now on iran and the ndaa. ever since president trump unilaterally decided to abandon the iran nuclear agreement, our two countries have been on a path to greater conflict. in the past month, iran has heightened its aggressive actions in the region, prompting responses from the u.s. government. no one looks at iran through rose-colored glasses, that's why americans, myself included, are worried about the current course of events. escalation happens quickly in the middle east. without a steady hand at the helm, without a coherent plan or strategy, things this president has lacked since the moment he took office, the danger of bumbling into war is acute. so democrats have been urging leader mcconnell to allow us a vote on the amendment to the ndaa concerning a possible conflict with iran. we have an amendment, led by senators udall, merkley, murphy, and kaine, cosponsored by republican senators, paul and lee, that would prohibit any funds authorized by the current ndaa to be used to conduct who's tilts against th

passing ndaa is only half of the job. yes, we must authorize full funding for our military, but if we are truly committed to our military men and women, we must also vote on the defense appropriations bill to fund what we do here this week on ndaa. as we continue to debate the f.y. 2020 ndaa, we should aller the reason why we have this debate every year. one of the primary responsibilities of congress is to provide for the common defense. that responsibility is written in the constitution. and it is an oath each of us swore to uphold. i am reminded of that oath frequently when i am back home in nebraska. each time i shake hands with a nebraskan in uniform or meet a family member with a loved one overseas, i think about the responsibility we have and the debt we owe the ones who serve. over the years, countless sons and daughters of the heartland have answered that call to service. they are regular men and women from every background and every walk of life, united by their desire to safeguard their homeland and protect the

the work that will be done is some of the most important work in the markup of the ndaa. congress has all the times in the past, no matter how partisan this body has ever become, has found a way to make the ndaa bipartisan. i have a fear that this new socialist democratic party has changed that. i'm hopeful in watching this markup tomorrow, to keep the tradition and put their partisanship aside and put the american uniform on when they fall into that chamber. we don't want to see partisanship go into to our men and women who are going to defend our freedom. being prepared means we may never have to send men and women into a battle like they faced that day. before we went home, we watched where the paratroopers dropped at 2:00 in the morning. and they thought they could all land. the intelligence did not give orm how deep the water was that they had to secure a bridge to move across to liberate france. two of our members jumped out of those planes on that sunday. a republican and a democrat. i hope when we jump into the ndaa, we have that same feeling and that same traditi

bipartisan ndaa, which we think is extremely important. and obviously, you know, giving our democratic friends a vote on the udall amendment. rather bizarre situation. democratic leader found himself in. most of his conference wanted to vote on it today. but, as you know, there are intervening events last night and tonight that created the scheduling problem for them. so, i decided i'd accommodate that. not wildly enthusiastically greeted on my side. but we'll be voting for a period of time starting at some indeterminant moment in the morning. i know you all are anxious to find out when it starts. and when it ends. and i can't tell you with specificity right now but we're trying to accommodate them. the main part on the udall amendment is none of our democratic friends would be supporting this if it were a democratic president. this clearly restricts administration's of both -- administrations of both parties who we've seen take measured responses to iranian acts of terror over the years, going back to 1979. when they captured our embassy

thornberry, to join us this morning to talk about the ndaa markup. mr. thorn bererry: thanks, liz. leader mccarthy and i were among those who had the opportunity to attend the 75th anniversary ceremonies at normandy for d-day recently. in addition to thinking about the incredible acts of bravery of those folks who scaled the cliffs, i think all of us were mindful of all that has been built and accomplished since that time. and as liz says, this week in the house both in the armed services committee, with with our committee markup, and also on the floorer with the defense appropriations, we have the opportunity to build upon what those in normandy fought and sacrificed for. we have consistently had testimony in the armed services committee since 2017 that there needed to be three to 5% real growth in the defense budget through 2025 just to repair our militarier and to maintain our current position -- military and to maintain our current position verer suss russia and china. neither the bill on the floor or the chairman's mark in the armed services committee meets that mark. i will h

specifically on the chain of command, as we laid it out in the markup for the ndaa.you may know, i worked with the chairman and members of the committee in sponsoring specific provisions as it relates to the command of space force. what i tried to lay out as an incremental approach that allows for the space force to be another big but bureaucracy, at least over time, while we work wit through this, and hopefully it says it up for success. that was my goal and i think the committee's goal. as you understand, the ndaa mark, should that eventually become life, and we know that it go, but there will be a dual hat commander of space force and space command for a year. after that year, of course, each would have their own commander-. i do not know at that point if you can draw straws or how that worked work, but that is what we will be working through. and then answers up the change chain of command. my request for you today, could you explain -- and of course the agency, the department could wait yet in support of these changes, particularly the dual the direct supervisio

