[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 72 (Friday, June 5, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5688-S5690]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            VETERANS AND HIGHWAY TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS BILL

  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I will address two subjects, 
primarily veterans and the highway technical corrections bill. But in 
this morning's Congressional Daily, the majority leader, when referring 
to the question of the matter of the treatment of disabled veterans who 
have been addicted to smoking and have become disabled because of that, 
said, ``Where was Rockefeller when we passed this bill?'' And that is a 
quote.
  The majority leader has publicly questioned my record on the issue of 
veterans' smoking-related disability rights, and I really thought I had 
a duty to set the record straight.

[[Page S5689]]

  The Clinton administration has met with me on several occasions on 
the veterans smoking issue. I told the Director of OMB and I told the 
Secretary of Veterans' Affairs at least a year ago that I would 
vigorously oppose their proposal to deny veterans' disability rights. I 
have maintained that exact position all along.
  When the Senate considered this year's Republican budget resolution 
in March, I offered an amendment to strike the budget language which 
would have transferred the smoking disability rights issue to the 
Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee and assumed denial of 
smoking-related disability rights--assumed denial of those rights. My 
amendment was defeated, frankly, fairly much along party lines.
  When the ISTEA bill was brought to the floor by the committee, there 
were no provisions at all in that highway bill which would have denied 
veterans disability rights. I support, therefore, highways and I 
supported the ISTEA bill. I voted for it.
  But in the course of the highway bill conference, language was 
inserted to deny smoking-related disability rights in the deep of the 
night, with no consultation--nothing. Of course, as we know now, even 
this midnight raid was not done correctly and requires major 
corrections, and I refer to the highway technical corrections bill. 
Since the conference report was not amendable, there was nothing that I 
could do about that. There was no opportunity to reverse at that point 
the injustice that was being done. I could not offer an amendment. It 
was called a conference report.
  The corrections bill on TEA 21 provides for the first time, 
therefore, the opportunity to fully protect highways and veterans. We 
no longer need to make a choice of one over the other. Highways will 
remain fully authorized. They will not lose a dime. Veterans' 
disability rights will be preserved.
  The Republican leader asked where was Rockefeller? I am pleased to 
respond that I have been busy protecting the rights of disabled 
American veterans. That is where I have been.
  Further, Mr. President, I rise to urge the Republican leader to bring 
up H.R. 3978, the highway corrections bill, for immediate floor 
consideration in the Senate. Our failure to have this corrections bill 
considered immediately will have a devastating impact on veterans' 
disability rights.
  As I indicated yesterday to my colleagues, when H.R. 3978 is 
considered, I plan to offer an amendment--and nothing will stop me from 
offering an amendment if that bill comes up, and I will object to other 
bills coming up in order to force that bill to come up if I am able to 
so exercise my due parliamentary rights --I plan to offer an amendment 
to strike the veterans' disability compensation offset from the 
underlying conference report on H.R. 2400. I have asked for a very 
limited time agreement of 30 minutes equally divided--15 minutes for 
each side does not seem to me unreasonable--and then a vote.
  As the Presiding Officer is very well aware, adoption of my amendment 
will have the effect of preserving current law; that is, it will 
preserve existing disability rights for veterans, the status quo. It 
will simply preserve what already exists--nothing new--what already 
exists, and will fully preserve each and every highway project that was 
included in the ISTEA bill. That is such an important point to make.
  Some people think we are talking about removing billions of dollars 
from highways. We are not. Not one dime will be lost to highways. All 
of that money is going to have to be appropriated by the Appropriations 
Committee in any event. Let me repeat that: Every highway project in 
ISTEA, now TEA 21, will remain fully authorized after my amendment is 
adopted, if adopted. They will be in law, so to speak.
  The highways will be in law. If the leadership permits the TEA bill 
to stand as is by failing to raise the corrections bill, veterans' 
disability rights will be eliminated and the current law will be 
changed. Smoking will be considered an act of ``willful misconduct'' in 
the military, and we will be cutting smoking-related disability 
benefits for veterans who became ill on active duty and those who 
became ill due to exposure to Agent Orange and those who became ill due 
to exposure to ionizing radiation. This goes far beyond the intended 
scope of even the conferees, I have confidence in that.
  Mr. President, roads and bridges are, obviously, very important to 
the State of West Virginia, which is only 4 percent flat. I support 
highways. I support highway funding. Not a single project in West 
Virginia or in any other State--I repeat and repeat again--will be 
affected in any way by the amendment which I will put forward if given 
a chance.
  This amendment is a proveteran amendment. It is simply whether we are 
going to deny disabled American veterans the rights they now have under 
the law. There has been a great injustice done to America's veterans, 
and this corrections bill is an opportunity to remedy that injustice.
  Existing law requires the payment of disability compensation to 
veterans who can prove in a very complicated process that they became 
addicted to tobacco while in military service, if that addiction 
continued without interruption and resulted in an illness and in a 
disability. Addiction is the illness; addiction is the issue. The 
conference report on the highway bill rescinded--that is, cut--this 
compensation to disabled veterans for tobacco-related illnesses 
resulting from nicotine addiction that began in service.
  This cut in veterans' disability compensation generated $17 billion 
in what only can be called the most extraordinary paper savings that I 
have come across in my 13 years in the Senate, and these paper savings 
were literally stolen from veterans and used to partially fund an 
unprecedented increase in the ISTEA fund.
  Of course, anyone familiar with these claims for compensation for 
tobacco-related illnesses, and there will be few who are, knows that 
OMB's cost estimate is just a guess. They just guessed, and they sort 
of guessed in a way that they could pay for a lot of the other 
President's program ideas. I didn't appreciate that, but that is the 
game they decided they were going to play, and so that is what they 
did. They tried to talk me out of my objections to it, and they could 
not. That is my administration, not the Presiding Officer's. The so-
called savings we are spending on highways are just that, they are 
paper savings.
  Since 1993, the Veterans' Administration has only received less than 
8,000 claims--the Presiding Officer will be interested in this; since 
1993, there have been only 8,000 claims for these tobacco-related 
disability illnesses-- and has granted only 200 to 300--200 to 300. So 
27 million veterans and only 200 to 300 disability claims for smoking-
related illnesses granted by the Veterans' Administration.

