[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 66 (Thursday, May 21, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H3690-H3694]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999

  The Committee resumed its sitting.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I rise in strong support of the Moran-Thornberry amendment.
  I sat on the Subcommittee on Civil Service, and I have a full 
appreciation, because I heard the quagmire of technical problems 
associated with ensuring medical care for Medicare-eligible veterans. 
There are risks associated with being a part of any control group. I do 
not for a moment believe that this body is going to leave any veterans 
who decide to go into this program in a lurch at the end of the period.
  I do think it is unthinkable to let this gap in health care for these 
veterans to go on any longer. I do think this is Congress at its best. 
We did not know what to do after we heard this testimony. We said let 
us do a demonstration project and learn from it; that will allow us to 
know whether we spread it or change it or fix it.
  Moreover, these are the first people to be allowed into the FEHBP 
program other than the traditional clients programs. I think we will 
learn something about FEHBP as well, and I think the people to learn it 
from are veterans who have been left out of their full right to medical 
care.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Military Personnel.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I would like everyone to recognize, this has 
been one of the consequences of base closures. Many of the retirees, 
they located next to these military treatment facilities and now that 
the bases have closed, they are unwilling to move, and they do not want 
to move. They are stationed where they are. So we are dealing with some 
cleanup work to do from base closures, and that is what this is about.
  I want to recognize the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) on the 
Subcommittee on Military Personnel whose letter we received, we made it 
a part of the Record; not only the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Thomas), but the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer), so we are well 
aware of their objections.
  We recognize that the Committee on Commerce and the Committee on Ways 
and Means were not committees of jurisdiction on this, but what I want 
to say to the gentleman is that invitations were sent out, there were 
meetings with CBO and the Committee on the Budget and the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight, and the Committee on National Security 
on this. The gentleman has raised some very interesting points here 
today, and what I would like to do between now and conference is for us 
to work together on this as we move toward a demonstration.
  I also want to compliment the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) and 
the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Watts) and the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Thornberry). I appreciate them accepting that one of these sites 
should also be one of the Medicare subvention sites so we completely 
understand what we are doing, and I am glad we are not moving to the 
total phase-in, but only a limited pilot.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown).
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this 
amendment and would like to commend my colleagues, the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Watts) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) for 
their leadership in this area.
  As a Member of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs and a 
representative from Florida, I am very concerned

[[Page H3691]]

