>> coming up on c-span2 the house armed services committee works on the defense budget for next year. and we will take you live to the senate where work continued on a bill that would require the obama administration to submit any nuclear agreement with iran to congress for review.

>> a government report alleges homeland security official while serving as head of the u.s. citizenship and immigration services gave special access to the visa program. today he testifies before the house homeland security committee to answer questions about political favoritism. see it live starting at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span3. >> ray mabus discusses the navy's future amid budget challenges and evolving threats overseas today. you can see his remarks in the national press club live at 1 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> 150 years ago this weekend a greedy nation gathered along the route of abraham lincoln's

funeral train as it made its way from washington, d.c. to his final resting place in springfield, illinois. this sunday afternoon on c-span3 we're live from oak ridge cemetery in springfield to commemorate the anniversary of president lincoln's funeral with over 1000 reenactors and to re-creation of the 1865 eulogy, speeches and musical performances as well as historians and authors on the funeral journey editorial been really recruited lincoln funeral car. on c-span, saturday at 10 a.m. eastern the grand prize winners in our student came documentary competition. the festivities at the state visit of japanese prime minister shinzo abe including his arrival at the white house and for those in the dinner in his honor. sunday morning the supreme court of the united states oral arguments on the issue of same-sex marriage on whether the 14th a member requires a state to license about 20 people of

same-sex. on c-span2's booktv this weekend, saturday night on "after words." >> when the kansas-nebraska act was signed in 1854, the very act of signing it, of just signing that piece of paper was abused by missourians as an act of war.

sober northerners decided that if popular sovereignty will decide the fate of kansas, we are going to send people to settle. that was viewed as an act of war by many missourians. we just assume this would all be theirs. in may 1856, john brown, his sons and a couple of other followers dragged five men from their cabin along the creeks and their shot and hacked to death with broadswords. that's effectively cleared that area of southern settlers. >> in topeka if you look at the schools just and as such would be very hard-pressed to determine whether white students are african-american students attended because the school board really did provide all of the same materials that the white schools offered.

and what is the more interesting for most people when they come to visit if they find out that after graduating from elementary school, african-american students attended integrated middle and high schools. while they certainly were no supporters of segregation and saw the injustice of having to attend separate elementary schools, the african-american community also is very proud of their schools because these were excellent facilities. so while there was support for the idea of integration, there was also some resistance especially from the teachers and the local chapter of the naacp who feared the loss of his institution and the loss of those jobs. >> watch all of our events from topeka on c-span2's booktv and sunday at 10 on american history tv on c-span3. >> now, part of the house armed services committee's daylong

markup session on the 2016 defense policy bill. authorizing pentagon programs and funding. numbers passed the legislation 60-2 early this point. in minutes agree to include a short waiting period for female combat job and u.s.-israel anti-tunneling system to protect against terrorist attacks. members voted against retiring the air force's a-10 fleet and cutting six f-35 fighter jets. the senate market its version of the bill privately per tradition in the coming months. it runs two and a half hours. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> the meeting will come to order. the committee needs to take a markup of h.r. 1735, the national defense authorization act for the fiscal year 2016. as the all well know we've got some scheduling challenges today, and so i'm going to ask unanimous consent to have my full written statement be made part of the record. without objections ordered. i do want to make three brief

comments as we begin today. number one it's good to see adam back because y'all know he's had some significant orthopedic surgery, he and i have been in touch by phone and e-mail and so forth but it took fair amount of grit for them to come back across the country in be here today. so i appreciate him of making the effort to be with us and i very much appreciate all the hard work which, in the spirit with which all members have brought to the things that we've done so far this year. we tried to do some things a little differently. anybody's been indulgent with that and i'm very grateful. i'm particularly grateful where members have supported me on issues where our institutional interests were involved.

i do know it's tricky sometimes when there are policy differences for us to stand up for our right to receive information, for example, i just think it's really important for us to remind ourselves we are a separate branch of government with separate responsibilities with oversight and other duties and that's the way the founders intended it. i think we're off to good start and i appreciate the. second point is this bill marks up to the house passed a budget, and it is in will get their act together, the house-senate budget, it is in my view not enough money. it is certainly not the ideal way to budget when you add to oco, but it does reach the level that general dempsey told us was the lower record of what it takes to defend the country to educate others don't have the choice to be made. is like there's a lot of extra money.

