Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Add at the end of title I the following: SEC. __. CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTINUING AUTHORITIES…

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moulton). The amendment was agreed to. The Acting CHAIR. There being no further amendments…

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment to the Water Resources Development Act, which will increase funding for the Army Corps of Engineers' storm and hurricane restoration and impact minimization program. As communities…

Mr. Chair, I would just like to thank the chairman for his help in supporting this amendment, and ushering it through the process. I think it is a good amendment, and I am proud to have bipartisan support for it. Mr. Chair, I yield the…

Now, to Secretary Shulkin's credit, he came up at my request and visited on a Saturday afternoon.

But one of the things we learn in the Marines is that of all of the different leadership steps: coming up with a great plan, doing the reconnaissance to get the intelligence, none of it really matters unless you supervise what happens.

The problem, Mr. Secretary, is the decision to stay in or pull out is ultimately a binary decision.

How do you make our Eastern European allies trust us in the fight against Russia when we are not really willing to stand up to Russia right here at home?

China has successfully conducted test launches of several effective anti-satellite missiles, ostensibly able to destroy U.S. satellites.

It does not seem like our effort is calibrated to really meet that threat at all.

So you do not think that when the President comes out against NATO and says that we might not even be a part of NATO, maybe should not even be a part of NATO, that does not contribute to any distrust?