i voted for defense appropriations over the years. some may say progressive, but i have seen common ground, and i think we can do that once we open the government. >> i know, but i think we're forgetting some -- i'm a whole life. i know how to negotiate, but i've never ever got into a room to compromise, when a good thing in their mouth, just to let you know, i'm not compromising anything. now, this law, the last eight months, the president -- the administration has found different pieces of it, they say, it's okay, but this part is not okay. i think when you sit back and take a look at this, this is such a huge piece of legislation. my lisa called me today and talked about the health care they can no longer afford. she started a business on her own. she bought her own health care. it was $70 a month. it's going to triple now, and all these things we talk about, you can keep it? not true. there's so many things about this where the -- i just say this, i absolutely want to compromise. i have not talked to one member whos relishing the

i certainly want to thank the chairman of the defense appropriations subcommittee, as well as the chairman of the full committee for all of their good work on the appropriations committee. and it is not out of disrespect that i rise in strong pposition to this legislation. we are piecemealing, destroying the government of the united states, including the defense and the ability to defend ourselves of this nation. while we would suggest today that we are solving the problems at the department of defense, i would ask the question, what about maintenance of the existing equipment needed for readiness? not in here. what about procurement for new equipment that is being eaten up in afghanistan? not in here. what about research and development to keep technological superiority of our forces so we are never in a fair fight? not in here. what about maintaining facilities where these personnel live, where they work, where they serve our nation? not in here. what about the commissaries? not in here. i recognize that yesterday the army chief of staff said that this shut down is impacting significantl

and this whole appropriations process could rightly be one that we would find some common ground as we've done. i voted for defensens over the years. some might say a progressive. but i've seen common ground. and frankly, right now homeland security is suffering. and i think we can do that once we open the government. >> i know. but i think we're forgetting something very important here. my whole life, i'm an automobile dealer. i know how to negotiate because that's the way i've stayed alive. but i've never ever gone into a room to compromise with somebody when the first thing out of their mouth is, just to let you know, i'm not compromising on anything. >> on the affordable care act. >> this law, this law, the president, the last eight months, he has found and the administration have found different pieces of it that they say well, you know what, it's okay but this part's not okay. and i think when you sit back and take a look at this, this is such a huge piece of legislation. i have constituents calling me. one woman called me today talking about her and her daughter riley who can no longer afford the health car

. >> what appropriations bills were sent before october 1st. >> my gosh, we sent the defense, the military -- we sent homeland security, we sent four different appropriations bills over to the senate. the senate took action on none of them. that's why the defense department needed an emergency measure last week, which thank goodness mr. reid passed through the senate and the president signed. he could have -- he could have taken up the defense appropriations bill and done that, but none of the appropriations bills sent by the house to the senate have had floor action. >> why is that? >> you're asking the wrong person. ask the majority leader in the senate who schedules floor time on the senate. >> and what do you think if speaker boehner were to call a floor bill on passing a clean cr? how do you think that vote would go? >> that includes a special deal for congress and their employees? no. we said no to that. we don't think there should be any special deals as part of the affordable care act. we think individuals should get the one-year delay on their tax just like the big corporations di

line of division between establishment and populist across both of the parties to the house defense appropriations bill is a perfect example that vote split each of the major parties and you know the speaker the high. as the house minority leader in the president were arrayed against the combined forces of the progressive left anti-war democrats and the libertarian right tea party influenced republicans and together those two forces came within seven votes of defunding the n.s.a.'s domestic bulk collection operations and if we had that vote against a day we would win it because there's been sustained outcry since and i think many of the members of congress particularly democrats who were carrying the bush administration's water here because the obama administration told them to i think they've been hearing it from their constituents and so i think that trans partisan resonance of a constitutional perspective against what i would describe as the corrupt interests of an establishment in bed with the national security establishment that's ultimately the fault line that we're seeing emerge and to see

i just want to point out, because we are in a house hearing, the house has passed defense appropriations which are sitting in the senate. ushough congress, in order to congregate together, must complete it together, the house has done all of its work. we are continuing to be in this period where the house does it work and we wait for the senate. that period of uncertainty makes it difficult for us. i understand your frustration. there are bills that are sitting there for action. >> thank you, chairman. thank you for holding this hearing to discuss the state of affairs with sequestration. i will address the air force. i am joined by lieutenant .eneral mike marler -- moeller thank you rolling this hearing. we are committed to remaining the best in the world. that means being able to fight and win against pure adversaries. in the middle of trying to make sure we meet that future and keep readiness high, we have had to deal with the sequester. when the sequester hit back in february, it was well known that there were only two places in the budget to find the dollars to match what was needed

