|
John Fleming on Homeland Security
|
|
|
Dems soft on national defense & undermine morale of troops
As a nation, we must be united against our enemies, whether they are nations or terrorists organizations. Frankly, I abhor the way modern Democrats are soft on national defense and how they undermine the morale and the mission of our troops.I will
proudly stand with the men and women who are serving our nation and the cause of freedom. Fort Polk and Barksdale Air Force Base are mission critical to US defense capability, & I will be the strongest possible advocate for these great military assets.
Source: 2008 House campaign website, flemingforcongress.com "Issues"
, Dec 6, 2008
Member of House Committee on Armed Services.
Fleming is a member of the House Committee on Armed Services
United States House Committee on Armed Services retains exclusive jurisdiction for: defense policy generally, ongoing military operations, the organization and reform of the Department of Defense and Department of Energy, counter-drug programs, acquisition and industrial base policy, technology transfer and export controls, joint interoperability, the Cooperative Threat Reduction program, Department of Energy nonproliferation programs, and detainee affairs and policy.
The Committee on Armed Services maintains six permanent subcommittees, an Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, and a Defense Acquisition Reform Panel. Each of the subcommittees have differing jurisdictions, which overlap on key issues, but all are dedicated to providing for the men and women of America`s Armed Forces and the nation`s common defense. The subcommittees are: - Tactical Air and Land Forces
- Military Personnel
- Oversight & Investigations
- Readiness
- Seapower & Projection Forces
- Strategic Forces
- Emerging Threats & Capabilities
Source: U.S. House of Representatives website, www.house.gov 11-HC-AS on Feb 3, 2011
Sponsored opposing the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
Fleming co-sponsored Resolution on UN
Congressional Summary:Expressing the conditions for the US becoming a signatory to the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).
- WHEREAS the ATT poses significant risks to the national security, foreign policy, and economic interests of the US as well as to the constitutional rights of US citizens and US sovereignty;
- WHEREAS the ATT fails to expressly recognize the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms;
- WHEREAS the ATT places free democracies and totalitarian regimes on a basis of equality, recognizing their equal right to transfer arms, and is thereby dangerous to the security of the US;
- WHEREAS the ATT will create opportunities to engage in `lawfare` against the US via the misuse of the treaty`s tribunals;
- WHEREAS the ATT could hinder the US from fulfilling its strategic and moral commitments to provide arms to allies such as Taiwan & Israel;
- Now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that--
- the President should not sign the Arms Trade Treaty,
and that the Senate should not ratify the ATT; and
- that no Federal funds should be authorized to implement the ATT.
Opponent`s argument against bill:(United Nations press release, June 3, 2013):
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon [said] "With the ATT, the world has decided to finally put an end to the 'free-for-all' nature of international weapons transfers. From now on, weapons and ammunition should only cross borders after the exporter confirms that the transfer complies with internationally agreed standards. The Treaty will provide an effective deterrent against excessive and destabilizing arms flows, particularly in conflict-prone regions. It will make it harder for weapons to be diverted into the illicit market, to reach warlords, pirates, terrorists and criminals, or to be used to commit grave human rights abuses or violations of international humanitarian law."
Source: S.CON.RES.7 & H.CON.RES.23 : 13-HCR23 on Mar 13, 2013
Restrict domestic monitoring of phone calls.
Fleming signed restricting domestic monitoring of phone calls
The Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ensuring Effective Discipline Over Monitoring Act of 2014 or the USA FREEDOM Act: Congressional Summary:
Requires the FBI, when seeking phone call records, to show both relevance and a reasonable suspicion that the specific selection term is associated with a foreign power engaged in international terrorism.Requires a judge approving the release, on a daily basis, of call detail records; and to limit production of records to a period of 180 days.Requires a declassification review of each decision issued by the FISA court; and make such decisions publicly available, subject to permissible redactions.Opposing argument: (ACLU, `Surveillance Reform After the USA Freedom Act`, June 3, 2015): The USA Freedom Act that passed by a 67-32 margin is not as strong as we wanted. It is markedly weaker than the original version of the USA Freedom Act that the ACLU first supported in 2013.
We supported a sunset of the provisions in an effort to advance more comprehensive reform, including rejecting surveillance through cybersecurity information-sharing legislation. Notwithstanding this, however, it is very clear that the USA Freedom Act is a historic step forward.
Opposing argument: (Cato Institute , `Cato scholars differ on USA Freedom Act`, Oct., 2015): The privacy community remained divided over the USA Freedom Act. The final version of the bill reauthorized several expiring Patriot Act provisions, but limited bulk collection. Some legislators argued that to pass new legislation would only provide the government convenient new legal justification for its spying--which it would interpret broadly. On the opposite side of the argument stood some pro-privacy groups who held that modest reforms were better than no reforms at all.
