{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-2012-12-31-pt1-PgH7508", "2012-12-31", 112, 2, null, null, "NAVAL VESSEL TRANSFER ACT OF 2012", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ALLOTHER", "H7508", "H7511", "[{\"name\": \"Ileana Ros-Lehtinen\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Eliot L. Engel\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Gus M. Bilirakis\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Brad Sherman\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John P. Sarbanes\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"112\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"6649\"}, {\"congress\": \"112\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"6649\"}, {\"congress\": \"112\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"6649\"}]", "158 Cong. Rec. H7508", "Congressional Record, Volume 158 Issue 171 (Monday, December 31, 2012)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 171 (Monday, December 31, 2012)]\n[House]\n[Pages H7508-H7511]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                   NAVAL VESSEL TRANSFER ACT OF 2012\n\n  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass\nthe bill (H.R. 6649) to provide for the transfer of naval vessels to\ncertain foreign recipients, as amended.\n  The Clerk read the title of the bill.\n  The text of the bill is as follows:\n\n                               H.R. 6649\n\n       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of\n     the United States of America in Congress assembled,\n\n     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.\n\n       This Act may be cited as the ``Naval Vessel Transfer Act of\n     2012''.\n\n     SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF NAVAL VESSELS TO CERTAIN FOREIGN\n                   RECIPIENTS.\n\n       (a) Transfers by Grant.--The President is authorized to\n     transfer vessels to foreign countries on a grant basis under\n     section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.\n     2321j), as follows:\n       (1) Mexico.--To the Government of Mexico, the OLIVER HAZARD\n     PERRY class guided missile frigates USS CURTS (FFG-38) and\n     USS MCCLUSKY (FFG-41).\n       (2) Thailand.--To the Government of Thailand, the OLIVER\n     HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigates USS RENTZ (FFG-46)\n     and USS VANDEGRIFT (FFG-48).\n       (3) Turkey.--To the Government of Turkey, the OLIVER HAZARD\n     PERRY class guided missile frigates USS HALYBURTON (FFG-40)\n     and USS THACH (FFG-43).\n       (b) Transfer by Sale.--The President is authorized to\n     transfer the OLIVER HAZARD PERRY class guided missile\n     frigates USS TAYLOR (FFG-50), USS GARY (FFG-51), USS CARR\n     (FFG-52), and USS ELROD (FFG-55) to the Taipei Economic and\n     Cultural Representative Office of the United States (which is\n     the Taiwan instrumentality designated pursuant to section\n     10(a) of the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C. 3309(a))) on a\n     sale basis under section 21 of the Arms Export Control Act\n     (22 U.S.C. 2761).\n       (c) Alternative Transfer Authority.--Notwithstanding the\n     authority provided in subsections (a) and (b) to transfer\n     specific vessels to specific countries, the President is\n     authorized, subject to the same conditions that would apply\n     for such country under this Act, to transfer any vessel named\n     in this Act to any country named in this Act such that the\n     total number of vessels transferred to such country does not\n     exceed the total number of vessels authorized for transfer to\n     such country by this Act.\n       (d) Grants Not Counted in Annual Total of Transferred\n     Excess Defense Articles.--The value of a vessel transferred\n     to another country on a grant basis pursuant to authority\n     provided by subsection (a) or (c) shall not be counted\n     against the aggregate value of excess defense articles\n     transferred in any fiscal year under section 516 of the\n     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j).\n       (e) Costs of Transfers.--Any expense incurred by the United\n     States in connection with a transfer authorized by this\n     section shall be charged to the recipient notwithstanding\n     section 516(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22\n     U.S.C. 2321j(e)).\n       (f) Repair and Refurbishment in United States Shipyards.--\n     To the maximum extent practicable, the President shall\n     require, as a condition of the transfer of a vessel under\n     this section, that the recipient to which the vessel is\n     transferred have such repair or refurbishment of the vessel\n     as is needed, before the vessel joins the naval forces of\n     that recipient, performed at a shipyard located in the United\n     States, including a United States Navy shipyard.