I rise today to point out a very, very important fact I think every American should be aware of. We passed a continuing resolution today that simply says all the President of the United States has to do is submit a budget that is balanced…

I would just add we did make an attempt, although it may have been a last minute attempt, to broker a deal with the White House and with the Senate Democrats on missile defense, and thought we were moving in that direction. The meeting we…

I rise to take this 5-minute special order to discuss the budget and my concerns with the lack of progress and really the lack of response from the administration. We have heard continuously from some of those Members on the minority side…

Mr. Speaker, I rise to, in the strongest possible terms, express that if Members want to vote to sustain the President's veto, do not buy the rhetoric that somehow we are doing this because it will in any way violate any treaty. This bill…

I would add it is the feeling of this committee that that letter has no standing whatsoever. It is a political document. But I would say to the President, Where is your letter for the 13,000 Philadelphia, PA, tri-State workers that are…

I would just like to say I cannot believe the discussion here. I would like for our colleagues to tell the 1 million men and women in this country who lost their jobs in the defense industry over the past 2 years that there are no cuts…

I think the easiest course to take perhaps on this bill would be to support an amendment that would cut the intelligence funding that is so vital for our national security in a time when we are making tough decisions. But our job here in…

they say that actions speak louder than words. In the case of the Clinton administration, that appears to be true. We have heard from the Clinton administration they are concerned about arms proliferation; specifically, missile technology…

first I want to thank our colleague from Oklahoma, Mr. Lucas, for offering this resolution. I rise in strong support. Mr. Speaker, for the last 9 years in this Congress I have worked the issues of fire and life safety and emergency…

The Secretary would like to have it, because it would end up supporting his needs for additional money for readiness that his President will not give in to because he pulls his defense budget number out of the air, as you know.

let us be straight with the American people our colleagues. This amendment is not about getting out of the United Nations nor is it against peacekeeping. It is about fairness, to our taxpayers and military. We heard debate earlier today…

The commission has the same authority these commissions had, which is basically to come back to Congress and do what the Secretary has not been able to do, and that is give us the straight scoop on what our defense needs are.

What I said is what I said. Do not put words in my mouth. What I said is I want the Secretary of Defense to come back within 60 days and make recommendations to us that we can act on.

I do not disagree with the gentleman. In fact I applaud his leadership on the issue of military installations and facilities. My point is we are taking a bigger and bigger chunk out of the defense budget for nondefense items, up 361…

I want to clarify what Dr. Evers, the Deputy Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Office with the administration said yesterday in my office. The maximum amount for a full-blown ballistic missile defense system for our Nation would be…

let us cut through all of the rhetoric we have heard here today. Why is H.R. 7 before us in this body today? Is it only because of Republicans? I think back to last summer when this bill was first drafted. It was not drafted in January of…

I just want to add that in that assessment done for the Secretary, General O'Neill tells us that we can get a 90 percent effective rate against three SS-25s that would be the likely scenario of a third world nation getting SS-25…

One further point besides the sale of Russian submarines to Iran, which we now have documented, we also know that the Russians offered to take the SS-25, which is their mainstay nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile, and offer that…

I am going to roll up my pant legs because it is too late to save my shoes. As we prepare to debate H.R. 7 today, one thing we are going to do throughout this debate is we are going to call Members on the facts. There is going to be a lot…

The key problem that I have with this amendment, Mr. Chairman, is that it does not get at the heart of what this debate is all about, and that is asking the Secretary to report back to us within 60 days for as soon as practicable…

In other words, the gentleman is saying that if it is determined that the theater ballistic missile system should have space-based interceptors, it is OK?

First of all, I have the highest respect for our colleague on the other side who has offered this amendment. Mr. Chairman, perhaps few in this body have spent as much time on missile defense as our colleague from South Carolina. I want to…

I would add, Mr. Chairman, this is the only case I can think of where we are going to see an amendment offered that eliminates a specific type of technology that may or may not be requested by the Pentagon. We could say, ``Why don't we…

The gentleman's amendment further ties the hand of the gentleman's administration and the Defense Department. What we are saying is, let Secretary Perry come back and tell us what he wants and then we can respond.

What this bill simply says, we do not put a dollar amount. We simply say to the Secretary, come back to us within 60 days and tell us what is doable in terms of implementing national missile defense. We then have to take his…