Source: H.R.2048&S.2685 14-H2048 on Apr 28, 2015
End bulk data collection under USA PATRIOT Act.
Fleming co-sponsored USA FREEDOM Act
Congressional summary:: Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ending Eavesdropping, Dragnet-collection, and Online Monitoring Act or the USA FREEDOM Act:
- Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to require that the records sought pertain to an individual in contact with a foreign power.
- Amends the USA PATRIOT Act to minimize the acquisition and retention of information and to prohibit its unauthorized dissemination.
- Imposes additional requirements on the authorized use of pen registers and trap and trace devices (devices for recording incoming and outgoing telephone numbers).
- Prohibits the searching of collections of communications of US persons.
Opponent`s argument against (Electronic Frontier Foundation): The bill only addresses a small portion of the problems created by NSA spying. It does not touch problems like NSA programs to sabotage encryption standards; it does not effectively tackle
the issue of collecting information on people outside of the US; and it doesn`t address the authority that the government is supposedly using to tap the data links between service provider data centers, such as those owned by Google and Yahoo. The bill also does not address excessive secrecy; it won`t deal with the major over-classification issues or the state secrets privilege.
Opponent`s argument against (J. Kirk Wiebe, former NSA Senior Intelligence Analyst interview with TheRealNews.com): It`s window dressing. Stopping bulk collection is a good step, but the only thing that`s going to fix this is direct access into NSA`s databases by an independent group of hackers, techie types, people like Snowden who know how to get into a network and look at things and verify that the data they`re collecting and what they`re doing with it complies with the Constitution. The NSA has essentially operated illegally--unconstitutionally--for 60% of its existence.
Source: HR3361 & S1599 14-H3361 on Oct 29, 2013
$515B for military plus $89B off sequester for wars.
Fleming voted YEA National Defense Authorization Act
Congressional Summary: HR 1735: The National Defense Authorization Act authorizes FY2016 appropriations and sets forth policies regarding the military activities of the Department of Defense (DOD), and military construction. This bill also authorizes appropriations for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), which are exempt from discretionary spending limits. The bill authorizes appropriations for base realignment and closure (BRAC) activities and prohibits an additional BRAC round.
Wikipedia Summary: The NDAA specifies the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense (DOD) for Fiscal Year 2016. The law authorizes the $515 billion in spending for national defense and an additional $89.2 billion for the Overseas Contingency Operations fund (OCO).
Opposition statement by Rep. Gerry Connolly (May 15, 2015): Congressman Connolly said he opposed the bill because it fails to end sequestration, and pits domestic investments
versus defense investments. Said Connolly, `This NDAA uses a disingenuous budget mechanism to circumvent sequestration. It fails to end sequestration.`
Support statement by BreakingDefense.com(Sept, 2015): Republicans bypassed the BCA spending caps (the so-called sequester) by shoving nearly $90 billion into the OCO account, designating routine spending as an emergency war expenses exempted from the caps. This gimmick got President Barack Obama the funding he requested but left the caps in place on domestic spending, a Democratic priority. `The White House`s veto announcement is shameful,` Sen. John McCain said. `The NDAA is a policy bill. It cannot raise the budget caps. It is absurd to veto the NDAA for something that the NDAA cannot do.`
Legislative outcome: House rollcall #532 on passed 270-156-15 on Oct. 1, 2015; Senate rollcall #277 passed 70-27-3 on Oct. 7, 2015; vetoed by Pres. Obama on Oct. 22, 2015; passed and signed after amendments.
Source: Congressional vote 15-HR1735 on Apr 13, 2015
Military spouses don't lose voting residency while abroad.
Fleming signed Military Spouses Residency Relief Act
A bill to amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to guarantee the equity of spouses of military personnel with regard to matters of residency, and for other purposes. - Prohibits, for purposes of voting for a federal, state, or local office, deeming a person to have lost a residence or domicile in a state, acquired a residence or domicile in any other state, or become a resident in or of any other state solely because the person is absent from a state because the person is accompanying the person`s spouse who is absent from the state in compliance with military or naval orders.
-
Prohibits a servicemember`s spouse from either losing or acquiring a residence or domicile for purposes of taxation because of being absent or present in any U.S. tax jurisdiction solely to be with the servicemember in compliance with the servicemember`s military orders if the residence or domicile is the same for the servicemember and the spouse. Prohibits a spouse`s income from being considered income earned in a tax jurisdiction if the spouse is not a resident or domiciliary of such jurisdiction when the spouse is in that jurisdiction solely to be with a servicemember serving under military orders.
- Suspends land rights residency requirements for spouses accompanying servicemembers serving under military orders.
