[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 58 (Thursday, May 9, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H2371-H2386]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
part b amendment no. 10 offered by mr. Bereuter
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Part B amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Bereuter:
At the end of subtitle D of title V (page 125, after line
9), insert the following new section:
SEC. 533. PREPARATION FOR, PARTICIPATION IN, AND CONDUCT OF
ATHLETIC COMPETITIONS BY THE NATIONAL GUARD AND
MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL GUARD.
(a) Athletic and Small Arms Competitions.--Section 504 of
title 32, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(c) Conduct of and Participation in Certain
Competitions.--(1) Under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of Defense, members and units of the National Guard
may conduct and compete in a qualifying athletic competition
or a small arms competition so long as--
``(A) the conduct of, or participation in, the competition
does not adversely affect the quality of training or
otherwise interfere with the ability of a member or unit of
the National Guard to perform the military functions of the
member or unit;
``(B) National Guard personnel will enhance their military
skills as a result of conducting or participating in the
competition; and
``(C) the conduct of or participation in the competition
will not result in a significant increase in National Guard
costs.
``(2) Facilities and equipment of the National Guard,
including military property and vehicles described in section
508(c) of this title, may be used in connection with the
conduct of or participation in a qualifying athletic
competition or a small arms competition under paragraph
(1).''.
(b) Other Matters.--Such section is further amended by
adding after subsection (c), as added by subsection (a) of
this section, the following new subsections:
``(d) Availability of Funds.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2)
and such limitations as may be enacted in appropriations Acts
and such regulations as the Secretary of Defense may
prescribe, amounts appropriated for the National Guard may be
used to cover--
``(A) the costs of conducting or participating in a
qualifying athletic competition or a small arms competition
under subsection (c); and
``(B) the expenses of members of the National Guard under
subsection (a)(3), including expenses of attendance and
participation fees, travel, per diem, clothing, equipment,
and related expenses.
``(2) Not more than $2,500,000 may be obligated or expended
in any fiscal year under subsection (c).
``(e) Qualifying Athletic Competition Defined.--In this
section, the term `qualifying athletic competition' means a
competition in athletic events that require skills relevant
to military duties or involve aspects of physical fitness
that are evaluated by the armed forces in determining whether
a member of the National Guard is fit for military duty.''.
(c) Stylistic Amendments.--Such section is further
amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``Authorized
Activities.--'' after ``(a)''; and
(2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``Authorized
Locations.--'' after ``(b)''.
(d) Conforming and Clerical Amendments.--(1) Subsection (a)
of such section is amended--
[[Page H2372]]
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``; or'' and inserting a
period; and
(C) by striking paragraph (3).
(2) The heading of such section is amended to read as
follows:
``Sec. 504. National Guard schools; small arms competitions;
athletic competitions''.
(3) The item relating to section 504 in the table of
sections at the beginning of chapter 5 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``504. National Guard schools; small arms competitions; athletic
competitions.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, this Member rises to offer an amendment which he is
jointly presenting with the distinguished gentleman from Rhode Island
(Mr. Langevin). The Bereuter-Langevin amendment makes a minor change in
current law which can reap significant benefits by allowing National
Guard units to use already appropriated funds to sponsor competitions
and send members to those competitions.
Currently only nonappropriated funds from post exchanges and other
activities and from competition entry fees can be used to cover
operating expenses for the events of all health, pay, and personal
expenses for participating National Guard members. Indeed, the existing
National Guard competition events program does provide National Guard
members with an opportunity to hone their training-related skills such
as running, swimming, and marksmanship in a competitive atmosphere. As
the National Guard actively recruits new members, this can be another
attractive feature in recruitment and retention programs for certain
members of the National Guard.
Through these competitions, National Guard members can qualify for
higher level national and international competitions, including the Pan
American games and the Olympics. Also, National Guard members who
compete in athletic and small arms competitions can now do so with
members of the active duty military. Bringing active reserve and
National Guard components together in this fashion builds better
appreciation among the various components and overall force
cohesiveness.
Additionally, some of the National Guard-sponsored competitions are
open to participation by the entire civilian community for
participation. The high visibility and the community interaction such
events provide is key for providing support for local National Guard
units.
While recruitment and retention and community support have always
been important in maintaining the National Guard structure, they have
become even more critical as we wage the war on terrorism during which
our men and women in the National Guard are more frequently called to
duty overseas and to provide security in our homeland. For the National
Guard competitive events programs to continue to thrive, greater
funding flexibility, which this amendment provides, must be granted to
the National Guard units sponsoring competition and sending members to
those competitions.
Now, unlike active duty military personnel who have all health, pay
and personal expenses covered while competing, National Guard members
are not on duty while competing and, thus, are not covered. For
example, if National Guard members suffer injuries while competing at
the National Marksman Competition in Little Rock, Arkansas, they must
pay for the incurred health care costs, even though they were competing
with their National Guard unit.
Unfortunately, placing National Guard members on orders, as occurs
with military reservists participating in these competitions, is not a
solution to the coverage issue. Why? Because National Guard members
placed on active duty cannot compete with their National Guard units
team.
Mr. Chairman, it should be emphasized that the amendment does not
create participation incentives for the National Guard members which
are greater than those incentives for active duty military personnel,
nor does it allow the National Guard to seek excessive funds for these
activities. Indeed, the amendment limits the National Guard's use of
appropriated funds for athletic and small arms competition to a very
modest $2.5 million annually.
{time} 2340
Mr. Chairman, this Member urges his colleagues to vote for this
amendment as an important way not only to recruit or retain motivated
men and women for the National Guard, but also to show support for the
men and women currently serving our country in our National Guard
during this challenging time. I ask for Members' support.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment. I do not
believe there is any opposition. I would like to claim the customary
division of time.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder) is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by my fine
colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter). The amendment he
offers would allow the National Guard to use appropriated funds to
attend and compete in athletic events and small arms competition. I
think it is a good amendment.
The problem we are having here today is there are many fine Members,
like the gentleman from Nebraska, who also had ideas they would like to
have presented to the House. Not all ideas are ones I would have agreed
with. I did not support and will not support the amendment of the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) on base closure. I think we do
need another round of base closures. I think the process we arrived at
last year was a legitimate one.
But people should have their day in the sun to discuss these things,
and the voters that sent these Members here should have their day to
see these Members bring forth the ideas that they want to have
discussed.
I think this is a very sad day for this House, at a time of
international conflict, when the world depends on this country to fight
the war on terrorism, that good people on the Democratic side were
denied amendments to try to improve the bill that provides for the
common defense of this country.
I do not think this is the kind of activity and arrogance that the
American people are going to tolerate. I hope the lesson learned here
through the day and through the night is that we have got to do a
better job of acting in the spirit of bipartisanship and not just using
it in our press releases back home.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I wanted to explain to my colleagues, in asking for
their support, that I am going to be asking for a record vote, only
because the gentleman from Rhode Island and I offered this same
amendment last year and it was dropped in conference, I assume by our
colleagues in the other body. So that is the reason I will be having a
record vote. I thank my colleagues for their support.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the
gentleman from Missouri for yielding to me and giving me this
opportunity.
For about 12 hours now I have asked my colleagues, who were all
elected by roughly the same number of people as I have been, for an
opportunity for an up-or-down vote on whether or not we ought to have
another round of base closures.
I am adamantly opposed to base closures. After the first three rounds
of base closure, we cannot name one weapons system that has been
purchased with base closure money. We cannot find one general, one
admiral, one Secretary of Defense, one undersecretary, who would name
one base that
[[Page H2373]]
they think ought to be closed. Yet my colleagues, particularly on the
Republican side, have steadfastly refused even the simple courtesy of
an up-or-down vote.
Last year the Senate, by the narrowest of margins, passed base
closure language. The House never voted on it. It was part of the
defense authorization bill which was brought to this House in the
conference report well after September 11, when we were given the
opportunity to say we are for the troops or against base closure. That
really was not a fair fight, and they knew it was not.
Base closure ruins the lives of those military retirees, and over
half of them, over half of them have retired near a base so they can
use the commissaries and the hospitals. When we close the base, the
commissary goes, the hospital goes; and we basically have ruined their
lives. They are too old to move again.
Base closure puts every single employee in the Department of Defense
wondering, starting tomorrow, whether or not his job is in jeopardy,
whether or not he ought to borrow the money to send his kid to college
or buy another car or fix up their house. For all the reasons that
Members oppose A-76, they ought to be against base closure.
All I have asked is one simple thing today, because I think it is
real fair that the business sections around America, all those cities
and counties that we all used to serve in the local government that are
spending millions, if not billions, of dollars trying to save those
local bases from closure, all we want is an up-or-down vote.
We asked for the opportunity to stand up for our constituents. As a
matter of fact, most of us begged for the opportunity to stand up for
our constituents: send me to Washington so your voice can be heard loud
and clear.
Why is it tonight that they hide behind the Speaker? Why is it
tonight that they hide behind these silly rules, nine members of the
Committee on Rules who will not give a straight up-or-down vote whether
or not they think it makes sense to close bases?
