed in part b of house report number 116-143, offered by mr. lieu of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 476, the gentleman from california, mr. lieu, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the
gentleman from california. mr. lieu: thank you, mr. chair. i rise to speak in support of the amendment offered by representative gabbard of hawaii on limitation on the use of fund from the special defense acquisition fund for saudi arabia and the united arab emirates. this fund allows u.s. military to preorder weapons for sales to foreign militaries and intended to reduce the wait times for weapons related services. while this is normally a good way to prevent a long and detrimental wait for our allies to use weapons of self-defense, it is unconscionable it would be used to kill civilians in an unjust war. saudi arabia and the u.a.e. have since 2015 been bombing schools, hospitalses, buses, enother civilian targets. as of march, nearly 18,000 people have been killed or injured by this bombing campaign since hostilities began in 2015. thousands more have been displaced by the fighting and millions face starvation, hunger, and disease. this has create add
humanitarian crisis, destroyed water supplies, and created shortages in food and medical care. we have already passed a resolution seeking to end the u.s.'s involvement in this slaughter only to have the president veto it while he continues to supply saudi arabia with u.s. missiles and bombs. this amendment will prevent the military from speeding supplies to saudi arabia and the u.a.e. and do much to alleviate the suffering of the people of yemen. i ask all members support this amendment. and our involvement in this shameful war. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? new york seek recognition? >> mr. chair, rise to claim the time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> i oppose this amendment prohibiting the use of funds from the special defense acquisition fund to provide assistance to saudi arabia or the united arab emirates if such assistance could be used in hostilities in yemen. nearly every member in this chamber has made it very clear we are concerned about civilian casualties resulting from the conflict in yemen.
however this amendment does not address that concern. the war yemen must end. mr. zeldin: but as iran continues to finance terror and help the houthis, who have overthrown the government, the consequence will be utter devastation for the yemeni civilians. our assistance for the coalition opposing houstonny and iranny started in 2015 during the obama administration when the houthis overthrew a lemmed government with iran's assistance. they fired missiles against the coalition with support from iran and the u.s. provided intelligence and logistical support in compliance with the armed conflict. iran poses a massive geostrategic threat in the area around yemen, throughout the middle east, and the united states and many of our allies. right now saudi arabia, the united arab emirates, yemen, and u.s. share a common adversary in iran. we cannot signal to iran their continued aggression will be tolerated. iran's in fairous activities must be countered effectively.
the coalition continues to face an onslaught of houthi attacks on civilian targets. and united states needs a nuanced approach that helps our nation, partners avoid civilian casualties. instead, this amendment slams the door shut crushing any opportunity to see the region and civilians protected. i have no doubt the coalition will continue to purchase arms, including defensive weapons, from other source that is have no regard for how these weapons are deployed. as a result of this amendment, the war in yemen will not end. more will the united states or our striege alyle notice containing iran's maligned influence in the region. i urge members to oppose this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time coifment the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. california. yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. mr. zeldin: i urge my colleagues to oppose. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question son the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no.
