Dont think its a matter of if, when it comes to a space force, its a matter of when. I dont think this is reflection of what the air force has done here. Theyve worked this hard. I believe theyve shown due diligence, theyve worked hard to provide us the best space force possible. I think weve gone from a time when space was supporting ground, air and sea, from a supporting roam, were now transitioning to the where the work will be done in space. Think that changes the game. That means we need to grow a space force, space professionals, space culture and people in a service thats totally dedicated to space control. I think were at that point where we need to move this direction. I think it also will help us consolidate the many space offices we have in the multiple services and also consolidate the many acquisition resources we have out there and put it under one space service. Think theres also some chances for an opportunity for savings. And with that i yield back and i support where the chairman is going. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And i appreciate your thoughts on this. Im not on that subcommittee, im on three other subcommittees this is honestly the first time ive heard about a major retorsion our air force and department of defense. I would think something this significant, if it was, were at that point in our committee that we would have some hearings and discussions at the full Committee Level. Hear from the secretary of defense, hear from the secretary of air force just as mr. Turner said. I remember being deployed on over to saudi arabia pre9 11 and running common search and rescue there was a space cell over next to us and i was like, what do you guys do, im just a fighter pilot, no the really understanding all they brought to the fight we learned what they brought to the fight. We integrated them operationally and theres tremendous capabilities both in targeting and many other elements, that this is about from my view, just further integration, not further separation or bureaucracy, i want to associate myself with mr. Turners amendment on this. I appreciate the chairmans leadership. For those of us on the subcommittee. This is a shocking first time weve heard of this a very major reorganization of our military and i think it deserve as couple of hearse hearings and discussions on it at the full Committee Level and i yield back. Mr. Russell . We certainly all understand the threats in space and we know that that is, where everything is heading. I guess you know id like to associate myself with what what ms. Mcsally said this is the first time on reorganization that weve, that any of us have heard about this. I would like to pride myself a little bit in staying informed and yet weve not had any, any type of full Committee Hearings on this issue. Either that or i missed them. In i would like if i can, within the limits of my time, ask mr. Rodgers whom i have Great Respect for, why would the air force which handles onethird of their mission is space, and they see it as a growing third half and they see it as a future, why would the air force not be able to handle the mission . If the gentleman would care to answer. The fact is air dominance is their Number One Mission, you heard general bacon talk about this cultural component. And thats the problem. We have the greatest air force the world has ever seen. Because their Number One Mission when they come to work every day, is air dominance, to be the best air dominant force on the planet. You cant have two Number One Missions. The fact is space is one of several collateral missions that are subordinate and will always be subordinate as long as theyre in the air force. Thats the problem i have. If you want to make space, space professionals, the best they can be, they need to come to work every day, knowing space dominance is the Number One Mission thark mission. That culture can only be bred if we segregate them, properly resource them, educate and develop them so they can meet these new challenges. The fact is when i first came here along with mr. Turner 15 years ago, space was not that integral in war fighting. Today it is absolutely integral. Just like it is in our commercial lives if youve got a handheld phone you look at, youre using space when you use that phone. If you put your debit card or credit card in a gas pump, youre using space. If you are a farmer and you have tractors, youre using space to plow in the fields, space is an integral part of our lives, an integral part of the military. Unfortunately, the air force with its organizational bureaucracy has net been able to fix the problems that exist in space and i dont believe they ever will. If i did it would be easier to let them do it. If i could, reclaim my time. For some additional query. Abraham lincoln said nothing good can be frustrated by time. I think in that hes accurate. I perfectly understand if you want to bury something, do a study or a committee. But there are times when it is necessary, for us to really look and examine an issue. So i guess my question is, what would the harm be, other than well weve been digging into this for 31 years, but thats not true of the committee. Twothirds of this committee twothirds of congress has been elected since 2010. Many of us veterans that have been kind of on the user end of a lot of the things that we discussed on this committee, what would the harm be, to have full Committee Hearings and deliberations to hear from the secretary of defense. Who hear from nasa to hear from the air force . What would be the harm in doing that. If you would, sir. Thats a great question and there is no harm and theres nothing that prohibits us from doing that. After we pass this and while the air force is designing the new space corps. To have the different people come before the full committee. You keep in mind they report back to us for us to implement what they design the next years ndaa. So we can go forward with the full Committee Hearings and briefings as youre talking about collaterally while this is moving forward in the air force. And i appreciate the gentlemans answers, thank you for taking the time to do that. I guess my own, my own thinking on it, and again i dont, i have great admiration from both you and mr. Turner, i dont have a dog in this fight. I have the highest regard for the chairman and the ranking member. I personally would like a little more deliberation, maybe that seems selfish or unfair. Because of that, i will be supporting mr. Turners amendment. Because how do we know that the air force is not capable . Weve gone from ground attack transitions, theyve gone through different support transitions, logistics. We are even talking about reentry and outer space from ground to space. Were going to cross some fierce here, and for that, i yield back. Mr. Bishop. Thank you, mr. Chairman, i think some of us are expressing a feeling of unease, i realize ive only talked about studying stuff and i guess im talking about that again right now. Mr. Chairman if i could just ask you, is the vision of Going Forward to actually establish a core, a corps, the marine corps has over 300,000 this would have less than 50,000. Is that the done deal at the end of the day . Or are we going to be looking at where it should fit in the overall structure of the program. If i could just ask how you envision