\n       (g) Expiration of Authority.--The authority to transfer a\n     vessel under this section shall expire at the end of the 3-\n     year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this\n     Act.\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from\nFlorida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel)\neach will control 20 minutes.\n  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.\n\n                             General Leave\n\n  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all\nMembers may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks\nand to include extraneous material in the Record on this bill.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the\ngentlewoman from Florida?\n\n[[Page H7509]]\n\n  There was no objection.\n  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may\nconsume.\n  I rise in support of H.R. 6649, the Naval Transfer Act of 2012, as\namended.\n  According to the Secretary of the Navy, authority to transfer surplus\nvessels is an important element of the U.S. strategy for decommissioned\nships. It enables our Navy to manage its inventory while strengthening\nties with our key security partners and with allies by transferring\nships that meet key operational requirements.\n  This legislation authorizes the transfer of 10 decommissioned Oliver\nHazard Perry class guided missile frigates to Mexico, to Thailand, to\nTurkey and Taiwan. Six of the 10 vessels would be authorized for\ntransfer on a grant basis as excess defense articles under section 516\nof the Foreign Assistance Act.\n  Mexico, Thailand, and Turkey would each receive two frigates. With\nrespect to Turkey, I remain greatly concerned with the deterioration in\nthat country's relations with, and policy toward, the democratic Jewish\nstate and our ally, the State of Israel.\n\n                              {time}  1310\n\n  Since the 2010 flotilla incident--a crisis on the high seas that\ntriggered a tailspin in Turkish-Israeli relations--we have witnessed a\nTurkey that is increasingly hostile toward Israel.\n  From its recall of its Ambassador to Israel, its attempts to\nmarginalize Israel in other international fora, and its continued\noccupation of Cyprus to the embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood and its\noffshoots, current Turkish policy is unacceptable. I will continue to\nchallenge those and take steps to ensure, for example, that Turkey is\nsanctioned for its activities regarding the Iranian regime.\n  But, Mr. Speaker, the proposed transfer that we're talking about\ntoday is not validation of the current Turkish policy in the region. It\nis about our Nation's long-term national security interests. That is\nwhat this bill is all about. Turkey is a NATO ally that we need to\ncontinue participating in joint anti-piracy operations, for which they\nwould use these frigates. It has even commanded the Combined Joint Task\nForce 151, fighting piracy in the Gulf of Aden and along the Somali\ncoast, protecting American citizens who are traveling in that volatile\nregion.\n  Additionally, in light of the deteriorating security environment in\nSyria and Turkey's critical role in that arena, the Department of\nDefense feels that it was necessary for our foreign policy priorities\nand security objectives that Turkey receive these transfers.\n  Finally, Mr. Speaker, in 2010, the last time that Congress authorized\nsuch naval transfers, we approved the grant transfer of three OSPREY\nclass mine-hunter coastal ships to Greece, but no transfers to Turkey.\n  Lastly, these transfers are job creators here at home. Each frigate\ntransferred will require 40 to $80 million of repair and refurbishment.\nThis represents economic benefit to the United States through labor and\nservices during the transfer process, as well as the potential for\nmillions more in follow-on services, equipment, and training. According\nto estimates from U.S. sources, each frigate transfer creates or\nsustains approximately 100 shipyard jobs and 50 services jobs in the\nU.S. for approximately 6 months. Performing this ship transfer work in\ndomestic shipyards that perform U.S. Navy overhauls and repairs lowers\nthe cost of U.S. Navy maintenance by spreading costs over a wider base.\nThe end result is an overall lower cost to our U.S. Navy and thus for\nthe American taxpayer.\n  The alternative to foreign ship transfers for ships no longer\nrequired by the U.S. Navy is to place the decommissioned ships into\ncold storage or have them be sunk. Navy funding is required for both\nthe storage and the sinking option.