in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. zeldin: i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will e postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 24 printed in part b of house report 1116-143. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. lieu: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 24 printed in part b of house report number 116-143, offered by mr. lieu of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 476, the gentleman from california, mr. lieu, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. lieu: thank you, mr. chair. i don't have any philosophical objection to supporting our allies, saudi arabia and the u.a.e., but what i object to and what many of us in congress
object to is the bypassing of congress in selling arms to saudi arabia and the u.a.e. on may 24 the trump administration threw second pompeo notified congress that it was declaring a fake emergency to bypass congressional review of 22 arm sales to saudi arabia and united arab emirates. how do we know this is fake emergency? because there is no emergency to the united states or to u.a.e. or saudi arabia regarding the war in yemen. it is a horrific humanitarian problem. the saudi-led coalition has killed countless civilians. but it is not an emergency that would justify weapons sales to saudi arabia and u.a.e. that bypass congressional procedure. and it's been creeptly reported that the u.a.e. is now pulling its troops out of yemen. what kind of emergency is this that would require the bypass of congress to sell arms to the u.a.e. and saudi arabia. in addition, we had a hearing in foreign affairs committee
where the trump administration official admitted that many of these arms would not even be ready for months if not years in order to be sold. so it is unacceptable that the administration is trying to bypass congress. what this amendment would do is simply say can you not declare a fake emergency to bypass congress to sell these arms. if you want to sell these arms to sad sawed and u.a.e. you have to -- saudi arabia and u.a.e. you have to do them through congress. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. zeldin: i rise to claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. zeldin: i rise in opposition to this amendment which would prohibit any funds from being used to process any arm sales or transfers to saudi arabia or the united arab emirates pursuant to an emergency certification made under the arms export control act. the president's emergency certification on may 24 to move 22 armed sales as an emergency was to address increased threats from iran's u.s. security interests and iran's
continued efforts to destabilize the region which directly impacts our strategy allies. the democrat majority had been holding on to arm sales and abusing oversight power with the arms export control act. some of these requests by the administration have been on hold for over a year. and there is no progress in determining why. we witnessed just last month on june 19 iran shot down a u.s. military asset, a drone over international waters, one of many examples of iranian aggression toward united states and other nations. many in that region surrounding iran. there is no doubt that iran is an increased threat. i urge members to oppose this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. lieu: i yield two minutes to representative david cicilline. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cicilline: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in strong support of the lieu amendment and proud to be a co-sponsor of this amendment which will prevent the sale of
weapons to the gulf without undergoing the proper congressional notification process. this administration has invented an emergency in the middle east in order to circumvent the process of congressional review over arm sales. an egregious and legally questionable move to put more weapons in the hands of the regimes responsible for perpetrating horrific civilian casualties in yemen often with u.s. weapons. the administration briefs this body on iran just days before the emergency was declared yet never mentioned anything at the time about an emergency. the administration claims iran poses such an imminent threat to our allies that emergency assistance is needed for saudi arabia and the united arab emirates to defend themselves. most of these weapons are offensive weapons and much of the sale will be delivered months or years from now. the logic doesn't make sense because there is no logic. this is an administration that's cozy the up to riyadh, sweeping aside gross human rights abuse, turning a blind eye to the saudi's taking a
buzz saw to "washington post" reporter, and supporting an intervention in yemen causing famine, destruction, and mounting loss of life. just because you don't like the process doesn't mean you get to ignore it. this action has implications far beyond this current sale and if congress doesn't reassert our proper role in the rocess, we give up our process entirely. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: gentleman from california is recognized. mr. lieu: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york. mr. zeldin: thank you, mr. chair. i just want to point out chairman engel has been approaching this issue more of a surgical approach and looking at federal law. i think that that would be the more appropriate tactic and being able to work together in bipartisan fashion on this issue. this amendment with all due respect to my good friend from california is a little more of a sledgehammer. i think he probably say that