We are in a war. How many times have I heard it tonight? Every one of
the service chiefs says they need more people, not fewer. Right now,
the military is looking for a base to put the Joint Strike Fighter.
They are looking for a base to put the F-18E and F.
There is a base in Florida that has three 8,000-foot runways. It has
a fourth runway that is 10,000 feet long. The planes can take off and
they go straight out over the Atlantic Ocean. They can make all the
noise they want. They can do all the dogfighting they want. God forbid,
if something goes wrong and they have to eject, they know they can
eject without fear of that plane falling on someone's house or a
busload of kids.
That base is called Cecil Field. It is outside Jacksonville, Florida.
It was closed by a previous round of base closures, and now the
taxpayers of America are going to spend over $1 million to replace it
because we gave the property away, just like we gave away the property
at Governor's Island, just like we gave away the property at the
Presidio, and just like we spent $13 billion, let us remember, a
thousand, thousand, thousand, thousand times 13 to clean up the bases
that we gave away from the first three rounds of base closure.
If Members think that is a good idea, then have the guts to vote for
it. But if Members think it is a bad idea, or if they think those of us
who think it is a bad idea, who got elected by just as many people as
them, ought to have an up-or-down vote on it, I thought I would ask
just once tonight to give us a vote.
That is all I ask. If we lose, I understand the rule of the majority.
But I think the Members of this House, when those bases start getting
padlocked, ought to have the opportunity to look the citizens who are
going to lose their bases, who are going to lose their jobs, I think we
ought to have the opportunity to look them in the eye and say, I voted
to keep this base open, or I voted to shut it down. But do not hide.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, today I join my colleague, Mr. Bereuter,
in offering an amendment that strengthens the athletic skill, unit
cohesion and morale of our dedicated service members.
As my colleague has explained, this amendment authorizes the National
guard to use its appropriated funds to cover the costs of conducting
and participating in athletic events related to military duties or
physical fitness requirements.
This is of particular importance to my state, as Rhode Island is home
to the Leapfest event.
But the entire country benefits from these National Guard
competitions. Through these activities, the National Guard provides our
service members with the opportunity to hone their service-related
skills in competitive events and provides incentives for its
recruitment and retention programs.
However, currently state National Guard units can use only non-
appropriated funds to cover operating expenses for the events and
related personal expenses for participating unit members. These non-
appropriated funds are extremely limited, leaving most National Guard
members paying out of their own pockets.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to place our Nation Guard members
on a level playing field with their Active Duty and Reserves
counterparts. I'd like to thank Mr. Bereuter for his leadership on this
issue and ask members to vote yes on the Bereuter-Langevin Amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter)
will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 printed in part A of
House Report 107-450.
Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Taylor of Mississippi
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do
now rise.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion to rise offered by the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 168,
noes 241, not voting 25, as follows:
[Roll No. 152]
AYES--168
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barrett
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (OK)
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Filner
Ford
Frank
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Hall (TX)
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Maloney (CT)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Miller, George
Mink
Moore
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Phelps
Pomeroy
Rahall
Rangel
Rodriguez
Roemer
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott
Sherman
Shows
Slaughter
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thurman
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Waters
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOES--241
Aderholt
Akin
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Blagojevich
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boozman
[[Page H2374]]
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carson (IN)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clement
Coble
Collins
Combest
Cooksey
Cox
Cramer
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Everett
Fattah
Ferguson
Flake
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutknecht
Hansen
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kerns
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Mascara
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
McKinney
Menendez
Mica
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Myrick
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Pastor
Paul
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rivers
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schaffer
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Souder
Stearns
Stump
Sullivan
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Upton
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins (OK)
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--25
Brady (TX)
Burton
Cannon
Clay
Clayton
Coyne
Crane
Dooley
Fletcher
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hill
John
Kennedy (MN)
Lewis (GA)
Millender-McDonald
Nethercutt
Ose
Reyes
Riley
Roukema
Shimkus
Traficant
Watson (CA)
Waxman
{time} 0012
Mr. SWEENEY changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. THOMPSON of California, LUCAS of Kentucky, CARDIN, BORSKI,
GREEN of Texas and Ms. KILPATRICK changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the motion to rise was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21 printed
in part B of House Report 107-450.
Part B Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Part B amendment No. 21 offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey:
At the end of title VII (page 159, after line 14), insert
the following new subtitle:
Subtitle C--Department of Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Health
Resources Sharing
SEC. 721. SHORT TITLE.
This subtitle may be cited as the ``Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Health Resources Sharing and
Performance Improvement Act of 2002''.
SEC. 722. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING STATUS OF
HEALTH RESOURCES SHARING BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT
OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Federal health care resources are scarce and thus
should be effectively and efficiently used.
(2) In 1982, Congress, in Public Law 97-174, authorized the
sharing of health resources between Department of Defense
medical treatment facilities and Department of Veterans
Affairs health care facilities in order to allow more
effective and efficient use of those health resources.
(3) Health care beneficiaries of the Departments of Defense
and Veterans Affairs, whether active servicemembers,
veterans, retirees, or family members of active or retired
servicemembers, should have full access to the health care
and services that Congress has authorized for them.
(4) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs, and the appropriate officials of each of the
Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs with
responsibilities related to health care, have not taken full
advantage of the opportunities provided by law to make their
respective health resources available to health care
beneficiaries of the other Department in order to provide
improved health care for the whole number of beneficiaries.
(5) After the many years of support and encouragement from
Congress, the Departments have made little progress in health
resource sharing and the intended results of the sharing
authority have not been achieved.
(b) Sense of Congress.--Congress urges the Secretary of
Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs--
(1) to commit their respective Departments to significantly
improve mutually beneficial sharing and coordination of
health care resources and services during peace and war;
(2) to build organizational cultures supportive of improved
sharing and coordination of health care resources and
services; and
(3) to establish and achieve measurable goals to facilitate
increased sharing and coordination of health care resources
and services.
(c) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act--
(1) to authorize a program to advance mutually beneficial
sharing and coordination of health care resources between the
two Departments consistent with the longstanding intent of
Congress; and
(2) to establish a basis for improved strategic planning by
the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs
health systems to ensure that scarce health care resources
are used more effectively and efficiently in order to enhance
access to high quality health care for their respective
beneficiaries.
SEC. 723. REVISED COORDINATION AND SHARING GUIDELINES.
(a) In General.--(1) Section 8111 of title 38, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 8111. Sharing of Department of Veterans Affairs and
Department of Defense health care resources
``(a) Required Coordination and Sharing of Health Care
Resources.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the
Secretary of Defense shall enter into agreements and
contracts for the mutually beneficial coordination, use, or
exchange of use of the health care resources of the
Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense
with the goal of improving the access to, and quality and
cost effectiveness of, the health care provided by the
Veterans Health Administration and the Military Health System
to the beneficiaries of both Departments.
``(b) Joint Requirements for Secretaries of Veterans
Affairs and Defense.--To facilitate the mutually beneficial
coordination, use, or exchange of use of the health care
resources of the two Departments, the two Secretaries shall
carry out the following functions:
``(1) Develop and publish a joint strategic vision
statement and a joint strategic plan to shape, focus, and
prioritize the coordination and sharing efforts among
appropriate elements of the two Departments and incorporate
the goals and requirements of the joint sharing plan into the
strategic and performance plan of each Department under the
Government Performance and Results Act.
``(2) Jointly fund the interagency committee provided for
under subsection (c).
``(3) Continue to facilitate and improve sharing between
individual Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of
Defense health care facilities, but giving priority of effort
to initiatives (A) that improve sharing and coordination of
health resources at the intraregional and nationwide levels,
and (B) that improve the ability of both Departments to
provide coordinated health care.
``(4) Establish a joint incentive program under subsection
(d).
``(c) DOD-VA Health Executive Committee.--(1) There is
established an interagency committee to be known as the
Department of Veterans Affairs-Department of Defense Health
Executive Committee (hereinafter in this section referred to
as the `Committee'). The Committee is composed of--
``(A) the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Veterans
Affairs and such other officers and employees of the
Department of Veterans Affairs as the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs may designate; and
``(B) the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and such other officers and employees of the
Department of Defense as the Secretary of Defense may
designate.
``(2)(A) During odd-numbered fiscal years, the Deputy
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall chair the Committee.
During even-numbered fiscal years, the Under Secretary of
Defense shall chair the Committee.
``(B) The Deputy Secretary and the Under Secretary shall
determine the size and structure of the Committee, as well as
the administrative and procedural guidelines for the
operation of the Committee. The two Departments shall share
equally the Committee's
[[Page H2375]]
cost of personnel and administrative support and services.
Support for such purposes shall be provided at a level
sufficient for the efficient operation of the Committee,
including a permanent staff and, as required, other temporary
working groups of appropriate departmental staff and outside
experts.
``(3) The Committee shall recommend to the Secretaries
strategic direction for the joint coordination and sharing
efforts between and within the two Departments under this
section and shall oversee implementation of those efforts.