we had an amendment that came up a couple of months ago that was on the defense appropriations bill.up with john conyers, and this is not a partisan issue . this is for republicans, democrats, libertarians, conservatives, liberals, everyone in between. when we fought for that amendment and we took to the house floor and had that debate, that was the proudest moment for me as an elected official. [cheers] >> we brought republicans and democrats together to speak on that amendment. we only had 7.5 minutes. that is the debate time they gave us, seven and a half minutes to talk about one of the most important issues facing our country and the world. we split it up between 11 or 12 people. on both sides of the aisle. i have to tell you that afterwards, after we had that debate, people were saying congratulations, they were proud of what we had done even though we had not had the vote yet. when the vote came down, it was close, it scared people. it scared the establishment in both parties. we have the president of the united states fighting against the amendment. it was the first time in h

the work of my colleagues who have spoken, including senator corn cornyn, congress in the defense appropriations act expressly prohibited the department of defense from spending anymore taxpayer money on russian helicopters and doing business with russoborne exports. and, in fact, i wrote to the secretary of defense about this program. i've written numerous letters. and i have met with the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. well, did that stop these purchases? no. the half a billion dollar contract recently signed, recently completed, now under way by the united states army for more russian helicopters used previously appropriated funds to ignore the will of congress. clearly, the spirit and intent of the national defense authorization act was to end these purchases, and the united states department of defense in effect has defied the will of congress. so here we are today almost a billion dollars out the door, and the near certainty that these helicopters are going to be used to smuggle drugs -- thearktthat's right, smuggle drn afghanistan. the contract has been completed. we can be sure, j

he was, of course, the chairman of the defense subcommittee on the appropriations committee for manyhe also served on the military construction and veterans affairs subcommittee. and his thumb print is very visible in the improved medical care and the quality of life of our troops. among the many other issues that he held dear to his heart. bill was a leader in this house. he was able to make his mark with grace and fortitude. he was a lion. about the things he cared about. but he was a gentle alonzo. -- lion and did things with grace and with a quiet voice. until you crossed him on the betterment of our troops. and then bill young would let .ou know where to get off i will miss bill young greatly. as i know all of us will. my prayers are with his family, with beverly, his many friends, and all of those who had the privilege of knowing and working with bill young. he will be missed greatly. i thank the chairman for yielding and i yield back. mr. mica: i thank the gentleman. we're also pleased to have a distinguished leader of the florida delegation and now the dean of the florida del

that is how the defense appropriations bill was put together. it absorbed all of the money and leave all the budgets starving. i know that this is important. i am a democrat that supports strong defense. but to take a lower number and say we will take the lower number but given all to defense and then you cannot find anything in health and education and social services that are so important. that is not right either. one more point. one more point is this. the senator from tennessee has been very brave because there are not that many brave people around. he has said, we may need to raise revenues here and there and we cannot solve all the problems by cutting. in the last deal we did, we were able to figure out how to raise the revenue and also make cuts so with that have a good way of bouncing our budget and not pull the rug out from this promising economy. 5% unemployment in louisiana. i am not in a state that does not have jobs. we have so many that we need people to fill them. it breaks my heart we about to pull the rug. we are close. i know

we passed the defense appropriations bill in july. we passed the v.a. bill in june. none of it has to happen. this shows the break down in appropriations and budgeting. that's what this c.r. is about. >> the democratic viewpoint is that you are just trying to defund obama care. gut the law. >> the law of the land, channelled in the supreme court. the republicans in the house won't accept it. >> that's the democratic view but it doesn't reflect reality. with the last major c.r. we did, b it realigned the launch day of the individual mandate with the corporate mandate the president moved pack. it didn't defund obama care or delay the law. in fact, the government shut down today, but obama care is up and running. >> what do you make that some people get waivers and exemptions? it seems to me that whether it is a good or a bad idea, they are all people or organization that is have a tremendous amount of lobbying power and access. a small business owner in our hometown would not have that access. >> that's correct. i have been opposed toyota. it creates a quandary. i want

