I thank the gentleman for his consideration. What I would like to add to this is that the Air Force tested CHAMP on that delivery vehicle--a successful test, as it may be--and the testimony from those combatant commanders, the guys in the field that actually need it, are saying: hey, I would rather have it in 18 months than in 2025. It is just that simple. We heard testimony with regards to China and about Russia. Wouldn't it be better to use these limited funds that we have already spent millions of dollars on to develop the process, develop the technology, wouldn't it be better today to spend $10 million to actually get it in the field to support our troops and our warfighters? That is our argument. While I respect the Air Force, I think what the Air Force has--and they are looking at a long-term solution, a reusable vehicle, which I support, but I also support those who are out on the front line today. I have three kids out on the front line. This helps those soldiers, airmen, marines, and sailors with more protection. We can do it cheap, and we can do it today, and we can have it done in 18 months. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Share
More from Richard B. Nugent
The amendment treats the National Guard dual status military technicians as uniformed personnel in the event of furlough. Dual status technicians are uniformed full-time guardsmen, but a lot of their workweek falls into a legal gray area…
I do not, Mr. Speaker. I want to reiterate my earlier announcement that all time is yielded for the purpose of debate only, and we are not yielding for other purposes. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida does not yield…
I absolutely appreciate the chairman doing that and would love to work with him.
If I could inquire, I thought the gentleman was closing. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, there is some confusion here that the gentleman may be offering to amend the rule. I am just trying to get a sense for what is going on over there before I…