with the state of military health care, particularly since so many 
Floridians are being affected. I have received the letters and the 
personal visits by military retirees who are concerned about their 
health care options.
  The health care industry is in change and we in Congress need to take 
some leadership. I support this pilot program 100 percent, and I urge a 
``yes'' on this amendment.
  As Memorial Day approaches, let us show our military personnel that 
we do care and that we as Members of the United States Congress do keep 
our promises to the veterans.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. All time of the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Moran) has expired.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).
  (Mr. STEARNS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Thornberry-Watts-
Cunningham amendment.
  Mr. Chairman. Because the need for expanded health care for military 
retirees is so important, I am pleased to join with my colleagues, 
Representatives Watts, Thornberry and Moran in their efforts to permit 
Medicare-eligible retired members of the Armed Forces and their 
Medicare-eligible dependents to enroll in the Federal Employees Health 
Benefits program (FEHBP).
  This amendment proposes a three-year demonstration project at six to 
ten sites in the United States. The cost is offset by the sale of 
national defense stockpile materials.
  We made a commitment to those who chose to serve in defense of our 
country. Military retirees were promised health care for life. However, 
there is a Catch-22 situation for Medicare-eligible retired military 
because once they either turn age 65 or qualify for disability 
treatment, they lose their CHAMPUS benefits. Unfortunately, they are 
placed last on the priority for treatment at Military Treatment 
Facilities, and they are prevented from participating in the new 
TRICARE program.
  Of the 1.2 million military beneficiaries 65 or older who are 
Medicare eligible, approximately 324,000 receive ``space available'' 
care in military treatment facilities.
  I want to address the FEHBP Program as a complement to military 
health care. The FEHBP has been successfully operating over the past 
thirty years at about one-third of the cost incurred in other private 
health insurance programs.
  Under the FEHBP, a consumer could opt to buy coverage that would 
include fee-for-service, HMO, PPO, or a union sponsored plan similar to 
the postal workers, etc.
  In order to ensure that our military have the same choice of plans 
now available to U.S. Senators and Representatives, the President and 
Vice President, and over ten million federal workers, I urge passage of 
this amendment that would offer our nation's military and veterans the 
same basic benefits that we here in Congress have available to us.
  This amendment has been endorsed by The Retired Enlisted Association 
(TREA) and the National Association for Uniformed Services (NAUS). I 
agree with these groups and believe we must fulfill our commitment to 
our nation's military retirees and veterans.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Civil Service who has also been a leader in this effort.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the House Subcommittee on 
Civil Service, I have worked with the amendment sponsors to make our 
military retirees eligible for our Federal Employees Health Benefit 
Program.
  While this amendment does not cover dependents and active military 
and retirees under age 65, which I have advocated, I strongly support 
this amendment.
  This is a reasonable start with a 3-year demonstration project 
limited to 70,000 individuals. With base closures and military 
downsizing, our health care system for our military and our retirees 
has broken down. TriCare has been described to me as try-to-get-care.
  As we approach Memorial Day, as we have heard said on the other side, 
we must remember those who have died in service to our country. How sad 
it would be if we abandon those who survived and those who have served 
us on this occasion. This amendment, my colleagues, only allows 
military retirees over 65 and surviving dependents and those who died 
in active duty to be eligible for the same benefits as Members of 
Congress.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. I would like to 
commend the sponsors for their efforts to fulfill the promise made to 
military personnel. Since the Second World War, recruits were offered 
``free health care for life'' at a military hospital if they served a 
20-year career in the military. These promises were made when the ratio 
of active duty personnel to military retirees was much greater. 
However, as we have drawn down the force, base closures, reductions in 
medical personnel and budget cuts have diminished this health care for 
retirees, forcing them to rely on Medicare. This amendment will test 
the FEHBP option for those with the greatest need to improve the 
viability of the program.
  Many of us are worried about the potential costs of this legislation, 
both to the Defense Department and to the beneficiaries. The Department 
had predicted that the costs of implementing this program would further 
reduce the space of available care. I am pleased to note that this 
proposal would not harm Defense health care program's budget, and it is 
funded by stockpile sales.
  I take this moment to commend the gentleman from Virginia and the 
other cosponsors for their dedication to this issue.
  Mr. Chairman, at this time I wish to make an inquiry of the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  I would like to ask if the gentlewoman supports this amendment, and 
if so, why?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member 
for his leadership. I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) and 
the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Watts) for their amendment.
  I absolutely do support this amendment. I think just a few days away 
from celebrating our veterans and our men and women in the military 
that we need to honor our military veterans. This amendment will not 
impact military readiness and it will not be offset by cuts in 
discretionary defense funds, but this amendment would ensure that every 
Medicare-eligible retiree is covered and provided health insurance and 
would allow Medicare eligible military retirees the option to join the 
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program through a 3-year 
demonstration project.
  I would simply say that what this does is it answers the questions of 
all of my veterans, when I go home to my district, asking me about 
their medical program and how they cannot be in this retiree program.
  So I simply say that this is a good amendment supported by the 
National Military and Veterans Alliance and every major military 
association. We must also show our support for our military retirees. 
It is a good amendment, a strong amendment, and the right thing to do.
  I strongly support my colleagues' amendment concerning enrolling 
military retirees in the Federal Employees Health Benefits program.
  Currently America's military men and women are denied free accessible 
and quality health care after they have retired from their dedicated 
service in the U.S. military.
  We should honor our military veterans and we should be committed to 
ensure that the men and women who fight for and protect our country 
receive adequate health care. However, in our country, retirees from 
the military do not receive the same benefits as Federal employees.
  This amendment would not impact military readiness and will not be 
offset by cuts in discretionary defense programs. But, this amendment 
would ensure that every Medicare eligible retiree is covered and 
provided health insurance, and will allow Medicare eligible military 
retirees the option to join the Federal Employees Health Benefits 
program through a limited 3 year demonstration project.
  This amendment is supported by the national military and veterans 
alliance and every major military association. We must also show our 
support for our military retirees.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for her answer to 
my inquiry.
  I think it is very important that we do follow through on this 
program to see how it works, because we must do our very best in our 
committee and in this Congress to fulfill that promise made to military 
personnel, not just for those who it will affect directly, but to those 
future soldiers and retirees that we wish to keep the faith with.

