[Pages H5308-H5314]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

COST OF WAR AGAINST TERRORISM AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2002

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 4547) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for
military activities of the Department of Defense and to prescribe
military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2003.
The Clerk read as follows:

H.R. 4547

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Cost of
War Against Terrorism Authorization Act of 2002''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Amounts authorized for the War on Terrorism.
Sec. 3. Additional authorizations

TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Subtitle A--Authorizations to Transfer Accounts

Sec. 101. War on Terrorism Operations Fund.
Sec. 102. War on Terrorism Equipment Replacement and Enhancement Fund.
Sec. 103. General provisions applicable to transfers.

Subtitle B--Authorizations to Specified Accounts

Sec. 111. Army procurement.
Sec. 112. Navy and Marine Corps procurement.
Sec. 113. Air Force procurement.
Sec. 114. Defense-wide activities procurement.
Sec. 115. Research, development, test, and evaluation, defense-wide.
Sec. 116. Classified activities.
Sec. 117. Global Information Grid system.
Sec. 118. Operation and maintenance.
Sec. 119. Military personnel.

Subtitle C--Military Construction Authorizations

Sec. 131. Authorized military construction and land acquisition
projects.

TITLE II--WARTIME PAY AND ALLOWANCE INCREASES

Sec. 201. Increase in rate for family separation allowance.
Sec. 202. Increase in rates for various hazardous duty incentive pays.
Sec. 203. Increase in rate for diving duty special pay.
Sec. 204. Increase in rate for imminent danger pay.
Sec. 205. Increase in rate for career enlisted flyer incentive pay.
Sec. 206. Increase in amount of death gratuity.
Sec. 207. Effective date.

TITLE III--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Establishment of at least one Weapons of Mass Destruction
Civil Support Team in each State.
Sec. 302. Authority for joint task forces to provide support to law
enforcement agencies conducting counter-terrorism
activities.
Sec. 303. Sense of Congress on assistance to first responders.

SEC. 2. AMOUNTS AUTHORIZED FOR THE WAR ON TERRORISM.

The amounts authorized to be appropriated in this Act,
totalling $10,000,000,000, are authorized for the conduct of
operations in continuation of the war on terrorism in
accordance with the Authorization for Use of Military Force
(Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) and, to the extent
appropriations are made pursuant to such authorizations,
shall only be expended in a manner consistent with the
purposes stated in section 2(a) thereof.

SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS

The amounts authorized to be appropriated by this Act are
in addition to amounts authorized to be appropriated for
military functions of the Department of Defense for fiscal
year 2003 in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2003 or any other Act.

TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Subtitle A--Authorizations to Transfer Accounts

SEC. 101. WAR ON TERRORISM OPERATIONS FUND.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense
for fiscal year 2003 the amount of $3,544,682,000, to be
available only for operations in accordance with the purposes
stated in section 2 for Operation Noble Eagle and Operation
Enduring Freedom. Funds authorized in the preceding sentence
may only be used as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Transfer Authority.--Subject to section 103, the
Secretary of Defense may, in the Secretary's discretion,
transfer amounts authorized in subsection (a) to any fiscal
year 2003 military personnel or operation and maintenance
account of the Department of Defense for the purposes stated
in that subsection.

SEC. 102. WAR ON TERRORISM EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT AND
ENHANCEMENT FUND.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is hereby
authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense
for fiscal year 2003 the amount of $1,000,000,000, to be
available only in accordance with the purposes stated in
section 2 and to be used only as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Transfer Authority.--Subject to section 103, the
Secretary of Defense may, in the Secretary's discretion,
transfer amounts authorized in subsection (a) to any fiscal
year 2003 procurement or research, development, test, and
evaluation account of the Department of Defense for the
purpose of--
(1) emergency replacement of equipment and munitions lost
or expended in operations conducted as part of Operation
Noble Eagle or Operation Enduring Freedom; or
(2) enhancement of critical military capabilities necessary
to carry out operations pursuant to Public Law 107-40.

SEC. 103. GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO TRANSFERS.

(a) In General.--Amounts transferred pursuant to section
101(b) or 102(b) shall be merged with, and available for the
same purposes and the same time period as, the account to
which transferred.
(b) Congressional Notice-and-Wait Requirement.--A transfer
may not be made under section 101(b) or 102(b) until the
Secretary of Defense has submitted a notice in writing to the
Committees on Armed Services and the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives of
the proposed transfer and a period of 15 days has elapsed
after the date such notice is received. Any such notice shall
include specification of the amount of the proposed transfer,
the account to which the transfer is to be made, and the
purpose of the transfer.
(c) Transfer Authority Cumulative.--The transfer authority
provided by this subtitle is in addition to any other
transfer authority available to the Secretary of Defense
under this Act or any other Act.