``(4) The Committee shall submit to the two Secretaries and
to Congress an annual report containing such recommendations
as the Committee considers appropriate. The two Secretaries
shall implement the Committee's recommendations unless, with
respect to any such recommendation, either Secretary formally
determines that the recommendation should not be implemented
or should be implemented in a modified form. Upon making such
a determination, the Secretary making the determination shall
submit to Congress notice of the Secretary's determination
and the Secretary's rationale for the determination.
``(5) In order to enable the Committee to make
recommendations in its annual report under paragraph (4), the
Committee shall do the following:
``(A) Review existing policies, procedures, and practices
relating to the coordination and sharing of health care
resources between the two Departments.
``(B) Identify changes in policies, procedures, and
practices that, in the judgment of the Committee, would
promote mutually beneficial coordination, use, or exchange of
use of the health care resources of the two Departments, with
the goal of improving the access to, and quality and cost
effectiveness of, the health care provided by the Veterans
Health Administration and the Military Health System to the
beneficiaries of both Departments.
``(C) Identify and assess further opportunities for the
coordination and sharing of health care resources between the
Departments that, in the judgment of the Committee, would not
adversely affect the range of services, the quality of care,
or the established priorities for care provided by either
Department.
``(D) Review the plans of both Departments for the
acquisition of additional health care resources, especially
new facilities and major equipment and technology, in order
to assess the potential effect of such plans on further
opportunities for the coordination and sharing of health care
resources.
``(E) Review the implementation of activities designed to
promote the coordination and sharing of health care resources
between the Departments. To assist in this effort, the
Committee chairman, under procedures jointly developed by the
Secretaries of both Departments, may task the Inspectors
General of either or both Departments.
``(d) Joint Incentives Program.--(1) Pursuant to subsection
(b)(4), the two Secretaries shall carry out a program to
identify, provide incentives to, implement, fund, and
evaluate creative coordination and sharing initiatives at the
facility, intraregional and nationwide levels. The program
shall be administered by the Committee established in
subsection (c), under procedures jointly prescribed by the
two Secretaries.
``(2) To facilitate the incentive program, there is
established in the Treasury, effective on October 1, 2003, a
DOD-VA Health Care Sharing Incentive Fund. Each Secretary
shall annually contribute to the fund a minimum of
$15,000,000 from the funds appropriated to that Secretary's
Department. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
``(3)(A) The implementation and effectiveness of the
program under this subsection shall be reviewed annually by
the joint Department of Defense-Department of Veterans
Affairs Inspector General review team established in section
724(i) of the Department of Defense-Department of Veterans
Affairs Health Resources Sharing and Performance Improvement
Act of 2002. On completion of the annual review, the review
team shall submit a report to the two Secretaries on the
results of the review. Such report shall be submitted through
the Committee to the Secretaries not later than December 31
of each calendar year. The Secretaries shall forward each
report, without change, to the Committees on Armed Services
and Veterans' Affairs of the Senate and House of
Representatives not later than February 28 of the following
year.
``(B) Each such report shall describe activities carried
out under the program under this subsection during the
preceding fiscal year. Each report shall include at least the
following:
``(i) An analysis of the initiatives funded by the
Committee, and the funds so expended by such initiatives,
from the Health Care Sharing Incentive Fund, including the
purposes and effects of those initiatives on improving access
to care by beneficiaries, improvements in the quality of care
received by those beneficiaries, and efficiencies gained in
delivering services to those beneficiaries.
``(ii) Other matters of interest, including recommendations
from the review team to make legislative improvements to the
program.
``(4) The program under this subsection shall terminate on
September 30, 2007.
``(e) Guidelines and Policies for Implementation of
Coordination and Sharing Recommendations, Contracts, and
Agreements.--(1) To implement the recommendations made by the
Committee under subsection (c)(2), as well as to carry out
other health care contracts and agreements for coordination
and sharing initiatives as they consider appropriate, the two
Secretaries shall jointly issue guidelines and policy
directives. Such guidelines and policies shall provide for
coordination and sharing that--
``(A) is consistent with the health care responsibilities
of the Department of Veterans Affairs under this title and
with the health care responsibilities of the Department of
Defense under chapter 55 of title 10;
``(B) will not adversely affect the range of services, the
quality of care, or the established priorities for care
provided by either Department; and
``(C) will not reduce capacities in certain specialized
programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs that the
Secretary is required to maintain in accordance with section
1706(b) of this title.
``(2) To facilitate the sharing and coordination of health
care services between the two Departments, the two
Secretaries shall jointly develop and implement guidelines
for a standardized, uniform payment and reimbursement
schedule for those services. Such schedule shall be
implemented no later than the beginning of fiscal year 2004
and shall be revised periodically as necessary.
``(3)(A) The guidelines established under paragraph (1)
shall authorize the heads of individual Department of Defense
and Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities and
service regions to enter into health care resources
coordination and sharing agreements.
``(B) Under any such agreement, an individual who is a
primary beneficiary of one Department may be provided health
care, as provided in the agreement, at a facility or in the
service region of the other Department that is a party to the
sharing agreement.
``(C) Each such agreement shall identify the health care
resources to be shared.
``(D) Each such agreement shall provide, and shall specify
procedures designed to ensure, that the availability of
direct health care to individuals who are not primary
beneficiaries of the providing Department is (i) on a
referral basis from the facility or service region of the
other Department, and (ii) does not (as determined by the
head of the providing facility or region) adversely affect
the range of services, the quality of care, or the
established priorities for care provided to the primary
beneficiaries of the providing Department.
``(E) Each such agreement shall provide that a providing
Department or service region shall be reimbursed for the cost
of the health care resources provided under the agreement and
that the rate of such reimbursement shall be as determined in
accordance with paragraph (2).
``(F) Each proposal for an agreement under this paragraph
shall be effective (i) on the 46th day after the receipt of
such proposal by the Committee, unless earlier disapproved,
or (ii) if earlier approved by the Committee, on the date of
such approval.
``(G) Any funds received through such a uniform payment and
reimbursement schedule shall be credited to funds that have
been allotted to the facility of either Department that
provided the care or services, or is due the funds from, any
such agreement.
``(f) Annual Joint Report.--(1) At the time the President's
budget is transmitted to Congress in any year pursuant to
section 1105 of title 31, the two Secretaries shall submit to
Congress a joint report on health care coordination and
sharing activities under this section during the fiscal year
that ended during the previous calendar year.
``(2) Each report under this section shall include the
following:
``(A) The guidelines prescribed under subsection (e) of
this section (and any revision of such guidelines).
``(B) The assessment of further opportunities identified
under subparagraph (C) of subsection (c)(5) for the sharing
of health-care resources between the two Departments.
``(C) Any recommendation made under subsection (c)(4) of
this section during such fiscal year.
``(D) A review of the sharing agreements entered into under
subsection (e) of this section and a summary of activities
under such agreements during such fiscal year and a
description of the results of such agreements in improving
access to, and the quality and cost effectiveness of, the
health care provided by the Veterans Health Administration
and the Military Health System to the beneficiaries of both
Departments.
``(E) A summary of other planning and activities involving
either Department in connection with promoting the
coordination and sharing of Federal health-care resources
during the preceding fiscal year.
``(F) Such recommendations for legislation as the two
Secretaries consider appropriate to facilitate the sharing of
health-care resources between the two Departments.
``(3) In addition to the matters specified in paragraph
(2), the two Secretaries shall include in the annual report
under this subsection an overall status report of the
progress of health resources sharing between the two
Departments as a consequence of the Department of Defense-
Department of Veterans Affairs Health Resources Sharing and
Performance Improvement Act of 2002 and of other sharing
initiatives taken during the period covered by the report.
Such status report shall indicate the status of such sharing
and shall include appropriate data as well as analyses of
that data. The annual report shall include the following:
[[Page H2376]]
``(A) Enumerations and explanations of major policy
decisions reached by the two Secretaries during the period
covered by the report period with respect to sharing between
the two Departments.
``(B) A description of any purposes of Department of
Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Health Resources
Sharing and Performance Improvement Act of 2002 that
presented barriers that could not be overcome by the two
Secretaries and their status at the time of the report.
``(C) A description of progress made in new ventures or
particular areas of sharing and coordination that would be of
policy interest to Congress consistent with the intent of
such Act.
``(D) A description of enhancements of access to care of
beneficiaries of both Departments that came about as a result
of new sharing approaches brought about by such Act.
``(E) A description of proposals for which funds are
provided through the joint incentives program under
subsection (d), together with a description of their results
or status at the time of the report, including access
improvements, savings, and quality-of-care enhancements they
brought about, and a description of any additional use of
funds made available under subsection (d).
``(g) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
``(1) The term `beneficiary' means a person who is a
primary beneficiary of the Department of Veterans Affairs or
of the Department of Defense.
``(2) The term `direct health care' means health care
provided to a beneficiary in a medical facility operated by
the Department or the Department of Defense.
``(3) The term `head of a medical facility' (A) with
respect to a medical facility of the Department, means the
director of the facility, and (B) with respect to a medical
facility of the Department of Defense, means the medical or
dental officer in charge or the contract surgeon in charge.
``(4) The term `health-care resource' includes hospital
care, medical services, and rehabilitative services, as those
terms are defined in paragraphs (5), (6), and (8),
respectively, of section 1701 of this title, services under
sections 1782 and 1783 of this title, any other health-care
service, and any health-care support or administrative
resource.