\n  Turning to the other four frigates, Mr. Speaker, these would be\nauthorized for transfer to our close friends and ally, Taiwan. The\ntransfer of these four frigates is not only a symbol of our enduring\ncommitment to a secure and democratic Taiwan but will also provide the\nisland with additional capabilities to conduct maritime security\noperations in the Taiwan Strait.\n  The legislation also requires that any expense incurred by the U.S.\nin connection with a transfer authorized by this bill shall be charged\nto the recipient.\n  Mr. Speaker, passage of this bill will help advance United States\nforeign policy interests and our broader national security\nrequirements. Therefore, I urge adoption, and I reserve the balance of\nmy time.\n  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill, H.R. 6649,\nas amended, and yield myself as much time as I may consume.\n  Mr. Speaker, this bill authorizes the transfer of decommissioned\nfrigates to four foreign countries. The governments of Turkey, Mexico,\nand Thailand would each receive by grant two Perry class frigates. That\nmeans for free. Taiwan would be authorized to purchase four of the same\nclass of frigates, which they clearly need to protect their territorial\nwaters.\n  I object to this bill primarily because of Turkey. While I recognize\nthat Turkey is an important NATO ally, I regret that I have to oppose\nthis bill in light of Turkey's problematic behavior and disturbing\nrhetoric regarding Israel and Cyprus over the past year and a half. For\nexample, in May, with no apparent justification, Turkey sent combat\naircraft to intercept an Israeli aircraft that was flying near Cyprus.\nThis could have turned into a significant confrontation between a U.S.\nNATO ally and the United States' closest ally in the Middle East.\nFortunately, it did not.\n  In September 2011, Turkey announced that it would send warships to\nescort aid convoys to Gaza. It has not followed through with this\nthreat, but nor has it rescinded it.\n  Prime Minister Erdogan and Foreign Minister Davutoglu have been\nfamously competing to see who can issue the most vile denunciations of\nIsrael, as we saw, once again, during the recent Gaza crisis. Indeed,\ntheir allegations of ``ethnic cleansing'' and ``crimes against\nhumanity,'' quotes from them, topped even the claims of Hamas for\nstridency and falsehood. Of course, the prime minister called Israel a\n``terrorist state.'' Is that the kind of rhetoric we should expect from\na NATO ally?\n\n  Some people say this should continue because, after all, Turkey is an\nally and we need to help them. Well, I look at it the other way.\nThey're a NATO ally, so they have responsibility. And the way they're\nacting has been anything but responsible. This is not an\ninconsequential or trivial matter. As many public opinion surveys show,\nand as is widely acknowledged, Turkey wields enormous influence among\nMiddle Easterners, with the sway to exacerbate or tamp down tensions as\nit sees fit. For too long, it has been exacerbating these tensions,\nparticularly since the new government--well, it's not new anymore--a\ngovernment for several years with an Islamist bent has been in.\n  Moreover, Turkey's longstanding recognition of Hamas has done nothing\nto moderate that group. It has merely lent legitimacy to a terrorist\ngroup and undermined the standing of the Palestinian Authority in\nRamallah. Indeed, in the aftermath of the Gaza hostilities, Turkey's\nextreme rhetoric and one-sided approach to Israel's conflict with Hamas\ndisqualified it from playing the useful mediating role which should be\nits natural vocation.\n  Turkey's unnecessarily harsh anti-Israel rhetoric over the last\nseveral years actually did cost the Turks the support of Congress to\nauthorize the transfer of two decommissioned U.S. frigates in the last\nCongress. It should have that result again in this Congress, and it\nshould be denied.\n  But Turkey's poisonous rhetoric and menacing behavior towards Israel\nis not the only reason to oppose this ship transfer, and perhaps not\neven the most potentially explosive. To cite the other important\nreason: Turkey has repeatedly threatened Cyprus and its energy\nexplorations. One year ago, Turkey used its naval forces--and, by the\nway, the very naval forces this bill would enhance--in an effort to\nharass and intimidate Cyprus and workers employed by the Houston-based\nNoble Energy company as they sought to explore for offshore natural gas\nin Cyprus' exclusive economic zone. Prime Minister Erdogan also\nthreatened that Turkey would use force to stop these explorations.\nProbably because of U.S. opposition, it has not done so, but, again,\nTurkey has never rescinded the threat. Almost exactly 1 year ago,\nTurkey conducted a dangerous live-fire\n\n[[Page H7510]]\n\nnaval exercise in the vicinity of both the Cypriot and Israeli offshore\nnatural gas explorations, which Cyprus and Israel are doing jointly.