Subtitle B--Authorizations to Specified Accounts

SEC. 111. ARMY PROCUREMENT.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2003 for procurement accounts of the Army in amounts as
follows:
(1) For ammunition, $94,000,000.
(2) For other procurement, $10,700,000.

SEC. 112. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS PROCUREMENT.

(a) Navy.--Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal year 2003 for procurement accounts for the Navy in
amounts as follows:
(1) For aircraft, $106,000,000.
(2) For weapons, including missiles and torpedoes,
$633,000,000.
(b) Marine Corps.--Funds are hereby authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for the procurement account
for the Marine Corps in the amount of $25,200,000.
(c) Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for the
procurement account

[[Page H5309]]

for ammunition for the Navy and the Marine Corps in the
amount of $120,600,000.

SEC. 113. AIR FORCE PROCUREMENT.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2003 for procurement accounts for the Air Force in
amounts as follows:
(1) For aircraft, $214,550,000.
(2) For ammunition, $157,900,000.
(3) For other procurement, $10,800,000.

SEC. 114. DEFENSE-WIDE ACTIVITIES PROCUREMENT.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2003 for the procurement account for Defense-wide
procurement in the amount of $620,414,000.

SEC. 115. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION,
DEFENSE-WIDE.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2003 for the research, development, test, and evaluation
account for Defense-wide activities in the amount of
$390,100,000.

SEC. 116. CLASSIFIED ACTIVITIES.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 2003 for unspecified
intelligence and classified activities in the amount of
$1,980,674,000, of which--
(1) $1,618,874,000 is authorized to be appropriated to
procurement accounts;
(2) $301,600,000 is authorized to be appropriated to
operation and maintenance accounts; and
(3) $60,200,000 is authorized to be appropriated to
research, development, test, and evaluation accounts.

SEC. 117. GLOBAL INFORMATION GRID SYSTEM.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
for the Department of Defense system known as the Global
Information Grid may be obligated until the Secretary of
Defense submits to the Committees on Armed Services and the
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and House of
Representatives the Secretary's certification that the end-
to-end system is secure and protected from unauthorized
access to the information transmitted through the system.

SEC. 118. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.

Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal
year 2003 for the use of the Armed Forces for expenses, not
otherwise provided for, for operation and maintenance, in
amounts as follows:
(1) For the Army, $14,270,000.
(2) For the Navy, $5,252,500.
(3) For the Marine Corps, $11,396,000.
(4) For the Air Force, $517,285,000.

SEC. 119. MILITARY PERSONNEL.

There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Defense for military personnel accounts for
fiscal year 2003 a total of $503,100,000.

Subtitle C--Military Construction Authorizations

SEC. 131. AUTHORIZED MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS.

(a) Projects Authorized.--Using amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in subsection
(b), the Secretary of the military department concerned may
acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the installations and locations, and in the
amounts, set forth in the following table:

Projects Authorized
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation or
Military Department location Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Army......... Qatar.................. $8,600,000
Department of the Navy......... Naval Station, $4,280,000
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba..
Naval Station, Rota, $18,700,000
Spain.................
Department of the Air Force.... Bolling Air Force Base, $3,500,000
District of Columbia..
---------------
Total................ $35,080,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for the
military construction projects authorized by subsection (a)
in the total amount of $35,080,000.

TITLE II--WARTIME PAY AND ALLOWANCE INCREASES

SEC. 201. INCREASE IN RATE FOR FAMILY SEPARATION ALLOWANCE.

Section 427(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``$100'' and inserting ``$125''.

SEC. 202. INCREASE IN RATES FOR VARIOUS HAZARDOUS DUTY
INCENTIVE PAYS.

(a) Flight Pay for Crew Members.--Subsection (b) of section
301 of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking
the table and inserting the following new table:

``Pay grade: Monthly Rate
O-10............................................................$200
O-9.............................................................$200
O-8.............................................................$200
O-7.............................................................$200
O-6.............................................................$300
O-5.............................................................$300
O-4.............................................................$275
O-3.............................................................$225
O-2.............................................................$200
O-1.............................................................$200
W-5.............................................................$300
W-4.............................................................$300
W-3.............................................................$225
W-2.............................................................$200
W-1.............................................................$200
E-9.............................................................$290
E-8.............................................................$290
E-7.............................................................$290
E-6.............................................................$265
E-5.............................................................$240
E-4.............................................................$215
E-3.............................................................$200
E-2.............................................................$200
E-1...........................................................$200''.