``(5) The term `primary beneficiary' (A) with respect to
the Department means a person who is eligible under this
title (other than under section 1782, 1783, or 1784 or
subsection (d) of this section) or any other provision of law
for care or services in Department medical facilities, and
(B) with respect to the Department of Defense, means a member
or former member of the Armed Forces who is eligible for care
under section 1074 of title 10.
``(6) The term `providing Department' means the Department
of Veterans Affairs, in the case of care or services
furnished by a facility of the Department of Veterans
Affairs, and the Department of Defense, in the case of care
or services furnished by a facility of the Department of
Defense.
``(7) The term `service region' means a geographic service
area of the Veterans Health Administration, in the case of
the Department of Veterans Affairs, and a service region, in
the case of the Department of Defense.''.
(2) The item relating to that section in the table of
sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 38, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``8111. Sharing of Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of
Defense health care resources.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1104 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``may'' and inserting
``shall''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on October 1, 2003.
SEC. 724. HEALTH CARE RESOURCES SHARING AND COORDINATION
PROJECT.
(a) Establishment.--(1) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs
and the Secretary of Defense shall conduct a health care
resources sharing project to serve as a test for evaluating
the feasibility, and the advantages and disadvantages, of
measures and programs designed to improve the sharing and
coordination of health care and health care resources between
the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of
Defense. The project shall be carried out, as a minimum, at
the sites identified under subsection (b).
(2) Reimbursement between the two Departments with respect
to the project under this section shall be made in accordance
with the provisions of section 8111(e)(2) of title 38, United
States Code, as amended by section 723(a).
(b) Site Identification.--(1) Not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretaries shall
jointly identify no less than five sites for the conduct of
the project under this section.
(2) For purposes of this section, a site at which the
resource sharing project shall be carried out is an area in
the United States in which--
(A) one or more military treatment facilities and one or
more VA health care facilities are situated in relative
proximity to each other, including facilities engaged in
joint ventures as of the date of the enactment of this Act;
and
(B) for which an agreement to coordinate care and programs
for patients at those facilities could be implemented not
later than October 1, 2004.
(c) Conduct of Project.--(1) At sites at which the project
is conducted, the Secretaries shall provide a test of a
coordinated management system for the military treatment
facilities and VA health care facilities participating in the
project. Such a coordinated management system for a site
shall include at least one of the elements specified in
paragraph (2), and each of the elements specified in that
paragraph must be included in the coordinated management
system for at least two of the participating sites.
(2) Elements of a coordinated management system referred to
in paragraph (1) are the following:
(A) A budget and financial management system for those
facilities that--
(i) provides managers with information about the costs of
providing health care by both Departments at the site;
(ii) allows managers to assess the advantages and
disadvantages (in terms of relative costs, benefits, and
opportunities) of using resources of either Department to
provide or enhance health care to beneficiaries of either
Department.
(B) A coordinated staffing and assignment system for the
personnel (including contract personnel) employed at or
assigned to those facilities, including clinical
practitioners of either Department.
(C) Medical information and information technology systems
for those facilities that--
(i) are compatible with the purposes of the project;
(ii) communicate with medical information and information
technology systems of corresponding elements of those
facilities; and
(iii) incorporate minimum standards of information quality
that are at least equivalent to those adopted for the
Departments at large in their separate health care systems.
(d) Pharmacy Benefit.--(1) One of the elements that shall
be tested in at least two sites in accordance with subsection
(c) is a pharmacy benefit under which beneficiaries of either
Department shall have access, as part of the project, to
pharmaceutical services of the other Department participating
in the project.
(2) The two Secretaries shall enter into a memorandum of
agreement to govern the establishment and provision not later
than October 1, 2004, of pharmaceutical services authorized
by this section. In the case of beneficiaries of the
Department of Defense, the authority under the preceding
sentence for such access to pharmaceutical services at a VA
health care facility includes authority for medications to be
dispensed based upon a prescription written by a licensed
health care practitioner who, as determined by the Secretary
of Defense, is a certified practitioner.
(e) Authority To Waive Certain Administrative Policies.--
(1)(A) In order to carry out subsections (c) and (d), the
Secretary of Defense may, in the Secretary's discretion,
waive any administrative policy of the Department of Defense
otherwise applicable to those subsections (including policies
applicable to pharmaceutical benefits) that specifically
conflicts with the purposes of the project, in instances in
which the Secretary determines that the waiver is necessary
for the purposes of the project.
(B) In order to carry out subsections (c) and (d), the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs may, in the Secretary's
discretion, waive any administrative policy of the Department
of Veterans Affairs otherwise applicable to those subsections
(including policies applicable to pharmaceutical benefits)
that specifically conflicts with the purposes of the project,
in instances in which the Secretary determines that the
waiver is necessary for the purposes of the project.
(C) The two Secretaries shall establish procedures for
resolving disputes that may arise from the effects of policy
changes that are not covered by other agreement or existing
procedures.
(2) No waiver under paragraph (1) may alter any labor-
management agreement in effect as of the date of the
enactment of this Act or adopted by either Department during
the period of the project.
(f) Use by DOD of Certain Title 38 Personnel Authorities.--
(1) In order to carry out subsections (c) and (d), the
Secretary of Defense may apply to civilian personnel of the
Department of Defense assigned to or employed at a military
treatment facility participating in the project any of the
provisions of subchapters I, III, and IV of chapter 74 of
title 38, United States Code, determined appropriate by the
Secretary.
(2) For such purposes, any reference in such chapter--
(A) to the ``Secretary'' or the ``Under Secretary for
Health'' shall be treated as referring to the Secretary of
Defense; and
(B) to the ``Veterans Health Administration'' shall be
treated as referring to the Department of Defense.
(g) Funding.--From amounts available for health care for a
fiscal year, each Secretary shall make available to carry out
the project not less than--
(1) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
(2) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2004; and
(3) $15,000,000 for each succeeding year during which the
project is in effect.
(h) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``military treatment facility'' means a
medical facility under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of a
military department.
(2) The term ``VA health care facility'' means a facility
under the jurisdiction of the
[[Page H2377]]
Veterans Health Administration of the Department of Veterans
Affairs.
(i) Performance Requirements.--(1) The two Secretaries
shall provide for a joint review team to conduct an annual
on-site review at each of the project locations selected by
the Secretaries under this section. The review team shall be
comprised of employees of the Offices of the Inspectors
General of the two Departments. Leadership of the joint
review team shall rotate each fiscal year between an employee
of the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of
Veterans Affairs, during even-numbered fiscal years, and an
employee of the Office of Inspector General of the Department
of Defense, during odd-numbered fiscal years.
(2) On completion of their annual joint review under
paragraph (1), the review team shall submit a report to the
two Secretaries on the results of the review. The Secretaries
shall forward the report, without change, to the Committees
on Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs of the Senate and
House of Representatives.
(3) Each such report shall include the following:
(A) The strategic mission coordination between shared
activities.
(B) The accuracy and validity of performance data used to
evaluate sharing performance and changes in standards of care
or services at the shared facilities.
(C) A statement that all appropriated funds designated for
sharing activities are being used for direct support of
sharing initiatives.
(D) Recommendations concerning continuance of the project
at each site for the succeeding 12-month period.
(4) Whenever there is a recommendation under paragraph
(3)(D) to discontinue a resource sharing project under this
section, the two Secretaries shall act upon that
recommendation as soon as practicable.
(5) In the initial report under this subsection, the joint
review team shall validate the baseline information used for
comparative analysis.
(j) Termination.--(1) The project, and the authority
provided by this section, shall terminate on September 30,
2007.
(2) The Secretaries may terminate the performance of the
project at any site when the performance of the project at
that site fails to meet performance expectations of the
Secretaries, based on recommendations from the review team
under subsection (i) or on other information available to the
Secretaries to warrant such action.
SEC. 725. REPORT ON IMPROVED COORDINATION AND SHARING OF
HEALTH CARE AND HEALTH CARE RESOURCES FOLLOWING
DOMESTIC ACTS OF TERRORISM OR DOMESTIC USE OF
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.
(a) Joint Review.--The Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall jointly review the
adequacy of current processes and existing statutory
authorities and policy governing the capability of the
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs
to provide health care to members of the Armed Forces
following domestic acts of terrorism or domestic use of
weapons of mass destruction, both before and after any
declaration of national emergency. Such review shall include
a determination of the adequacy of current authorities in
providing for the coordination and sharing of health care
resources between the two Departments in such cases,
particularly before the declaration of a national emergency.
(b) Report to Congress.--A report on the review under
subsection (a), including any recommended legislative
changes, shall be submitted to Congress as part of the fiscal
year 2004 budget submission.
SEC. 726. ADOPTION BY DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS OF
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PHARMACY DATA TRANSACTION
SYSTEM.
(a) Adoption of PDTS System.--The Secretary of Veterans
Affairs shall adopt for use by the Department of Veterans
Affairs health care system the system of the Department of
Defense known as the ``Pharmacy Data Transaction System''.