\n  The Turkish attitude is epitomized by Turkey's Minister for European\nUnion Affairs, Egemen Bagis, who addressed the issue of Cypriot natural\ngas exploration last year. This was his warning, and I quote:\n  This is what we have a navy for. We have trained our marines for\nthis. We have equipped the navy for this. All options are on the table.\nAnything can be done.\n  And I want to remind my colleagues that Turkey has continued to\noccupy the northern part of Cyprus since the 1970s. It's just\nunacceptable.\n\n                              {time}  1320\n\n  Mr. Speaker, I realize that Turkey is an important member of NATO. It\naccepted radar emplacements for NATO's missile defense initiative, and\nit is an important element of the solution to several regional\nproblems--notably, Syria--but it has become a major problem for U.S.\ninterests in terms of its relations with Israel and the inflammatory\nand distinctly unhelpful role it has assumed in the Palestinian issue,\nas well as its threats against Cyprus.\n  In the last several years, the once warm relationship between Israel\nand Turkey has unfortunately frozen over. We would truly like to see a\nthaw in that relationship, just as we would like to see Turkey respect\nthe sovereign right of every country in the region, like Cyprus, to\nutilize their natural resources. Until then, I believe we should hold\noff on sending powerful warships to Turkey and encourage the government\nin Ankara to take a less belligerent approach to their neighbors.\n  Early in the next Congress, I would look forward to working with my\ncolleagues on a new ship transfer bill that excludes Turkey, if we can\ndefeat this bill, or appropriately conditions our ship transfer so that\nthe government in Ankara gets the right message.\n  So I urge my colleagues to reject this bill, and I reserve the\nbalance of my time.\n  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from\nFlorida, my colleague, Mr. Bilirakis, an esteemed member on our\nCommittee of Foreign Affairs.\n  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate it very\nmuch.\n  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6649, the Naval Vessel\nTransfer Act of 2012. As part of this legislation before us, the United\nStates would transfer two Oliver Hazard Perry class guided missile\nfrigates to the Government of Turkey.\n  I have serious concerns, and I oppose this military transfer, Mr.\nSpeaker, because the Turkish navy, as recently as last year, held naval\nlive-fire exercises in the eastern Mediterranean. These provocative\nexercises took place near the natural gas fields of Israel and the\nRepublic of Cyprus and threatened to disrupt peaceful and productive\neconomic activity. Instead, Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that, in the\neastern Mediterranean, Congress will continue to work to foster the\nrelationships between the United States, Greece, Israel, and Cyprus in\norder to promote and foster issues of mutual, economic, and diplomatic\nimportance.\n  For those reasons, Mr. Speaker, I oppose the bill.\n  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have\nleft?\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has 13\\1/2\\\nminutes remaining.\n  Mr. ENGEL. I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.\nSherman).\n  Mr. SHERMAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.\n  Woodrow Wilson noted that Congress in committee is Congress at work.\nCongress ignoring the committee process is a Congress that doesn't\nwork.\n  This bill has not been the subject of hearing and, more importantly,\na markup in the Foreign Affairs Committee. And in the dead of night,\nprovisions to transfer two frigates to Turkey, a controversial\nprovision, was added to this otherwise innocuous bill.\n  There are arguments on both sides of the issue: Should we transfer\nthe frigates to Turkey at no cost, a gift from the American taxpayer?\nShould we condition that transfer? Should we limit it to perhaps only\none ship?\n  I'd like to have hearings. I'd like Congress to work its will.\nInstead, a bill is brought to the floor on a day we were not scheduled\nto be in session for a last-minute discussion and a last-minute vote.\n  In prior discussions in our committee dealing with providing frigates\nto Turkey, we've been told that Turkey lives in a dangerous\nneighborhood, that it shares a border with Iran. I would ask: Where on\nthe Turkish-Iranian border will these frigates be deployed? The last\ntime an oceangoing vessel has been seen in eastern Anatolia, it was\nNoah's Ark.