Source: S.475&HR.1182 2009-S475 on Feb 25, 2009
|
|
|
Other candidates on Homeland Security: |
John Fleming on other issues: |
LA Gubernatorial: Jeff Landry John Schroder Mitch Landrieu Sharon Hewitt Shawn Wilson LA Senatorial: Bill Cassidy Gary Chambers John Neely Kennedy Julia Letlow Luke Mixon
LA politicians
LA Archives
|
Senate races 2026:
AK:
Dan Sullivan(R,incumbent)
vs.Andy Barr(R)
vs.Mary Peltola(D)
AL:
Tommy Tuberville(R,retiring)
vs.Barry Moore(R)
vs.Steve Marshall(R)
AR:
Tom Cotton(R,incumbent)
vs.Dan Whitfield(I,withdrew)
vs.Ethan Dunbar(D)
CO:
John Hickenlooper(D,incumbent)
vs.Janak Joshi(R)
vs.Julie Gonzales(D)
vs.Mark Baisley(R)
DE:
Chris Coons(D,incumbent)
vs.Mike Katz(I)
FL:
Ashley Moody(R,appointee)
vs.Alan Grayson(D)
vs.Angie Nixon(D)
GA:
Jon Ossoff(D,incumbent)
vs.Buddy Carter(R)
vs.Mike Collins(R)
vs.John F. King(R,withdrew)
IA:
Joni Ernst(R,retiring)
vs.Ashley Hinson(R)
vs.Bob Krause(D)
vs.Jim Carlin(R)
vs.J.D. Scholten(D,withdrew)
ID:
Jim Risch(R,incumbent)
vs.David Roth(D)
vs.Todd Achilles(I)
IL:
Richard Durbin(D,retiring)
vs.Juliana Stratton(D)
vs.Raja Krishnamoorthi(D)
vs.Robin Kelly(D)
KS:
Roger Marshall(R,incumbent)
vs.Patrick Schmidt(D)
KY:
Mitch McConnell(R,retiring)
vs.Charles Booker(D)
vs.Daniel Cameron(R)
vs.Pamela Stevenson(D)
LA:
Bill Cassidy(R,incumbent)
vs.John Fleming(R)
vs.Julia Letlow(R)
MA:
Ed Markey(D,incumbent)
vs.Seth Moulton(D)
vs.John Deaton(R)
ME:
Susan Collins(R,incumbent)
vs.Janet Mills(D)
MI:
Gary Peters(D,retiring)
vs.Haley Stevens(D)
vs.Joe Tate(R,withdrew)
vs.Mallory McMorrow(D)
vs.Mike Rogers(R)
|
MN:
Tina Smith(D,retiring)
vs.Angie Craig(D)
vs.David Hann(R)
vs.Peggy Flanagan(D)
vs.Royce White(R)
MS:
Cindy Hyde-Smith(R,incumbent)
vs.Ty Pinkins(D)
MT:
Steve Daines(R,incumbent)
vs.Reilly Neill(D)
NC:
Thom Tillis(R,retiring)
vs.Michael Whatley(R)
vs.Roy Cooper(D)
NE:
Peter Ricketts(R,incumbent)
vs.Dan Osborn(I)
NH:
Jeanne Shaheen(D,retiring)
vs.Chris Pappas(D)
vs.John Sununu(R)
vs.Scott Brown(R)
NJ:
Cory Booker(D,incumbent)
vs.Justin Murphy(R)
NM:
Ben Ray Lujan(D,incumbent)
vs.Matt Dodson(D)
OH:
Jon Husted(R,appointee)
vs.Sherrod Brown(D)
OK:
Markwayne Mullin(R,incumbent)
vs.Troy Green(D)
OR:
Jeff Merkley(D,incumbent)
vs.Jo Rae Perkins(R)
RI:
Jack Reed(D,incumbent)
vs.Connor Burbridge(D)
SC:
Lindsey Graham(R,incumbent)
vs.Catherine Fleming Bruce(D)
vs.Paul Dans(R)
SD:
Mike Rounds(R,incumbent)
vs.Brian Bengs(I)
TN:
Bill Hagerty(R,incumbent)
vs.Diana Onyejiaka(D)
TX:
John Cornyn(R,incumbent)
vs.Ken Paxton(R)
vs.Wesley Hunt(R)
vs.James Talarico(D)
vs.Jasmine Crockett(D)
VA:
Mark Warner(D,incumbent)
vs.David Williams(R)
WV:
Shelley Moore Capito(R,incumbent)
vs.Jeff Kessler(D)
vs.Tom Willis(R)
WY:
Cynthia Lummis(R,retiring)
vs.Harriet Hageman(R)
vs.Reid Rasner(R)
|
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Jobs
Principles
Social Security
Tax Reform
Technology
War/Peace
Welfare
Other Senators
Congressional Votes (analysis)
Congressional Ratings
Affiliations
Policy Reports
Page last updated: Feb 15, 2026; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org
|