would be true unapologetically. i would certainly encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to be able to work together through concerns that others may have rather than passing this particular amendment. there has been a hold that's been placed for a very long time and i would also encourage any members of congress who are responsible for the hold or support the hold to articulate to us and to the administration exactly what the hold is, the concerns are, and how we can work through it together. i hope that we all are in unanimity with concern over iranian aggression in the middle east. we all are in unanimity concerned when we see iran behind -- beyond the rhetorical calling us the great satan, pledging death to america, building a land bridge across the middle east, supporting assad and syria and financing
hezbollah in lebanon and certainly the concerns with the movement in shipping lanes around yemen, could be flict that the houstonies in overthrowing a legitimate government did with the backing of the iranians. there are a lot of concerns we have on our side of the aisle as it relates to iranian aggression. i hope that we can work together in dealing with those concerns that we all have as relates to iranian aggression. with that i continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. lieu: thank you, mr. chair. i agree iran is a maligned influence in the middle east. that doesn't mean the administration gets to bypass congress in selling arms to saudi arabia and the u.a.e. i would like to yield one minute to chairman smith. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shoot: i exree spect the gentleman's point how we need to work towards an agreement where congress can have the most constructive role possible. the tendency of the white house
to declare an emergency when they want to do something we haven't allowed them to do is troubling because it takes us out of the process. we need to find a way to make sure they can't do that. then not a huge mystery why these armed sales have been held up. we are concerned about iran's maligned influence. we ever also concerned about the actions of saudi arabia has been taking in that region that could be storing up con-- stirring up conflict and making it easier for iran to have that influence. specifically killing civilians in yemen in a way that generate sympathy. certainly for the houstonies in yemen, but sympathy for that side. we are worried about the way saudi arabia is conducting this war, certainly. we are also worried about other actions by saudi arabia. certainly the murder of the journalist, khashoggi, has not been answered. so simply selling weapons to saudi arabia at this point is something that is going to take time and is going to raise questions. for the president to simply bypass us, taking us out of the process in that situation, i think undermines our role. that's the purpose of this
amendment. i urge adoption. the chair: the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. zeldin: i also think it's important to note that the united states has not engaged in direct hostilities in yemen. we stopped the refueling of saudi aircraft, so the activities have actually in many respects have been walked back from what was historically known as being directly engaged in hostilities on the ground which isous not the case here as relates to the continues. continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. lieu: i request an iowa vote. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. zeldin: i would urge all my colleagues to oppose this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the yeas have it. mr. zeldin: request a recorded vote the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 26 printed in part bmp of house report 116-143. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition washington? >> i offer to offer amendment mber 26 as the degig knee of mr. khanna. the clerk: amendment number 26 printed in part b of house report 116-14 offered by mr. smith of washington. the chair: the gentleman from washington, mr. smith and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington for five minutes.
mr. smith: this is a variation on a bill that the house and senate passed that would cut off any u.s. support for the saudi coalition that is fighting in yemen. and i will agree with some of the discussion that came earlier. this is a complicated situation because we are concerned about the influence of iran in the region. but the problem is the way the war has been conducted in yemen. as i mentioned previously, the civilian casualties and the way the war has been conducted has undermined our efforts to conduct a peaceful solution. nd i met with both saudi officials and how they were trying to mitigate civilian officials. what they have showed me on those pieces of paper, they bombed a school bus killing a large number of children.
and actually bombed a funeral, a funeral that had a lot of key leaders at it that were going to be responsible for negotiating a peace agreement and on countless other incidents, they have bombed civilian targets. and there is a very aggressive blockade going on in yemen that is having a devastating humanitarian impact. now i understand that iran is also doing things that we should oppose that are killing civilians and stiring up difficulties but we are not supporting iran and we are not responsible. to the extent that we help saudi arabia through intelligence sharing and refueling, we are participating in the atrocities that are being committed on that side. this will not lead us to a peaceful solution. this amendment as did the bill we passed, very carefully carves out the activity we are engaged in in yemen to counter al qaeda
and isis that have arisen in the region. we have a counterterrorism in yemen. is amendment -- -- this is focused on the civil war in yemen. as we get to the point now where iran is involved, that's not the way it started. the houthis in yemen were oppressed minority and suffered decades of the mistreatment at the hands of whoever happened to be in charge in yemen which led to the revolt. houthis have committed atrocities as well. but initially, this is a civil war that doesn't have to do with the terrorism fight we are doing. it is important for the credibility of our foreign policy to differentiate between our legitimate activities to stop those terrorists in yemen who threaten us and our allies in the region and the activities of this broader civil war as i