that Going Forward . My understanding is that the division would be for a space corps underneath the air force in a similar sort of relationship to the marine corps underneath the navy. So you have the civilian overseers, just like you have with the navy. But you as far as, the uniform, it would be a separate essentially before i include that, may i yield at least a minute to mr. Turn centre. Thank you. I just want to emphasize again that i, this, if you support this amendment youre not saying that we dont need a space corps. Youre saying that we dont have enough information to do that. I am a very active member of the Strategic Forces subcommittee and i appreciate mr. Cooper, i have not made it to every discussion, but i know that of the discussion level it has been on the problems of the air force, not on designing a space corps. And thats really what i think we need is hearings on designing a space corps before we legislatively command a space corps. Now with respect to mr. Rodgers statements about the air force and their job for air doll nance. You cant accomplish air dominance without space. Everything we do includes space. The question of whether or not the air force can do it or not, its, youre not taking it away from the air force, youre creating another organization under the air force so theyre still doing it. Were changing organizational boxes under the same organization, rather than tasking and funding and working strategically to insure their performance. Again, my only concern is is i think theres a whole lot more information that we all should have before we go to that level and thats why i offered the amendment, and i would certainly appreciate your intention, the needs that we have in space, but i think we should be wellinformed, of both the negatives of doing this and the positives of doing this before we would undertake imposing this. I yield back. It if i could reclaim my time. Mr. Chairman, i think all of us are saying the same thing. We want to move into space significantly. The air force is saying the samg thing. We all want to do that. Theres some concern as far as how fast we go and in what direction we go. With a little bit more input coming from the air force, i feel much more comfortable with that i think with the turner amendment or the underlying bill were still going to move in that direction, im assuming. But ohio far we go and what kinds of commitment we go to where the end of the line is, is the question we have here. And i would err on this side op the element of caution, i yield back. Mr. Bridenstine . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I just wanted to make a few operations, because im on chairman rodgers committee. Ive been hearing talk about this for well over a year. I saw chairman rodgers at the space symposium give a speech on it and ive seen more media about this and ive seen chairman rodgers bring more attention within the media. On whats happening in space. Than ive seen since my time in congress and quite frankly, in my entire life. Chairman rodgers has been making sure everybody is as well aware of this as he could do. With the media and everything else. So the idea that this is new, is absolutely not true this was a recommendation of Donald Rumsfelds commission, was even before he was secretary of defense. And that, that commission was very bipartisan. As has been all of our discussions, on this inside the Strategic Forces subcommittee. So its not new it hasnt been a secret. Its been so well publicized in the media. Chairman rodgers has given plenty of speeches on this. So i would just like to go on record reporting chairman rodgers on this record and oppose the amendment. Mr. Karimendi . With specific regard to the amendment its going to be a study that speaks to the secretary of air force deciding if it is an interim report on whether there is a strategic need to establish a space corps, weve already heard from the secretary that she thinks not. There i there is no need for it. Those of us that have served with mr. Rodgers on the committee and gone through multiple committees on all the various pieces of the air force that deal with space, i dont know if they share my conclusion, but my conclusion is theres mass confusion as to this and therefore, an inability to focus on the overarching need. I also recall in some of my hearings that the Chinese Government has totally reorganized its military and one of their sections is space. I see mr. Rodgers confirming what i think my memory told me. And apparently it is accurate. They did it for a very special reason as i recall. They recognize that it is the critical frontier of the next war. If there is to be one. Or the next peace. If we fail to recognize the strategic importance of space, so let me put it the other way. If we recognize the strategic importance of it, there probably wont be a war. But if we fail to, we leave ourselves vulnerable and therefore the deterrent effect is lost we really need to focus and pull together all of the various elements involved in space issues. And unfortunately mr. Turners amendment is all too often a way of avoiding a necessary issue. I dont know that this would become law this time. I know the chairman would want very much to push this forward to try to make it law this time. But if we accept the proposed amendment it will simply be buried and this issue will tend to not be addressed. So i would oppose the amendment in hopes that the space corps as in the mark would continue and cause us all to focus on something that is critically important. I suspect that im probably misinterpreting mr. Turners intent here. But weve seen a lot of, a lot of studies. And its a great way of avoiding the reality of the problem. I think, mr. Turner, as well intended you may be, youre about to bury a very important issue, another study, and therefore, i oppose your amendment. Other discussion on the turner amendment . Mr. Mcquichen . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I recall shortly after we were brought into this congress, in assigned to this committee, we had the daylong meeting on the challenges of space. I personally dont know what else we need to study, to go forward with the space command. I had to laugh to myself and when i say laugh to myself. I laughed in an admiring way when mr. Bishop quoted 1776 and so i will share with you my quotation from 1776. That one useless man is called a disgrace, two or more are called a law firm and three are called a congress. And then john adams goes on to say, all we do is twiddle, piddle and never resolve. Lets not do that in this case. Lets go forward with, with all due respect to the pate robb of the amendment, lets reject the amendment and lets get on with the establishment of a space command. Thank you, mr. Chairman, i yield back. If theres no further discussion, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio, mr. Turner. Those in favor of the amendment will say aye . Those opposed will say no. In opinion of the chair the nos have it the gentleman from ohio request for a record vote and there is support for that. Further proceedings on the amendment for mr. Turner will be postponed. Next well turn to the gentleman from alabama. Were going to leave the House Armed Services Defense Authorization markup. Can you continue watg
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.