(b) Incentive Pay for Parachute Jumping Without Static
Line.--Subsection (c)(1) of such section is amended by
striking ``$225'' and inserting ``$275''.
(c) Other Hazardous Duties.--Subsection (c)(1) of such
section is amended by striking ``$150'' and inserting
``$200''.
(d) Removal of Air Weapons Controller Crew Members From
List of Hazardous Duties.--Such section is further amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking paragraph (12);
(B) in paragraph (11), by striking ``; or'' and inserting a
period; and
(C) in paragraph (10), by inserting ``or'' after the
semicolon; and
(2) in subsection (c), as amended by subsections (b) and
(c) of this section--
(A) by striking ``(1)''; and
(B) by striking paragraph (2).

SEC. 203. INCREASE IN RATE FOR DIVING DUTY SPECIAL PAY.

Section 304(b) of title 37, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``$240'' and inserting ``$290''; and
(2) by striking ``$340'' and inserting ``$390''.

SEC. 204. INCREASE IN RATE FOR IMMINENT DANGER PAY.

Section 310(a) of title 37, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``$150'' and inserting ``$250''.

SEC. 205. INCREASE IN RATE FOR CAREER ENLISTED FLYER
INCENTIVE PAY.

The table in section 320(d) of title 37, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:

``Years of aviation service Monthly rate
4 or less...................................................$200 ....

Over 4......................................................$275 ....

Over 8......................................................$400 ....

Over 14..................................................$450.''.....

SEC. 206. INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF DEATH GRATUITY.

Section 1478(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``$6,000'' and inserting ``$12,000''.

SEC. 207. EFFECTIVE DATE.

(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the
amendments made by this title shall take effect on the later
of the following:
(1) The first day of the first month beginning on or after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) October 1, 2002.
(b) Death Gratuity.--The amendment made by section 206
shall apply with respect to a person covered by section 1475
or 1476 of title 10, United States Code, whose date of death
occurs on or after the later of the following:
(1) The date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) October 1, 2002.

TITLE III--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 301. ESTABLISHMENT OF AT LEAST ONE WEAPONS OF MASS
DESTRUCTION CIVIL SUPPORT TEAM IN EACH STATE.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams are
strategic assets, stationed at the operational level, as an
immediate response capability to assist local responders in
the event of an emergency within the United States involving
use or potential use of weapons of mass destruction.
(2) Since September 11 2001, Civil Support Teams have
responded to more than 200 requests for support from civil
authorities for actual or potential weapons of mass
destruction incidents and have supported various national
events, including the World Series, the Super Bowl, and the
2002 Winter Olympics.
(3) To enhance homeland security as the Nation fights the
war against terrorism, each State and territory must have a
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team to respond to
potential weapons of mass destruction incidents.
(4) In section 1026 of the Bob Stump National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 as passed the House of
Representatives on May 10, 2002 (H.R. 4546 of the 107th
Congress), the House of Representatives has already taken
action to that end by expressing the sense of Congress that
the Secretary of Defense should establish 23 additional
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams in order to
provide at least one such team in each State and territory.
(5) According to a September 2001 report of the Comptroller
General entitled ``Combating Terrorism'', the Department of
Defense plans that there eventually should be a Weapons of
Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams in each State,
territory, and the District of Columbia.
(b) Requirement.--From funds authorized to be appropriated
in section 101, the Secretary of

[[Page H5310]]

Defense shall ensure that there is established at least one
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team in each State.
(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support
Team'' means a team of members of the reserve components of
the armed forces that is established under section 12310(c)
of title 10, United States Code, in support of emergency
preparedness programs to prepare for or to respond to any
emergency involving the use of a weapon of mass destruction.
(2) The term ``State'' includes the District of Columbia,
Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam.
(d) Deadline for Implementation.--The Secretary of Defense
shall ensure that subsection (b) is fully implemented not
later than September 30, 2003.

SEC. 302. AUTHORITY FOR JOINT TASK FORCES TO PROVIDE SUPPORT
TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES CONDUCTING COUNTER-
TERRORISM ACTIVITIES.

(a) Authority.--A joint task force of the Department of
Defense that provides support to law enforcement agencies
conducting counter-drug activities may also provide,
consistent with all applicable laws and regulations, support
to law enforcement agencies conducting counter-terrorism
activities.
(b) Conditions.--Any support provided under subsection (a)
may only be provided in the geographic area of responsibility
of the joint task force.
(c) Funds.--Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated
for fiscal year 2003 in the amount of $5,000,000 to provide
support for counter-terrorism activities in accordance with
subsections (a) and (b).

SEC. 303. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON ASSISTANCE TO FIRST
RESPONDERS.

It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense
should, to the extent the Secretary determines appropriate,
use funds provided in this Act to assist, train, and equip
local fire and police departments that would be a first
responder to a domestic terrorist incident that may come
about in connection with the continued fight to prosecute the
war on terrorism.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton)
each will control 20 minutes.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise to claim time in opposition.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton)
opposed to the motion?
Mr. SKELTON. No, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the clause 1(c) of rule XV, the Chair
recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) to control the time
in opposition to the motion. Each side will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).