that's how the defense appropriations bill is put together. it absorbs all of the money and leaves all of the other budgets starving. i know defense is important. i supported a strong defense. i stood against irresponsible cuts to the defense department. but to take a lower number in the whole budget and say we'll take a lower number and give it all to defense and you can't find anything in health and education and social services that are so important. that's not right either. let me have one more point. i said one, one more point is this -- when the senator from tennessee has been very brave because there aren't that many brave people around here. he's said we may need to raise a few revenues here and there. we can't solve this problem by cuts alone, the last big deal we did, we were able to figure out how to raise revenue and make some cuts so we could have a good way, a steady way to balance our budget and not pull the rug out from underneath this very promising economy. i've got 5% unemployment in louisiana. i'm not talking as a state tha

that is how the defense appropriations bill was put together. it absorbed all of the money and leave all the budgets starving. i know that this is important. i am a democrat that supports strong defense. number and a lower say we will take the lower number but given all to defense and then you cannot find anything in health and education and social services that are so important. that is not right either. one more point. one more point is this. the senator from tennessee has been very brave because there are not that many brave people around. need toaid, we may raise revenues here and there and we cannot solve all the problems by cutting. in the last deal we did, we were able to figure out how to raise the revenue and also make cuts so with that have a good way of bouncing our budget and not pull the rug out from this promising economy. louisiana.ment and i am not by states that does not have jobs. we have so many that we need people to fill them. it breaks my heart we about to pull the rug. we are close. i know how much my people are counting o

defense workers should not be furloughed, the first circumstance is if congress passes a defense appropriations bill. then, the military is funded and the president has no legal basis for using the shutdown as an excuse for if you are loge defense workers. -- furloughing defense workers. unfortunately, this first circumstance does not exist. the house of representatives four months ago passed the national defense authorization act on a bipartisan vote that included 103 democrats, and while the house, almost three months ago, passed the defense appropriations bill on a 315-109 bipartisan vote that included 95 democrats, president obama, democrat senate majority leader harry reid and their allies refused the senate to vote on either bill that would fully restore defense suspending lost because of sequestration and fully fund america's national security. the second circumstance exists if president obama declares workers essential. while i disagree in question why any commander in chief in his sole discretion would leight 400,000 defense workers , president obama did just that. hence the second cir

and just to say, that's how the defense appropriations bill is put together.it absorbs all of the money and leaves all the other budgets starving. now, i know defense is important. i'm a democrat that supported a strong defense. i have -- i have stood against irresponsible cuts to the defense department. but to take a lower number in the whole budget and say, okay, we'll take a lower number but we give it all to defense, and then you can't fund anything in health and education and social services that are so important, that's not right either. so -- and one more point. i said one but one more point is this. and the senator from tennessee has been very brave because there aren't that many brave people around here, but he's been one of the brave ones that have said, you know, we may need to raise a few revenues here and there, we can't solve this whole problem by cuts alone. and so in the last big deal that we did, we were able to figure out how to raise some revenue and also make some cuts so that we could have a good way, a steady way to balance our budget and

appropriation. it is that simple. so, mr. speaker, i urge the secretary of defense to do the simple thing, the right thing -- allow all chaplains in the armed forces to be their military and federal civilian employees and contractors to minister unhindered to the men and women of the armed forces. i congratulate my colleague, doug collins, of georgia, for bringing this resolution to the floor and urge all member to support it. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the derailment from south carolina reserves is time. the judgment from washington. >> i yield myself as much time as i may consume. i do not oppose this resolution as it sounds sensible, but i do want to raise a couple of process issues. i found about this 20 minutes ago. i think it is just emblematic of how much this body has broken down. we have to talk to each other. i do not have any objection to this. i have got staff, the armed services committee has a staff. we have worked together in the armed services committee better than any other committee in this congress. i will grant you that is not saying mu

appropriation. it is that simple. so, mr. speaker, i urge the secretary of defenseo do the simple thing, the right thing -- allow all chaplains in the armed forces to be their military and federal civilian employees and contractors to minister unhindered to the men and women of the armed forces. i congratulate my colleague, doug collins, of georgia, for bringing this resolution to the floor and urge all member to support it. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the derailment from south carolina reserves is time. the judgment from washington. >> i yield myself as much time as i may consume. i do not oppose this resolution as it sounds sensible, but i do want to raise a couple of process issues. i found about this 20 minutes ago. i think it is just emblematic of how much this body has broken down. we have to talk to each other. i do not have any objection to this. i have got staff, the armed services committee has a staff. we have worked together in the armed services committee better than any other committee in this congress. i will grant you that is not saying much