we have an amendment supported by every democrat, to the ndaa and the senate. it's led by senator udall. it would require congressional approval of any funding for a conflict in iran. it's supported by all of us. we are asking leader mcconnell to do the right thing, and give us a vote next week on the ndaa on that amendment. thank you. >>> strong statement from senator schumer. also joining us lived iran is releasing the video, producing a map, what is the latest we are hearing from the iranian side? they are not saying this was a big mistake on their part, not a rogue -- and if you look at the video that the iranians put out, them shooting missiles at this drone, and you listen to some of the voices on that video, it certainly doesn't sound like people who feel they have made a big mistake. the big mistakes is where was this drone shot down. the country's foreign march terr -- we searched for that location. it would, now, volcano whether or not that's true is up in the area. the pentagon is saying something different, but iranians are clearly say this was not

chairman, so the senate version of ndaa advocates to enhance u.s.-taiwan defense relations. will the house version have similar language? >> i'm sorry. i can't hear you. >> the senate version ndaa advocates to enhance u.s.-taiwan defense relations. will the house version have the similar language, and do you support -- tanks and advanced fighter jets to taiwan? >> do i support what? >> do you support u.s. should sell tanks -- >> should sell tanks? >> tanks. and f-16 v to taiwan. >> i think we should sell weapons that enable taiwan to -- i don't know if we have language in our bill on protecting taiwan. that's not technically our jurisdiction. it's foreign affairs, and they were a little persnickety in giving us waivers this year. but, yeah, i'm all in favor of that because, again, on the deterrence message, the best thing on taiwan is to make china know if that any sort of military attempt to subjugate taiwan back into china is going to carry too high a cost. we have to make sure they perceive that cost is high, and therefore they don't want to go down that path. so i don't

as democrats, we may hold off the humanitarian bill in ndaa for two weeks from now. yet, another delay because it's an unrelated bill. so i don't know if we get the humanitarian vote, again, this week because democratic leadership is postponing again while going to the floor and saying, why isn't the trump administration doing more about this? you can't have it both ways. this is not about hurting the president and his presidential election hopes for next year. this is about a group of kids that we need to reduce the incentive for them to be able to come illegally across our border and we need to take care of the folks that are already here. this is not that hard. but it's become this horrible partisan issue. i think all of us are really frustrated with. to say this has been discussed to death. we got to be able to act on this. so i want to ask just a couple stats. how many folks are coming across as males at this point and claiming to be 17 years old? is there a disproportionate amount of males crossing the border and saying i'm 17? >> sir, i don't have the exact nu

the senate votes on the ndaa. we will hear more talk on usmca. i was thinking about how busy this week will be as we head towards the july 4 recess, especially with some open vacancies almost all over the administration. host: and an unusual time not to have a press secretary. guest: exactly. stay tuned to the president's twitter feed. we hear from nate in milwaukee, a democrat. caller: thank you for having me. i am keeping an eye on the supreme court this week because of borten cases coming up. especially related to gerrymandering and the possibility of new information from republican gerrymandering expert. it reminds me that, a lot of the time, these political parties say one thing to the public and then do something totally different behind closed doors, to try to rig their own elections. wisconsin'se of gerrymandering court case, and if anyone wants to check that out, there is an august 1 article from 2012 titled oncuments cast new light redistricting -- reveal partisan motivations." it shows how people got into one honest elections and tried

you will see in the ndaa the bill we are about to vote on here in congress that there will be additional ideas expressed there. i won't talk about them in specifics because the chairman is working through those. but all of us on the panel have been involved in ensuring we get the rite aid there. ambassador volker you have been instrumental in ensuring that we know what they want and what they need. my hope is we will have good news here shortly. i was on the contact line last year at a time when the snipers were pretty active. one of the things that i think i think most of my constituents don't realize is the degree to which it is still a hot war. when i placed a wreath at the memorial recently for the ukrainians who lost their lives there, includes about 3,000 troops, who continue to face artillery and the snipers. ambassador herb hadsst your tesy was in many respects the most powerful for me because you are talking about what's going on on the contact line, the number of officers involved, the number of tanks and artillery -- i amazing the ukrainians have been able to push back the way