General Leave

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on the bill under consideration, H.R. 4547.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that half the time
in support of the bill, that is the time that I have of 20 minutes,
that half of that be designated to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Skelton) for purposes of control.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, on July 18, the House Committee on Armed Services
reported out the bill presently before the House, H.R. 4547, on a near
unanimous vote of 50 to 1. To understand what this bill does, allow me
to first provide a bit of background.
The President's budget request for fiscal year 2003 contained an
unprecedented request for the Congress to establish a $10 billion war
contingency fund that would allow the Department of Defense maximum
flexibility in expanding these funds to prosecute the war on terrorism.
In response, the House adopted a budget resolution in March that set
aside $10 billion of the defense budget in a special reserve fund for
this purpose.
The operative language of the budget resolution establishing the
procedure by which the House would be able to consider authorizing or
appropriating the $10 billion fund requires that only legislation that
provides new budget authority for operations of the Department of
Defense to prosecute the war on terrorism will qualify to use this
fund.
On July 3, the President submitted to Congress a request to amend his
budget to provide a bit more detail on how DOD proposes to expend these
funds but would still essentially remain one large $10 billion
contingency fund. When the committee and the House acted on the defense
authorization bill earlier this year, we recognized that this approach
would require that we split the defense authorization bill into two
pieces. One would involve the requested defense program minus the $10
billion, and the other would be the $10 billion which would follow at
some later point.
In passing the base defense bill, we also took preliminary action on
the $10 billion bill by authorizing about $3.5 billion worth of
programs that we judged to be more appropriately considered as part of
the so-called ``cost of war'' fund. Since then, the Senate has passed
its version of the defense authorization bill and chose to include the
$10 billion, unlike the House. So at this point, we are disconnected
with the Senate over the $10 billion as we prepare to go to conference.
All this background brings us to today. The objectives of this bill
are twofold: First, to preserve the prerogative of the Congress and the
authorizing process by considering and issuing our recommendation on
this remaining piece of the defense budget; and, second, to move this
bill through the process so that we can go to conference with the
Senate with both sides having acted on the totality of the defense
budget for fiscal year 2003.
H.R. 4547, as amended by the Committee on Armed Services, represents
a compromise of sorts. It authorizes specific activities where we have
received specific detail on how the Pentagon intends to execute war-
related activities and it grants the administration flexibility for
these accounts that traditionally are nearly impossible to define in
such a situation.
This bill accomplishes a number of objectives: First, it preserves
the action already taken by the committee by fulfilling our commitment
to authorize the $3.5 billion worth of war-related items we deferred
earlier in May. Second, it would keep intact all major elements of the
budget request and authorize those amounts for which the administration
has identified a specific purpose. Third, it provides the Department of
Defense significant flexibility by creating two transfer accounts that
the Secretary can use to move money around and to meet the needs of the
war as they emerge.

{time} 2330

Finally, it fully and specifically complies with the terms of the
budget resolution by ensuring that all activities funded by this bill
are directly for the prosecution of the war on terrorism. I would
repeat that to my colleagues, that all the dollars that are expended in
this bill must be compliant with the resolution that this House passed
on September 14, 2001.
Mr. Speaker, we are moving this bill through the House tonight on an
expedited schedule for a good reason. The President has asked the
Congress to send him first those bills that he needs to ensure that we
continue to prevail in our war against terrorism.
The House has done everything possible to comply with this important
request, and tonight's expedited consideration of this war funding bill
is a continuation of this commitment to properly support our men and
women who are on the front lines of this challenge.
In closing, I thank committee members on both sides of the aisle who
worked so cooperatively to move this process forward with the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton),
the ranking member.
Mr. Speaker, this bill was developed on a bipartisan basis with the
mutual objective of striking a balance between congressional
prerogatives and the need to provide the department with some
flexibility in financing this unprecedented global war on terrorism.
The bill represents a very reasonable approach that accomplishes all
these goals. I urge Members to give it their very strong support.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Arkansas (Mr. Synder).