Such system shall be fully operational for the Department of
Veterans Affairs not later than October 1, 2004.
(b) Implementation Funding.--The Secretary of Defense shall
transfer to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or shall
otherwise bear the cost of, an amount sufficient to cover
three-fourths of the cost to the Department of Veterans
Affairs for initial computer programming activities and
relevant staff training expenses related to implementation of
subsection (a). Such amount shall be determined in such
manner as agreed to by the two Secretaries.
(c) Reimbursement Procedures.--Any reimbursement by the
Department of Veterans Affairs to the Department of Defense
for the use by the Department of Veterans Affairs of the
transaction system under subsection (a) shall be determined
in accordance with section 8111(e)(2) of title 38, United
States Code, as amended by section 723.
SEC. 727. JOINT PILOT PROGRAM FOR PROVIDING GRADUATE MEDICAL
EDUCATION AND TRAINING FOR PHYSICIANS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs shall jointly carry out a pilot program
under which graduate medical education and training is
provided to military physicians and physician employees of
the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans
Affairs through one or more programs carried out in military
medical treatment facilities of the Department of Defense and
medical centers of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The
pilot program shall begin not later than January 1, 2003.
(b) Cost-Sharing Agreement.--The Secretaries shall enter
into an agreement for carrying out the pilot program. The
agreement shall establish means for each Secretary to assist
in paying the costs, with respect to individuals under the
jurisdiction of that Secretary, incurred by the other
Secretary in providing medical education and training under
the pilot program.
(c) Use of Existing Authorities.--To carry out the pilot
program, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs may use authorities provided to them under
this Act, section 8111 of title 38, United States Code, and
other laws relating to the furnishing or support of medical
education and the cooperative use of facilities.
(d) Termination of Program.--The pilot program under this
section shall terminate on July 31, 2008.
(e) Repeal of Superseded Provision.--Section 738 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
(Public Law 107-107; 10 U.S.C. 1094 note; 115 Stat.1173) is
repealed.
SEC. 728. REPEAL OF CERTAIN LIMITS ON DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS RESOURCES.
(a) Repeal of VA Bed Limits.--Section 8110(a)(1) of title
38, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``at not more than
125,000 and not less than 100,000'';
(2) in the third sentence, by striking ``shall operate and
maintain a total of not less than 90,000 hospital beds and
nursing home beds and''; and
(3) in the fourth sentence, by striking ``to enable the
Department to operate and maintain a total of not less than
90,000 hospital and nursing home beds in accordance with this
paragraph and''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on October 1, 2003.
SEC. 729. REPORTS.
(a) Interim Report.--Not later than February 1, 2004, the
Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall
submit to the Committees on Veterans' Affairs and the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of
Representatives a joint report on their conduct of each of
the programs under this Act through the end of the preceding
fiscal year. The Secretaries shall include in the report a
description of the measures taken, or planned to be taken, to
implement the health resources sharing project under section
724 and the other provisions of this Act and any cost savings
anticipated, or cost sharing achieved, at facilities
participating in the project. The report shall also include
information on improvements in access to care, quality, and
timeliness, as well as impediments encountered and
legislative recommendations to ameliorate such impediments.
(b) Annual Report on Use of Waiver Authority.--Not later
than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act,
and annually thereafter through completion of the project
under section 724, the two Secretaries shall submit to the
committees of Congress specified in subsection (a) a joint
report on the use of the waiver authority provided by section
724(e)(1). The report shall include a statement of the
numbers and types of requests for waivers under that section
of administrative policies that have been made during the
period covered by the report and, for each such request, an
explanation of the content of each request, the intended
purpose or result of the requested waiver, and the
disposition of each request. The report also shall include
descriptions of any new administrative policies that enhance
the success of the project.
(c) Pharmacy Benefits Report.--Not later than one year
after pharmaceutical services are first provided pursuant to
section 724(d)(1), the two Secretaries shall submit to the
committees of Congress specified in subsection (a) a joint
report on access by beneficiaries of each department to
pharmaceutical services of the other department. The report
shall describe the advantages and disadvantages to the
beneficiaries and the Departments of providing such access
and any other matters related to such pharmaceutical services
that the Secretaries consider pertinent, together with any
legislative recommendations for expanding or canceling such
services.
(d) Annual Report on Pilot Program for Graduate Medical
Education.--Not later than January 31, 2004, and January 31
of each year thereafter through 2009, the two Secretaries
shall submit to Congress a joint report on the pilot program
under section 727. The report for any year shall cover
activities under the program during the preceding year and
shall include each Secretary's assessment of the efficacy of
providing education and training under that program.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, next year the Department of Defense and Veterans
Affairs
[[Page H2378]]
will spend over $40 billion combined on health care for current or
former military personnel and their families. Despite this enormous
sum, despite the fact that this year under the leadership of the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), the discretionary spending, the
health care spending will increase just for VA alone by $2.8 billion,
there is still not enough to meet the growing demand.
The bipartisan amendment that I offer today on behalf of myself, the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), the gentleman from New York (Mr.
McHugh), the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), and the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Evans), is designed to provide additional resources to
both health care systems by providing sharing agreements between the
Department of Defense and the VA.
Mr. Chairman, while statutory authority to allow resource sharing has
existed for more than 20 years, as a matter of fact, the legislation
was enacted during my first term 21 years ago, the latest figures tell
us that the level of sharing between the VA and the DOD remains
extremely low, almost a joke, accounting for less than 1 percent of
their combined health care budgets.
The Federal Government can and must do more to increase resource
sharing whenever and wherever feasible. Our amendment accomplishes that
by providing additional incentives and putting additional pressure on
both the Department of Defense and the VA to move forward with common-
sense, practical steps to increase the level of resource sharing
between these two massive health care systems.
Under our amendment, the VA and DOD would establish at least 5 health
care resource sharing projects at locations where both have significant
medical facilities. These projects would, to the extent feasible, adopt
a new management system to look at ways to eliminate differences
between the budget, health care provider assignment, and medical
inpatient information systems.
{time} 0015
The amendment would also establish a permanent joint committee in the
Departments of Defense and VA to provide stronger strategic direction
and oversight of sharing initiatives and would authorize $30 million
over each of the next 3 years to reward sharing innovations.
Mr. Chairman, let me be very clear. This amendment will not in any
way compromise the quality or variety of care available to military
veterans, military personnel or their families, or the veterans as
well. It will expand health care services, because any savings that are
achieved will be reinvested locally so that those benefits will accrue
at the local level.
Mr. Chairman, I do have a much longer statement, but let me just
finally say that this is backed by the Paralyzed Veterans of America,
the VFW, American Legion, and the DAV.
Mr. Chairman, I hope the Members will support the amendment, and I
herewith submit for the Record letters of support for this amendment
from the organizations I referred to earlier:
The American Legion,
Washington, DC, May 8, 2002.
Hon. Christopher H. Smith,
Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of
Representatives, Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Smith: On behalf of the 2.8 million members
of The American Legion, I would like to express our full
support for the Department of Defense (DoD)--Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Resources Sharing and
Performance Improvement Act of 2002. The initiatives outlined
in this bill would improve health care access for veterans
and DoD beneficiaries by authorizing the sharing of health
resources between DoD medical treatment facilities and VA
health care facilities.
The American Legion recognizes the benefits from current
sharing agreements between DoD and VA health care facilities
and the potential gains from additional efforts. Clearly,
there are multiple venues for sharing agreements that will
augment services, build on the respective strengths of the
participants and improve overall health care for all DoD and
VA beneficiaries.
The American Legion has long supported the goal of
improving the quality and access of health care through the
sharing and coordination of VA-DoD health care resources.
This bill is a solid first step toward achieving that goal.
Once again, The American Legion fully supports the DoD-VA
Health Resources Sharing and Performance Improvement Act of
2002. The American Legion appreciates your continued
leadership in addressing the issues that are important to
veterans, members of the Armed Forces, and their families.
Sincerely,
Steve A. Robertson,
Director, National Legislative Commission.
____
Paralyzed Veterans of America,
Washington, DC, May 9, 2002.
Hon. Christopher H. Smith,
Chairman, House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Cannon House
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: On behalf of the members of Paralyzed
Veterans of America (PVA) I want to express our support for
your amendment to H.R. 4546, the Bob Stump National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. The amendment calls
for increased direction and incentives to improve sharing of
health care resources and services between the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) and Department of Defense (DoD) health
care systems.
PVA strongly believes the two departments have much to
share in the provision of health care services that can be of
mutual benefit to both patient populations. Unfortunately,
existing statutory sharing authority has failed to provide
the appropriate atmosphere, direction, and incentives to
encourage VA and DoD to maximize their cooperation potential.
This amendment seeks to correct that shortcoming.
Both departments have distinct patient population and
missions. Recognizing that fact, we applaud language in the
amendment that stipulates within the gamut of sharing
opportunities, both large and small, such activities will not
affect the ability of the VA to protect one of its primary
missions--the maintenance of its capacity to provide such
specialized services as spinal cord injury care for severely
disabled veterans. We believe there are many areas where
sharing health care resources can improve care and reduce
costs in both systems.
Thank you for your continuing care and concern for our
nation's veterans.
