{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-2002-11-22-pt1-PgE2131", "2002-11-22", 107, 2, null, null, "CONFERENCE REPORT FOR H.R. 4546, THE BOB STUMP NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "ALLOTHER", "E2131", "E2131", "[{\"name\": \"Walter B. Jones Jr.\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"107\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"303\"}, {\"congress\": \"107\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4546\"}, {\"congress\": \"107\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4546\"}]", "148 Cong. Rec. E2131", "Congressional Record, Volume 148 Issue 152 (Friday, November 22, 2002)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 152 (Friday, November 22, 2002)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E2131]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n    CONFERENCE REPORT FOR H.R. 4546, THE BOB STUMP NATIONAL DEFENSE\n                 AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003\n\n                                 ______\n\n                          HON. WALTER B. JONES\n\n                           of north carolina\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Friday, November 22, 2002\n\n  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, last week, the House of\nRepresentatives took up and passed the conference report to H.R. 4546,\nthe Fiscal Year 2003 National Defense Authorization Act. As one of the\nconferees to that measure, I was proud to support the overall bill and\nwas pleased to see its passage. The Bob Stump National Defense Act was\na fitting tribute to a man whose congressional career was spent working\nfor our Nation's men and women in uniform.\n  This year's Defense Authorization Act has three main principles:\nprotecting and defending America's homeland, supporting U.S. service\nmembers and their families, and better equipping troops with training,\nequipment and weapons to fight and win the war against terrorism. It\nmarks the largest increase in defense spending in over 20 years,\nproviding billions of additional dollars for procurement, research, and\ndevelopment for the next generation of weapons. The measure continues\nour commitment to improving the pay of military personnel by providing\na 4.1 percent pay increase and continued the administration's plans to\neliminate out-of-pocket housing costs for military families. H.R. 4546\ndevotes considerable resources toward protecting our homeland from the\nthreat of terrorist attacks and from the growing proliferation of\nballistic missiles. I stand behind this bill because I believe it\nprovides our military with the foundation it needs and deserves. We are\nliving in a time of war and must act accordingly.\n  Despite the important advances this bill makes for our national\ndefense, I retain two reservations about the final product.\n  One significant issue which has not been addressed is legislation I\nsponsored to redesignate the position of the Secretary of the Navy as\nthe Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps. For over 200 years the Navy\nand Marine Corps have shared a secretary in being, but not in name.\nNotwithstanding their jointness, the Navy and Marine Corps are distinct\nwith their own history, honors, and tradition. Rather than detracting\nfrom those traditions, this legislation seeks to recognize the\nseparate, but equal traditions that the Navy and the Marine Corps team\nshare. It acknowledges that there are two members of the same team and\nseeks to reinforce to the American people that the Secretary is a proud\nsupporter of both. The legislation was adopted unanimously in the House\nArmed Services Committee, over half of whose membership had cosponsored\nthe legislation. It was supported by three former Secretaries of the\nNavy, the current and two former Commandants of the Marine Corps, a\nformer Secretary of the Veterans Administration, and many other former\nsenior leaders of the Navy and Marine Corps. The Fleet Reserve\nAssociation and the Marine Corps League, each boasting thousands of\nmembers, also strongly urged passage of the legislation. Yet because of\nthe concerns of a few, it was not included in the final conference\nreport.\n  However I do not view this as a setback, but instead an opportunity.\nI remain committed to introducing the measure again early in the 108th\nCongress. As Commandant Jim Jones stated, this is an idea whose time\nhas come. I will be working diligently with my Navy and Marine Corps\nfriends to broaden the support and communicate the importance of this\nmeasure. By passing this legislation, the teamwork that has been\npresent for over 200 years will finally be recognized in the title of\nthe person who coaches the team.\n  A second shortcoming of the otherwise outstanding measure is the\ncompromise on concurrent receipt. Although the language in the\nconference report regarding concurrent receipt is a very important step\nforward, I strongly believe that more should be done. As I stated in a\nletter to President Bush, if a man or woman served in uniform and\nretired honorably, they deserve to receive the retirement pay they were\npromised. If in the course of that service, that military member was\ninjured and sustained a lasting disability, they should be compensated\nfor that as well. One was earned for service and one was earned for\nsacrifice. It is for that reason that I have been a strong supporter of\nlegislation to eliminate this offset since coming to Congress.\n  It is true that correcting this unfair penalty is expensive, however\nI also believe that our military retirees are priorities for which we\nmust be willing to support. Congressman Bilirakis, numerous military\nand veteran organizations such as the Fleet Reserve Association, and\ncountless veterans have waged a tireless effort to see legislation\nending the prohibition against concurrent receipt enacted. They should\nbe commended for the great work that has been accomplished to date and\nencouraged to continue this fight in the future. I look forward to\nworking with them on future efforts to meet the principles behind H.R.\n303. Our military retirees did not fail us when they were called. We\nshould not fail them.\n\n                          ____________________"]], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "primary_key_values": ["CREC-2002-11-22-pt1-PgE2131"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 71.19008700828999, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}