[[Page H5311]]

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, let me just say I am a member of the
Committee on Armed Services and the committee considered this bill last
week and I voted for it coming out of committee, but this is a very,
very poor process.
Members got the Blackberry a week or two after September 11, and we
get notice when bills are going to be considered. I believe it was 8:47
this evening I got a message that said that we were going to finish
with the Cuban amendments on Treasury-Postal appropriations and go
home.
At 9:12 another message comes over it and says through this expedited
process, we are going to consider a $10 billion bill, and we are going
to give 20 minutes on each side. The Chamber is empty. Do not kid
anyone, Members are not sitting in their offices watching the debate
tonight. This is a time of war, a time when our country expects us to
be paying attention to these kinds of bills, and we are not expediting
the process, we are expediting the denial of democracy.
I wanted to do an amendment on this bill. This process means there
are no amendments. I had help with my amendment by the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), a well-respected Republican subcommittee
chairman, and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of
the Committee on International Relations, were joining me on an
amendment that we were going to go to the Committee on Rules to try to
put on this bill.
This process denies the right of any Member to bring an amendment on
a $10 billion bill. I think it is a very, very poor way to do a process
at any time, particularly at 11:30 at night when Members have gone
home.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the bill being considered this evening will complete the
House's consideration of the second piece of fiscal year 2003 National
Defense Authorization Act. The bill passed the Committee on Armed
Services with broad bipartisan support. Passing this bill will allow
the House to quickly proceed to conference with the Senate on both
pieces of the authorization bill, thereby providing our men and women
in uniform with all the tools they need to fight the global war and to
protect the American people.
The bill as passed by the Committee on Armed Services reflects a
balanced approach to authorizing the $10 billion war reserve fund
requested by the administration. The amendment carries forward the
specific authorizations made by the committee when it first considered
the bill earlier this year. It includes the wartime pay and allowances
increases from that earlier consideration, and includes two new,
operationally oriented transfer funds that should enable the Department
of Defense to meet operational expenses associated with prosecuting the
war against terrorism.
Although the committee's approach may not provide the Department of
Defense with complete discretion and use of the $10 billion, I believe
it provides sufficient flexibility for the department.
I also want to indicate my support for the premise of this bill that
the funds we authorize today are tied to the resolution passed by
Congress on September 14, 2001, that authorizes the use of force
against those who attacked our great Nation on September 11. The effort
here today is to provide the administration funding for activities that
are directly related to prosecuting the war against terrorism.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, so do I understand that this in no way
authorizes the expenditure of monies for any attack on the nation of
Iraq?
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, by its verbiage, this is limited to the
resolution that passed Congress on September 14, 2001.
Mr. DOGGETT. Which is a very narrow resolution tying it to the events
of September 11?
Mr. SKELTON. Absolutely.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, the funds authorized and the increases to
pay and allowances included in this bill are critical to the Department
of Defense's ability to continue to fight the war.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr.
Allen).
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate both the ranking member, the gentleman
from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), and the chairman, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter), for bringing this legislation before us. I
rise in support of the legislation. I particularly appreciate the
language that the committee has included in section 2 pertaining to the
scope of the authorization in the bill. Section 2 states that the $10
billion authorized in this legislation ``are authorized for the conduct
of operations in continuation of the war on terrorism in accordance
with the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50
USC 1541 note) and, to the extent appropriations are made pursuant to
such authorizations, shall only be expended in a manner consistent with
the purposes in section 2(a) thereof.''
Section 2(a) of the Use of Force resolution authorizes the President
``to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations,
organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed,
or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or
harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future
acts of international terrorism against the United States by such
nations, organizations or persons.''
Therefore, it is clear that the committee intends that funds
authorized in this bill are only to be used for military operations
against entities responsible for the September 11 attacks, or entities
that harbor those responsible.
Likewise, I believe funds in this bill cannot be used to expand the
war on terrorism to other nations absent clear and compelling evidence
that a nation was responsible for the September 11 attacks or is
actively and willingly harboring those responsible unless subsequently
authorized for such a purpose by Congress.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 2340

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to congratulate the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen) and the
committee for focusing in on that point because certainly it was not
the intent of that committee to have that used for anything other than
what is in the resolution of September 14 which, Mr. Speaker, I voted
for.
I want to say that while I know that is the intention of the
committee, I would be very concerned about people in the administration
who may interpret it to say, as it reads, that the President is
authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those
nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized,
committed or aided the terrorist attacks.
It is no secret when we look at the events of the last few weeks, we
see headlines such as:
``Bush to Formalize a Defense Policy of Hitting First,'' New York
Times, June 17.
``U.S. Plans Massive Invasion of Iraq,'' UPI, July 10.
``U.S. Capable of Quick Iraq Strike,'' Associated Press, July 10.
``We could have a situation where on Monday it first looks like there
will be a war, on Friday troops are in Kuwait, and by the next Thursday
they are in Baghdad.'' John Pike, Defense Analyst. Associated Press,
July 10.
``U.S. Says Iraq Would Target Troops,'' Associated Press, July 13.
``According to officials who spoke to UPI, three dates are being
discussed as possible times to launch the attack. The first would be
before the November elections.'' UPI, July 10.
``U.S. Worries Iraq's Chemical and Biological Weapons Would Target
Invading American Troops, Israel.'' Associated Press, July 13.
One of the things that concerns me, Mr. Speaker, is notwithstanding
the assumption which the honorable gentlemen have here about how this
money is going to be spent, I have here the House markup with the
actual breakdown of the amount of moneys that are going to be used per
category