  In arriving at its $17 billion estimate, the administration, for some 
unexplained reason, estimated that 500,000 veterans would apply for 
tobacco-related claims every year, Mr. President. It is absurd; it is 
ridiculous. It is a shell game. It was intended to pay for some of 
their other programs. And in the process, they wanted to cut off 
disability claims for veterans who are owed them. It is make-believe.
  The amendment that I offer would maintain current law as is by 
reversing the highway bill's raid on veterans.
  My amendment strikes no highway project. My amendment merely 
preserves VA's disability compensation for tobacco-related conditions 
as is.
  I am sure we will hear a good deal of doomsday projections about the 
effect of this amendment. Again, here are the facts. The amendment does 
not otherwise affect the highway bill or the projects that it 
authorized. They remain the same. They are unaffected. My amendment 
will not bring down the highway bill, will not create a sequester. I 
can read you law on that. But I will spare the Presiding Officer that. 
But those who say that, ``Oh, this will cause a sequester and a cut in 
Medicare, Social Security,'' the Presiding Officer and others will hear 
that argument--that argument is wrong. That argument is wrong. Those 
are the contentions of those who would deny disability benefits to 
veterans.
  When we argued this issue 2 months ago, when my amendment to the 
budget resolution was debated, I warned my colleagues that veterans 
would be justifiably outraged by this raid on their disability 
compensation program, and they are.

[[Page S5690]]

  America's veterans perceive that Congress has turned its back on the 
Government's responsibility and promise to care for its veterans and on 
the role it played in fostering their addiction to tobacco--that is 
well known to the Presiding Officer and all other Members--distribution 
of free cigarettes in C-rations and K-rations; reduced prices; and they 
delayed the warning that appeared on tobacco in the military cigarettes 
until 5 years after it had been done at the civilian level.
  Mr. President, we have spent weeks talking about addiction to tobacco 
and how powerful that addiction is and how that addiction has been 
fostered. Why is it when it comes to the issue of veterans and tobacco, 
it is viewed solely as a matter of personal choice? Why is it that this 
administration and this Congress believe that veterans should have had 
greater knowledge about tobacco's addictive properties when they began 
smoking than the general public did?
  Veterans believe in doing their share and carrying their weight. They 
always have; they always will. But the Congress is not asking for cuts 
in all accounts this year, oh, no. In fact, we are not even demanding 
that others, such as Social Security disability recipients, lose 
smoking-related compensation. Again, only veterans are singled out for 
this treatment.
  There has been a lot of talk about veterans and smoking in the last 
few months. So I want to make sure that my colleagues are not confused. 
The amendment that was adopted on Tuesday to direct a portion of the 
proceeds from the tobacco bill to VA health care in the tobacco bill, 
by voice vote, is only for health care. The tobacco-related amendment 
does not deal with disability benefits, compensation; only with health 
care, not compensation, benefits for tobacco-related illnesses. That is 
a major point.
  Those of my colleagues who will seek refuge in the tobacco 
legislation need to reconsider. And, in fact, in some sadness I am not 
even sure there will be tobacco legislation. I hope otherwise. But one 
cannot be confident at this point.
  In any event, some will say--and I close on this point--that the 
corrections bill puts in $1.6 billion for other veterans programs. And 
indeed it does. But our friends in the veterans community speak with 
one voice on this issue. And I agree. They cannot support the increase 
in benefits to one set of veterans to be paid by the cutting of 
important benefits to another set of veterans.
  Veterans across this Nation reject this attempt to buy them off. That 
is why I urge support of my amendment. It is a simple choice. Again, 
the choice is not highways versus veterans. Highways are fully 
protected. Veterans are not. Please choose veterans.
  I thank the Presiding Officer and I yield the floor.
  Mr. DeWINE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed in 
morning business for the next 25 minutes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________