On the recordMay 25, 2011
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.
