Transcripts For CSPAN Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20140619 : c

Transcripts For CSPAN Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20140619

Bring these men to trial, now while we can do so on our own terms and give the Defense Department the Legal Authority it needs to make the right decisions about these prisoners. It is costing us 2. 7 million per detainee per year versus 34,000 at a maximum prison in the United States. More than 300 individuals convicted of crime related to terrorism are currently incarcerated in federal prisons with no escapes. The role in the benghazi attack is a great example of our ability to deal with highprofile terrorists safely and swiftly. He will not be brought to guantanamo. He will be brought to the United States to answer for his crimes in a federal court and punished in accord answer with the laws of this nation. I have every confidence to bring him to justice. He said its continued operation mock ours values. Its time to put an end to this by supporting this amendment. Let me use one more quote, in the words of the family members of the 9 11 victims, the Current System is immoral, unlawful, counterproductive, unnecessary and has failed to deliver justice for the 9 11 attacks. I reserve the balance of my time. The chair for what purpose does the gentleman i seek time in opposition. The chair the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Frelinghuysen madam chairman, id like to first recognize mr. Morans service on our committee. As just exhibited in the full committee, he is truly a passionate man, and i may say hes been absolutely, consistently passionate on this issue. But despite his passion and reason, i stand in opposition to his amendment. The provisions contained in our bill are the same as current law. And have been carried in some form since fiscal year 2010 in both the appropriations bill and in the Defense Authorization bill. Quite honestly, they need to remain there. The provisions we carry ensure that the remaining gitmo detainees who are judged to be the most dangerous will never be brought into our homeland where u. S. Citizens could be threatened. There is a pretty strong and enduring consensus, and bipartisan consensus, in congress that quan taun moe should remain open, that the detainees should not be transferred to the United States for any reason, and that no facility should be built in the United States to house them. And as everyone here is aware, as its been mentioned in earlier debate, a number of detainees have been released from guantanamo and have gone back to the field, to the fight, and killed and wounded americans. The threat is real. We havent quite left afghanistan. Threats there are real. I strongly oppose his amendment and ask the house to give a Strong Negative vote and i eserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman is recognized. Mr. Moran how much time do i have remaining . The chair the gentleman has 2 1 2 minutes. Mr. Moran thats what i thought. At this point, id like to yield the remaining time to the distinguished member of the committee from new york, mr. Nadler. The chair the gentleman is recognized for two and a half minutes. Mr. Nadler madam speaker, we are holding 154 people at guantanamo, 77 of whom have been cleared for release. They have been found guilty of nothing. Are thought to be guilty of nothing. Have been judged not to pose any danger. Nonetheless, theyre not released. Theres no reason and no right for us to hold them further. The others should be brought to the United States and tried in a secure facility, tried for their offenses. Mr. Chairman, i wonder which of our colleagues doesnt believe in the american system of justice sni wonder which of us doesnt trust our own american courts . I wonder who among us doesnt believe in the bill of rights . Who doesnt believe in the right to counsel or who doesnt have the right to establish their guilt or innocence in court. What we have at guantanamo is an assault to those beliefs. We have begun to let go of our freedoms bit by bit, by each executive order and each act of congress. We are giving away our right to privacy and with this legislation we are continuing down the path of destroying the right to be free from imprisonment without due process of law. The language in this bill prohibits move anything detainee into the United States or releasing any at all and guarantees well continue Holding People indefinitely, people who may not be terrorists, may not be enemy combatants, some of whom we may suspect to be terrorists, none of whom have had a day in court. We will continue to hold them indefinitely without charge contrary to everything this ountry stands for. Mr. Cotton says this congress has judged these people to be dangerous people. This congress has no right to make such a judgment. People, to be found guilty, must be found guilty by a court, not a legislative body. Because of this momentous challenge to the founding principles of the United States that no person may be deprived of liberty without due process f law and certainly may not be deprived of liberty indefinitely without due process of law. This will give detainees no further constitutional rights. The Supreme Court ruled they would have the same rights at fwauntaun moe as they would have here. They should be brought here, tried in a federal court where they can be convicted or found guilty, instead of waiting for a military tribunal which has succeeded in finding nobody guilty at all. Just because we think, or somebody in the government thinks that someone is a terrorist, does not mean that that person is a terrorist. He may or may not be, and does not mean he does not have his a right to his day in court. I yield back. The chair the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. Mr. Frelinghuysen i reserve. The chair the gentleman from new jersey reserves. The gentleman from virginias ime has expired. Mr. Frelinghuysen yes, madam chair, what about the justice for the victims, those who died on september 11, 2001 . And what about justice for those that those five detainees that were released the other day in the Prisoner Exchange . How is there justice there . They were among the worst of the worst. We need to keep the provisions in this bill. And and i urge a no vote, a strong no vote on this amendment and yield back. The chair the gentleman from new jersey yields back. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The amendment is not agreed. To mr. Moran i ask for a recorded vote. The chair pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia will be postponed. For what purpose does the gentleman from i move to strike the last word. The chair the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Frelinghuysen and to yield to the gentleman from alabama for purposes of a colloquy. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise to engage in a colloquy regarding the neas combat ship which represents the future Small Surface combatant for the United States navy this program is in its infancy but so far has cleared many hurdles and is well on its way to becoming an integral part of the fleet. The navy reduced the budget requests from four ships in fiscal year 2015 as they projected last year to three ships. Mr. Chairman, your bill has further reduced the program to a recommended level of two ships. Mr. Chairman, would you agree that the l. T. S. Is an important part of the navys future fleet . Mr. Frelinghuysen let me first salute the gentleman from alabama for his strong advocacy on behalf of the of this combat ship and let me say that this combat ship plays an extremely Important Role in the future of the navys fleet. In fact, the ship represents nearly 1 6 of the 306ship fleet the navy has expressed as its stated fleet requirement. During the markup of the bill, the committee spent as much time, if not more, on this issue than any other. In the end, we were extremely concerned with the strong words expressed by the secretary of defense with respect to the Small Surface combat requirements that these ships must have. Since the combat ship does play a vital role, we want to make sure were buying the correct version. Thats why we slowed the production. However, we recognize the importance of the industrial base, very much so. And we certainly dont want to let that in any way stagnate. So we provided funding for two ships to bridge the gap until the navy can verify the requirements and incorporate them into the production line. I do recognize that this is an Important Program for your community and that youve been a remarkable advocate, youve been on my case for quite a long time. Im hugely admiring of your passion and determination. I want to assure you well continue to work with you to address your concerns. Well continue to monitor as we proceed to conference with the senate and will work with the gentleman to ensure we adopt the right policy for our National Security and the industrial base, including the very important shipyard in the gentlemans district in mobile, alabama. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate your attention in this matter, i look forward to working with you and Ranking Member visclosky and subcommittee chairman rogers as we move forward. Mr. Byrne as you said the l. C. S. Plays an Important Role in the future of the navys fleet. Its vitally important that congress not use sight of this and i not lose sight of the importance of this shipyard to my district. Mr. Frelinghuysen i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition . For what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition . Madam chair, i have an amendment at the desk. Its lee number 31, preprinted in the congressional record. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 31 printed in the congressional record, offered by ms. Lee of california. Madam chairman. The chair for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition . Mr. Frelinghuysen i reserve a point of order on the gentlewomans amendment. The chair a point of order is eserved. The point of order is pursuant to House Resolution 628. The gentlewoman from california oh the gentleman from the gentlewoman from california and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california for five minutes. Ms. Lee thank you, madam chair. I rise today remembering 12 years ago, when i stood on this floor and offered an amendment with the same purpose as the amendment that i offer this evening, to prevent a war with iraq, to keep our young men and women, our troops, out of harms way and to be prudent with taxpayers hardearned dollars as well as ensuring our National Security. Madam chair, we are all familiar with the reports coming out of iraq about the horrific sectarian violence taking place. We must not let history repeat itself. These calls to be dragged back into a war in iraq must be rejected because the reality is theres no military solution in iraq and i want to applaud the president for reiterating that again today and for making it clear that he does not want combat troops on the ground in iraq. This amendment would not allow funding for combat operations. This is a sectarian war with ngstanding roots that wrp inflamed when we invaded iraq. Any solution must take into account respect for the entire iraqi population. The change iraq needs must come from iraqis rejecting violence in favor of a peaceful democracy that represents all and respects the rights of all. Our job is to continue to promote and support regional and international engagement, recognition of human rights and political reform, support for women and