Date: 1997-07-29
Speaker: LINDA SMITH (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Washington

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman. I was actually in my office listening to this debate. and it took me back to the research project I did when I was first in Congress about 2 years ago and then the request for briefing after briefing on all the technology. all the smart weapons. we might say. and I learned to admire many of my colleagues who had worked so hard to make sure that those smart weapons were there. smart weapons like the B2. and the B2 being one that does not risk as many American lives. gets in. gets the job done. But then I got to the point of finding out how many are enough. and I have listened to the debate. and I think the important thing for me was I looked back. to the original debate over how many B2s would be enough from the beginning. It was 10. then it was 20. We have now 21 in some level of construction. not all of them done. most of them not ready for flight. and we are already starting to say we need 9 more. I have been told they are needed because we want to keep some of the construction on. and these will be the ones we begin in 2002. As I look at the priorities before us. it has been real hard for me because I have since the early 1980s. unlike some of my colleagues arguing for this amendment. I have been a hawk. I am very strong. very strong pro defense. I was a Democrat turned Republican over the peace through strength movement in the early 1980s. came in because of Ronald Reagan. And so when I looked at this I thought is America going to be stronger. safer? Are we going to be able to save more American lives if we have 9 on top of the 21? My briefings did not show me that we needed another nine. very hard when I stand here with people I admire so much who have fought so strong for a national defense. but I have to respectfully disagree. When it comes to priorities and balancing the budget. I believe we have to have a strong America. but we have to balance the budget. I believe that this amendment simply says that some of the money. a very small amount. $50 million. will be there for breast cancer research in the military department. In looking at this particular program as someone that does not necessarily believe just because we give somebody money they are going to do something good with it. I found it is the most effective. the most efficient. good for the military families. and this is somewhere else I go. I believe that good strong military medical. good strong research for America. all ties together. It does not have to be more bombers. So with that I would conclude and just say I support this amendment because I just have to respectfully disagree. I believe right now we are on the verge of discovering more about breast cancer and cancer. and the research has been sorely underfunded. This could save lives immediately. not maybe after 2002. and by the way. it takes a long time to develop those planes. We are way into 2010 before we start talking about anything being used. If we had a war. it is many. many years before we would use them if we ever needed them. but breast cancer is killing people right now. So with that. I would ask Members to support this amendment and support a strong national defense.