[[Page H5312]]

in the cost of the war. I think it is more than interesting that we see
for a war supposedly in Afghanistan an amount of almost a half a
billion dollars is going to be used for chemical and biological
defense. An amount of nearly $600 million would be used for conversion
of Tomahawk missiles. An amount of $3.5 billion would be used for an
operations fund. An amount of over a half a billion dollars would be
used for combat air patrols. I think that is interesting because when
you take that in the context of a New York Times report of a
preliminary Pentagon planning document in an article written by Eric
Schmitt, it suggests, according to the Times, that the military brass
is considering a large scale air and ground assault involving as many
as 250,000 American troops. Indeed, that has been the reportage that we
have seen. This report goes on to say in an editorial that such a
Pentagon plan for an invasion of Iraq would be backed by hundreds of
warplanes. It goes on to say that Saddam Hussein may not be as easily
deterred from using his hidden stocks of anthrax, botulinum, toxin and
VX nerve gas.
So when you put this document together with the report of the
preliminary Pentagon planning document, I think this is one of those
cases where one plus one equals an invasion of Iraq, notwithstanding
the September 14 language or the fine work of our committee. I want to
express that as a concern because there is some symmetry here on the
issue of congressional oversight. Members of our Committee on Armed
Forces fought very hard to assure there would be congressional
oversight. Yet we have a fund of about $10 billion which is largely
going to be beyond congressional control. The administration has
repeatedly been trying to escape congressional oversight. That, Mr.
Speaker, has really been the tenor of the debate we have had over the
homeland security bill itself. I spent 15 hours in our government
oversight committee. Much of the discussion had to do with the
authority of Congress to have oversight over budgetary items and to
have oversight over other areas which involve Congress' constitutional
responsibility.
I rise here because when I look at this report that is from the
Congressional Research Service, we see an increase from the original
May 1 markup to the July 18 markup of almost a total of $6 billion. I
think that the facts that we are here late at night, it is a quarter to
midnight, and most Members of Congress are on their way home or are
already asleep, we really need to have the kind of full-fledged debate
about this, because when you see the administration moving in a
direction towards war with Iraq and certainly not being able to finance
that war unless they brought a resolution specifically to do that
before this Congress, the fact that this amount of money is available
ought to be of concern to all Members of Congress, because
notwithstanding the fine work of our committee, we have had people
connected to the administration as well as our own Members of Congress
state openly that this resolution of September 14 already gives the
President the authority he needs to do what he may want to do and has
said he wants to do in Iraq. I know what the bill says and I
congratulate our fine members for doing that work, its due diligence,
but I feel that this is an appropriate time to kind of stop the music
and focus on this, because all around this country, people are
expecting this Congress to step up to its responsibilities under
article 1, section 8 of the Constitution with respect to Congress' war-
making authority. I voted for the resolution on September 14. But it
was my intention in voting for that to see a focused response and now
we hear our good chairman and ranking member speak in terms of a global
war against terrorism but yet on one hand if it is a global war against
terrorism, then it would appear that the administration would then be
authorized to go beyond Afghanistan. Yet if it is only Afghanistan,
then we ought to be very certain in our interpretation that that is
exactly what it is going to be. But as I stand here at a quarter to 12
on this evening, I can say that based on information that we have had
from the New York Times and information that we have from our breakdown
from the Congressional Research Service, I have real concern that the
administration could take this money and will take this money and use
it to prosecute a war against Iraq.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me reiterate, according to the language of this bill, that it is
limited to the verbiage attached to the September 14 resolution. Let me
also add it is my considered opinion, Mr. Speaker, that should there be
contemplated action against the country of Iraq by the United States of
America that this Congress has the duty to pass upon such authorization
as we have done so in the past.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill, in part because I
believe it strikes a proper balance between the flexibility needed in
the executive branch and the due prerogatives of those of us in the
Congress on this very important issue of the future prosecution of the
war against terrorism.
This bill leaves intact the law that exists as of today with respect
to the future prosecution of the global war against terrorism. That law
contemplates three circumstances. The first would be an emergency
urgent circumstance where the President, consistent with his
constitutional authority, could act to defend the country. This bill in
no way limits, nor should it limit, that prerogative.
The second circumstance that the present law contemplates is a
circumstance where there is clear and compelling evidence of a
connection between any other state or organization and the events of
September 11 in fostering, harboring, planning, aiding and abetting the
actions of September 11. Under those circumstances, under the law, the
President is already authorized to take steps to defend the country and
this bill leaves that intact.
The third circumstance contemplated by the law would be a
circumstance that is not emergency, where there is not a demonstration
of a clear and compelling link between the actions of another state and
the activities of September 11, and it is contemplated that under those
circumstances the President, consistent with the Constitution, would be
required to come to the House and to the Senate and seek authority to
further prosecute activities in defense of the country.

