[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 167 (Wednesday, December 5, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12394-S12396]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 1291
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 194, S.
1088; further, that the Rockefeller-Specter substitute amendment at the
desk be agreed to, the committee-reported substitute amendment be
agreed to, as amended, the bill be read a third time, that the Veterans
Affairs Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R.
1291, the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration, that all after
the enacting clause be stricken, the text of S. 1088, as amended, be
[[Page S12395]]
inserted in lieu thereof, the bill be read a third time and passed, the
title amendment be agreed to, S. 1088 be returned to the calendar, and
any statements related thereto be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I must say that I am mystified as to
why there would be an objection to proceeding to consideration of this
bill. I realize that the objecting Senator is not the one holding up
passage of this important piece of veterans legislation. But as the
hold is anonymous, I would ask whichever one of the Senators across the
aisle is holding the bill to please come and speak to me to let me know
the nature of the objection. As far as I know, the Committee's Ranking
Member also has no idea who has objected to the bill. This bill was
voted unanimously out of Committee and is completely lacking in
controversy.
More specifically this bill makes significant enhancements to
educational benefits for veterans and their families. The original GI
Bill allowed a generation of soldiers returning from World War II to
create the booming post-war economy, and, in fact, the prosperity that
we enjoy today. Today's Montgomery GI Bill, MGIB, modeled after the
original GI Bill, provides a valuable recruitment and retention tool
for the Armed Services and begins to repay veterans for the service
they have given to our Nation. As a transition benefit, it allows
veterans to gain the skills they need to adjust productively to
civilian life.
I am very pleased that the legislation would increase the MGIB basic
monthly benefit by $50 per month this year, $100 in 2002, and $150 in
2003. I am even more proud that this bill also takes the next
evolutionary step to keep pace with the careers and education that
today's veterans require. As our colleagues know, many servicemembers
leave the military with skills that place them in demand for careers in
the technology sector. But even these veterans may require coursework
to convert their military skills to civilian careers. The bill would
allow veterans to use their Montgomery GI Bill educational benefits to
pay for short-term, high technology courses that would allow veterans
to earn the credentials they need to gain entry to today's civilian-
sector careers.
Currently, the MGIB provides a basic monthly benefit of $672 for 36
months of education. This payment structure is designed to assist
veterans pursuing traditional four-year degrees at universities.
However, in today's fast paced, high-tech economy, traditional degrees
may not always be the best option. Many veterans are pursuing forms of
nontraditional training, such as short-term courses that lead to
certification in a technical field. In certain fields, these
certifications are a prerequisite to employment.
These courses often last just a few weeks or months, and can cost
many thousands of dollars. The way MGIB is paid out in monthly
disbursements is not suited to this course structure. For example, MGIB
would pay only $1,344 for a two-month course that could cost as much as
$10,000.
The percentage of veterans who actually use the MGIB benefits they
have earned and paid for is startlingly low--45% of eligible veterans,
according to VA's Program Evaluation of the Montgomery GI Bill
published in April 2000--despite almost full enrollment in the program
by servicemembers. By increasing the flexibility of the MGIB program,
we will permit more veterans to take advantage of these benefits. We
should give veterans the right to choose whatever kind of educational
program will be best for them.
This legislation would modify the payment method to accommodate the
compressed schedule of the courses. Specifically, it would allow
veterans to receive an accelerated payment equal to 60 percent of the
cost of the program. This is comparable to VA's MGIB benefit for flight
training, for which VA reimburses 60 percent of the costs. The dollar
value of the accelerated payment would then be deducted from the
veteran's remaining entitlement. This provision would also allow
courses offered by these providers to be covered by MGIB.
A provision that is extremely important right now would preserve
educational benefits for those that must leave their studies to serve
on active duty in support of the National Emergency declared in
response to the events of September 11th. This provision would restore
educational entitlements for recipients of the Montgomery GI Bill,
Veterans Educational Assistance Program, VEAP, and Dependent's
Educational Allowance, DEA, for regular servicemembers and reservists
who are called up for active duty and who are forced to relocate or
take on extra work because of their participation in support of the
National Emergency. Their ability to complete their education should
not be compromised because they were called up in our fight against
terrorism.