[[Page H3692]]

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Fowler), a member of the committee.
  (Mrs. FOWLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.
  It is common knowledge that many military retirees were promised 
access to free health care for life. All this amendment does is give 
military retirees a chance to participate in the same plan that every 
Federal employee has.
  By providing more choices, the FEHBP uses market forces to control 
costs and ensure high quality. Military retirees should have these 
choices. This amendment merely provides for a demonstration project. 
Coupled with the subvention demonstration project that we passed in the 
Balanced Budget Act, this will provide some insights on how we can 
correct the current system.
  This amendment does not fulfill the promise of free health care for 
life, but it is a step in the right direction. I urge my colleagues to 
support this amendment.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Ryun), a member of the subcommittee.
  Mr. RYUN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this particular 
amendment.
  I know that some of my colleagues oppose this amendment. However, as 
a member of the subcommittee, I have heard the testimony and I have met 
with retirees who face a real medical problem. As military 
installations are closed and downsized, our military retirees are being 
shut out.
  This amendment is a small step forward, keeping the promises that we 
have made to our military many years ago.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman 
from Washington (Mrs. Linda Smith).
  Mrs. LINDA SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, this is simply about 
keeping our word. I have no answer when retirees ask me, why when I 
reenlisted and they promised me lifetime health care, can I not get it? 
There is no excuse for not keeping our word; and this is a beginning, 
just a beginning, to do that.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman 
from Missouri (Mr. Blunt).
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  I rise in strong support of this amendment, Mr. Chairman. I think, as 
exactly as the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. Smith) said, it is 
about keeping our word. This amendment does not keep our word, but it 
is a step in the right direction. It is a step in doing what we ought 
to do. We need to look harder for the resources necessary to do exactly 
what we told veterans we were going to do.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge strong support of this amendment.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, obviously, what is at debate here is whether or not 
this program, the way it is currently constructed, is one which has a 
maximum chance of retaining viability.
  One of our colleagues, I believe, got a little carried away in her 
eloquence and indicated that this was going to be available for every 
eligible retiree. It is not. It is a very limited program, 70,000. The 
gentleman from Virginia said it really exposed the trust fund to $50 
million. That is correct. But it is a $327 million CBO estimate cost 
over 3 years, 70,000 retirees, $327 million. It also has no permanent 
transition.
  One of the things we tried to do in the DOD subvention and that 
Members will see we are doing in the VA subvention is to say that if it 
is, in fact, successful, this is what occurs as a follow-up.
  What we have here is an amendment that started out at more than $3 
billion. In an attempt to get costs under control, although we were not 
able to work, and I would like to make one brief allusion to the May 4 
meeting. That was the one meeting that was held. It was a late Friday 
night phone call, and my staff was unable to work because they were 
working on the VA subvention. They did a follow-up on Monday, and that 
was their only opportunity to try to have some input.
  All of us want to help our military retirees and our veterans. We 
have two solid subvention programs going forward with all kinds of 
guarantees for the retirees and, if the program is a success, its 
ability to continue forward.
  What we have here, I am sorry to say, is kind of a jerry-rigged 
program funded out of asset sales for 3 years in which there are a 
number of questions in terms of the way in which the program blends for 
the retirees, and it almost guarantees its failure.
  What I have been trying to do is to get people to understand that, if 
we make certain changes in this, if we can sit down and get it to 
conform more to the kinds of underlying structures we had in the 
subvention bill, what all of us seem to want, which myself, the 
gentleman from California wants, is a successful program.
  This program as it is currently constructed is doomed to fail. That 
is not the way we should go forward in terms of our military retirees. 
We should make the kinds of changes that enhance the chance of this 
program succeeding. It has fundamental flaws. Obviously, with the 
number of people who feel the pressure nearing Memorial Day, this 
measure is going to pass. I hope someone sits down and corrects the 
flaws. The military retirees deserve better than this amendment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks).
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Watts-
Moran-Thornberry amendment. Our government is not doing an adequate job 
of fulfilling the promise of lifetime health care that was made to 
those who have made a career in our military.
  With budget cuts, reductions in military medical personnel, and base 
closures, access to quality care within the military health care system 
has become especially difficult for military retirees who are eligible 
for Medicare.
  While Medicare-eligible retirees and their families remain eligible 
for space-available care in military hospitals, they are not eligible 
to participate in the Department of Defense Tricare program, and 
Tricare is reducing the amount of space-available care accessible to 
those beneficiaries.
  As a result, many of these retirees are discovering that the health 
care benefit they earned through their dedicated service in the 
military may not be available when they need it most. We need to find a 
cost-effective way to meet the health care needs of these military 
retirees, and to fulfill the promise of lifetime health care that was 
made to them. This amendment is a step in that right direction.
  The amendment would allow up to 70,000 Medicare-eligible military 
retirees in several sites across the country to enroll in the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program, and to receive the same health care 
benefits as Federal employees and Federal retirees. It has been 
carefully designed to establish a demonstration program that is large 
enough to provide for a valid test of this concept, yet keeps annual 
costs to a reasonable level over the course of the 3-year 
demonstration. The costs have been offset in full.
  I want to commend my colleagues on the Committee on National 
Security, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry), the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Watts), as well as the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Moran) for their dedicated efforts on behalf of our military retirees, 
on behalf of this amendment. They have worked tirelessly to develop a 
good demonstration program that will help us to begin to restore faith, 
not only with those who served in the military as a career, but those 
who will continue to serve to date.
  I also want to commend the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) for his 
longstanding support of improving health care for our military 
retirees, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) for his 
contribution.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support for this bipartisan amendment.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SPENCE. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me the time. I want to just share with my colleagues here, Mr. 
Chairman, when I was in the Army Medical Corps, every month at the end 
of the