Sincerely,
Richard B. Fuller,
National Legislative Director.
____
Disabled American Veterans
Washington, DC, May 9, 2002.
Hon. Christopher H. Smith,
Chairman, House Veterans Affairs Committee, Cannon House
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Smith: The Disabled American Veterans (DAV)
appreciates the introduction of your amendment to H.R. 4546,
the national Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003.
The Department of Defense (DoD)-Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Health Resources Sharing and Performance
Improvement Act of 2002 would, in part, require sharing and
coordination of VA/DoD health care resources and authorize
initiatives to improve access to health care services
provided to beneficiaries of both systems. It would also
authorize a demonstration project to identify the feasibility
and benefits or disadvantages of coordinated management of
health care resources of both departments.
We agree that scarce Federal health resources should be
used effectively and efficiently in order to enhance access
to high quality health care services for active
servicemembers, veterans, retirees, and family members of
active or retired servicemembers as provided by law.
Certainly we have a compelling moral duty to honor our
pledges to them, and a responsibility to see that resources
are used wisely to achieve this goal. This amendment seeks to
ensure that both departments take full advantage of the
opportunities authorized by law to provide improved health
care for all beneficiaries. We are pleased that language in
the amendment maintains the integrity of the special
disabilities programs in accordance with section 1706(b) of
title 38, United States Code.
We agree that DoD and VA should commit their respective
departments to exploring new ways for significantly improving
health resources sharing and to building organizational
cultures supportive of health resources sharing. This
provisions gives strong incentives for increased
collaboration between the respective departments and is an
initial step forward to achieving this goal.
We sincerely thank you for your introduction of this
amendment and continued support to improve health care
services for our Nation's veterans.
Sincerely,
Joseph A. Violante,
National Legislative Director
____
Veterans of Foreign Wars
of the United States,
Washington, DC, May 9, 2002.
Hon. Christopher H. Smith,
Chairman, House Veterans' Affairs Committee, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Smith: On behalf of the 2.7 million members
of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States (VFW)
and our Ladies Auxiliary, I am pleased to offer our strong
support for the amendment you are to offer to H.R. 4546, the
FY 2003 National Defense Authorization Act. This bold and
far-reaching legislative initiative will promote health
resource sharing between the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) and the Department of Defense (DOD). We strongly believe
that improved VA-DOD health resource sharing will greatly
benefit our veterans, our
[[Page H2379]]
active duty military and our military retirees.
Despite the repeated attempts of Congress to increase
sharing arrangements, very little has actually taken place.
The 1999 Congressional Commission on Servicemembers and
Veterans Transition Assistance found that VA and DOD shared
only $62 million out of a $32 billion healthcare budget.
These two agencies have had the authority to enact sharing
agreements for over twenty years, yet they have done little.
The VFW believes that the provisions of this amendment will
serve as a strong incentive for VA and DOD to at last pursue
these mutually advantageous agreements.
It is our view that increased health resource sharing will
be doubly beneficial. It has the potential to provide an
expanded wealth of services to all beneficiaries, all while
reducing costs. The Transition Commission noted, for example,
that were VA and DOD to better coordinate the purchase of
medical products, including pharmaceuticals and supplies,
they would realize a savings of almost $2 billion over a
five-year period. Further, a May 2000 General Accounting
Office report claimed that VA and DOD could realize a gain of
up to $300 million per year with improved joint
pharmaceutical contracts.
The VFW insists that all cost-savings resulting from
improved resource sharing agreements be reinvested back into
the Departments' health care systems without any funding
offsets. The resulting supplemental revenue will help bring
the Departments' respective health care budgets closer to
what is actually needed to provide the timely, first-rate
health care our active duty servicemembers and veterans so
richly deserve. Additionally, the resultant additional
dollars will serve as an effective incentive for the
Departments to pursue other additional avenues of health care
sharing.
Notwithstanding this legislation's manifest benefits, we do
have some concerns that we would articulate here. First, we
believe that the individuals who head the Health Executive
Committee which this legislation creates should have equal
authority and the highest possible access to their respective
Secretaries. This will help preserve the integrity of their
decision-making and mitigate potential institutional
interference. We note that under your amendment the senior
DOD head will be the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness whereas VA's Deputy Secretary represents that
department. We recommend that the DOD head be the Deputy
Secretary of Defense.
A second concern is since the findings of this Committee
are essentially binding upon the two departments, that they
not unduly supplant established and effective planning
procedures nor serve as a means to circumvent the will of the
Congress and the longstanding oversight capacity of the
veterans service community. Great care must be exercised to
ensure that the considerable authority invested in this
Executive Committee is not misapplied.
Despite this, the VFW strongly supports this bold approach
to expanding and, indeed, enforcing the implementation of VA-
DOD health care resource sharing agreements. Most
importantly, it specifically addresses a key VFW goal that
veterans and the active duty military receive the best
possible health care in the best possible way. We thank you
for introducing this vital measure, and we look forward to
working with you to ensure its success.
Sincerely,
Robert E. Wallace,
Executive Director.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, I am unaware of any opposition to the
amendment, and so I rise to claim the customary division of time.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr.
Snyder) is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I rise in support of the amendment offered by my friend and
colleague, and the chairman of the House Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
The amendment he offers, Mr. Chairman, would require the Department
of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to approve and expand
their health care resource sharing efforts. The gentleman is my
chairman on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and I appreciate him
and look forward to working with him on the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs and on the Committee on Armed Services for many years to come
on this very important issue.
Ironically, we have time this evening to consider debate on these two
last amendments which are noncontroversial. While noncontroversial,
they are important and ought to be discussed. The two proponents of
these amendments deserve their opportunity to discuss them on the House
floor at their request. But just as importantly, we should have had the
opportunity to discuss the controversial issues in this bill offered by
very fine Members of this House, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Spratt), the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr.
Maloney), the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen), and others. All had
issues they wanted to have discussed.
At the full Committee on Armed Services, under the very able
chairmanship of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), we had very
vigorous and full debate on every issue that members wanted to be
discussed, and we voted on every issue on which someone wanted to vote.
The result was people were satisfied with the process and the bill came
out of committee 57 to one.
Ironically, the issue we have heard most about today, which is the
amendment of the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) on base
closure, could have been avoided if the Committee on Rules had acted
properly last year. Now, what do I mean by that? Last year, the
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) and I had an amendment to provide for
a base closure commission. The Committee on Rules did not make that in
order. So the folks that want to discuss base closure can now say we
have never had a vote on the House floor. We are repeating this process
year after year, denying the opportunity to discuss issues.
In 1981, I was working as a doctor in Thailand as part of the
Cambodian refugee relief effort. We were living in the town of
Aranyaprathet, right on the border, right next to a Thai army base. It
was a very volatile border, and there was a lot of military presence.
Got up one morning, the army base was emptied out. The Thai Army had
gone to Bangkok to overthrow the government, overthrow the democracy
and stage a coup. We went out that day to Thai villages where I would
provide medical care with the medical team I worked with. We worked
with these Thai paraprofessional medical people, and the fellow we were
supposed to work with that morning could not perform his work. All he
could do was sit and cry, literally cry about the fact that his
democracy was overthrown.
Well, I was very proud to be an American that day, very proud of our
American democracy. And what I learned that day in Thailand is that
democracy has got to be nourished or we lose it. Well, I am very proud
of this bill I am going to vote for here probably in about an hour,
when we finish this process; but I am not proud of this process.
I think everyone has gathered that this process has been very
dissatisfying to many people in the House, and I would hope my
colleagues would respect our opinion in the future on other bills this
year. At this very critical time in our Nation's history, we, as a
body, as the people's House, need to do a better job of nurturing our
democracy in this country.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding
me this time.
The amendment before the House tonight is a compromise that I believe
will lead to better health care for our veterans and our service men
and women, as well as a more efficient use of resources for their care.
Chairman Smith has been the driving force behind this idea, and I
commend him and the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) and the
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder), the chairman and ranking member
of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, for their very cooperative,
fair, and objective considerations of the issues and concerns of both
the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense and
both of our committees here in the Congress.
While each Department has traditional and long-standing values and
practices in providing health care to separate beneficiary populations,
this bill seeks the common interest of both veterans and military
personnel and to create partnerships and better coordinations in each
institution. This amendment will commit each Department to improving
health sharing and
[[Page H2380]]
coordination of resources and services. It will also prompt the
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to take
full advantage of all these opportunities to make our health care
resources available for all active and retired service men and women.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment.
Mr. EVANS. Mr. Chairman, Congress has long supported the sharing of
scarce Federal health care resources between the Department of Defense
(DoD) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In fact, Congress
vested both Departments with broad authority two decades ago to do just
that and has since repeatedly encouraged more effective and efficient
use of this sharing authority by DoD and VA.
President Bush noted in the Administration's Fiscal Year 2003 budget
submission to Congress that only a negligible portion of the nation's
scarce Federal health care resources are actually being shared between
the two Departments. While sharing between DoD and VA exists
technically, sharing remains the exception, not the rule. Without
future legislation there is little reason to believe that VA and DoD
will develop a culture that values mutually beneficial sharing. Until
this occurs, taxpayer dollars will not be spent as effectively as
possible.
