Mr. Chairman, I want to join as a member of the Committee on National Security and a member of Mr. Hefley's Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities in thanking Chairman Vucanovich for her great work. It is a work that really has contributed so much to the men and women who wear uniforms for our country. It has been mentioned a couple of times that we spend more money than the President has requested in military construction, but I think Mr. Hefner hit the nail on the head when he pointed out that we always have paid more attention to the quality of life issues than the administrations, regardless of whether they are Democrat or Republican. I am reminded that this bill that Barbara Vucanovich helped to put together and Mr. Hefner helped to put together that provides for military construction, the defense bill taken together with that important component is roughly $100 billion less in real dollars than the 1985-86 Reagan defense budget. Because we were strong in the 1980's and because we brought down the Berlin Wall and dissolved the Soviet empire, we have been able to reduce defense expenditures. But beyond that, this bill also and the military construction budget that is an important part of the overall defense bill is in line and is consistent with the balanced budget program that the House leadership is moving forward with. So this is not a budget buster.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing military construction funding and its implications during a House committee meeting.
Share
More from Andrew P. Hunter
It is my belief that, collectively, NATO is not yet at a maturity level sufficient to effectively incorporate cyber technologies that exploit critical Russian infrastructure.
Jimmy Saxton is a guy who probably has learned more about our Special Operations Forces and their needs than probably anybody else in Washington, D.C. He is the guy who is the chairman of the first Terrorism Subcommittee, which oversees…
I think anytime that you have a situation where academic freedom is being constrained, that has real implications for national security.
That would have meant jobs for the American workers, and it would have meant that we kept a lot of that talent pool, that industrial base capability, in the United States. This would have been a huge win for American workers and it would…