. >> -- in july, the house passed the defense appropriations bill to fund the military, including illegally furloughed employees, in a bipartisan effort. since july, the majority leader has yet to bring that bill to a vote. this summer we passed a bill to support -- although the attorneys are still arguing over what the word support means. but because of these examples, it is imperative that all federal employees are guaranteed they will receive the backpay that is due them. this will not cost the government extra. there is precedent. it is logical. our goal should be to start the government working. as we are looking within two weeks of this time of the debt ceiling, the issue of sequestration, entitlement reform, a senate that continues to demand the spend an extra $60 billion we do not have an obamacare, it is clear that the strategies of the past to not work. senator reid's position has one. we have nothing. and we will continue to have nothing until something new breaks this logjam. if the senate were to engage in legitimate talks with really go she asian, that could break this logjam.

i want to thank chairman young of the defense appropriations subcommittee and the subcommittee members for their work and certainly support the gentleman's legislation. unfortunately, the department of defense had to report that since october 1 of this year, 17 service members have perished whose survivors would be entitled to a death gratuity payment. so the gentleman's legislation is correct. it is timely and it should pass. the only other observation i would make at the beginning of the debate is the house passed the pay our troops act, 3210. i would hope that none of our colleagues are under the miss impression that we have solve -- misimpression that we have solved all of our problems in relation to our national defense. essentially it deals with about 40% of the department's budget, the problem that mr. frelinghuysen is attempting to address today is but a slice of that 60% that unfortunately the government of the united states is now -- now not dealt with sincing the -- since the beginning of the fiscal year. i thank the gentleman for his efforts and reserve the balance of my ti

the absence of a defense appropriations bill, along with budget cuts and sequestration, poses a threat to the long-term readiness of service members and family as training has been curtailed, moves have been postponed or canceled, and important contrast cannot be executed. military families, like other american families, rely on other programs and services provided by the federal government. wic program of the will affect many young military families who rely on the assistance. public schools educating large numbers of military children, faith the loss of much needed impact will affect many young military families who rely on the assistance. public schools educating large numbers of military children, faith the loss of much needed impact funds if the shutdown continues. service members continue to do and fight onloy behalf of the nation. they need to know the programs and the services they rely on it will be available to ensure the readiness. a permanent fix, not the band-aid of budget deals. the national military family association, along with the military coalition ask to pass the ap

the absence of a defense appropriations bill along with budget cuts and sequestration poses a threat to the long-term readiness of servicemembers and families as training has been curtailed, moves have been postponed or canceled, and important contracts cannot be executed. military families like other american families rely on other programs and services provided by the federal government. the shutdown will affect any young military families who rely on this assistance. public schools educating large numbers of military children face the loss of much-needed impact aid funds if the shutdown continues. service members continue to deploy and fight on behalf of our nation. they and their families need to know that the programs and services they rely on will be available to ensure that readiness. we need a permanent fix, not the temporary and date of budget deals or to face this again in a few months. the military family association along with the military coalition asks you to pass the appropriation bills, end the government shutdown and show military families and survivors that they con

i sit on the defense appropriations subcommittee.hink we've got real problems in the procurement and sometimes we overdo it in terms of high-tech, trying to get every edge we can, and we make these programs so expensive that we don't have the sheer numbers that you might need in a war. i think all i can tell you is we're looking at that. we're trying to find better ways to do it. i think we've had, you know, really a succession of good defense 60's. i think leon panetta did a fine job there, and i've got a lot of confidence in secretary hagel. but it's a big bureaucracy over there, and it's tough to manage, tough to get your fingers around. they are making some improvements and changes, but we've got a very long way to go. >> an article in "usa today" reads, military v.a. benefits are the latest casualty. meanwhile, the families of four soldiers and a marine killed in afghanistan since the shutdown last week are not receiving a $100,000 death gratuity or any unpaid income due their loved ones or being reimbursed for burial expenses,