we have an amendment supported by every democrat to the ndaa in the senate that's led by senator udol that would require congressional approval of any funding for a conflict in iran. it's supported by all of us. we are asking leader mcconnell to do the right thing and give us a vote next week on the ndaa on that amendment. thank you. >> senator, was there any -- al qaeda? >> okay. kelly o'donnell, let me go to you on what we just heard there from senator schumer. he is of course talking about the broad defense bill that funds the entire defense department. they want to basically attach something to it that would prevent use of funds for any conflicts with iran. they are saying that the aumf that's covered our war on terror should not apply in this situation. what's your take on what senator schumer had to say there, and also your reporting on what's gone on, on the hill aall day? well, we just also heard from mitch mcconnell, the senate majority leader when he returned, and he described the trump administration as taking a measured response. he did not go into the kind of detail we ju

and the ndaa bill at the end of the year that's for national defense authorization act, when these bills come about you can pretty much throw anything in it and if anyone questions it, they come back with the old, you're not supporting our troops. then there was the cost plus spending i learned of from the film "iraq for sale" about 15 years ago. i wanted mr. schatz to address these things that i just brought up. >> much longer conversation talking about military spending, but we do care about it. in the congressional pig book we identify wasteful spending on defense. going back to the grace commission, $424 billion of wasteful spending. 25 of that was defense. defense is not 50% of the budget. it's half of discretionary spending but there's also non-discretionary entitlement spending which is 60% of the budget these days. >> paul from greenfield center, new york, on the republican line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. how are you? >> just fine. go ahead. >> caller: yes. i want to terminate the president's fund, annual taxpayer subsidized payments to past presidents. think about i

remember, a member the file world dress -- farewell address from the military-industrial spending in the ndaa bill, if you remember the year the national defense authorization act. when these bills come about, you could pretty much throw anything in it and then if anyone questions it, they come back with the old, you're not supporting our troops. then, there was a cost plus spending i learned of from the film iraq for sale about 15 years ago and i wanted mr. schantz to address these things i just brought up . >> that's a much longer conversation talking about military spending but we do care about it in the congressional pig book and we identify spending on defense and reagan found $24.4 billion of wasteful spending and 25% of that was defense. defense is not 50% of the budget, by the way. it is half of discretionary spending but remember there's also nondiscretionary entitlements vending which is so 60% of the budget these days. . >> let's talk to paul from new york on the republican line. paul, good morning . >> good morning gentlemen, how are you . >> i want to terminate the president's fu

what if an advisor was to ask about the status of the ndaa with several senate democrats campaigning for president instead of being president to support our military. could they say, senators jill brant, klobuchar should get off the presidential campaign bill and back to the senate to complete the ndaa? instead the senate minority leader is asking for a full stop in the senate until the democratic primary is complete. what if an adviseor makeance obviously connection between a policy proposal and possible political motivation? is the advisor allowed to highlight the intention othey have lawmaker? i'm sure introducing legislation that gives more free stuff to more people has nothing to do with her presidential campaign. what about if an advisor ways in -- weighs in on current u.s. senator's campaign against bortion? what if a senator claims to support something while running for office but refuses to introduce a bill. can the president's advisor comment on how the sitting senator is acting in a political not governmental capacity? what about this? senator jill brand in her role as sen

some efforts i think next week as the senate takes up our national defense authorization act, the ndaatry to inject itself a little bit. i think what happened over the last 24 hours should be a wakeup call for all members of congress that we need to keep a close hand on this and not watch and listen to our classified briefings. we need to have a little bit more active involvement here. >> how do you do that? let's say the house -- through some miraculous act of bipartisanship, the house removing the current aumf happens? so now there's another provocation, good forbid and the president says we're going to bomb, what could you do? >> i think we have to work toward another authorization. i think what has to happen here, leaders need to talk. they have to insist that congress be allowed to do its duty ooin any foreign relations that involves military action. it's really going to take the other side of the aisle. i think it's going to take the republicans to stand up and exert themselves. you're going to have democrats talking about that. but i think we're going to have some republicans ta

some efforts i think next week as the senate takes up our national defense authorization act, the ndaao try to inject itself a little bit. i think what happened over the last 24 hours should be a wakeup call for all members of congress that we need to keep a close hand on this and not watch and listen to our classified briefings. we need to have a little bit more active involvement here. >> how do you do that? let's say the house -- through some miraculous act of bipartisanship, the house removing the current aumf happens? so now there's another provocation, good forbid and the president says we're going to bomb, what could you do? >> i think we have to work toward another authorization. i think what has to happen here, leaders need to talk. they have to insist that congress be allowed to do its duty in any foreign relations that involves military action. it's really going to take the other side of the aisle. i think it's going to take the republicans to stand up and exert themselves. you're going to have democrats talking about that. but i think we're going to have some republicans ta