said is merely creating more violence in the middle east and powering iran and increasing sympathy for the houthis and the people in yemen. the u.s. should step back from this. if saudi arabia is the great alley, we should have a conversation with them about how they change their actions so we can be in a better position to support them and lead to greater peace in the region and contain iran. the current policy isn't working. this amendment makes it clear ta the united states is not supporting the saudi-led coalition that is engaged in the civil war in yemen and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. zeldin: i rise to claim time in opposition. i completely support congress' solemn duty under article 1 of the constitution to authorize u.s. troops to foreign hostilities but that is not the
only issue here. this amendment attempts to block intelligence sharing to saudi arabia at a time when those partners have civilian tarts that are being attacked by houthi rebels. intelligence sharing can help our partners protect their forces and civilians and help them ensure they are hitting the correct targets minimizing civilian activities. houthis are stepping up their attacks. the houthis shot down a u.s. drone earlier this summer. f we cut off, it will have repercussions. there is a reason that bipartisan majority supported exempting on yemen that we considered earlier this year. it is because this type of cooperation is essential to u.s. interests in the region including responsible conduct on the war in yemen. it's important to point out that
here in this case with yemen, the houthis overthrew a government with the backing of iran. iran is the largest state sponsor of terror. collar,maligned nonfuke nepharious activities. we give attention to their nuke. call israel the little satan and pledge death to america. they have been attempting to build a land bridge to the west of the country. they have much more growing influence within the government of iraq. they have been propping assad in syria. they have been financing rockets and other activities to support hezbollah in lebanon. when you look towards the strait f almendev and the strategic advantage for iran to be able to help the huties in overthrowing
this government, iranian aggression has caused a realignment of different alliances within the middle east. many of these nations are looking at israel differently than they used to because they are so concerned with iranian aggression. what is most important for u.s. interests in the middle east and yemen, one, it is critically important and as the gentleman said in his point minimizing civilian casualties must be of bipartisan concern and international concern most importantly for innocent civilians who end up losing their life. and those who are cutting off access to humanitarian aid is of great concern and great debate. so for myself, speaking for myself specifically as it relates toll yemen, i'm greatly concerned by the houthi s' activities backed by iran and one that we should be successfully hoping that that
aggression is pushed back to the point that houthis and iran are unsuccessful and pushed back in a defensive posture and don't see further aggression. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington. mr. smith: i have no further speakers. i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. zeldin: i yield one minute to the gentleman from arkansas, mr. crawford. mr. crawford: i rise in opposition as a me veteran and member of the house intelligence committee, i have seen how u.s. intelligence supports foreign policy abroad and how important our allies are. intelligence sharing relationship is a force multiplier ensuring the security of the united states and its allies. restricting such critical information sharing results in disastrous repercussions. saudi arabia have civilian
targets that are being attacked by houthi rebels. these rebels pose a threat to u.s. military personnel in the rige. there was an annual report on civilian casualties. you know what minimizes that? intelligence to ensure to hit the correct targets. i'm concerned with the dangerous long-term implications of this ill-advised amendment. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. mr. zeldin: i continue to reserve. mr. smith: i'm prepared to close. the chair: the gentleman from ew york is recognized. mr. zeldin: who has a right to close? the chair: the gentleman from washington has the right to close. mr. zeldin: i would just encourage all my colleagues to oppose this amendment for
reasons that were stated. hopefully with great concern across this entire body on both sides of the aisle as it relates to iranian aggression, we need to work together all around the world wherever the united states can be of assistance to minimize casualties. there is debate at times about who is responsible, but it is important for us to do a better job working together to achieve the best results in the interests of the united states. i encourage my members to vote no. the chair: the question is on the amendment -- mr. smith: i yield myself. the intelligence sharing part that the gentleman from arkansas is really important. there are multiple countries involved in this coalition in yemen. a.e., working with the u. ey do take steps to minimize
casualties. saudi arabia has not. and believe me, i certainly understand the maligned relationship with iran. but they have not used this intelligence sharing in away that minimizes civilian casualties. i cited the instances, the school bus that was bombed, the funeral party that were bombed. they are not using this intelligence sharing to minimize civilian casualties. they have to change their ways before we continue to do this. on the broader issue and that's what yemen is about for u.s. policy purposes is iran's influence in the region and the role that saudi arabia plays in the violence. and the problem i have with the administration's policy, we are doing nothing to contain what saudi arabia is doing but exascerbates the violence and creates openings for iran. we need to balance ta. as far as iran is concerned,