{time} 2350

That is the law, and that is the balance that is struck, and this
bill leaves that balance intact. For that and for many other reasons, I
would urge both Republican and Democratic Members to vote in favor of
this very necessary funding to continue to prosecute our very
successful efforts in this field.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, we approach the midnight hour here in
Washington, in our Nation's Capital. This bill was first noticed for
consideration by the House less than 3 hours ago. One hour ago copies
of the bill were not available for Members to review, and, in the time
since then, there are fewer Members present here tonight than there are
members of the National Security Committee.
Any bill that authorizes the expenditure of $10 billion of taxpayer
money for any purpose, no matter how worthy or important to the Nation,
deserves better consideration than this. It is outrageous to be taking
up such a matter under these conditions.
Seldom has a day in recent weeks gone by without some administration
official or commentator suggesting that the salvation for our Nation's
security lies in expanding use of nuclear weapons, or that our Nation
should alter its traditions by launching a surprise attack, or just a
simple but dangerous cry, ``on to Baghdad.''
Each of these alternatives would do more to undermine the security of
American families than to assure that security. We need a full and
complete debate about such a major change in

[[Page H5313]]

our national defense policy. No administration official has been able
to connect a regime in Iraq, that all of us despise, to the terrorism
of September 11. If they could, they surely would have done so by now.
I am pleased that no one here tonight speaking in support of this
bill claims that this bill is anything more than what I would term an
attempt to put some limits, however modest they may be, on what
otherwise would have been a $10 billion slush fund that the
administration requested. If the administration wishes to make the case
that it should invade Iraq, or any other country, for that matter, not
connected to the events directly of September 11, it needs to come to
this Congress and come to this country and make its case, not at
midnight, but in the full light of day.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I was on the floor to pay
tribute to a fallen hero in our community, Judge Carl Walker, but I
realize that the time will not allow us to do that tribute this
evening.
I want to acknowledge the concern that I have, but expressing as well
the support I have for the ranking member's explanation about the
limitation on this allocation. I think it would be important to
enunciate the fears of the American people and the responsibility of
the United States Congress as relates to the oversight over the
determination of a country going to war.
I would hope as this legislation moves through the House that we make
it very clear that there can be no precipitous attack on Iraq without
the oversight, the Constitutional oversight, of the United States
Congress.
There are three branches of government, the executive, the Congress
and as well the judiciary. A venture or advance, if you will, into
Iraq, without any participation by this Congress I believe would be an
illegal act and would cause devastation in our relations with our
allies around the world.
This is not the direction to take, and I would hope this funding does
not point us in that direction.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California and thank the
gentleman from Ohio for their thoughtful presentation this evening. I
think this is a very important bill that we should pass. It received
very thorough discussion in the Committee on Armed Services and passed
by a nearly unanimous vote out of that committee.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the House to pass this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let us suppose for a moment that these funds that were
we are appropriating tonight are only for Afghanistan, that the half a
billion dollars listed in this report for combat air patrols would in
fact be used in Afghanistan.
I would like to call to the attention of this House recent news
accounts that indicate that hundreds and hundreds of innocent civilians
of Afghanistan have been killed accidentally in bombings by U.S.
warplanes. I say that in an appeal to the administration to stop the
bombing, because we have no quarrel with the Afghan people. The Taliban
are overthrown, al Qaeda has fled, bin Laden has vanished, and yet,
with this document, we see that the bombs will continue to drop
indiscriminately.
Is there any American who has not been shaken at the mere thought of
the horrors of U.S. warplanes bombing a wedding celebration in the
village of Bal Khel killing dozens of innocent civilians? Whatever
moral authority our Nation had at the beginning of the conflict is
being lost in such bombings.
These types of acts do not represent America. Democracy does not wed
terror. These acts must not be cloaked in the irresponsible and inhuman
euphemism of collateral damage.
I appeal to the administration to stop the bombing, let an
international police force continue in Afghanistan, and let the humble
people of Afghanistan be spared the friendly fire from the skies.
Enough of bombing the villages to save the villages. Stop the bombing,
I appeal to the administration.
Mr. Speaker, I took this floor this evening so that questions which
need to be asked in this House are in fact asked at a time when an
administration is widely publicized to be preparing for a preemptive
strike in Iraq. The administration sought and received an amount of
money that is a virtual blank check to spend $10 billion any way they
see fit.

