On the recordJuly 12, 2019
I just want to say that this amendment is a smart, thoughtful way to think about how we reduce military spending over the long term without sacrificing national security. And, Madam Chair, I don't understand when patriotism got linked to how much money we give to defense contractors. That is not my idea of patriotism. Patriotism, to me, and protecting the troops means that we make sure that we do not send them into harm's way unless absolutely necessary, which means that we look at the threats of the future, we assess our response to that, and we take care of our troops. This bill does that in many, many, many, many ways. I have squabbles, as you know, with the top-line spending number because I don't believe that being patriotic means we just continue to raise the amount of money that we give. I think we need to be thoughtful and comprehensive about what our national security looks like internationally. And, Madam Chair, I also think that national security should mean how we treat people here in this country. If we send troops overseas and yet we cut their healthcare, we take away preexisting conditions for their family members, we refuse to provide public education, that is not helping our troops while they are overseas to worry about their families. So national security is a big picture conversation. It is not about how much money we give to defense contractors. This amendment is thoughtful. It says what we know about the future.…





