On the recordJuly 13, 2017
Mr. Chairman, I regret that my good friend from Colorado has offered this amendment. It was not voted on in either subcommittee or in full committee. It should be rejected by this House, and rejected overwhelmingly. Why? We need to make sure that our missile defense works. This is not a vote on whether we are for or against missile defense. I am strongly for missile defense. I just want to make sure that it works. In the National Defense Authorization Act of 2015, there is a strong section in that act that requires that it work. The gentleman's amendment is not supported by the Missile Defense Agency, it is not supported by the Pentagon. What it is is a vendor's dream, what it is is a defense contractor's dream, because it would enable them to sell stuff to us, the American taxpayer and to the citizens of this country, promising national defense, but not proving it. We need to fly it before we buy it. We need to test it before we invest in it. We need to make sure that it works before we fork over the dough. If this loophole were to be established into law, allowing missiles to be flown through this loophole, it would delight the defense contractor industry. This is an amazing breach of what really, I think, has been American law for 150 years. Back during the Civil War, there was a law passed called the Lincoln Law.…