so i think we'll need to keep working for a better way to promote fiscal responsibility and defend the country at the same time rather than these arbitrary caps and sequestration mechanisms that exists today. last one want to make is this. are significant reform in this bill. i don't think we can credibly argue for more money if we are not willing to make changes that improve the way that money is spent. some people have criticized some of the reforms for 24. some people say they haven't gone far enough. but i'm sure there's that everybody, there are lots of excuses to delay or do nothing. i just want to make it clear that as far as the reform provisions go especially i want to work with all members and the department and the services to improve these provisions as we move along through conference. none of them were perfect and they all will be and should be

improved. but it think it's essential that we work to get better value for the taxpayer's money it also think it's essential as we've heard a lot of our briefings and hearings that we improve the agility of our system to keep up with the involving national security meeting. is built as a start. is not the answer but it's just a start but if you think that's a key part of our responsibility. i would yield to mr. smith. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would just make a couple quick comments, mainly because my first, this is going to be a long day, so brevity is going to be appreciative by the chairman and everybody else. huge committee, lots of amendments. it's going to be tough to get through it also will have to work together to get that done. second, by and large i agree with each other. i think we've done some great work as always with staff and members. i'm committed to trying to put together a national defense

authorizing act that best serves the men and women are protecting us. i think we do a very very good job of the. i continue to be concerned first of all by the existence of the budget caps. we found a little dodge here with the oco but that is not the best way to fund the defense department. number one. number two it leaves open the question that there are many others myself included, feel that the budget gaps have a negative impact on things other than defense. yes, defense is incredibly important but so is infrastructure. so is education so as health health care so it's health care, so is basically having the basic infrastructure of a country and those things continue to be cut. as we work our way through this process will be president and will others allow defense to sort of sneak out of the budget control act box through oco while everything else continues to fall behind rex i have my doubts, so anyone who thinks the

budget control act is on the window won't have to worry about in the armed service committee, there are still many rounds to go in that fight. i am concerned as i think it would go to budget control act levels we would not be adequately funding defense. even with a very needed reforms that chairman says, has indicated are put into this bill. lastly and you would've me say this openly not too often i will try to make much of twice during the course of the next 14 hours, if we are going to have an efficient department of defense we cannot simply protect every single parochial program interest that we have. every time the department of defense comes along and tries to save money somebody steps up and tries to stop it because it impacts their district. i get that. i would also say there are some people people do also legitimately disagree between legitimate disagree on everything? i mean literally everything that

department of defense has proposed as a way to save money in light of the budget control act, in light of as the chairman said even with the oco money we are still not where we need to be. this congress has blocked most notably as will come up later a base closure. closure. i guess that says we are 20% over capacity. this bill once again prohibits the department of defense from doing base closure. there are many, many other examples that will come out throughout the course of the evening, but as i said the little plaque down there that gives you the talked about article 1, section 8 doesn't say it is our job to protect every single program that is of interest to our district. it says it's our job to protect the national defense. sometimes those things conflict so i hope as we go through this will get the department of defense the flexibility it needs to make the decisions it needs to make in a tight budget environment. we can do everything we would like to do, no way.

in a tight budget and we give the department of defense the flexibility they need to adequately do their job and protect our country and without i yield back and look forward to the markup. >> i thank the gentleman. and i've got some preliminary announcements and procedural things, but first if we can come up on the screen i've got a warning for folks. don't let this be your fate. in other words, i do want to get anybody off, but not everything has to be said by everybody as we go through the next 14 hours. so my wife found that and gave it to me, which is always been a reminder to me. we may see it again over the course of the evening. the order of consideration for today's markup of h.r. 1735 will

follow our subcommittee structure. we will begin first with the subject matter that falls under the gestation of the subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities and the subcommittee on tactical air and land forces, then seapower and projection forces and subcommittee on readiness, subcommittee on military personnel, subcommittee on strategic forces and finally the full committee matters. second let me remind numbers any an amendment offered must be in writing and 80 copies must be available at the desk for distribution, except for those of you who submitted yours by monday's deadline and then the committee made the copies for you. in addition if a member has commitment that involves jurisdiction of other committees we request that member before he or she offers vietnam after letter from the respective committee chairmen indicating their waiver of the right of referral. i note i impose the same requirement before including language in the underlying mark. i remind members this is approach with all for managers and distance we can directly to the house floor without our