I commend the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Smith, for his
leadership with this amendment. How much of what kind of sharing is
possible? It is my hope that the provisions of this amendment will
forge thoughtful answers to this question and achieve the goals long
sought by Congress.
Particularly noteworthy are the incentives endorsed in this
amendment, which are intended to promote innovation and effective, new
approaches to achieving the goals of sharing between DoD and VA. I also
applaud the joint oversight provisions of this amendment, introducing
shared accountability for the effective use of the resources provided
in the amendment and shared accountability for assessing and reporting
program outcomes. The Smith amendment allows the Secretaries of DoD and
VA to terminate programs that are ineffective or demonstrate
inefficiencies or a questionable use of scarce resources.
VA adoption of DoD's Pharmacy Data Transaction Service (PDTS) will
provide benefits to veterans receiving VA medical care. Although this
data system integration will no doubt present VA with some initial
challenges, I believe the integration of these two systems has the
potential to greatly improve the quality of patient care, eliminate
harmful or dangerous drug interactions and bridge the information
technology gaps that persist between the two agencies--on at least one
front.
Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment and I urge my colleagues to
vote for the amendment.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
The amendment was agreed to.
Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will
now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed in the following order: Part A amendment No. 7 offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez), part A amendment No. 8
offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode), part A amendment
No. 9 offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), and part B
amendment No. 10 offered by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.
Part A Amendment No. 7 Offered by Ms. Sanchez
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded voted
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Sanchez) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 202,
noes 215, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 153]
AYES--202
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barrett
Bass
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Boehlert
Bonior
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Coyne
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Dunn
Edwards
Ehrlich
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foley
Ford
Frank
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gephardt
Gilchrest
Gilman
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Horn
Houghton
Hoyer
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kirk
Kleczka
Kolbe
Kucinich
Lampson
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Miller, Dan
Miller, George
Mink
Moore
Moran (VA)
Morella
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Obey
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Ramstad
Rangel
Rivers
Rodriguez
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott
Serrano
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Simmons
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Tanner
Tauscher
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thurman
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Waters
Watt (NC)
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOES--215
Aderholt
Akin
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Bartlett
Barton
Bereuter
Berry
Bilirakis
Blunt
Boehner
Bonilla
Boozman
Borski
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Chabot
Chambliss
Coble
Collins
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English
Everett
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Forbes
Fossella
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gillmor
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Grucci
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hart
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Keller
Kerns
Kildee
King (NY)
Kingston
Knollenberg
LaFalce
LaHood
Langevin
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Manzullo
Mascara
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Mica
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Murtha
Myrick
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Ortiz
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Portman
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schaffer
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stenholm
Stump
Stupak
Sullivan
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Upton
Vitter
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins (OK)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--18
Burton
Cannon
Clay
Combest
Crane
Hall (OH)
John
Kennedy (MN)
Lewis (GA)
Millender-McDonald
Nethercutt
Ose
[[Page H2381]]
Reyes
Riley
Roukema
Traficant
Watson (CA)
Waxman
{time} 0044
Ms. NORTHUP changed her vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. KOLBE changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. SWEENEY. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 153, I inadvertently voted
``no,'' and I intended to vote ``aye.''
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, the Chair announces
that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of time within
which a vote by electronic device will be taken on each amendment on
which the Chair has postponed further proceedings.
Part A Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Goode
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on amendment No. 8 printed in Part A of House Report 107-450 offered by
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode) on which further proceedings
were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 232,
noes 183, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 154]
AYES--232
Aderholt
Akin
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Coble
Collins
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeFazio
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Doolittle
Duncan
Dunn
Emerson
English
Etheridge
Everett
Ferguson
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Horn
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kerns
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Knollenberg
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Manzullo
McCarthy (NY)
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
Mica
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Moore
Moran (KS)
Myrick
Ney
Norwood
Nussle
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schaffer
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Spratt
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Sullivan
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins (OK)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--183
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barrett
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Buyer
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Coyne
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Engel
Eshoo
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Ford
Frank
Frost
Ganske
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Green (TX)
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Houghton
Hoyer
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Lofgren
Lynch
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Miller, George
Mink
Mollohan
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rivers
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Simmons
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Stark
Stupak
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Weiner
Whitfield
Wilson (NM)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--19
Burton
Cannon
Clay
Combest
Crane
Hall (OH)
John
Kennedy (MN)
Lewis (GA)
Millender-McDonald
Nethercutt
Northup
Ose
Reyes
Riley
Roukema
Traficant
Watson (CA)
Waxman
{time} 0052
Mr. LEWIS of California and Mr. LATHAM changed their vote from ``no''
to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mrs. NORTHUP. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 154, I was unavoidably
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Part A Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Paul
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on amendment No. 9 printed in part A of House Report 107-450 offered by
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) on which further proceedings were
postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 264,
noes 152, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 155]
AYES--264
Aderholt
Akin
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Bartlett
Bass
Bereuter
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Coble
Collins
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeFazio
DeLay
DeMint
Dicks
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Etheridge
Everett
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
[[Page H2382]]
Holden
Horn
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kerns
Kildee
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Manzullo
Mascara
McCarthy (NY)
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
Menendez
Mica
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Mink
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Murtha
Myrick
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Ortiz
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Pascrell
Paul
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ross
Rothman
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sandlin
Saxton
Schaffer
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Souder
Spratt
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sullivan
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner
Upton
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins (OK)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--152
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barrett
Barton
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boucher
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Coyne
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Ehlers
Engel
Eshoo
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank
Frost
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Houghton
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kennedy (RI)
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lantos
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran (VA)
Morella
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Rangel
Rivers
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Slaughter
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Waters
Watt (NC)
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--18
Burton
Cannon
Clay
Combest
Crane
Hall (OH)
John
Kennedy (MN)
Lewis (GA)
Millender-McDonald
Nethercutt
Ose
Reyes
Riley
Roukema
Traficant
Watson (CA)
Waxman
{time} 0100
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Part B Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Bereuter
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on amendment No. 10 printed in part B of House Report 107-450 offered
by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) on which further
proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice
vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 412,
noes 2, not voting 20, as follows:
[Roll No. 156]
AYES--412
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Andrews
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Boozman
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Condit
Conyers
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Frank
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kerns
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Lynch
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Miller, Dan
Miller, George
Miller, Jeff
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Otter
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sullivan
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins (OK)
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--2
Miller, Gary
Stark
[[Page H2383]]
NOT VOTING--20
Boehner
Burton
Cannon
Clay
Combest
Crane
Hall (OH)
John
Kennedy (MN)
Lewis (GA)
McCarthy (MO)
Millender-McDonald
Nethercutt
Ose
Reyes
Riley
Roukema
Traficant
Watson (CA)
Waxman
{time} 0106
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to take this opportunity to thank the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member of the
Committee on Armed Services, for all of the hard work and the
cooperation that he has put into this bill in the last few days. He has
been a joy to work with and a very good friend, and one could not ask
for a better partner.
The subcommittee chairmen and the ranking members, thanks to them,
and a special thanks, Mr. Chairman, to all of the staff people who have
been working these last few weeks hour after hour after hour.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I think all of us need to thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Stump), the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, because as is
his usual custom, he would never say that he put in more hours than
anyone, worked harder, and has delivered an excellent and quality
product.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for
his very generous remarks, but I must say that the bill is
appropriately named after him. I might also point out that when I first
came to the Congress of the United States, the gentleman from Arizona
was my very first friend when we came up here in December of 1976.
A lot of good memories in the memory bank about the gentleman from
Arizona. He came out to Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri with me
back in the late 1970s and the airmen there had this wooden stump that
they called Sergeant Eucalyptus P. Stump, and the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Stump) and Eucalyptus P. Stump had their picture taken
together.
I might also say one of those great memories was going back to Ford
Island with him in 1991, the 50th anniversary of the bombing of Pearl
Harbor, and we went over to Ford Island and he showed me where he was
back in 1943 during the war. He is a marvelous, marvelous legislator, a
great friend, and one of the most decent human beings, and we thank him
immensely for his hard work and his generosity.
The CHAIRMAN. There being no further amendments in order, the
question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute,
as amended.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended,
was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
LaTourette) having assumed the chair, Mr. Camp, Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4546) to
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for military activities
of the Department of Defense, and for military construction, to
prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2003, and for
other purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 415, he reported the bill
back to the House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the
Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee
amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the
Whole? If not, the question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Spratt
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. SPRATT. I am, in its present form, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Spratt moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4546 to the
Committee on Armed Services with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
At the end of subtitle C of title II (page 49, after line
17), insert the following new section:
SEC. 234. PROHIBITION ON DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT OF
NUCLEAR-TIPPED BALLISTIC MISSILE INTERCEPTORS.
(a) Prohibition on Use of Funds.--No funds appopriated or
otherwise made available to the Department of Defense or the
Department of Energy may be obligated or expended to develop
or deploy a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile interceptor.