it's hard where the administration policy is going. maximum pressure campaign. we have even iran lash out since we abandoned the nuclear deal and more developing the nuclear deal. the administration is saying they want to force iran to the table to stop them from getting a nuclear weapon. we need a better policy. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from washington. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair -- mr. zeldin: request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from washington will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 27 printed in part b of house report 116-143. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 27
printed in part b of house report 116-143 offered by mr. cicilline ne of -- of rhode island. the chair: the chair recognizes the gentleman from rhode island for five minutes. mr. cicilline: the republic of cyprus has played a role in combatting terrorism and proliferation. the united states participates in joint exercises including multinational search and rescue and we coordinate training programs for cyprus, cybersecurity, counterterrorism and maritime safety and security. through information sharing, training programs and other international initiatives, the united states and cyprus work hand in hand to combat terrorist activity in europe. the united states works with cyprus to stop weapons of mass
u.s. tion and in 2015 joined cyprus as members of the proliferation security initiative in co-hosting a work shop focusing on inspecting and identifying proliferation material. despite the partnership between our two countries, the united states has had an arms embargo in place since 1997. this policy was to prevent turkey to use weapons and provide for reunification talks. however, more than three years since the embargo was implemented, turkey has more than 0,000 troops occupying. reunification talks have not produced intended results and the you is unable to maintain a relationship with a key partner. turkey continues to u.s. backed
military might to continually harassing vessels. and turkey but significant amount exxonmobil and the interests of key allies in greece, israel all of whom are key partners. . . russia seeks to undermine u.s. interest in the region. we need to enact policies that strengthen our relationship with cyprus and counteract dangerous threats in the region in the eastern mediterranean. the inability to defend its sovereignty and its economic interests threatens our own national security. lifting the arms embargo will have cyprus establish itself as a frontline state, defend itself from external threats and ensure cyprus is no longer forced to seek assistance from
countries like russia. it will make regional cooperation smoother for the united states to ensure our partners can have compatible defense systems and training from the u.s. military. my amendment will make sure cyprus will have the equipment necessary to help the u.s. combat terrorism, international crime, and protect significant natural gas fines. the senate has already taken up this issue and passed language to repeal the embargo with bipartisan support during the consideration of the ndaa. the house should follow suit and support passage of my bipartisan amendment. cyprus is a vital and strategic international partner and we need to make sure we are treating it as such. i urge adoption of my amendment and reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. does any member claim time in opposition? the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. thornberry: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thornberry: i appreciate the comments of the gentleman from rhode island, and i want to agree in substantial measure
with what he said about the progress that cyprus has made. both in countering russian influence and in combating international money laundering and other issues with which we have been working with them. and i do believe that, as the gentleman indicated, the embargo that's been in place since 1987 ought to be considered and looked at and there ought to at least consider a plan to gradually ve away from that embargo if and as cyprus continues to make progress in weaning itself off russian weapons and the other priorities that we have with them. what i worry about is all of a dden on a -- in a total of a
10-minute debate on the national defense authorization act that we come in and say, ok, the embargo's gone. what has been in place since 1987, never mind anymore, without really thinking through the consequences and having that plan that helps us work with cyprus to get to a better place. and i don't need to remind members that this area is very complex with a number of actors who have intense interest at what happens in cyprus and in the region. i'm not saying we don't move in that direction, but i am saying to come here with a 10-minute debate and say, ok, never mind what we've done since 1987 is fraught -- since 1987, is fraught with danger. i must oppose the amendment. i appreciate the progress that's being made.
