I rise in reluctant opposition to this amendment for the same very reason. The Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle is coming to an end. I agree with the chairman. It makes me cringe that they have spent $3 billion on this, but for an additional $34 million, we can finish the R&D phase of this program. That is what the chairman was talking about. Then we don't have to pay $145 million, as I understand it, in termination costs. I think it is just wise to get the final research done. So I would reluctantly have to oppose this amendment because it would take away our opportunity to get this better agreement that the chairman is talking about. SLAMRAAM is an AIM-9 missile that is ground-based, and this program is coming to an end. It is being terminated as well, and we support that. Again, I think we should reject the gentleman's amendment, but the outcome of what he is talking about will be achieved in the very near future.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker addresses opposition to an amendment related to military funding and program termination.
Share
More from Norman D. Dicks
I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), who's the ranking member on the Homeland Security Subcommittee.
The three of you have grayer hair than I do, and that means you have wisdom and experience along with it. I just want to say that I've enjoyed working with all three of you. Bill Young and I have worked together for many years. Jerry Lewis…
I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding on this vital matter, and I completely concur with his stated clarification on this CR's funding and language regarding cybersecurity. I strongly supported the inclusion of this anomaly, and…
Would you explain--you say here you have these two brigades, except pursuant to article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. Could you explain what the impact of this is, the treaty commitments here?