as the ranking member of the authorizing committee for defense, given your very appropriate comments bout the effects of the shutdown and continued uncertainty on the defense and national security community, what is it that you and your committee are thinking of being able to do in this year and in this environment? to help on the strategic front and creating a pathway forward for the defense community? >> we are working on different issues, 1206, 1203, trying to give greater flexibility to the war fighter as they confront the challenges that they face. we are strongly supportive of the special operations command. that is a key piece of this ally development, building partner capacity. they refer to it -- preparation of the environment. what are you preparing it for, exactly? the answer is -- we are trying to prepare it so we do not have insurgencies. that is training security forces, making sure governance is happening. they do medical care in certain places, trying to build a local population. and a lot of that is what we have done in the philippines. the big war approach in this id

the absence of a defense appropriations bill, along with budget cuts and sequestration, poses a threat to the long-term readiness of service members and families as training has been curtailed, moves have been postponed or canceled and important contracts cannot be executed. military families, like other american families, rely on other programs and services provided by the federal government. the shutdown of the w.i.c. program will affect many young military families who rely on this assistance. public schools, educating large numbers of military children, face the loss of much-needed impact aid funds if the shutdown continues. service members continue to deploy and fight on behalf of our nation. they and their families need to know that the programs and services they rely on will be available to ensure that readiness. we need a permanent fix, not the temporary band-aid of faces us again in the next few months. we ask you to pass the appropriation bills, end the government shutdown and show military families and survivors that they continue to have the nation's support. i am pleased t

this deliberation and will also be joined later by senator durbin who is the chair of the defense appropriations and handles much of the budget for this. our first witness james clapper is the fourth director of national intelligence since august 9, 2010. he served for 32 years in the united states armed forces. he retired in 1995 as lieutenant general in the air force. he previously served undersecretary of defense for intelligence and the defense intelligence agency. direct there it's good to have you here. please go ahead. see chairman leahy ranking member grassley and distinguish members of the committee sir, i would like to answer your question about the impacts of the government shutdown and the furloughing of our civilians. first the legal standard against which would make decisions about who is furloughed and who isn't and this is quoting from the love. that which is necessary to protect against imminent threat to life or property. our applying that standard is what resulted across-the-board in furloughing roughly 70%. i think that will change as -- if this drags on and we will make adju

speaker, i am the newest member of the defense subcommittee of appropriations. i was fortunate to receive his mentor ship. i learned from his fearless, unparalleled support of our troops and our veterans, and i admired his outspoken and unwavering commitment to what was in their best interest. mr. speaker, the a veteran myself of over 30 years, i was also a beneficiary of his incredible support of those who wear the uniform. while his presence will be youngr missed, the bill department of veterans affairs medical center will serve as a small and fitting reminder that this institution of our men and women in uniform, and america are undoubtedly better off because of bill young, and i'm proud to support it. i yield back. the gentleman's time is expired. >> city toledo time we have no? -- can you tell me how much time we have now? >> the gentlelady has 4.5 minutes, the gentleman has 10.5 minutes your >> thank you. i would like to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from new york, mrs. louis. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. today ineaker, i rise s

speaker, i am the newest member of the defense subcommittee of appropriations. was fortunate to receive his mentor ship. i learned from his fearless, unparalleled support of our troops and our veterans, and i admired his outspoken and unwavering commitment to what was in their best interest. mr. speaker, a veteran myself of over 30 years, i was also a beneficiary of his incredible support of those who wear the uniform. while his presence will be forever missed, the bill young department of veterans affairs medical center will serve as a small and fitting reminder that this institution of our men and women in uniform, and america are undoubtedly better off because of bill young, and i'm proud to support it. i yield back. >> the gentleman's time is expired. >> city toledo time we have no? -- can you tell me how much time we have now? >> the gentlelady has 4.5 minutes, the gentleman has 10.5 minutes. >> thank you. i would like to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from new york, mrs. louis. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise

defense. what is the appropriate amount for them to go in retreat on the having to go and defend themselves? the issue here might be who do we want to have to deal with that ambiguity? when somebody is facing quick decisions they have to make in terms of life and death, do we want to make them have to bear the burden to figure out at that time how far they are going to have to retreat and then make them realize they may be second guessed. i have an appendix that shows the number of cases where they were second guessed in cases where legislatures than others thought second-guessing was wrong there. they make it so somebody who really needs to act as self-defense is stopped from doing so and that's endangering the safety of the dolls. finally, mr. labahn, when he was talking about being able to go and have your "stand your ground" law, even though he may have been the initial aggressive air, she misses part of the law that he quoted. it goes onto say you can use it, but then opposed strict restrictions on how you can use it in that case. it says subset is not available to the person who evokes