(b) Definition.--In this section:
(1) The term ``nuclear-tipped ballistic missile
interceptor'' means a ballistic missile defense system that
employs a nuclear detonation to destroy an incoming missile
or reentry vehicle.
(2) The term ``develop'' includes any activities referred
to in section 179(d)(8) of title 10, United States Code, more
advanced than feasibility studies.
Mr. SPRATT (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that the motion be considered as read and printed in the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from South Carolina?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) is recognized for 5 minutes in support of
his motion to recommit.
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, when Ronald Reagan launched the Strategic Defense
Initiative, he made a wise decision. He decided that SDI should be non-
nuclear, and he did it for good reason. SDI was not the genesis of
missile defense. President Johnson had proposed a missile defense
system in 1967, a system he called the Sentinel. It was to be deployed
at 15 sites around the country, but it packed a nuclear warhead, and
the news of its coming was not warmly welcomed.
When the Nixon administration came to office, it answered the local
resistance to the Sentinel by naming it the Safeguard and by
reorienting its mission. Safeguard consisted of 2 interceptors:
Spartan, a third-stage missile with a 1 megaton warhead, and Sprint, a
shorter range missile with a warhead that produced an intense burst of
neutrons. Both of them were radar-guided. Neither was accurate enough
for what we call today hit-to-kill, but with a 1-megaton warhead, the
Spartan did not need hit-to-kill. The lethal range for the x-rays
generated by its warhead above the atmosphere was several kilometers.
These systems were flight-tested often, and compiled an unimpressive
record, but there was one flaw that really did it in. A nuclear weapon
detonation above the atmosphere produces a huge quantity of electrons.
Their interaction creates electromagnetic pulse and ionizes the whole
top of the atmosphere. And when electrons in this mix reach a certain
density, the waves that are projected by long-range radars are weakened
to the point that they can no longer see objects as small as reentry
vehicles. In other words, the Spartan and the Sprint, put together,
were self-blinding. They did not work. They were self-defeating.
In October 1975, we opened the site at Grand Forks for the deployment
of the system and it lasted all of 2 months; 2 months. We spent $20
billion in today's money and the system was shut down.
Now, after spending $20 billion to learn that nuclear-tipped
interceptors are self-blinding, self-defeating, let us do not go down
that path again. After spending another $60 billion since SDI to
perfect the technology we today call hit-to-kill, let us stick to our
knitting. It is about to work. It is about to come to fruition. Let us
keep missile defense focused on things that are feasible.
Now, my colleagues may say that what I am doing in this motion is
setting up a straw man and then knocking him down; that MDA is not even
developing so-called nuclear-tipped interceptors, and that is true, for
now.
{time} 0115
But there are reports that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld asked the
Defense
[[Page H2384]]
Science Board to weigh this option, and here is what our own committee
report says at page 230, in this bill on page 230:
``The committee understands that the Department may investigate other
options for ballistic missile defense; among them, nuclear armed
interceptors. The committee would consider the examination of such an
alternative to be a prudent step.'' I do not consider that to be
prudent in terms of dollars or defense policy. That is why I move to
recommit and undo this language.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute and 50 seconds to the gentleman from
Maine (Mr. Allen).
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this motion to recommit to prohibit
the development or deployment of nuclear-tipped ballistic missile
interceptors.
As the gentleman from South Carolina has said, the Safeguard nuclear
antimissile system was canceled by Congress 2 months after it was
deployed in 1975, partly because the new Russian MERVs would easily
evade the defense and partly because the public would not tolerate
U.S.-nuclear explosions over our cities and territories as a way of
defending this country.
President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative rejected the nuclear
option. If President Reagan knew it was a bad idea 20 years ago, why
revive it now? Yet Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld has reportedly
instructed the Defense Science Board to explore this option. There are
bad ideas and there are really bad ideas, and this bill should slam the
door on really bad, half-baked ideas like nuclear-tipped ballistic
missile interceptors.
General Kadish, director of the Missile Defense Agency, has said that
he has no interest in developing nuclear-tipped interceptors. He knows
that Americans will never tolerate this sort of defense that relies on
U.S. nuclear explosions over our homes, raining down radioactivity and
blinding radars and other sensors of conventional missile defenses.
The Committee on Armed Services has held numerous hearings supporting
hit-to-kill technology and showing it works. If it works, why return to
nuclear explosions as a way of defending our country?
The other side will suggest that we should not restrict the
Pentagon's ability to experiment with any technology; but, Mr. Speaker,
if that is true, why are we even here? Why do we not write a blank
check at the beginning of the year and go home? Because Congress has a
constitutional duty to set spending priorities. We should reject this
type of missile defense and vote for the motion to recommit.
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, let us vote to affirm Ronald Reagan's wisdom. Let us win
one for the Gipper. Vote ``aye'' for nonnuclear missile defense.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to
recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, there is no plan, no funding, no blueprint to use
nuclear-tipped interceptors. In fact, we do not have them. We used to,
and we disassembled them.
But the Soviet Union, now Russia, does indeed have them; and we are
doing precisely, if we vote for this motion to recommit, precisely what
the Gipper did not want us to do, and that is for Congress to take all
the chips off the table when the President has an opportunity to maybe
negotiate down or negotiate out that nuclear-tipped Galosh force that
Russia maintains around Moscow right now.
So let us win one for the Gipper; let us not vote for this motion to
recommit.
Let me just say one other thing to my Democrat friends. I was all set
for a motion to recommit on base closing. What happened to that motion
to recommit? I thought that would be what they would offer up here.
I would recommend to us that we kind of keep our eye on the ball. The
ball is, we are providing in this bill for the Armed Forces of the
United States of America. This bill has been the product of literally
thousands of hours put in by Members on both sides of the aisle, by the
staff.
I do not know how the rest of the Members feel, but the last 8
months, I have felt a little bit like it must have been after Pearl
Harbor. We were hit by a sneak attack in this country. It killed
thousands of our citizens. We came together, and a wave of patriotism
and spirit moved across this country.
We stood behind our military people. We sent our uniformed forces out
to hunt down the enemy and engage them in combat. They have been doing
that very, very effectively. I think it is entirely appropriate that we
name this bill in honor of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump),
because he is one of those World War II veterans who joined at the age
of 16.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) mentioned to me that
it might be a good time to mention the other World War II veterans,
because we do not have a lot of them. They are a great asset to this
Congress.
I would just ask, if they are here tonight, if they can stand: the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Hyde), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Hall), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), and the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton).
If we have missed anyone, please stand up. Let us give them a round
of applause. And the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger).
Now, Mr. Speaker, we have come together. We have put in thousands of
hours with staff and Members. We have put together a great bill that
does what we are supposed to do, and that is, we have given the
President and our troops the tools that they need to do the job. They
are doing their duty, and 1.2 million Americans in uniform across the
world are doing their duty to serve this country. Let us do our duty.
Let us pass this bill.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HUNTER. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. THOMAS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, just to make sure that everybody understands what this
vote is, a way of looking at it would be to vote yes or no as a
referendum on the motion for the committee to rise and those who
sponsored it. If Members like the motion to rise, vote yes; if they did
not like what happened, vote no.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair
will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote on the
question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 193,
noes 223, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 157]
AYES--193
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barcia
Barrett
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Edwards
Ehlers
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank
Frost
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
[[Page H2385]]
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Lynch
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Miller, George
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thurman
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOES--223
Aderholt
Akin
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barr
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boozman
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Coble
Collins
Cooksey
Cox
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Everett
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kerns
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Mica
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Moran (KS)
Morella
Myrick
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sandlin
Saxton
Schaffer
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stenholm
Stump
Sullivan
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner
Upton
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins (OK)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--18
Burton
Cannon
Clay
Combest
Crane
Hall (OH)
John
Kennedy (MN)
Lewis (GA)
Millender-McDonald
Nethercutt
Ose
Reyes
Riley
Roukema
Traficant
Watson (CA)
Waxman
{time} 0141
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The question is on the
passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. STUMP. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 359,
noes 58, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 158]
AYES--359
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Andrews
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boozman
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Condit
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jefferson
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kerns
Kildee
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Lynch
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Menendez
Mica
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Napolitano
Neal
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Ortiz
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sanchez
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaffer
Schiff
Schrock
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sullivan
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner
Udall (NM)
Upton
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins (OK)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--58
Baldwin
Barrett
Becerra
Blumenauer
Bonior
Brown (OH)
Capuano
Clayton
Conyers
Coyne
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
Doggett
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank
Hinchey
Holt
Honda
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jones (OH)
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lee
Lofgren
Markey
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meeks (NY)
Miller, George
Nadler
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Paul
Payne
Rangel
Rivers
Sanders
Schakowsky
Serrano
Stark
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Velazquez
Watt (NC)
Weiner
Woolsey
Wu
NOT VOTING--18
Burton
Cannon
Clay
Combest
Crane
Hall (OH)
John
Kennedy (MN)
Lewis (GA)
Millender-McDonald
Nethercutt
Ose
Reyes
Riley
Roukema
Traficant
Watson (CA)
Waxman
[[Page H2386]]
{time} 0147
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for military activities
of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for
defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel
strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed Forces, and for other
purposes.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________