On the recordMay 18, 2016
I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I want to speak about one of the amendments that is in this en bloc package offered by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney). My understanding of that amendment is that it tries to have a clearer process by which we fund the military, and that is a goal for which I have enormous sympathy. We clearly need to have more predictable funding for the military. That is true on behalf of our military commanders and all the troops. It is true on behalf of industry. It is true on behalf of budgeting in the government. I personally also agree we need to do away with the artificial caps that have caused such difficulty for the military in recent years. I also believe that it would be beneficial if administrations did not play political budgetary games. For example, in this year's budget, the President requests a very low number for Israeli missile defense, knowing full well that the Congress, on a bipartisan basis, is not going to let that go through. We are going to be more responsible. So they are counting on us to have to cut other programs so that we can do what they should have done to begin with. There are all sorts of tactics that are used in developing budgets. There has got to be a better way. Apparently, some administration political appointees have been urging Members of the House to call the approach in this bill a gimmick.…