children and religious freedom. Madam chair, after more than a decade of war, thousands of american lives and hundreds of billions of dollars, the American People are rightfully warweary. The American People are not interested in repeating the mistakes of the past. A recent poll found 74 of the public is opposed to sending combat troops into iraq this amendment would not impact the president s ability to protect u. S. Personnel or our embassies, we must do that it does not impair the president s ability to act if theres a direct threat to National Security. As the president sid to congress, doing so would be consistent with his responsibility to protect u. S. Citizens at home and abroad. Finally it doesnt impact the ability to gather intelligence. Id like to reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. The gentleman from new jersey is recognized fed. Mr. Frelinghuysen i seek time in opposition. The chair the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Frelinghuysen i rise to oppose the gentlewomans amendment. Whats occurring in iraq is complicated and dangerous and violent. And this is a complicated issue. The gentlewoman seeks to address with multifaceted policy ramifications that really cannot be fully debated in an amendment in this short period of time. The situation in iraq remains highly complicated, very dangerous and does, i believe and many i believe pose an imminent threat to the u. S. , particularly regional security. Witness the fact that the president has sent over a number of advisers to either protect the embassy or work with the iraqi military. This amendment, in my judgment, goes too far, as it attempts to tie the u. S. Governments hands, i. E. The commander in chiefs hands in navigating the come plated situation we face relating to threats coming from iraq, recognizing that half of the country is now in the hands of the Islamic State of iraq and syria. We have to be realistic. What this amendment would do is remove any possibility of the u. S. Engaging in any circumstance even if it would be in the best interest of our own country or allies. For example, this would preclude the u. S. From providing any assistance to the Iraqi Government to defeat a terrorist group inside of iraq and we be on the verge of doing exactly that. Giving the rising terrorist threats coming from within iraq and again, almost half the country is in the hands of terrorists, this is a very illadvised amendment and i strongly oppose and i reserve. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from california is recognized. Ms. Lee this amendment would not fund the combat operations in iraq. I yield one minute to the gentleman from minnesota, mr. Nolan. The chair the gentleman is recognized for one minute. Mr. Nolan i rise in support of the lee amendment. The American People have invested 10 years of precious blood and pressure into this conflict and the simple truth is the Iraqi Government and army have failed to win the confidence of their own people. The fact is, the army has cut and run leaving behind valuable equipment and we have no friends in this conflict. Its time to get out and stay out. Thank you, madam chair and thank you, representative lee, for your amendment. The chair the gentlewoman from california reserves. The gentleman from new jersey is recognized. Mr. Frelinghuysen this amendment sends the wrong message to the iraqi people who have suffered a great deal and i recognize the loss of our soldiers and the sacrifice of our soldiers and their families. I think this is a very illadvised amendment and i strongly oppose. I yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman from new jersey yields back. The gentlewoman from california is recognized. Ou have 2 1 2 minutes. The e i yield 2 time to gentleman from arizona. Mr. Grijalva im here to support the amendment to prohibit the use of Ground Troops in iraq. You know, what the American People are seeking is an end to 10, 12, 11 years of a war without end. The American People are seeking attention to the needs of this country, the veterans that fought in that war are seeking proper care for invincible wounds of this war. The only thing we need to protect, and its not about us going into a conflict and picking sides and fundamentally a a religious war where there will be no end for us, we must avoid and prevent combat troops to be in iraq. We do that because the American People are against it. We do that because it is the moral imperative and we do that because we learned a lesson from history and history has taught us this is a war that will not end. We have an opportunity to end it. We have the opportunity to demand of the International Community that they use diplomacy to solve the problem in the region. With that, i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from california is recognized. Ms. Lee i yield one minute to the gentleman from minnesota, mr. Ellison. The chair the gentleman is recognized. Mr. Ellison i thank the congresswoman. The malaki government has excluded huge portions of his population. Because of that, there is a conflict in that country of his own making. What do which do if we send combat troops there, we will be his air force and Ground Troops, we shouldnt do that. That isnt the right thing. If we want to help, what we should do is engage the regional community, the countries around iraq and iraqi leaders in a diplomatic solution that hopefully includes them having a more inclusive, less abusive government. That is the proper role of the United States, trying to stop us from being a combat troops. I think the gentleman is incorrect, we are right to stay out of this thing. What have we learned if 11 years has not taught us. Training, we have given them plenty of training. We have trained them up the wazoo. The chair the ge

© 2025 Vimarsana