building sequentially refer to other committees. also as the practice of the committee commitments involving additional spending should identify suitable offsets. members must offer amendment that the a point of order against h.r. 1735 on the house floor during its consideration. also want to remind all members of house rules prevent consideration of the bill reported by committee unless the report concludes your marks or statement that there are no congressional earmarks. is the policy of the house republican conference that no member shall request any congressional embark, therefore a bill cannot have any earmarks as in previous years. its features intends to operate under the five minute rule in order to allow all interested in the opportunity to speak in an orderly manner without objection numbers have five legislative days within which to submit written statements into the record. ordered. before beginning with subcommittee reports and

following consultation of mr. smith i ask unanimous consent the provisions contained within the reports of the various subcommittees and the chairman's mark for the full committee provisions be considered for the purposes of this markup as original text of h.r. 1735 and that these provisions be considered as having been read and the build can be open to amendment at any point. is there objection? without objection it is so ordered. without objection pictures authorized to declare a recess at any time. without objection. now, the committee will receive the report of the subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities. pursuant to committee rule 17 and in consultation with the ranking member we will postpone recorded votes on the dynamics of this particular subcommittee mark until the end of the subcommittee marked which i hope is before we have to break for the joint session. the chair recognizes the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee the gentleman from south carolina mr. wilson for any comments he would like to

make. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am very pleased to visit today the subcommittee on emerging threats, capability portion of the fiscal year 2016 national defense authorization act. in many ways this is both fitting and appropriate the subcommittee is going first to do. we are the subcommittee that oversees the most forward-looking critical cutting edge and intimate aspects of the department of defense, including the defense wide science and technology efforts such as the defense advanced research project agency or darpa and the military service laboratories. special operations forces cyber command portion of the national security agency and our cyber forces across the department of defense and military services. and many other programs and activities that deal with evolving and emerging threats from the weapons of mass destruction to an expansionist russia to the rise of the islamic state of iraq in the levant, isil or daesh.

mr. chairman the emerging threats in subcommittee capabilities subcommittee has been active in conducting oversight in all of these important areas, and bismark represents a comprehensive and bipartisan product that all members can be proud of. it is worth noting that much of the oversight conducted by this subcommittee is classified and takes place behind closed doors where we review everything current on sensitive activity and the programs involving the department of defense intelligence capabilities of special operation forces and cyber forces. i am grateful members of the subcommittee take this sensitive oversight role very seriously as we consider department of defense authorities and programs that enable the sensitive activities. mr. chairman, our emerging threats and capabilities subcommittee mark provide for stronger cyber operations capabilities. looks to safeguard our technological superiority, fully

enables our special operation forces for today and tomorrow, and provides resources and authorities to counter terrorism, unconventional warfare threats come and weapons of mass destruction. before we continue i would like to say thank you to all ranking member, who's been an appreciated and thoughtful partner and leader on many of these issues but has been a pleasure to work with you and i look forward to continuing our bipartisan working relationship. thank you, mr. chairman. i look forward to discussing the emerging threats and capabilities mark today and without i yield back the remainder of my time. >> thank the chairman. recognize the distinguished ranking member. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me begin by thanking especially my sincere appreciation for chairman wilson and all the members of emerging threats and capabilities subcommittee and most especially our dedicated staff. i am very proud of my personal

history of the subcommittee enjoys, and market before us today is a better product because of the. the mark carries initiatives in a variety of for areas including cyberspace programs authorities i'm particularly pleased that we paid her ticket attention to cyber command and decided mission teams, especially getting regular updates on how that isn't fully to make sure there's not a duplication of effort but we're giving it the proper support and able to move forward as they are. so i thank the chairman for his due diligence in that in particular. also, technology transition in general and the rapid innovation program in particular. i also am pleased with the support we have given inspector research development of advanced technologies special operations, counterterrorism and unconventional warfare, including increasing congressional oversight of

sensitive operations and supporting the families of our special operators. and the threats posed at home and abroad by weapons of mass destruction. mr. chairman, i am proud of the subcommittees efforts across the diverse and exciting portfolio. the world is a dangerous place as we know and it is this commission responsibly to do the hard work that gives our men and women in uniform and a dedicated scientists, engineers intelligence professionals and other civilians who support them, the tools and capabilities the capability that they need to keep our nation and our allies safe and secure. and so i think the efforts of emerging threats and capabilities subcommittee truly reflect our dedication to that purpose and again it's been a pleasure to work with chairman wilson and his cabinet members of the committee come and without, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. is it any further discussion of the subcommittee's report?

