[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 133 (Thursday, October 10, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H7854-H7859]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 4546, BOB STUMP NATIONAL DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer the motion to
instruct that I presented yesterday pursuant to clause 7(c) of rule
XXII.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The Clerk will report the
motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Taylor of Mississippi moves that the managers on the
part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes
of the two Houses on the House amendment to the Senate
amendment to the bill H.R. 4546 be instructed to agree to the
provisions contained in section 641 of the Senate amendment
(relating to payment of retired pay and compensation to
disabled military retirees).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and the gentleman from New York
(Mr. McHugh) each will control 30 minutes.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that debate on this
motion be limited to 30 minutes, 15 minutes on each side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor)
and the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) each will control 15
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, today almost 300 of us voted to give the President the
authority to wage war, and a sad consequence of that is that there will
be, if there is hostile action, young Americans coming home who have
lost their arms, their legs, their vision, their ability to speak.
Traditionally, there has been a system where they are compensated for
that loss. Unfortunately, for those people who have served our Nation
for 20 years or more, that compensation comes at the expense of the
retirement benefit they have already earned. A lot of us do not think
that is fair.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) has been for 17 years
pushing legislation to address this inequity, to allow those people who
served our Nation honorably in the military for 20 years or more to
collect their full pension benefits and be compensated for whatever
injuries they incurred on active duty, because it has very much so
reduced their ability to make a living in their post-military life.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Bilirakis), the person who has worked so hard on this issue for 17
years.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis)
is recognized for 6 minutes.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlemen for yielding me
time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant support of the Taylor motion to
instruct conferees on H.R. 4546, the Bob Stump National Defense
Authorization Act. I say reluctant not because I did not support the
Senate provision to provide for the full concurrent receipt of military
retired pay and VA disability compensation but because this motion
should not even be necessary.
My legislation to completely eliminate the offset between military
retired pay and VA disability compensation has received strong
bipartisan support in both Houses of Congress. In
[[Page H7855]]
fact, more than 90 percent of the Members of the House of
Representatives and more than 80 percent of the Senate have cosponsored
legislation to repeal the current offset.
This is the People's House, Mr. Speaker, and this is a Republic. The
people, by way of their Representatives, want concurrent receipt,
concurrent receipt based on two separate episodes, one having served
20-plus years and the other having suffered a service-connected
disability. It is not double dipping.
The last Congress took the first steps toward addressing this
inequity by authorizing the military to pay a monthly allowance to
military retirees with severe service-connected disabilities rated by
the Department of Veterans Affairs at 70 percent or greater. These
provisions were expanded to include retirees with ratings of 60
percent.
Earlier this year, I was very pleased when the House took the next
step in our fight to eliminate the offset by including funding for a
partial repeal of the offset in its fiscal year 2003 budget resolution.
Specifically, the budget resolution earmarks over $500 million as a
first step in fiscal year 2003, with increasing amounts over the next 5
years, providing a cumulative total of $5.8 billion. I want to
acknowledge and thank the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) for this.
I repeat, Mr. Speaker, the money is in our budget. The money is in
our budget. For years I have been told by the authorizers, get the
money in the budget and we will authorize it. The money is in the
budget. It will not come out of the military readiness allotment. The
funding falls short of the funding needed to completely eliminate the
current offset, but it will provide for a substantial concurrent
receipt benefit.
The House Committee on Armed Services incorporated the budget
resolution proposal into its authorization bill. As approved by the
House, H.R. 4546 includes a provision to authorize military retirees
who are 60 percent or greater disabled to receive their full retired
pay and VA disability compensation benefit by fiscal year 2007; not
complete elimination of the offset, but providing for concurrent
receipt for the more seriously disabled.
Until the program is fully implemented, the bill establishes a
transition program through which retirees will receive increasing
amounts of their retired pay. Transition payment levels will increase
annually until fiscal year 2007, when all retirees with a disability
rating of 60 percent or greater will receive their full retired pay and
VA disability compensation.
During its consideration of the authorization bill, the Senate
approved an amendment to authorize full concurrent receipt immediately.
While I would obviously prefer the Senate language because it does
mirror my bill, H.R. 303, I recognize it may be difficult to achieve
this goal in one step and that an incremental approach such as the
House language may be necessary.
I am extremely disappointed, Mr. Speaker, by recent efforts by the
Department of Defense to derail our progress on the concurrent receipt
issue. I believe the arguments against concurrent receipt being used by
the Defense Department are baseless and designed to be intentionally
misleading.
I want to remind my colleagues of a quote by our first Commander-in-
Chief, George Washington. He said, ``The willingness with which our
young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified,
shall be directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of
earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation.''
We are at war, Mr. Speaker, and our first President's words are more
applicable than ever.
At a time when our Nation is calling upon our Armed Forces to defend
democracy and freedom, we must be careful not to send the wrong signal
to our military service members. For those of them who have selected to
make their career in the U.S. military, they face an additional unknown
risk in the fight against terrorism. If they are injured, they will be
forced to forgo their earned retired pay in order to receive their VA
disability compensation. In effect, they will be paying for their own
disability benefits with their retirement collection.
We must include a substantial concurrent receipt provision in a final
defense authorization bill, and I urge my colleagues to support the
Taylor motion to instruct conferees. The time has come to do what is
right and support the elimination of the current offset between
military retired pay and VA disability compensation.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking my friend from Mississippi (Mr.
Taylor), both for bringing this question to the floor at this time,
well, maybe not at this time, but at all, and join in his very gracious
and I think very appropriate comments about the previous speaker, the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), who clearly has been, amongst
many defenders and many fighters, the number one champion on behalf of
this issue. All veterans and, indeed, all Members of this House and all
people who live under the blanket of security and freedom provided by
our military Armed Forces owe him a great debt of thanks.
