On the recordJune 12, 2024
This is a very problematic amendment. I mean, we all have parochial interests in our district that we want to protect, but one thing our committee has worked very hard to do is to not put those peripheral interests ahead of the broader interests of the Department of Defense and the national security of this country. No determination has been made to alter or close Parris Island at this point, but it is being examined for a lot of the reasons that the maker of this amendment stated. For this body to come in and make a political decision to block DOD from being able to analyze that data in a fair and unbiased way is an enormous mistake. This is the mother of all slippery slopes. I don't think there is a single Member in this body who doesn't have some interest in their district affected by the DOD. They have a base, they have a particular defense product that is maybe being manufactured there, and we could pass an endless array of amendments telling DOD that they can't touch anything in our district. That is the road to an incredibly ineffective, inefficient Department of Defense. We need to give the Department of Defense the ability to make their decision based on what is in the best interests of the country and the best interests of our national security.…
Source
govinfo.gov