are there any amendments to subcommittee report? >> i ask unanimous consent to call up an en bloc packet of unlimited that it can work and approved i the minority. >> without objection, so ordered. with the clerk please pass out the amendment is to be offered en bloc? without objection reading of the amendments will be dispensed with. gentleman from south carolina is recognized for five minutes to offer and explain the amendments amendments. >> i called our blog package number one comprised of the following the amendment number 24 by mr. wilson to modify personal authorities for research imaging facility. amendment number 25 by

mr. wilson to repeal or revise reporting requirements, amendment number 31 r. one by mr. hunter to limit funding on the distributed, distribute ground system for special operation forces until the report is delivered. amendment number 36 by mr. lamborn, directing a brief on combatant commanders directed energy requirements. amendment number 70 are won by mr. nugent directing a brief on the special operations forces directed energy requirements. amendment number 79 on the mentor-protégé program. and then number 100 by mr. wittman on cybersecurity and cyber vulnerability assessments. amendment 111 r-1 by mr. wittman directing a brief on the language translation technology or amendment number 140 by

ms. gabbard on high-performance computing needs. amendment number 171 by mr. brooks directing a brief on high resolution terrain data requirements. amendment number 184 r-1 by mr. castro concerning research and development work with the biosafety facilities. amendment number 188 r-1 by mr. wells directing a briefing on major force program funds for cyber operations. amendment number 191 by mr. walz directing an annual report for national guard capabilities. amendment number 202 by mr. franks establishing a commission to assess threats from electromagnetic pulse attack. amendment number 231 by mr. johnson increasing research and development funds for stroke of black colleges and universities in minority institutions. amendment number 232 r-1 by

mr. hunter directing a comptroller review general review of the distributive common ground system. amendment number 270 r-1 by mr. knight concerning the laboratory demonstration programs. amendment number 284 by mr. lambert and ms. graham establishing a program official to develop anti-coming systems an amendment number 285 r-1 by mr. lamborn directing an assessment of the directed energy investor base. >> is there any further discussion on the en bloc amendments? gentlemen from colorado. >> mr. chairman, very briefly i have several here. i'm on this subcommittee but i want to mention one in particular. i've worked with representative graham on this. we both have bills, we wrapped it up into one dynamic that you see at the bottom of the page.

tunneling is a huge issue people are trying to tunnel into israel. there were 30 tunnels after the last hostilities. at our southern border with tunneling for smuggling and other purposes. so this establishes a joint program for our two countries to work together. other countries could be brought in as well and technology to be developed to detect and defeat tunnels but this is something we can be proud of mr. chairman. i think everyone on this committee would wholeheartedly support this so that's one good thing that we are really doing in this en bloc package. thank you. i yield back. >> is there further discussion? if not the question is on the en bloc amendments offered by mr. wilson. the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the ayes have it and the amendment is adopted. arthur for the amendments to this section?

the gentleman from florida. >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk spent the clerk will please pass out the amendment. >> without objection we will dispense the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. and the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes to offer and explain his amendment. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i do appreciate this time. i offer a very simple nonpartisan noncontroversial sense of congress with the air force accountable for using the 10 billion appropriated in fy '15 as congress clearly intended to the air force has really been skating about the congressional

intent a lot later and almost everyone has experienced their frustration on tactics from retiring the a-10, filtering the air national guard flip-flopping and other should they continue to come up. many of you have heard me talk about, as the directed energy systems most really transition out of the laboratory into the warfighter. but for the uninitiated counter electronic high-powered microwave advanced missile project. it's a nonlethal munition and incapacitates all electronics with harming people or destroy facilities. and competence of the committee can instantly recognize the value of the collectors could bring your warfighters today. we've had combatant commanders testify in front of this committee that they would like to have that in their arsenal of the things to defend this country. the air force actually -- this particular model on a cruise

