On the recordJuly 13, 2017
This Congress in 2015 passed this requirement because it made sense. Institutional memory can be short. The MDA is already exempt from normal Pentagon acquisition processes. No one in this body should think that MDA is subjected to the DOD 5000 regular acquisition rules. What this amendment would do would be to short-circuit that process. And which Member of this House in either party would want to admit to the constituency that they represent that they voted to allow missiles to be purchased by this country before we knew they would work? The threat is real, and we need to be prepared for that threat and we need defense missiles that work. Already the shot doctrine is several to one. We have to shoot up four missiles and hope that we can stop the one from coming over. We need things that actually work better than that. We need to make sure this equipment that the U.S. taxpayer is buying functions correctly. We have already expedited the acquisition process for the MDA. Let's not expedite it further. If our missile defenses don't work, we are all in trouble. The Congress decided wisely and rightly in 2015. The MDA, as I say, does not support this amendment. They have had ample opportunity to come to us and say that they want more flexibility, more freedom, they want things that work too. This House should want things that work. So I urge my colleagues to support what works and oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.