[[Page H3693]]

month my Secretary would bring me a stack of patients who were unable 
to get in to see me for an appointment, because we were too busy. We 
did not have enough doctors in the clinic.
  I would go through that stack and I would be able to see which ones 
were going to end up in the emergency room. I did not like it. I did 
not like it at all, but at least I knew the emergency room was there 
when they got sick.
  Now, today, we have closed the emergency room to them, or we have 
closed the whole facility. We have turned our back on these people, Mr. 
Chairman. I encourage everybody to vote in support of this amendment. 
If this is a flawed amendment, I say vote for it and let us fix it in 
conference, and let us move the process along.
  When people say, we were not promised medical care when we retired, 
do not believe that. Everybody said that. I spent 6 years on active 
duty. We heard it all the time, do your 20 and you will get health care 
when you retire. We have turned our backs on these people.
  I commend all my colleagues for bringing this to the floor, and I 
encourage everybody to vote in support of this.
  Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SPENCE. I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding to me.
  I rise in support of this amendment, Mr. Chairman, and thank all 
those the gentleman has just mentioned for their good work on this.
  I believe it is important for us to realize it is not just a matter 
of keeping faith with our military retirees, it is also a matter of 
military readiness, because what I am hearing all around my State is 
that people who are on active duty now are telling their family 
members, do not re-up, do not reenlist. The military, the United States 
government, will not honor its commitments.
  So it becomes not just a matter of keeping faith with those who have 
gone before, but rather, with the military readiness of this Nation. So 
it is essential, I believe, that we in this Congress rise to the 
occasion of backing up our commitments to those retirees, not just so 
we can keep faith with them, but so we can keep faith with this Nation 
in providing for military readiness.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SPENCE. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, as the largest base closure in 
the United States, we need this bill.
  (Mr. FARR of California asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my 
strong support for the Moran-Watts-Thornberry amendment to the Fiscal 
Year 1999 Defense Authorization Act, which would create a demonstration 
project for military retirees to enroll in the Federal Employees Health 
Benefits Program (FEHBP).
  Guaranteeing health care for our nation's military retirees should be 
one of our nation's top priorities. Yet millions of military retirees 
are prohibited from receiving Department of Defense health care because 
they have passed the age of 65 and are eligible for Medicare. As a 
result, Americans who served in our nation's defense are denied the 
health care they have more than earned as a result of their sacrifices 
to our nation.
  In my own district, thousands of these retirees--individuals who 
dedicated many years of their lives to the military--are now without 
military health care. Denied CHAMPUS or TRICARE, and put last on 
priority lists for care at Military Treatment Facilities, these brave 
men and women have an increasingly difficult time obtaining the health 
care they need. This, Mr. Chairman, is simply unfair.
  The amendment before us provides a solution to the problem. It 
establishes a three-year demonstration project in which up to 70,000 
Medicare-eligible military retirees would be permitted to enroll in 
FEHBP at six test sites. The amendment would also allow dependents of 
these retirees to be eligible for FEHBP, as well as widows of those who 
died while on active duty for more than thirty days.
  Passage of this amendment will allow military retirees and their 
immediate families to continue to obtain cost-effective health care 
from the federal government after the age of 65. It is a fair and 
flexible solution that will help ensure that these brave and dedicated 
Americans will not have to worry about obtaining the health care they 
need and deserve.
  Mr. Chairman, next week we celebrate Memorial Day. I cannot think of 
a more appropriate time in which to act on behalf of our nation's 
military retirees. Let's pass this amendment today.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) 
is recognized for 30 seconds.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from 
California (Chairman Thomas) and his willingness to work with us to 
make sure that the protections that need to be in this provision are 
there as we move toward the conference. I think he is right, and I 
think that is important.
  I also believe that it is morally wrong, not to mention detrimental 
to our country's security, not to treat military retirees at least as 
well as we treat civilian Federal retirees.
  This amendment starts to fix that, and regardless of the other 
difficulties that have to be overcome, it is the right thing to do. 
This House ought to pass it.
  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Watts amendment 
because I feel it is imperative that Congress do its best to rectify 
the injustice done to military retirees who were promised, but have not 
received, the guarantee of lifetime medical care.
  Uncle Sam misled America's finest when he recruited them to the 
military. Therefore, while this amendment does not restore the entire 
promise, it does provide military retirees over the age of 65 with 
affordable, accessible, high-quality health care by allowing them to 
join the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program. Congress has access 
to FEHBP, Mr. Chairman, so why shouldn't our nation's military 
retirees?
  The Watts amendment is a step in the right direction--a move toward 
partially restoring the quality of healthcare at an affordable price 
that these retirees were promised upon entering the military. We owe 
them no less!
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my strong support for 
the Watts, Moran, Thornberry Amendment to the Defense Authorization 
Bill. For too long, our nation's military retirees have been denied 
access to the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan (FEHBP) even 
though they have devoted their entire lives to the defense and security 
of our nation. Most of these individuals entered the military on the 
premise that they would be entitled to comprehensive, quality health 
care for the rest of their lives. Unfortunately, our nation has not 
lived up to this important commitment.
  This amendment would create a demonstration program that would enroll 
70,000 Medicare eligible members or former members of the armed forces 
into the FEHBP. The program would be available in six sites around the 
country. At the end of the project, the Secretary of Defense, and the 
Director of the Office of Personnel Management will analyze whether or 
not the demonstration yielded its intended results.
  Throughout my tenure is Congress, I have often spoken out in behalf 
of using the FEHBP to cover the underinsured and the uninsured. The 
FEHBP is financially sound and in most states, the program provides at 
least three quality benefit plans for its members. This the least we 
can do for our armed forces who have stood up to protect the rights and 
freedoms that we all cherish today. After a long fight, we have taken 
the first step toward providing comprehensive coverage for such brave 
and selfless individuals. It is my hope that this provision will remain 
in the conference report and will be signed into law by the President 
in the most timely manner possible. Our armed forces deserve nothing 
less.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment 
offered by Congressmen Watts, Moran and Thornberry to allow military 
retirees who are eligible to join Medicare to enroll in the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP).
  Mr. Chairman, under this amendment, the Department of Defense would 
be allowed, on a trial basis, to give 70,000 military retirees, their 
eligible dependents, and certain ``Gold Star Widows'' the option of 
enrolling in the FEHBP program.
  For too long, the men and women who have served our nation in the 
armed forces have not been afforded access to the same health care 
programs that other federal retirees are eligible to join. For the 
first time, under the provisions of this amendment, they will be 
offered the choice of enrolling in the FEHBP program for their health 
care services. These are individuals who are not eligible for TRICARE, 
which serves active duty and under-65 military retirees.
  Our military retirees should have the same quality of health care 
coverage as other federal retirees, and should pay equitable premiums 
for that coverage.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is supported by numerous veterans 
organizations, including