missile back in 2012 which was successful. money that was put forward and last year to congresses told air force -- nonkinetic counter electronic systems. to give and revolution directed energy program called champ to combatant commanders a decade ahead of program schedule. last year as congress appropriated $10 million for that purpose. congressional intent for the chemical program last year could not be in a clear. i know because of the want to establish established the intent during floor debate on the amount that appropriated the funds an amendment passed by voice vote. fisher few people in air force middle-management pentagon and others are trying to pilfer those funds, but we intend to use for this purpose of getting champ to the combatant commanders. however, the air force as those were not delivered this weapon to our commanders in the field. my amendment removes any doubt as to what this committee and this congress has repeatedly

said. once again mr. chairman to make it very short we've had combatant commanders ask for this. it's been tested. it's been utilized. we are saying now use on a short-term put it on cruise missiles that we have that are sitting there in a warehouse because we removed the nuclear devices offer them and they are there today to be utilized. the air force has been dragging their feet on this and mr. chairman i ask that this amendment receive a positive response from this committee and i would be glad to answer any questions. and lastly it's one of these things would air force says they want to develop a reusable system which absolutely agree with but on the short-term you could deploy this in 18 months in give it to our combatant commander now. at the same time and in continue to work on a long-term in regards to on a reusable system. there is nothing that would

preclude us from doing that because the medevac we recommend that in all bill eggers we put forward on it so i offer this amendment and i stand ready to answer any questions. >> the gentleman yields back. picture will recognize himself in opposition to the amendment. not because i disagree with anything that mr. nugent said about the program itself. this is one of those instances where the chastity the heavy. and so i opposed this i'm in it for two reasons. number one is its a sense of congress and report language. now, the report is the opinion of the committee. we have never given a sense of congress in the committee report. that you are two different things. so that's fairly technical. the second reason, however, is that this money was appropriated in the omnibus for fiscal year

'15. and so now we're going to put into fiscal year '16 bill with the appropriators meant when they put it in last year's appropriation bill. they don't take very kindly to us with interpreting what they meant, if we didn't have a comparable provision in our bill. so you know again, i don't disagree, i'm not arguing the point of the program with the gentleman, but to have a sense of congress in our report language and to retroactively interpret appropriation language are two things we have never done before, i think lead us into some procedural problems. so, therefore, i unfortunately must oppose the enemy. is the other discussion on the amendment? the gentlelady from florida.

>> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i would like to thank chairman thornberry, chairman wilson ranking member smith and ranking member langevin for the help in ensuring this amendment was included in this en bloc package. and i want to offer my thanks to my colleague, mr. lamborn, for his work in cooperation on this bipartisan amendment. the bipartisan amendment will authorize research and develop it of an anti-tunneling defensive system to protect israel on terrorist attacks. this system also has uses for the united states on our borders at our foreign embassies and forward operating bases and to help protect our allies including south korea. it includes language am h.r. 1349, but graham lamborn united states israel anti-tunneling defense cooperation act. our closest ally in the middle east, israel from the dead of the constant threat of a terrorist attack from underground tunnels. is launched an unprecedented new

initiative to protect israel from this dangerous minister to secure peace we must help additional security state from attacks. i am don't have saved countless civilian lives, and anti-tunneling defensive shield will save countless more. i yield back, thank you for giving me the opportunity to offer my statement. >> i thank the gentleman was discussing the previous amendment which was fine. is a their other discussion on mr. nugent's amendment? if not the question is -- i'm sorry. the gentleman from rhode island. >> thank you. if i could just chime in briefly. i think mr. nugent for his thoughtful and intense support for directed energy come and she and i share that interest. i stand a strong strong opponent of directed energy and to support the champ program. i think the directed entity will

be a game changing technology that is going to both protect our forces our interest going forward, we need to present the department harder than what has been, as this technology matures and a lot of it is ready to be fielded. and i don't know the department is moving fast enough on a. i would like to see the move faster, but as you pointed out mr. chairman, the enemy as it is drafted is procedurally deficient, especially when you're talking about asking department to be retroactively spend funds that were appropriated in fy '15 and this is the fy '16 authorization. unfortunate i can't support it because of that but i do applaud the gentleman for his support of directed energy and we need to see that move forward, but this isn't the time with a place.