in july, the house passed the defense appropriations bill to fund the military, including those illegally furloughed employees, 315 votes in an intensely bipartisan effort. and yet since july, the majority leader has yet to bring that bill to the floor in the senate. we passed to fund our military although attorneys are arguing over the word support means. and we need to overcome this roadblock and get people back to work. because of these examples, it's imperative that all federal employees will be guaranteed they'll receive the back pay that's due them. this will not cost the government extra. there's precedent. it is logical. yes, our goals should be to get the government working. as we're looking within two weeks period of time the issue of debt ceiling, sequestration, entitlement reform, a senate that continues to demand we spend an extra $60 billion we don't have and obamacare, it's clear that the strategies of the past don't work. senator reid's position, my way or nothing, has won. we have nothing and we will continue to have nothing until something new breaks this logjam. if the

germans controlled europe d were poised to attack britai a frightened american congress appropriated $37 billion for defensere than the entire cost of world war i. how would the government raise these huge sums? that means taxes and bonds and bonds and taxes. schoumacher: treasury official roy blough remembers. now, the treasury view -- and i shared it -- was you get as much out of taxes as you can and up to 100%. now, of course we never succeeded in doing that. you take the whole war period, the tax revenues for the war period were a little less than half of the total. the rest of it was borrowed. schoumacher: in england, economist john maynard keynes urged the american government to borrow from a pool of money created by a compulsory savings program. but a group of young american economists had a better idea as richard gilbert recalls. the group which i led proposed to finance the war through borrowing -- in itself not different from the keynesian proposal -- but with a direct control of prices and wages to prevent the kind of inflation that had always been associated with war in the past and to bring to

worse and the reason it's going to be worse is because we have not passed any of the appropriations bills, not for defensene for veterans and none for anything else and as a result everything is effected and everything is on the table and basically what the debt ceiling says is you can't spend more money than you have and so we are going to be up beginning november 1 you will be up with social security benefits and social security is now paying out more than it's taking in so that bumps up against the debt ceiling limits. so we need to reach a reasonable compromise. frankly they ought to extend the -- ought to do a continuing resolution and put all of this into one big negotiation that hopefully can get us passed the next election. >> reporter: you have been saying that a long time, david, i know you have from your lips to god's ears one hopes and david walker is the ceo of the come back america initiative and former head of the government accounting office and obamacare health exchange is open on tuesday. i'll tell you what you need to know for opening day and why leading a healthy lifestyle and i'm no e

as the ranking member authorize the committee for defense given your appropriate comments about the effectsf the shut down and continued uncertainty on the defense and national security community what is it that you and your committee are thinking of being able to do in this year and this environment to help in the overall strategic front and creating some kind of pathway forward for the defense community in particular? >> well it's very difficult. we are working on a variety of issues on authorities 1206 in 1203 in different pieces to get greater flexibility as they confront and deal with the challenges that they face. it basically is building partner capacity. they refer to it as preparation of the environment. what are you preparing it for exactly that they answer to that question is we are trying to compare it so we don't have insurgencies and that is training security forces in making sure that governance is happening and socom does medical care with mid-caps to try to build local population support. a lot of this is what we have done in the philippines and emphasizing that. the big wa

defense. it is most appropriate this hearing was originally scheduled for september 17, marking the anniversary of the constitution signing. public schools have to teach about our founding document on that day. my organization which is not publicly funded celebrates constitution day by releasing our supreme court review. in reality, every day is constitution day so please excuse me if i have to leave to the national constitution center and philadelphia to discuss the issues attending the debt ceiling debate. stand your ground is -- is misunderstood. it allows people to defend themselves without having a so- called duty to retreat. that content has been part of u.s. law for 150 years. about 31 states, depending who you count, now have some type of stand your ground doctrine. the vast majority in common law before legislators took any action. some, like california and virginia, maintain it without any legislation still. of the 15 states that have passed stand your ground since 2005, a majority have democratic jennifercluding granholm, janet napolitano, and kathleen sebelius. louisiana and west vi