we need to look on ways to build on that progress, you go for us to say, oh, never mind, we'll up end something that's been in place for so many years , is dangerous. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from rhode island. mr. cicilline: i thank the gentleman for his thoughts. the best way to assist cyprus in weaning itself from the reliance of russian weaponry is to lift the arms embargo. it's something that both cyprus and the united states have studied for a long time. the best way to strengthen this partnership and alliance is to lift the embargo. i'd like to thank congressman gus bilirakis for co-sponsoring this amendment and for his leadership on this issue and i'd ask unanimous consent to submit his prepared testimony into the record, since he's not able to be here today, and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's request will be covered by general leave. the gentleman from texas. mr. thornberry: mr. chairman, i have no further requests for time and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from rhode island. mr. cicilline: i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from rhode island. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment -- mr. thornberry: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from rhode island will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 29 printed in part b of house report 116-143. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. engel: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 29 printed in part b of house report 116-143 offered by you mr. eng -- by mr. engel of new york. the chair: the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, and a
member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i always view military policy as a measure -- military action as a measure of last resort in our foreign policy. when the marn military is -- american military is engaged anywhere in the world it comes at the cost of american lives and the lives of innocent civilians. these are the most tragic costs of war. one reason why we can never be reckless in the use of military force. civilian casualties are a tragedy. they also give extremist groups fodder to radicalize and recruit new fighters. we need to do everything in our power to reduce the number of civilian casualties. the pentagon has made progress in this area, thanks in part to new requirements congress put in place. my amendment would build on this progress in a number of ways. first of all, it would help fill in the blanks when it
comes to our own planning and reporting about civilian casualties. right now there tends to be a big difference between what the defense department estimates in terms of civilian casualties before a military strike and what the department reports after. again, a big difference between our official reporting and what n.g.o.'s report. my amendment would require a new analysis of these disparities to help figure out why we're getting it wrong ahead of time and why there's such a wide range of reporting after the fact. secondly, while the pentagon has done good work developing sound policies in this area, more must be done on implementation. my measure would improve onsistent standards across all commands. assess mprove ways to
allegation of casualties and it will make sure we work more effectively with local populations. lastly, we need to understand that the defense department needs to keep learning and adapting. my amendment would require standards for incorporating lessons learned so our policies and practices will continue to improve as time goes on. and because this is a learning process, i'll say this amendment won't give us a perfect policy. we need to keep working toward more comprehensive, responsible ways of preventing and addressing civilian casualties. we need to keep giving the defense department the tools it needs to do so. this measure will provide a few more of those tools, and i'm glad the house is able to consider it today. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. >> mr. chairman, i yield myself
such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. >> let me start off, let me be clear, our military forces aim for zero civilian casualties. ms. stefanik: zero. and one civilian casualty during a military operation is one too many. and no one understands this better than our men and women in uniform who go through extreme efforts to continually avoid civilian casualties and no committee understands this better than the house armed services committee. so this amendment that we're discussing now is one of several that we have seen this year that unnecessarily expands and increases reporting on civilian casualties and allegations of civilian casualties caused by our men and women in uniform and i'm disappointed that once again the majority chose to give up defense committee jurisdiction to another outside committee. so this amendment would in effect give an outside committee additional reporting on what amounts to ongoing and current military operations. to date, this has been the
exclusive jurisdiction of the defense committees. in fact, the civilian casualty frameworks that we are discussing today were put in place in previous ndaa's under the previous republican majority on a bipartisan basis. we tried to work in additional edits to this amendment given the importance of this issue but it was refused by the majority, which is why we're debating this today. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: yeah, i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from new york. ms. stefanik: mr. chairman, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from nebraska, mr. bacon. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bacon: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the opportunity to speak on this. for serving 30 years in the air force, and served with multiple air operation centers, i know how hard our military works to get this right. our military forces go through extreme measures to avoid
civilian casualties. at any given time, combat and commanders have multiple boards, centers, cells, and working groups focused on reducing civilian casualties in addition to the working groups. there are recurring legal reviews evaluated with the law of war by judge advocates, legal advisors, target engagement authorities. this is before any strike is even taken. to evaluate civilian casualties and interrogations, they look at reports from all sources including n.g.o.'s, credible media sources and outlets and even social media. in addition to evaluating these reports, they look at the video surveillance they have and other witness observations. they take human intelligence and other intelligence. of course, there are going to be differences in this reporting. sometimes months afterwards between what d.o.d. sees and what other groups are saying.