so i yield back. >> i complete agree with everything he said. is there further discussion? if not the question occurs argument offered by the gentleman from florida mr. nugent. those in favor say aye. those opposed to say no. the opinion of the chair the no's have it the no's have it. the no's have it andy yen is not a great do. are there amendments to this section of the bill? if not -- oops. if not you recognize the java from south carolina mr. wilson for the purpose of emotion. >> the report as amended. >> question on the motion of the gentleman from south carolina. in favor say aye. those opposed to say no. the ayes have it and the motion is adopted. [inaudible conversations]

>> a. i'm just getting going. [laughter] okay. i think that's good. we completed one subcommittee provision. at this point the committee will stand in recess for the joint session. i would ask that everybody be back right after the joint session. will try to get going again at 12:15. there will be lunch provided in the anteroom at that point. please hustle back. the committee stands in recess. [inaudible conversations] >> the committee will come to

order. committee when i received the report of the subcommittee on land forces pursuant to committee rule seven team and in consultation with the rank and we will postpone all recorded votes on 10 minutes in this particular subcommittee market until particular subcommittee market until the end of this the end of the subcommittee margaret thatcher recognizes the gentleman from ohio for any comments you would like to make. >> mr. chairman, thank you for your support. i believe our mark we been able to balance the needs of trying to address both the funny comes industrial base looking toward future ingenuity, supporting our men and women in uniform. and trying to achieve the objectives and goals of the committee. with that i was about the remake of my statement for the record. spent i appreciate that very much. the chair recognizes the ranking member of the subcommittee ms. sanchez. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and once again i would like to

thank both you and the chairman of our subcommittee mr. turner for the leadership this year on putting together a bill. it went very smoothly. we had some cuts in some areas, the programs that need to be cut. we have a lot of oversight. also included many reports with respect to some of the big issues going on. i think members over all will be very happy with this part of the committee of the committee's work and in the same fashion as mr. turner, i will submit my opening statement for the record so we can move on. >> thank the gentlelady. before turn 10 them as is any further discussion on the subcommittee mark? if not are there any amendments to the subcommittee mark?

mr. turner. >> i ask unanimous consent to call up and en bloc package of them instead of an approved by the minority sector i want to thank mike ranking member deliver both this remark and these en bloc mms's. we think of represent a great deal of both review with our committee members, and addressing the needs of the committee spent without objection, so ordered. i will ask the clerk to pass out the enemas to be offered unblock. without objection we'll will dispense with the reading of the amendments.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio for purposes of explaining his amendment. >> mr. chairman, i call up the en bloc package which is comprised of the following amendment number 003 our two by mr. byrne and directs everything on the opposite strategies used for air force fire emergency services personal protective equipment. an emmy at number 57 r-1 by mr. scott to the director briefing on the potential chilling of an integrated capability for the next generation in the chaser program. and number 169 i'm sanchez the drudge report on the legal miniature aerial system. commitment never 17 are two by mr. brooks that requires a briefing on impacts of proposed new vehicle handling requirements by the consumer but

see commission on military off-road vehicles. amendment number 177 by dr. heck address a briefing on the army's plan to modernize on many alexi bradley fighting vehicles. amendment number 192 by mr. smith that expresses concern with the army's decision not to field a joint ied analysis tool. number 197 by 197 by mr. waldrop address a briefing on the requirements achieving a pure fleet of m1 abrams tanks. number 215 r-1 by mr. law said that drexel report on the efforts to reduce noise from the engine for the use of chevron attachments. amendment number 250 by mr. peters address a briefing on all research and develop programs that can improve the range and to endurance of tactical vehicles. >> is there any further discussion on the en bloc

package? if not the question is argument offered by the gentleman from ohio mr. turner. those in favor say aye. favor say aye. those opposed say no to anything of that your the ayes have it. the ayes have it and the amendment is adopted. are there for the amendments to this section was mr. conaway? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment. >> the clerk will pass out the amendment. without objection the amendment is considered as read. the gentleman from texas is recognized for five minutes on his amendment. >> i thank you, mr. chairman. i would often withdraw this amendment are unlikely to ask for a folder called to take this opportunity to highlight a

shortfall in the carrier fleet as a result of normal maintenance and other things going on. we're now down to 11. this admin would raise that carrier fleet to 12 by 2023 and would help sustain that. the current place is under stress given -- would start by 2023 to put the other carrier in place, but the big point is the deployments are excessive and long and wearing out the sailors demand these fleets, and it's quite frankly is nine and 10 months or longer deployments according -- [inaudible conversations] i'm sorry. mr. chairman i apologize for that. i thought it was already on seapower. >> we are moving fast but not that fast. >> exactly. i apologize for that.

