On the recordDecember 1, 2016
I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I support the defense authorization bill. Our men and women in uniform are the greatest fighting force in the world, and they deserve our unwavering support. I thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith for their hard work on this year's effort, but I oppose the rule because this bill could be made better not by expanding it, but by taking out parts that don't belong there in the first place. Year after year, Congress has placed more and more diplomatic prerogatives under the military's purview. There are 80 provisions from the House and Senate bills in the conference report that cross into the jurisdiction of the Foreign Affairs Committee. As that committee's ranking member, I am grateful to my friend, Mr. Smith of Washington, as we have worked together to improve these parts of the bill; but different agencies have different responsibilities and capabilities. That is why different committees oversee these issues. We would never ask a group of Foreign Service Officers to carry out a targeted strike on an enemy. That is not their job. So why would we assign diplomatic functions to those who are already handling the tall order of protecting and defending us? Take the Asia Maritime Security Initiative--a program seeking greater collaboration among our Asian partners to solve maritime disputes peacefully. This is the sort of effort that our diplomats are trained to deal with.…