but this is war. and there is -- war is chaos, and our adversaries inflate civilian losses to further their aims. so my position is this. we have a great process in place. it's working. the military is giving it their best to get it right. the integrity of our military commanders are such we can trust their effort with what they're doing you now. any discrepancies, they're acknowledged and they're investigated and they try to get it as right as they can. to say our military does not take civilian casualties seriously means you don't understand the policy, process and the effort to avoid these casualties in the first place. investigating any allegations of civilian casualties won't stop in any postoperation. they do their very best to get this right. our military's working hard. they're trying to achieve our objectives -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. bacon: i am in objection to the amendment. ms. stefanik: i reserve the
balance of my time to close. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: let me say i would respectfully remind my colleagues that the foreign affairs committee has jurisdiction over authorizations for the use of military force. and military strikes are conducted be under authority by the foreign affairs committee. it is shared jurisdiction. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady from new york. ms. stefanik: i continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: i reserve for the purpose of closing. the chair: the gentlewoman from new york has the right to close. mr. engel: mr. chairman, this isn't an easy subject to deal with, but it cannot be swept under the rug. it's good that the pentagon has taken steps in recent years to adopt stronger and more responsible policies when it comes to civilian casualties. we need to keep pressing
forward on this work, to make sure we have the best information, to make sure this is a problem taken seriously and being dealt with and to make sure the united states is behaving responsibly when these tragedies do occur. i ask for members to support this measure, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentlelady from new york. . ms stefanik: i think it's important to note as a matter of practice on the ground, we want zero civilian casualties not only for law and war and ethical reasons, but our troops are there to protect civilian populations. one civilian carget is one too many. this amendment is unnecessary because there are considerable policies in place and reporting that occurs to minimize any and all civilian casualties. this amendment is unnecessary
because in addition substantial and continued coordination that occurs between the d.o.d. and the state department and expanding back to the pentagon and foggy bottom which includes coordination with the national security council and intelligence community. we don't want to give up our jurisdiction when we are talking about military operations and knowing that our troops do everything they can to ensure there are zero civilian casualties. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amount offered by the gentleman from new york. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms stefanik: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 31 printed in
part b of house 116-14 . for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 31 printed in part b of house report 116-143 offered by mr. engel of new york. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 476, the gentleman from new york, mr. engel and member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: my amendment is a no-brainer and says we need to maintain strong and verifiable limits on russia's nuclear forces. a row butt nuclear deterrent has been the pillar of america's security and so has arms control. democratic and republican strayings alike have used arms control agreements to constrain russia's nuclear forces. these agreements allowed us to keep eyes on the ground so we
can confirm what the russians are doing. i fear this administration wants to throw all of that out the window. the president's withdrawal from the i.n.f. treaty is sending us down a dangerous path. don't get me wrong, russia's violation is not acceptable but the question is how do we respond to it? instead of using pressure to push the russians back into compliance, the administration is walking away. this sends a terrible message and signals contempt for the value of arms control. now that the debate is shifting to new start. this treaty won the praise of diplomats and defense and intelligence first as a tool for advancing our national security interests. it allows us to keep a lid on competition to hostile russia. the new start treaty places
strong limits on russia's strategic forces, meaning nuclear weapons that could reach the united states. this treaty gives us strong mechanisms to make sure russia is holding up their end of the bargain and provides insight to information that would be impossible to replace. indeed, up to this point, the state department has certified that russia is in full compliance with the new start treaty, but the clock is ticking. it is set to expire in aier and a half and can be extended another five years until 2026 but only if the unions and russia agree to do so. my amendment sets out which should be a commonsense approach and says as hong as russia remains in compliance with the treaty, the administration should work to extend the new start treaty unless the administration can complete a
replacement agreement with equal or greater constrains on the russians. we just cannot accept anything less. the amendment requires a series of reports from the administration on potential consequences if the treaty lapses and requires the president to submit a plan to congress on how to deal with these consequences. like so many other aspects, the trump administration has sent confusing messages about extending the treaty. they recently called it june likely, no desire to move beyond the arms control regime to tackle other issues like china. those are important, too. i agree with that. the united states should push ahead with a new arms agreement but shouldn't throw out the baby with the bath water. we should extend new start. we cannot allow russia's free re
inch n to expand its nuclear forces. arms control is a critical tool in a much broader effort as we compete with russia. arms control reduces uncertainty and creates patterns and predictability and helps us make sure our forces and programs are able to deal with the challenges we are facing. i ask members to support this amendment and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from wyoming seek recognition? ms. cheney: i rise in opposition to the amendment, mr. speaker. mr. chairman, i applaud my colleague's determination to ensure that the united states is doing everything possible to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. unfortunately, i think this amendment does not have that impact. we are engaged now in a situation with respect to new start, that it is a treaty that was designed and implemented and