the program is an operational program for communicating with our servicemembers. it is in the combat zones now and his amendment would increase the spending by $40 million. it would decrease administer of his wide by keeping a budget neutral, but these are radio and fumigation. and tactical system that is working, and this amendment would fully fund that an increase this into a sustainable production model. so with that brief explanation, i will reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman choose to withdraw the amendment? >> no. mr. chairman, that was on the other amendment.

>> i'm sorry. yes, i do intend to withdraw the amendment. we will get this squared away. thank you. >> thank you. i appreciate that. the and in our withdraw. are there other amendments to the section of the bill? the gentleman from california? >> yes, mr. chairman. i have an amendment at the desk. >> the clerk will pass out the amendment and without objection, the amendment will be considered red. -- read. >> the gentleman from california is recognized for five minutes on her amendment. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my amendment it is based on

concerns about the f-35 program it is to support a desire to better equip our national guard and reserve troops. the f-35 program faces significant challenges are despite the 14 years it has already taken, it still has 40% of its testing programs that is not complete. much for visiting continuously pushed into the future. it's also not close to meeting the reliability metrics it should've reached at this point in the broken. in addition we now have warnings from our independent oversight groups gao department of offers testing and a by election, and the dod inspector general. the gao points out that in most recent report that it is unlikely to achieve its romantic element called on time and schedule. it says the suppliers are not ready to accelerate production to the levels congress is requesting. it raises concerns about the f-35 engine, lack of reliability reliability.

the department of operational testing and evaluation in a separate report notes the f-35 sensors and software system is unstable and fails to distinguish friend from foe. appoints a major design and development flaws that leave the airplane unlikely to meet initial operational capabilities. and just last week the dod ig issued a report that found dozens of series faults and f-35 engine production, quality assurance process, making the engine so unstable that we must further delay testing. despite these warning signs i was troubled us into chairman's mark that we added an additional six f-35 aircraft on top of 57 aircraft already in the budget request. so i know many of us support the program. we do need to be prudent i'm not adding points to an already very aggressive production ramp up in

fiscal year 2016 from 30 aircraft last year to 57 next year. this dynamic is an effort to do two things. first it cuts six and 35 aircraft out of the 63 into chairman's mark. that was simply cuts the program back to the number of aircraft in the president's budget. this admin leaves six additional for the marine corps in place. instead it turns back the number for the air force from 44 to 38. those remaining, 38 for the air force by the way would still be an increase from the 28 the air force is placing on contract in 2015. the second thing the amendment does is take the funding for those six aircraft, 588.5 million come and visit to the national guard and reserve equipment account. the chairman's mark currently has 400 million in that account so my amendment it would push it up to about 1 billion.

it's worth noting the appropriations committee sabbatini provided more than $1 billion for this national guard and reserve account. and, finally it's important to note the funding cut for the f-35 represents only 6% reduction in the program procurement findings which is a staggering $10.2 billion just for this year. it also -- before we know they are ready. i urge members to support this amendment. >> the gentlelady yield back. the gentleman from ohio, mr. turner. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm in opposition to the amendment and would ask members to vote in opposition and vote no on this amendment. a couple things. one, as mrs. no she is cutting claims that we didn't have. she's cutting plane so both in the dod requested budget the president requested budget and in our bill. so certainly we shouldn't be cutting those of which everybody

has agreement cutting cutting plane which i've announce agreement. secondly you know our subcommittee held several hearings on the f-35 including classified briefings abrupt the members if it attended would know that the issues that she's right thing could've been dealt with in our hearings instead of in attempt to do an amendment. i think those on the committee are aware of them on our subcommittee did attend the hearings are the numbers we picked bolster makes it would be the national security goals of the program, and we address the issues and needs in oversight for the f-35. in fact, we did provide some reduction in spending in this program on and at the same time we ensure that the f-35 continues on pace to be able to provide what we need at our national security which would've been part of our classified briefing to the are a number of reasons why this is the wrong cut, a number of reasons why the number in a subcommittee budget

