Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages S5499-S5500]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
APPROPRIATIONS
Mr. McCONNELL. The American people deserve for the Federal Government
to spend their money in a considered, deliberate fashion, and until
very recently, we have been on a track to conduct a smooth, regular
appropriations process for this year.
More than a month ago, leaders in both parties, in both Chambers, and
at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue all agreed to terms that had been
negotiated by the Speaker of the House and the President's team. It
specified topline funding levels and put guardrails around the
appropriations process to keep out poison pills and all of our other
disagreements.
So yesterday, to keep us on track, I began the process to advance the
first set of appropriations bills. The next step is a vote tomorrow to
begin consideration of a package of House-passed funding bills that
Speaker Pelosi grouped together. They include several of the domestic
funding bills along with the legislation to fund the Department of
Defense. There should be no reason for Democrats to vote against this
first procedural step.
As Chairman Shelby and our committee colleagues continue to process
Senate legislation, proceeding to this floor action will help to keep
us on track toward passing as many of the 12 bills as possible this
month before we turn to a temporary continuing resolution.
So it has been distressing to hear troubling signals from the
Democratic side. We have heard that they may choose to filibuster the
Defense funding bill. They may block the very increase of defense
funding that they all just agreed to a month ago.
Progress on our shared priorities, good faith cooperation in areas of
disagreement--it seems all of this may be taking a backseat to a
familiar litany of partisan stumbling blocks. My Democratic colleagues
seem eager to bog down the funding process with all their outstanding
disagreements with the President, in other words, taking exactly the
kind of partisan approach we had successfully avoided last year and in
which both sides pledged just last month--just a month ago--to avoid
this time as well.
A couple of weeks ago, everyone at the table seemed to understand
that the world was too dangerous to leave funding for our military
vulnerable to poison pill riders or political copouts. I wish Democrats
would keep bearing that in mind today.
So whatever rationale my colleagues across the aisle may offer for
these new disruptions, let's get one thing straight: Holding defense
funding hostage for political gain is a losing strategy, not only for
Members of this body, not only for the appropriations process, but a
losing strategy for the safety and strength of our Nation.
As partisanship bogs us down here in Washington, Moscow and Beijing
are not exactly slowing down to wait for us. Our two most capable
great-power adversaries are expanding their own capabilities and
modernizing their forces by the day.
In the current international system, delivering on our promises to
America's men and women in uniform is not
[[Page S5500]]
a simple matter of routine maintenance on equipment. If we would like
the U.S. military of the future to remain the world's preeminent
fighting force, then, the stakes are much higher. As Russia rattles its
saber and develops weapons such as hypersonic cruise missiles and quiet
submarines, we need to continue funding for research and development of
our own cutting-edge capabilities.
We have to provide for the modernization of infrastructure and update
defenses against cyber threats so that China's ever-bolder meddling in
this domain cannot bring about the cyber hegemony it craves. We cannot
turn our back on our interests and partners in the broader Middle East.
In Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and beyond, we face ongoing
terrorist threats. Iran's violent aggression certainly highlights the
need for vigilance and for strength. All of this is needlessly more
difficult if we don't fund the military's modernization and readiness.
The stakes are too high for us to fail.
We cannot afford to abdicate our responsibility to deliver timely
funding to the critical priorities of the Federal Government, least of
all to the men and women in uniform who keep us safe. So I would urge
each of my colleagues to engage in this process, honor our agreement
that we made just 1 month ago--just a month ago--and keep us on track
to deliver for our country.
____________________