\n  Now these frigates will be deployed in the Mediterranean, and we've\nseen what the Turkish navy does in the Mediterranean. In 1974, there\nwas the invasion of Cyprus. More recently, there are the actions taken\nagainst Israel and in support of Hamas. In June of 2010, after a Gaza\nflotilla attempted to aid the terrorist group Hamas with supplies,\nTurkey threatened to send armed naval escorts to back another aid\nconvoy to Hamas. The Turkish Prime Minister, Erdogan, called for Israel\nto be punished for interfering with the previous effort to aid Hamas\nwith the flotilla. In September 2011, after a U.N. report on the Gaza\nflotilla was released, Turkey threatened to send an armed naval\npresence to the eastern Mediterranean to confront Israel, and Prime\nMinister Erdogan said that Israel should expect more naval presence\nfrom Turkey in the area, and I quote:\n\n       ``Turkish warships will be tasked with protecting the\n     Turkish boats'' bringing aid to Hamas in the Gaza Strip.\n\n  The gentleman from New York pointed out how the Turkish navy has\ninterfered with both the Cypriot and Israeli efforts to exploit natural\ngas deposits on the seabed between those two countries. This is\nparticularly outrageous when you realize that the Cypriot natural gas\nfields are off the shores of South Cyprus, an area where Turkey has not\ntried to assert its military presence. And they've gone further and\neven interfered with Israel exploiting its own natural gas fields off\nof its coast.\n  This is the action of the Turkish navy in the Mediterranean. Is this\nsomething that we should be furthering by two free frigates? I don't\nknow. We haven't had hearings. We haven't had a markup. We haven't had\na discussion on what limitations, what conditions, and what quantity of\nships should be transferred.\n  I've come to this floor on over 100 occasions to vote on suspension\nbills renaming post offices. Most of those bills were subject to a\nmarkup in the appropriate committee. Shouldn't we give that same level\nof attention to the transfer of frigates to Turkey?\n  Send this bill back to committee. Let us have a real discussion. Let\nus follow the rules, not suspend the rules, when we're dealing with a\nmatter of this importance to our foreign policy in the eastern\nMediterranean.\n  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.\n  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from\nMaryland (Mr. Sarbanes).\n  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the soon-to-be ranking\nmember of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Congressman Engel, for\nyielding this time, and I want to thank him for his eloquent opposition\nto H.R. 6649.\n  This is not a noncontroversial bill. I know it's being brought here\non suspension as though it is, and I'm sure in the past when we've had\nthese transfers of vessels, excess defense materials and so forth,\noften that is a noncontroversial action to take. In this case, it's\nanything but noncontroversial, and I'm surprised, frankly, that the\nmajority would bring the bill to the floor in this form.\n  Turkey is the problem here. There are vessels that are being\ntransferred to Turkey. These are vessels that apparently are obsolete\nfrom our standpoint, surplus material that can go to them. And, yes,\nTurkey is a NATO ally, but it's a problematic ally at best.\n  At critical moments over a period of many years, when the United\nStates has looked to its ally Turkey for assistance for some critical\nsupport, Turkey has been absent. You've heard already, discussed at\nlength here, the unlawful occupation of Cyprus. We're\n\n[[Page H7511]]\n\ntalking about 38 years of unlawful occupation of our ally Cyprus. The\nadventurism of Turkey in the eastern Mediterranean and its recent\nconduct towards Israel has been detailed here at length.\n\n                              {time}  1330\n\n  So what you have is, yes, an American ally but one that has created\nsome real problems for us and is a destabilizing actor in the eastern\nMediterranean.\n  You can only characterize Turkey's behavior in that region as gunboat\ndiplomacy. When you look at its conduct towards Cyprus, towards Israel,\nits interference with American commercial interests that are trying to\noperate in the exclusive economic zone of these two nations that are\ncritical to U.S. national security, Turkey has threatened to use force\nto stop Texas-based Noble Energy from drilling for oil and gas off the\nshores of Cyprus and Israel. Texas-based Noble Energy is an American\ncompany, and yet we are now going to transfer these vessels to Turkey\nfor further adventurism on the high seas. You've heard this now\ndetailed on both sides. At one point in the last year and a half,\nTurkey threatened to mobilize its air and naval assets to escort ships\nto Gaza.