The bill would also increase the Dependent's Educational Allowance
for dependents and eligible spouses of veterans to $690 from $588. This
program primarily provides for the children whose education would be
impeded because of the disability or death of a parent due to a
service-related condition. In addition, unremarried surviving spouses
of veterans are generally eligible for the educational allowance in
order to assist them in preparing to support themselves and their
families at the standard-of-living level that the veteran could have
been expected to provide for his or her family but for the service-
connected disability or death. As we send troops into harm's way, it is
entirely appropriate that we ensure that their families' futures are
secure.
The bill also enhances home loan programs. VA provides a guaranty to
mortgage lenders rather than a direct home loan to servicemembers and
veterans. A VA guaranty allows a veteran to buy a home valued at up to
four times the guaranty amount. The price of homes in major
metropolitan areas has increased significantly in the last several
years, yet the VA guaranty amount has not been increased since 1994.
This bill would increase the home loan guaranty amount to support a
loan of up to $252,700, keeping pace with FHA loan guaranties. It would
also extend for 4 years the authority for housing loan guaranties for
members of the Selected Reserve, currently set to expire in 2007.
Reservists must serve 6 years in order to become eligible for a VA-
guaranteed loan. In order for the home loan to be used as a recruiting
incentive now, the benefit must be authorized beyond 6 years.
Another provision of the bill would correct an unintended exclusion
of certain Gulf War veterans from eligibility for service-connected
benefits. Our efforts to explain symptoms reported by many troops
returning from the 1991 Gulf War have been frustrated by inconclusive
scientific data and by poor military record keeping during the
conflict. In 1994, Congress passed the Persian Gulf War Veterans'
Benefits Act to provide compensation to certain Gulf War veterans
disabled by ``undiagnosed illnesses'' for which no other causes could
be identified.
Since then, changes in medical terminology have led many Gulf War
veterans to receive diagnoses for chronic conditions without known
cause--such as chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia--which VA has
interpreted as precluding them from eligibility for benefits. Section
202 of the Committee bill would correct this unintended exclusion by
expanding service connection to ``poorly defined chronic multisymptom
illnesses of unknown etiology, regardless of diagnosis,'' characterized
by the symptoms already listed in VA regulations.
Because scientific research has still determined neither the cause of
veterans' symptoms nor the long-term health consequences of Gulf War-
era exposures, and because the Department of Defense recently expanded
its estimates of who might have been exposed to nerve agents, this
section also extends the presumptive period for benefits for Gulf War
veterans for 10 more years.
This bill would also remove the arbitrary 30-year limit for
manifestation of Agent Orange-related respiratory cancers in Vietnam
veterans. Current law only provides a presumption in Vietnam veterans
for respiratory cancer if the disease manifested within 30 years of
their service in Vietnam. The most
[[Page S12396]]
recent National Academy of Sciences report confirmed that there is no
scientific basis for assuming that cancers linked to dioxin exposure
would occur with a specific window of time. This provision would
eliminate the 30-year limit and allow future claims for Vietnam
veterans' respiratory cancers, irrespective of the date of
manifestation of the disease.
As you can tell, these are important provisions. But they are also
not opposed by anyone, as far as I can see. So why would someone block
their passage? What further adds to my confusion is that a very similar
scenario played out just a few weeks ago, with the very delayed passage
of legislation to improve programs to homeless veterans. As America
honored its veterans on Veterans Day, a member of the Senate was
blocking legislation to help those who have put their lives on the line
defending this country but who have fallen on hard times.
How is it, at a time when our Nation is at war and the resounding
call of patriotism rings in our ears a Senator or Senators is playing
penny ante partisan politics with legislation to help veterans,
servicemembers and their dependents? Everyone is now flying the
American flag. It is time that we act to honor those who carried it
into battle.
Again, I request that whomever has placed a hold on this bill please
come to speak to me I look forward to working with this colleague to
resolve whatever impediments there are to Senate passage of this bill.
____________________