{time} 2400

Now, this idea, of course, has met resistance from members of the
committee, and I will acknowledge that, ever since it was proposed.
Legislators have said that they did not want to give the administration
a blank check. But everyone who has looked at this knows that the
administration request has been vague and, yet, with the breakdown that
we have here, money for combat air patrols, money for chemical and
biological defense, money for the conversion of Tomahawk missiles, in
truth, this does not sound much like Afghanistan; it begins to sound
like Iraq.
When we take that in the context of the New York Times' discovery of
the Pentagon preliminary planning document which talks about a large-
scale invasion, my concern, Mr. Speaker, is that notwithstanding the
fine work of the men and women of our committee, that it is quite
possible this administration will go in that direction. Indeed, the
gentleman from New Jersey identified three specific areas where a
President could proceed, and his comments were, frankly, quite in line
with the assessments of other Members of Congress, not precluding the
possibility of the use of these funds for something other than
Afghanistan, notwithstanding the fine work of our committee.
I think it is noteworthy, at a time when an administration is
essentially abandoning multilateralists and articulating a first-strike
approach in Afghanistan, I think it is noteworthy that this Congress
has yet to have the kind of full debate that Members of both Houses of
Congress are beginning to call for. I think it is important that when
we see this cavalcade of headlines talking about massive invasions, a
quarter of a million troops, policies of hitting first, anticipating
that Iraq would target our troops; well, if there is an anticipation of
that, then we are talking about an invasion and, above all that, doing
this before the November elections.
In previous legislation tonight, this House took action on a
conference report on Defense and Homeland Security Supplemental
Appropriations in providing an additional $14.5 billion in funding
related to the U.S. military. Now, I think that the people of this
country have a right to know if the administration is, in fact,
planning to go into Iraq, and this Congress has a right to know and a
right to participate fully in a full-fledged debate. As a matter of
fact, even though myself and our esteemed ranking member may have a
difference of opinion on that, whether or not we should do it, I think
we agree that certainly Congress has a role.
Essentially, I would say to the chairman that is what I am here to
affirm, that Congress does have a role to play. Of course, I am opposed
to any such invasion for reasons I do not need to get into right now.
But even more important is that this Congress affirms its position with
respect to its power to send men and women from our country into combat
against Iraq or any other country.
So I want to thank the distinguished chairman and ranking member for
their diligence on this bill, but I also want to express my
reservations, serious reservations about the symmetry between the
contents of this bill and the planning document which The New York
Times covered in full detail.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to address just one point from my friend from Ohio, and that
is that the combat air patrols that are listed in the bill and in the
report are listed as Operation Noble Eagle, which is combat air patrols
over the United States, over American cities, which have been ongoing,
and I believe there are some $500-plus-million in the bill for that.

[[Page H5314]]

I would further say that this bill came up in two pieces, which is
extremely unusual for our system. One reason it came up in two pieces
was because we were undertaking continuing military operations and,
because of that, the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Stump), at whose direction I am acting today, worked with
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), and we put together a
bipartisan bill that did give some direction to where some of this
money went.
Let me just describe for the Members where some of the money went.
Some of it went to what is known as combat pay enhancements. That
includes increasing family separation allowance, increasing flight pay
for crew members, increasing the death gratuity given to survivors,
increasing career enlistment flying incentive, increasing diving pay,
increasing hazardous duty pay.
We also put in a number of required items that, in fact, the
administration had requested that had been early on in the base bill.
They include the chemical and biological antiterrorism program for
homeland defense, $480 million; command and control, computers and
intelligence, KC-135 tanker aircraft, linguists, military construction,
war pay, and the list goes on.
So we did leave some flexibility with the administration and we did
give some direction. I would simply say that it was because of the hard
work of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the hard work of the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and all of the members on our
committee, and I think we have heard from several of our very
thoughtful Members today on the Democrat side who participated very
fully, such as the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen), I think, and the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews) gave a very full evaluation of
what this did.
Once again, the key point that they reiterated was that this money
can only go to the military programs that are allowed under the
September 14 resolution, and, once again, I want to read that
resolution, because this is a base resolution that these dollars are
expended under.

The President is authorized to use all necessary and
appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or
persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or
aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11,
2001, or harbored such organizations or persons in order to
prevent any future acts of international terrorism against
the United States by such nations or organizations or
persons.

So this money is expended only in a manner, and can be expended only
in a manner, consistent with that resolution of September 14. I might
add, it is simply the last piece of the President's defense budget.
Now, on the other side, the Senate passed the full $393 billion
authorized or requested by the President. So they go to conference with
a full budget, so to speak, and until tonight, we only go to conference
with 383; that is, the budget less the $10 billion piece.
So it was important for us to act quickly. We just got the details on
this plan several weeks ago, we marked it up in the Committee on Armed
Services in a bipartisan way, and it was important to get this second
piece in place to be able to go to conference and do an effective job.
So I want to thank all of the Members that participated in the
debate.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Terry). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4547, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.

____________________