is the correct one and i would ask folks to vote no. i yield back. >> gentlemen from florida. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. look, this admin is going to cut aircraft from the f-35 program at a time when 80% of the savings that are going to be found are going to come from rate in quantity. this is the first program in about five years it was going to see a significant ramp up in production. we are about 65% complete with the testing, and probably would be at 78% by the end of the year. the f-35 capabilities are being fully realized through pilot maintain and currently underway at eglin air force base and later this year we will start at luke air force base. look, the f-35 has been performing very closely to the plans since the program was

rebaselining in 2015 the program has met its goal of delivering 36 aircraft in 2014 and is planning to deliver 45 aircraft this year. so with those facts, members would ask you to oppose them in as well. >> further discussion on the amendment? the gentleman from texas mr. veasey? >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i want to first thank my colleague from california for being a good knowledgeable member on the armed services committee here but i want to rise in opposition to this because it would reduce funding for the f-35 program and would for the first time in five years this program has seen significant increases in the production rate to harness the power of economies of scale to bring down the costs for aircraft. i think that's one important. we had an opportunity to go to eglin air force base and see the f-35 if they are making tremendous strides in reducing cost and coming onto schedule,

and the program will be nearly 80% complete by the end of this year. adequately it's 68% complete now. i respectfully urge colleagues to oppose this amendment because we are increasing our production and no to bring down costs, and really maintaining our air superiority for this fifth generation fighter is so important. and without i yield back. >> gentleman yields back of the chair recognizes the ranking member. >> thank you, mr. chairman. actually i would like to ask a question of the chairman of the subcommittee. the f-35 is critical important program. we are you know replacing i think 90% of our fighter attack aircraft with it eventually. the question has been how ready is it? basically, because what happened we have, i forget the number, staff can afford, how many pointsplanes of adult to this point?

how many f-35s of all variations? [inaudible] north of 100. >> over 130. >> right. and we continually have had problems with a lot of those planes as we have built them. it's the old joke about you are building a plane as you're going down the runway to take off. people usually talk about something other than building planes but in this case we actually are building plants. is the f-35 are the planes were putting money into right now are they ready to go? or article give a situation where we'll spend all this money, build another six and yeah, gosh, ma get a, the engine doesn't quite work, the aeronautics doesn't quite work. so we go back into it again. that's my concern is to make sure we're not spending money on something that isn't ready. so if you could reassure us on that point or not that would be helpful. >> in addition to having several

hearings on oversight for our subcommittee and having classified briefings on the issues of the capabilities of the plane as it compares to whether it will fly again, we went down to eglin as a subcommittee. mr. koh posted us and there were several of us have met with the pilots. those who were involved in standing up to the nation both in training and in operation for the f-35. it is getting incredibly high marks both on classified this as an unclassified basis to it is a plane that we actually need as we look to the challenges we face in the future. the issue we face in any production splash splash and play where we had concurrency like we did with this one where we're developing it as we are producing it is the unit cost. that's why we have a number that we have in our plans today. because we also are selling this plan to others but that's what's important that the message gets out clearly that the capabilitiescapabilities of the plan because were not only just find them, we are also something. people know this is a plan that

works. if we reduce the overall unit come is the only thing that happens is our costs go up and our performance date for full operational capability slides. that's what his numbers are so important that we have been developed and i appreciate the ranking member asking that. i yield. >> i think it's important to note that we are down 57% on the cost curve since the first lot of aircraft were produced at seven number is, in fact, coming down. the fact is this is just the wrong way to go about also adding funds to the guard and reserve. >> thank you. i yield back my time. >> further debate on this amendment? if not the question is on the endemic -- sorry. >> i would like to say a few things because this does fall under of course our committee. ipod ms. speier in being concerned about the f-35 and

where we are and how many units we need an acting as some would count for this as acting. i think if you come again become we didn't go to our opening statements but one of the things that has happened in this past year is that mr. turner as chairman has allowed our committee to have at various hearings and various briefings on the f-35. ..