it's why we have the ndaa on the floor next week dealing with defense issues.ouse has not one version, the senate's got another version, but at the end of it we are going to actually -- >> i guess i go back to the politics of it. the best way to call the bluff of the democrats on this, if mitch mcconnell thinks this is some sort of political thing they want to do is to actually hold the vote. >> yeah. i get that. that's why i continue to work on the bill. at the end of the day my responsibility is to get a bill ready, the leader's responsibility is to be able to bring it up or down in committees. >> what do you think it would take to convince mcconnell to bring your bill to the floor? >> i think it's solid bipartisan support that this is not going to be some game at the end of it to try to add things that everyone knows is going to be a poisoned pill or to try to federalize elections and that's been one we've pushed back on pretty hard. when you have election security issues is to keep elections secure by keeping them separate. it was one of the strengths of ou

the senate votes on the ndaa. we will hear more talk on usmca. was thinking about how busy this week will be as we head towards the july 4 recess, especially with some open vacancies almost all over the administration. host: and an unusual time not to have a press secretary. guest: exactly. stay tuned to the president's twitter feed. we hear from nate in milwaukee, a democrat. caller: thank you for having me. i am keeping an eye on the supreme court this week because of borten cases coming up. especially related to gerrymandering and the possibility of new information from republican gerrymandering expert. it reminds me that, a lot of the time, these political parties say one thing to the public and then do something totally different behind closed doors, to try to rig their own elections. wisconsin'se of gerrymandering court case, and if anyone wants to check that out, there is an august 1 article from 2012 titled oncuments cast new light redistricting -- reveal partisan motivations." it shows how people got into one honest elections and tried n

, sanders, booker, enclosure -- and klobuchar should complete the ndaa? the senate minority leader is asking for a. until the primary is complete. what if an advisor makes an obvious statement, obvious connection between a policy proposal and possible political motivation? is the advisor allowed to highlight the intention of the lawmaker? i am sure introducing legislation that gives more free stuff to more people has nothing to do with the presidential campaign. what about if an advisor weighs in on a current campaign position on abortion? cannot advisor say -- can an advisor say that? even further, what if a senator claims to support something while running for office but refuses to actually introduce a bill? in the president's advisor comment on how the sitting senator is acting in a political, not governmental, capacity? gillibrand has introduced legislation to eliminate pesticides from school foods, school lunch programs, demonstrating or misunderstanding of science and production agriculture. it is a coincidence it happened around the same time it wa

ou will see in the ndaa, there will be additional ideas expressed there. i won't talk about them in specifics, but all of this panel make sure we get the rite-aid there and ambassador volker you have been involved that we know what they want and what they need. so my hope is that we'll have some good news here shortly. i was on the contact line last year at a time when the snipers were pretty active and one of the things that i think most of my constituents don't realize he extent. when i placed the wreath at the memorial recently for the ukranians who lost their lives include 3,000 troops who continue to face artillery and the snipers. and ambassador, your testimony was in many respects the most powerful for me because you are talking about what is going on in that contact line, the number of tanks and artillery. it's overwhelming. it's amazing that the ukranians have been able to push back. not because we want war but we want peace. what happened in november and these 24 sailors. do you recommend additional sanctions? maybe an additional company to be sa

section 225 of the 2018 ndaa authorized a national security innovation and entrepreneurial education programs, including what is now known as nsin. nsin ames to educate and -- aprils to educate and build -- aims to educate and build esources for entrepreneurs for defense and national security applications. nsin initiatives provide education in technology innovation and entrepreneurship. of note, they provide the unique pathway for veterans to leverage their expertise while learning cutting-edge business innovation methodology and applying their knowledge to new national security problems. through these initiatives, d.o.d. is growing a cadre of prirs that are adept at critical thinking, innovative problem solving and the creation of successful ventures that deliver economic, national security and social value. one initiative in the national security innovation network is the highly successful hacking for defense force. hacking for defense or h-4-d is a course currently taught at more than two dozen universities across the nation. it pairs student teams with problem solvers -- with pro

what i would like to see and what we've been talking about through the ndaa process is a mechanism inn 2001, they had taken that power away from us. it is time do something different. >> you sit on the oversight committee. this administration has thumbed its nose at the office repeatedly. the president was advised to fire kellyanne conway. he said he would not do that. is she going to show up? >> i'd be shocked if she does, to be honest with you. >> part of what we do is help to illuminate for the american people what is going on. if you ask people on the street, few people know what the hatch act is. we'll try to eliminate that. again, it's action after action by the trump administration and all of the people he surrounds himself with that show he does not care about the law. he does not care about presidential norms. he believes he's above the law and that's why we need to make sure during this election process, we are rebooting that at every level. >> on your point, joe, one of the things i find could nfusing here, it is not like you need to prove that he's outside the law. even wi

