Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, as we have been debating the amendments to this energy and water bill, for some of the amendments I have risen in strong support and strong opposition.

With all due respect to the gentleman from California, I rise in the staunchest opposition to his amendment.

Mr. Chairman, our Nation's nuclear deterrent--and for the people at home watching--is done through the NNSA. The NNSA is the National Nuclear Security Administration. It is part of the Department of Energy.

As part of that key mission and as part of this great bill, we are fully funding and need to continue to fully fund the updates to our weapons programs to keep our nuclear deterrent strong.

Currently, the plutonium pits are being done and made at Los Alamos. They do an outstanding job. We are so fortunate that our great friends at the Savannah River reservation--and I have been there, and I have been in this facility that is being built--will work to create new plutonium pits.

The world is a dangerous place. Vladimir Putin, with his outrageous, wrong invasion of Ukraine must be stopped.

This man has basically threatened to use nuclear weapons. That is intolerable rhetoric. That is intolerable conduct. The strongest way to oppose that is to have a robust nuclear deterrent.

Our bill does that. Los Alamos does that. The NNSA does that. Thank goodness our friends at the great Savannah River reservation have done that for years and will continue to help our Nation's nuclear arsenal with this facility to produce plutonium pits. The Chinese are growing their nuclear arsenal. The world is moving in the wrong direction.

My hero, Ronald Reagan, in 1980 said, grow our nuclear deterrent, and he did that. I can remember standing in a college class with 200 students. I was the only person to stand up to fight the nuclear freeze.

Ronald Reagan was right. We defeated the evil empire, the Soviet Union, because we did not do a freeze. We stood up and built up our nuclear deterrent. We have to do that now.

Our partners at Savannah River are there. They are ready. This facility will supplement that.

With all due respect to the gentleman from California, he is wrong on this. America needs its nuclear deterrent. The NNSA needs to be kept strong, and this plutonium pit production for Savannah River needs to go forward.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I yield to Ms. Kaptur, my ranking member.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Granger).

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), my ranking member.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in opposition to this amendment by my good friend, Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi. I am grateful to see Chairman Fleischmann working with Ranking Member Marcy Kaptur as we oppose this amendment.

This is a time when the Chinese Communist Party is conducting the largest nuclear buildup in world history. War criminal Putin is invading Ukraine and threatens nuclear weapons. The dictatorship in Tehran is invading Israel; it is developing nuclear weapons while chanting, ``Death to Israel, Death to America.'' In defense, we should be modernizing America's nuclear arsenal.

We did not choose the war of dictators with the rule of gun who are invading democracies with rule of law, but we are in this. Ukraine has been invaded, Israel has been invaded, and they threaten Taiwan.

Plutonium pit production is among the most critical national security needs. As with every weapon, we must continue to invest in improvements to our nuclear inventory to achieve peace through strength in the tradition, as the chairman has so correctly said, of Ronald Reagan.

Sadly and incredibly, last night, BBC News broadcast a report: Russia has just rehearsed a massive nuclear strike capability. This was presented on Russian Putin's state TV last night as the defense minister reviewed with the war criminal Vladimir Putin of how current this is.

The United States currently has a statutory requirement of producing 80 plutonium pits per year, as close as we can to 2030. Of those 80, the Savannah River Site will be responsible for producing 50. As the only Member of Congress who has actually worked at the Savannah River Site, I know of the competence and capabilities of people at this site.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan). I would explain to the Chairman that this fine gentleman is my counterpart on the authorization side on the Energy and Commerce Committee. He has been a strong leader in nuclear and has been my partner. I am the appropriator, and he is the authorizer.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Granger).

Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, once again, I respectfully and vehemently disagree with my friend and colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

I represent the great people of the city of Oak Ridge in Tennessee, the birthplace of the Manhattan Project. The NNSA has a facility there. It is called the Y-12 facility. We are building the uranium processing facility.

That became very apparent to me when I was a college freshman correctly arguing against a nuclear freeze, against a room full of liberal, radical, leftist students. I knew I was right then because I knew Ronald Reagan was right. What I didn't know then was that nuclear weapons deteriorate. I thought if you had a nuclear weapon, you could put it on a shelf, and if you needed it, you could go get it. The reality is that nuclear weapons, by their nature, deteriorate and have to be updated.

Now, through three administrations--the Obama administration, the Trump administration, and now the Biden administration--I have worked hand in hand with the NNSA, the National Nuclear Security Administration. To do what? To make sure that our current nuclear arsenal, our nuclear deterrent, is strong.