\n  As Congressman Engel says, we're about to enhance those naval assets,\nwith high anxiety on my part and, I think, on the part of other Members\nthat they'll be used in furtherance of this same kind of provocative\nbehavior. If we are going transfer these things, at the very least we\nought to be putting some conditions on this transfer--that no offensive\nuse of these vessels can be made and that they can't be used to\ntraverse these exclusive economic zones that we've talked about. But\nthis is going free of any conditions, and it's why I have severe\nreservations about it.\n  This could be an opportunity to step back and think about how we\nconduct our foreign policy. Every bill we pass here matters. It all\nmakes a difference. This may be on suspension, and it may be getting\nrid of excess material, but it's a chance for us to send a powerful\nmessage in terms of the kind of foreign policy that the United States\nis going to exercise. Frankly, I don't think that Turkey should be a\nbeneficiary of this bill given its conduct over many years, but\nparticularly over the last couple of years. It sends the wrong message.\nIt rewards bad behavior. For that reason, I oppose it.\n  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.\n  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I yield myself such time as I may consume.\n  Mr. Speaker, in a snapshot, this is the background to this bill and\nthe inclusion of Turkey. I'd like to explain this.\n  These are DOD requests for our U.S. national security interests.\nTurkey is a NATO ally that DOD needs to continue participating in joint\nanti-piracy operations for which they would use these frigates. In\nlight of the deteriorating situation regarding Syria and Turkey's\ncritical role, DOD insisted that it was timely to do this transfer.\nNow, just a few years ago, in 2010, Congress authorized the grant\ntransfer of three Osprey class minehunter coastal ships to Greece--\nOsprey MHC-51, Blackhawk MHC-58, and Shrike MHC-62.\n  So today's bill, Mr. Speaker, maintains the Turkey-Greece balance.\nThis lowers costs to our U.S. Navy, as they won't have to deal with\ndecommissioned frigates. This bill creates U.S. jobs, as the mammoth\nportion of maintenance work is done here in the United States.\n  On the issue of granting to Thailand, to Mexico, to Turkey versus the\nselling of the ships to Taiwan, this is what our U.S. Navy says:\n\n       The determining factor on the grant or sale of extra\n     defense articles is always what is in the best interest of\n     the United States. Granting the hull does not make it free to\n     the receiving nation. Among the types of extra defense\n     articles that are granted to partner nations, ships are\n     unique in that there is always a significant refurbishment\n     cost paid by the receiving nation. The current legislation\n     requires the refurbishment of the hulls here in the United\n     States. This is approximately $60 million per hull; though\n     with Turkey our experience has been that they will spend even\n     more. Because of the high cost of refurbishment, we always\n     try to grant the hulls.\n\n  Both Armed Services Committee Chairman McKeon and Intelligence\nCommittee Chairman Rogers support this bill with the inclusion of\nTurkey.\n  Mr. Speaker, when our military officials tell me that they need these\nspecific transfers, including to Turkey, because it is in our Nation's\nsecurity interests and it advances our priorities, I believe that all\nof us here should take note. I trust our U.S. military when it comes to\nthe operational needs and joint military and anti-piracy activities.\nThis is why Turkey was included--and not at the last minute under the\ncover of night.\n  No, quite the contrary. For almost 2 weeks, the text of this bill has\nbeen posted not just for our fellow colleagues to review but for all of\nthe American people to review at their leisure. This bill is a standard\nbill that is done at the end of each Congress. Two years ago, as I\nstated, under a different majority, a similar annual transfer bill was\nconsidered at the end of the session.\n  So, in short, Mr. Speaker, this bill helps our ally Taiwan. It\nadvances our U.S. national security interests, and it reduces costs to\nour Navy. It creates jobs for Americans right here at home, and I hope\nthat our colleagues see it as such.\n  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the\ngentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) that the House suspend the\nrules and pass the bill, H.R. 6649, as amended.\n  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the\nrules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.\n  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.\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-2012-12-31-pt1-PgH7508"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 19.201913033612072, "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"}