we're working with the armed services, the ndaa to look at that, but i would ask you to take a look at it. finally, my last question, and i would ask you to respond to all three of them. the department of defense inspector general just found out that there is -- dod continues paying excessive profits on parts purchased from sole source manufacturers and providers. again, i don't have a problem vendors making money. i'm for that. but i do have a problem when 46 out of 47 parts that they looked at had excessive profits where they went from 17 to 4,451%. according to the ig. i would ask you to take a look at it. i'm a big supporter of what you all do but when you have vendors losing parts, when you have all this excessive profits made -- and i'm a capitalist. i just feel that the taxpayers are being taken advantage of. mr. chairman, i know this is my last series of questions but i would ask you to look at those three items that i just mentioned. border would be something that if you go to do that, clear the line of sight for it and you can put a lot of technology in those areas and probab

there is no rush to complete the ndaa. we have passed it very frequently later in the year with no harmful consequences to our military. we should have the vote on the udall amendment which is an urgency before we bumble into war. and it should occur when every senator is able to cast their vote. last week the republican leader promised the senate would hold an open amendment process on the ndaa. we have critical national security issues to debate, including iran, including election security. will the republican leader keep his word and allow this debate to go forward? for much of this year leader mcconnell unfortunately and now becoming known from one end of america to the other has turned the senate into a legislative graveyard where we hardly if ever vote on the prevailing issue of the day. will the majority leader let the senate have this important vote or is this another issue, another debate, the ability to fund a war that will be buried in his legislative graveyard? i hope he will not continue his shameful record of

and i believe that this year's ndaa accomplishes just that. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the assistant democratic leader. mr. durbin: mr. president, if you study the recent course of american history you can note there's been the emergence of opportunity and debates on freedom many times during the last 50 years. i think back to my time, my early years of education in high school and college when america was in the midst of a debate about the rights of african americans, the so-called civil rights movements of the 1960's. we've had debates as well on the question of liberty and freedom and freedom from discrimination for women in america, for those who are disabled. it really is a hallmark of this democracy that we continue to expand opportunity and continue to question our own beliefs when it comes to the freedom which each of us cherishes. we're now in the midst of an interesting transformation in this country on the issue of the rights of people with different sexual orientation. we have seen some dramatic changes in just the last few years as we

and influence in this troubled region, including arms sales to key regional partners as well as the ndaa. so i would urge every one of my colleagues to keep these deadly serious developments at the top of our mr. schumer: these things have a habit of escalating almost on their own. should be discussed with the american people. not number three in the state department going to a closed door meeting. the president, instead of tonight talking about all this immigration stuff which he's going to, he ought to tell the people at his rally what he wantsed into iran. we, the policy in iran has been erratic and opaque. nobody knows what their plans are and why they're doing what. and as we have learned over -- since the 1960's, unless the american people are onboard with the strategy, it ultimately is not going to get their support and congress' support. so we need the president, and i told this to mr. pompeo, to secretary of state pompeo on the phone saturday, we need the president to lay out what he thinks the problem is and there is a problem. how he wants to deal with it. and what are his lim

and influence in this troubled region, including arms sales to key regional partners as well as the ndaa. so i would urge every one of my colleagues to keep these deadly serious developments at the top of our mr. schumer: these things have a habit of escalating almost on their own. should be discussed with the american people. not number three in the state department going to a closed door meeting. the president, instead of tonight talking about all this immigration stuff which he's going to, he ought to tell the people at his rally what he wantsed into iran. we, the policy in iran has been erratic and opaque

ndaa, the f.y. 2019 this program provided active duty, reservists and retirees with this benefit. this is an example of programs operated by the military that can and do work for the american people. expanding the benefit to include 100% of disabled veterans was common sense and will help those veterans visit their families, old friends from the service and seek services for medical and mental health treatment with the best possible health care providers. 100% disabled veterans in delaware, the expansion offers a expansion due to doffer's air force base's location in the state. many communities are similarly improved, thanks to this program. while the effort to expand access to this program to some of our veterans oh was well intended, i have heard from veterans they may have had an unintended consequence. it does not allow caregivers or spouses to travel with eligible veterans. for many veterans -- that r-rated as 100% disabled, the inability to have their caregiver or spouse on the flight disqualifies them from using this incredible program. we must ensure all eligible veterans