DJOU STATEMENT ON TROOP FUNDING BILL 

Washington, DC — Congressman Charles K. Djou (HI-01), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, issued the following statement after the majority in Congress failed to fund American troops in harm’s way:

“It is a sad day when the United States Congress fails to support the men and women who are serving in harm’s way. It is ironic that just a few days from our celebration of Independence Day, this Congress refused to vote on funding for those who are defending our freedom around the world.

“Instead of an up-or-down vote on funding for our troops, the majority in Congress forced votes on unrelated domestic spending and on provisions that would actually undermine President Obama’s ability as Commander-in-Chief to conduct military operations in Afghanistan. I stand with President Obama and demand that this Congress fulfill its duty, like so many brave soldiers are doing right now, and give our military the resources it needs to get the job done and get home safe.

“What should have been a clean up-or-down vote on funding for the troops was politicized by the majority in Congress. This is yet one more reason that the American people are clamoring for change in Washington.” 

While the Senate approved a clean troop funding bill in May, Democrats in the House sought to add unrelated domestic spending as well as amend the bill to limit the President’s ability to effectively conduct military operations. The bill contained roughly $72.5 billion in discretionary and mandatory spending.  Of that, $35.4 billion or 48 percent was totally unrelated to ongoing wars.

The Obama Administration announced earlier today that:

“As in any military operation, the ability of U.S. forces to operate effectively in Afghanistan depends on affording the Commander in Chief the utmost flexibility and discretion.  If the final bill presented to the President contains provisions that would undermine his ability as Commander in Chief to conduct military operations in Afghanistan, the President’s senior advisors would recommend a veto.” 

###