defense. it's most appropriate the hearing was originally scheduled for september 17th.he anniversary of the constitution signing. my organization cay o', which thankfully, isn't publicly funded celebrateds by releasing the supreme court review. in reality, every day is constitution day please excuse peanut if i have to leave early to travel to philadelphia to discuss the constitutional issues. now stand your ground is tremendously misunderstood. all it does is allow people to defend themselves without having a so called duty retreat. that cob accept is in part of u.s. law for over 150 years. about 31 states depending how you count, now have some type of stand your ground doctrine. the vast majority in common law before legislators took any action. some, like california and virginia, maintain it without any legislation still. of the 15 states that have passed stand your ground since 2005, a majority have democratic governors. including jennifer, namp, and kathleen inteel yous. even florida -- passed the state senate unanimouslily. when illinois' strengthened the long sta

it was part of the department of defense appropriation debate this summer the amash amendment and manyrns about the things in the authorization -- reauthorization of the intelligence bill. i just want your reassurance that we are not losing the opportunity to do that by passing this bill tonight. >> i thank the gentleman. there would be inevitably another opportunity after that and i share the gentleman's concerns about it and would want a robust debate. of course as you know your committee could actually make this rule and an extended debate should you choose. even on this bill. >> thanks chairman for the observation. i also want to know the appropriation for the impact they bill that is important to those districts where there are large ownerships of federal property within the school districts that are not available for local taxation. we appreciate that as well and i yield that pairs the gentleman yields back is time could i want to thank each of you. excuse me just a moment please. >> the gentleman is recognized. >> you were with us at our last meeting and i think you enjoy that e

defense. what's the appropriate amount to retreat when they have to defend themselves, and the issue here might be who do we want to make, have to make deal with that ambiguity. when somebody's facing very quick decisions that they have to make in terms of life and death. do we want to make them bear the burden to fry to figure out if at that time how far they are going to retreat, and then make them realize they maybe second guessed as i have an appendix showing the number of cases where they were second guessed. in cases where legislators and others thought second guessing was wrong that so they make it somebody needs to act in self-defense is stopped from doing so thus endangering the safety of themselves or their family members that are there. finally, mr. labahn talking about being able to go and have your stand your ground law apply even though were you the initial aggressor there, he misses part of the law that he quoted because it goes on to say you can use it, but it puts strict restrictions on how you can use it in that case. it says stand your ground law is not available to person wh

as the ranking member of the authorizing committee for defense, given your very appropriate comments about the of the shutdown and continued uncertainty on the defense and national security community, what is it that you and your committee are thinking of being able to do in this year and in this environment. to help on the strategic front and creating a pathway forward for the defense community? >> we are working on different 1203, trying to give greater flexibility to the war fighter as they confront the challenges that they face. we are strongly supportive of the special operations command. that is a key piece of this ally development, building partner capacity. they refer to it -- preparation of the environment. what are you preparing it for, exactly? the answer is -- we are trying to prepare it so we do not have insurgencies. that is training security forces, making sure governance is happening. care in certain places, trying to build a local population. and a lot of that is what we have done in the philippines. approach in this ideological struggle -- you things run strikes have

defense. what is the appropriate amounts of them having to retreat when they are going to defend themselves? the issue here might be -- who do we want to have to make do with that ambiguity? when somebody is facing very quick decisions that they have to make in terms of life and death, do we want to make them have to bear the burden, to try to figure out at that time how far they are going to have to retreat? and then make them realize that they may be second-guessed, as i have an appendix that shows a number of cases where they were second-guessed, and cases were legislatures and others thought that the second-guessing was wrong there. that may make it worth somebody who may need to act in self defense is stopped from doing so and thus endangering the safety of themselves or their family members that are there. labahn, when he was talking about being able to go and happy "stand your ground" apply, although you may be the initial aggressor there, he mentioned part of the law that he quoted. , but then it say with very strict or surgeons on how you can use it in that case. lawsys stand your g

appropriation. it is that simple. i urge the secretary of defense to do the simple thing, the right thing, allow all chaplains -- to armed forces to be minister on hand or did to the men and women of the armed forces of the united states areas i congratulate doug collins of georgia, chaplain of the u.s. air force reserve, to bring -- for bringing this to the floor and urge all members to support it. >> the gentleman from south carolina reserves his time. the gentleman from washington is recognized. >> i yield myself such time as i may consume. i do not oppose this resolution. but i do want to raise a couple of process issues. i found out about this 20 minutes ago. and i think it is emblematic of how much this body has broken down. we have to talk to each other. i do not have any objection to this. i have staff, the armed services committee has a staff that work together. we have worked together in the armed services committee better than any other committee. i will grant you that is not saying much. but we have. we just simply have to talk to each o