I have served here for 22 years and served all those years on the House Committee on Armed Services, and today I am the recognize second ranking Democrat on that committee; and if there is any comity left in this institution, surely I should have the right to offer one well-considered, carefully crafted, very serious amendment. That is what I proposed. That is what I offered. I knew that the Committee on Rules had been narrowing down the debate for years and years, so I went prepared to the Committee on Rules and asked for simply one amendment. Now, I do not stand here in personal pique because my amendment has not been made in order. Far from it. It is not that this rule shuts me out or shuts out the people I represent in South Carolina. It shuts out our troops. It shuts out our sergeants and warrant officers. It denies every trooper who goes into combat the opportunity to have $250,000 of group life insurance at Uncle Sam's expense. That is what it does. The amendment that I proposed would take $414 million out of ballistic missile defense and move it, first of all, $300 million for targeted pay increases for noncommissioned officers, NCOs, who bear the burden of fighting, who are the backbone of our military in Iraq and Afghanistan. These personnel, grades E-5 through E-9, are the troops we need most to keep. If they vote with their feet and leave the Army, we will have a broken Army.
John Spratt: “I have served here for 22 years and served all those years on the House Committee on Armed Services, and today I am the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the need for an amendment to support military personnel during a House floor debate.
Share
More from John Spratt
I think it is a bit irresponsible to at least articulate to the American people, to the Congress, why you think we need a new policy direction.
This bill fully funds national security activities in the Departments of Defense and Energy, including top-line funding increases for DOD as well as fully funding Iraq and Afghanistan operations. This is the fourth consecutive year that…
The positive impact of the Recovery Act is already being made apparent, and more economic activity will be generated as stimulus dollars continue to spend out.
shouldn't we stop creating new programs, now agencies, new commissions and new discretionary spending?