adopted in a world that is very different than the one in which we live today. those of us on this side of the aisle are not suggesting that we should withdraw from the treaty. so it is disingenuous for the amendment to suggest that no funds should be used to withdraw. we don't want to withdraw from the treaty. however, we shouldn't blindly extend the treaty. in today's world in which we know the treaty does not cover the types of weapons that the russians are developing nor does it cover at all the types of weapon systems that the chinese are developing and deploying, we want to make sure that the united states is able to provide those kinds of restricks across the board and not stick to a treaty that only particular types of weapons systems and only with respect to russia. i oppose this amendment because it's important we not tie the president's hands and not send a
message to the president and to our adversaries. the russians would like to see this treaty extended as it is. they would like to not be constrained in the development of task ti call nuclear weapons. those of us who are arguing in favor of ensuring the treaty covers all of the threats, would like to see a much morrow bus arms control system than the one that would be place than if we steppeded this treaty without considering the possibility of including the chinese and russians. and the administration has said that. the president has urged that the national security council look at ways that we can make sure the treaty covers all of our security needs, not simply extend it beyond the 2021 date. we think it's important that the president have that ability and we think it's important that the congress not send a message to
our adversaries that we are simply urging the president to extend this treaty as is. i would urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, mr. chairman. and i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: can i find out how much time we have on this side? the chair: one minute remaining. mr. engel: i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from massachusetts, well respected member of the foreign affairs committee, mr. keating. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. keating: i rise in support of chairman engel's amendment inspired by a bipartisan new start bill that's co-sponsored by mr. mccaul, the ranking member. it is a bill that urges extensions of the new start treaty. russia's broad range and destabilizing influence is well known. we need to concxds con train russia's arsenal to the best of
our ability and we have an effective tool in place. and we have heard from so many leaders why this is so important. like the general commander of the united states strategic command -- the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from assachusetts, mr. moulton. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. moulton: i just want to point out i agree with my colleague that this treaty is outdated and russia and china are developing weapons that exceed what is included here. but all the more reason why we need the time by extending this treaty to develop a stronger replacement. we shouldn't do what russia wants. that's why i oppose this president, which russia wants. we need to have a stronger
replacement for this treaty and this amendment does exactly that. it gives us the time to get there while ensuring our safety. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new york's time has expired. ms. cheney: may i inquire as to how much time i have remaining? the chair: 2 1/2 times remaining. ms. cheney: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to mr. thornberry. mr. thornberry: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. i want to make two points. one is that the undersecretary of state for arms control is supposed to meet with her russian counterpart on this issue next week. what do we do? we come to the floor and we want to tie our hands. we want to restrict her ability to negotiate with the russians. that doesn't make any sense to
me. there has been discussion about flaws in the treaty and how it has not kept up with changes in technology and the house wants to say, well we out to extend it any way to extend the russians a benefit that they don't have to give up anything for. maybe extending new start makes sense. the russians ought to participate in that as part of a negotiation, not a unilateral move for us. secondly, i have to note more broadly in this bill that when start when new start was ratified, part of the agreement was, yes, we'll go down to a lower number of nuclear weapons but increase the nuclear weapon complex, because if something goes wrong, you have less margin for error. and this bill before us cuts
funding -- the requested funding from the nuclear complex and equested for the minuteman iii replacement and cuts our attempts to have a strong nuclear deterrent. ms. cheney: i'm prepared to close. i would like to ensure that our colleagues recognize the limitations of the treaty that my colleague mr. engel is suggesting we extend. the treaty is insufficient with respect to the arms that it limits. the treaty is insufficient with respect to the participants in the treaty and the treaty has an insufficient verification regime. it is important we make sure we arm those who are negotiating these treaties with the support they need to concxds con plude a treaty that supports the security of the nation. with that, i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and
yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. cheney: i would like to request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york will be postponed. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will resume on those mendments in part b of house 116-14 in the following order, amendment number 1 by mr. smith of washington, amendment number 3 by ms. speier of california. amendment number 6, amendment number 9, amendment number 10 by mrs. tores of california. amendment number 11 by mr. connolly of virginia. amendment number 14. amendment number 17 by ms. omar.
amendment number 19 by mr. smith of washington. amendment number 21. amendment number 23 by mr. liu of california. amendment number 24 by mr. liu of california. amendment number 26 by mr. smith of washington. amendment number 27 by mr. cicilline of rhode island, amendment number 29 by mr. engel of new york, amendment number 31 by mr. engel of new york. the chair will reduce two minutes after the first vote in this series. e unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote in eement number one by the gentleman from washington, mr. smith on which fufert proceedings were postponed and ony the yeas prevailed by voice vote. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in part bmp of house report 116-143 offered by mr.
smith of washington. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of a recorded voit will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]