Where I disagree respectfully and most vehemently with my colleague from California is that our resolve is to tell the world today, whether it is in Moscow, Beijing, or any of the other countries that have a nuclear capability--and sadly, to my colleague, there are at least 10 countries now that have the ability to produce and deliver a nuclear weapon. That is scary. The resolve of the people of the United States must be to have a strong nuclear deterrent today and in the future. That is why we have to have this program. That is why we have to keep our Nation's nuclear arsenal strong and vibrant now and in the future.

Specifically, Mr. Chairman, the W87-1 Modification Program will replace the W78 warhead and support fielding the Air Force Sentinel missile system. Mr. Chair, we have our nuclear triad--land based; sea, with our great United States Navy; and Air Force. It is a triad, and it is a strong triad. This is the message to the world, that we can never have a nuclear weapon used and deployed.

Listen to Mr. Putin. He is threatening it. That is outrageous. We can never have that type of rhetoric in the world. We have to stand against that.

The strongest way to do that is a nuclear deterrent and a commitment, not only to our friends in Savannah River, not only to our friends in Oak Ridge, but all over the United States. We have strong weapons labs that are doing a great job. The men and women of the NNSA are our great patriots. They are within the Department of Energy. The customer is the Department of Defense, but we are doing a tremendous job.

I wish the world were a benign place. I wish it were a world without nuclear weapons, but they are existent. They are there. We are the leader in protecting the free world. We have to protect the people of the United States. We have to send a message.

Mr. Chair, I, therefore, strongly and vehemently oppose the gentleman's amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding.

On this issue I agree with Ranking Member Kaptur. While I recognize the current administration has gone too far in pursuing its climate goals, I believe there are aspects of this program we can all support. In particular, the SuperTruck program awardees represent the largest producers of medium- and heavy-duty trucks in the United States. The potential research and development of benefits are still worthy of pursuit. For these reasons, I oppose the gentlewoman's amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Madam Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding.

While I can completely understand the frustrations many of my colleagues may experience in some of their dealings with some of the aspects and personnel in the executive branch, respectfully, I think reducing the salaries to a dollar is not likely to solve the problem. In fact, it may create even more problems in a challenging environment.

So with all due respect to my colleague from Florida, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Madam Chair, I thank my ranking member for yielding to me, and I did hear both of my colleagues. Respectfully, I disagree with this amendment.

I do not think that attempting to reduce salaries to a dollar is likely to address this problem, and it may very well create more problems than it attempts to solve.

Madam Chair, I respectfully oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to oppose the same.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I hold my dear colleague and friend from Texas in the highest esteem. I think he is one of our brightest and best Members, and he has served so well on the Energy and Commerce Committee. It is a pleasure and privilege to serve with him. I play baseball with him, and candidly, he is a much better baseball player than I am. I trust his judgment, but respectfully, on this issue, I want to be consistent.

I have opposed reducing salaries to $1 in the previous amendments. He articulated his issues very well, but I do think this causes a dangerous, difficult precedent. In that regard, I urge a ``no'' vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me.

Mr. Chair, as with the previous amendment, I fully understand and appreciate my distinguished colleague's frustrations. However, I respectfully disagree that reducing the salary to a dollar is the way to address that.

Mr. Chair, I respectfully urge a ``no'' vote on that, and I thank my esteemed colleague for his amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, in regard to the energy and water bill that is before the House today, I respectfully rise in opposition to the amendment.

We discussed earlier today in some very strong and positive debates about the role of the NNSA and the strong nuclear arsenal aspect of the Department of Energy, which is so critically important, and I debated against my Democratic colleagues in that regard. That is all part of this great energy and water bill. It is a wonderful robust bill, not only for the Department of Energy, but also for the water side of the bill.

The reduction proposed in this amendment would negatively impact national security and critical infrastructure programs in the bill. As I alluded to, this bill has both defense and nondefense spending in it.

The amendment makes no distinction of where the reductions would come from, instead allowing the Biden administration to administer the reductions as they see fit. I would not trust the administration to do that. I think Congress needs to do that. That would likely affect the NNSA, as I have alluded to, and I cannot respectfully support any amendment that would jeopardize the balance of this bill, therefore, I oppose the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I wish to thank my friend, the distinguished gentleman from Montana, for offering this amendment.

I know many of us have frustrations with some of the Army Corps' projects. However, this reduction by $620 million I must oppose for several reasons.

The reduction proposed in this amendment would, in my view, jeopardize critical ongoing Corps of Engineers projects across this great country, including in my district, the great Chickamauga Lock Project in the Third District of Tennessee.

All too often the Corps of Engineers fails to finish what it starts. This bill provides funding to complete a number of significant projects. A cut of this magnitude would, in my view, undermine public safety and America's economic competitiveness.

It is in that regard that I respectfully urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. 4394, to include corrections in spelling, punctuation, section numbering cross-referencing, and the insertion of appropriate headings.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source