[[Page H3694]]

the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and I want to add my support for the 
Watts/Moran/Thornberry Amendment. It is a first step toward providing 
our military retirees with needed, affordable health care coverage.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this 
amendment offered by my colleagues, Representatives J.C. Watts (R-OK), 
Jim Moran (D-VA), and William ``Mac'' Thornberry (R-TX) that will help 
provide a portion of the military retiree community with affordable, 
accessible, high-quality health care by allowing them to join the 
Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). This amendment 
authorizes the Department of Defense (DoD) to conduct a demonstration 
program to enroll Medicare-eligible military retirees in the (FEHBP). 
The cost of the demonstration program is offset by the sale of the 
National Defense Stockpile materials. Furthermore, this demonstration 
project features a three-year program located at 6-10 sites around the 
nation. It will provide coverage for Medicare eligible military 
retirees (age 65 and above). This amendment will also cap costs at $100 
million per year.
  Mr. Chairman, although adoption of this amendment falls far short of 
our original commitments to our veterans. I believe that the passage of 
this amendment will bring a step closer the promise of lifetime health 
care made to career military and retirees is kept and I urge all of my 
colleagues to support the passage of this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. All time has expired.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Thornberry).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 420, 
noes 1, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 178]

                               AYES--420

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kim
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryun
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Adam
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--1

       
     Thomas
       

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Ganske
       

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bateman
     Gonzalez
     Harman
     Johnson, Sam
     McGovern
     Meeks (NY)
     Parker
     Pickett
     Skaggs
     Torres
     Wicker

                              {time}  1702

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will rise informally.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood) assumed the chair.

                          ____________________