I thank my friend for yielding. My objection, respectfully, to this amendment is it supplants the decision of the commander in the field with the judgment of the Congress. I frankly agree that there are very, very few circumstances I could imagine where we would not want our troops in the field to be fully armed to their complete comfort and satisfaction level. And so it's hard for me to imagine a circumstance where that's not the case. But it's easy for me to understand a circumstance where the person in the field who is charged with the responsibility of achieving the mission and achieving maximum protection of his or her troops should have the authority to make that decision. So my objection to this is not the intent. I think we share it. My objection is the fact that the amendment supplants the judgment of that commander in the field and replaces it with the judgment we are making here thousands of miles away based on facts that we could not possibly foresee. So although I share the gentleman's intent, for that reason I would respectfully encourage the Members to vote ``no'' on the amendment. {time} 1800 The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Share
More from Rob Andrews
I respectfully appeal the ruling of the Chair. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the House?
Last night, on rollcall Nos. 32 and 33 for H.R. 1791 and H.R. 357, I am not recorded because I was absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on both. Today, on rollcall Nos. 34 and 35 for the Rule on H.R. 3590 and H. Res. 470…
I want to enter your contest for a new name for nontraditional students. I would call them survivors.
I thank my friend for yielding. With a sense of real mixed emotions, I join this discussion tonight, certainly with gratitude and pride for Barry's 33 years of service but also for a real sense of regret that he will not be a part of our…