This is obviously a very troubling issue. It has been a perplexing
one for this House for a number of years. But it is not a new issue in
terms of confronting Members of Congress.
This is a policy that has been in place for some 100 years. As the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) so clearly stated, the House has
taken some very definitive steps, and I think thanks are due to, as the
gentleman from Florida said, the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Nussle)
of the Committee on the Budget, the leadership on the Committee on
Armed Services on both sides of the aisle and Members again on both
sides of the aisle who have fought for and have been concerned about
this for some time.
It is interesting to note, Mr. Speaker, that when the House provision
was adopted in H.R. 4546, the vote on the floor was 359 to 58. Clearly
every Member, Democrat and Republican, have expressed great concern and
great support for trying to take an important step towards righting
what most of us feel is a very clear wrong.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) also pointed out some
realities in conference with respect to what we were able to achieve.
The fact of the matter is, the Senate provision over 10 years costs
nearly $46 billion. Maybe equally important is the fact that, over 10
years, $15 billion of that $46 billion amount is discretionary
spending, money that would have to come out of the military services
budget, money that would diminish the appropriations that we provide to
do all kinds of good things in support of those very brave men and
women that we all care so much about.
The House version, on the other hand, compared to the Senate version,
is more affordable and less expensive; not $46 billion, but nearly $18
billion. Again, as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) so
correctly stated, it has, regrettably, caused a great deal of concern
and expressions of opposition from the department and one that has
placed the entire authorization bill into a great state of flux.
I want to give compliments to the leadership of the other body. They
are working in the conference, Senators Levin and Warner particularly,
to try to find a way in which we can do all that is humanly possible in
the confines of the bill at hand to right this wrong. They have been
joined by the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), with the great
support, of course, of the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump) and
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking minority member,
and all of the members of the committee to try to see what we can do
to, as I say, make this situation better for every deserving veteran.
There is no disagreement tonight between myself and the objective
that the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) has defined. I would
certainly suggest, respectfully, to all of our Members that the
objective of this motion to instruct is a very laudable and a very
worthy goal that all of us support; and I certainly would not urge a
single Member to vote against it.
Let me again give my appreciation to the gentleman from Mississippi
(Mr. Taylor) and to all those other Members who have fought so long and
hard to try to take a step in the right direction on this.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H7856]]
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), a senior Democrat member of the
Committee on Armed Services and a father of two members on active duty
in the United States military.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, my fellow Missourian Mark Twain once said, ``The more
you explain it to me, the more I don't understand it,'' and I have a
difficult time in understanding why we cannot go forward with this
issue.
The motion by the gentleman from Mississippi is well taken, and I
thank him for it. I associate myself with the gentleman from Florida
and with the gentleman from New York in their views. We in Congress
need to ensure that our military retirees who have become disabled as a
result of military service receive all the benefits to which they are
entitled because of service-connected disabilities.
{time} 2245
This is not brain surgery. This is what is fair; this is what is
decent. They are the ones who made the sacrifices for our wonderful
country, and the least we can do is to ensure that we repay the debt
that we truly owe them.
Now, the House version of the authorization bill would authorize the
payment of military retiree pay and VA disability compensation for all
military retirees who are at least 60 percent disabled. The Senate
version, more expensive. The Senate version of the bill would authorize
both the military retiree pay and the VA disability compensation of any
retiree who has been determined to be disabled at any percentage.
Well, out of all of this, there ought to be a compromise that we can
live with. Unfortunately, the President has threatened a veto, to veto
this conference bill in a time of war, with a lot of very, very
important items in this bill such as pay raise, benefits; many, many
items that they need with which to conduct the war against terrorism. I
would simply say that we need to follow the dictates of this House as
it has happened and voted before.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I proudly yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Cunningham), a Member of this House that certainly
knows firsthand about the sacrifices of the men and women of the
military, and a gentleman who is a former member of the Committee on
Armed Services and then moved over as a member of the Subcommittee on
Military Construction of the Committee on Appropriations.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this
resolution. Remember the movie ``Born on the 4th of July'' with Ron
Kovic? Remember Agent Orange, Desert Syndrome. These are folks that
fought for our country. Some of them died, some of them came back with
afflictions and they need this resolution. It is important. I would
hope every Republican and every Democrat comes together on this
particular bill, and I laud my colleagues who are supporting the bill.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Alexandria, Virginia (Mr. Moran).
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, we are talking about people who
have watched their families struggle all their adult lives because of
their service-connected disability. Now that they are eligible for
military retirement, they are being punished because they are eligible
for both; and like most military retirees who are able to enhance their
military retirement pay, because of their disability, they have not
been able to.
It is only fair that they receive their military retirement and their
service-connected disability. On the day that we voted to send more
troops to war, this is the day we ought to fix this injustice. Let us
do the right thing. Let us pass it.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood).
(Mr. NORWOOD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very, very strong support of this
motion, and I would take this opportunity to congratulate the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) for years of work.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Shows), someone who has worked very
hard for the veterans for his duration of his time here in Washington.
Mr. SHOWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the gentleman's motion
to instruct.
The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and I have been working
together to help restore the broken promise of health care for our
country's military retirees. Our failure to make good on what is known
as a concurrent receipt is one of those broken promises.
One of those promises is a pension when they retire, if they serve a
career in uniform, at least 20 years. Another promise is that VA health
care would be provided if they become disabled in the line of duty.
They do not know about the archaic law that requires them to deduct
service-connected disability pay from their pensions. No other Federal
employee has to do that. All other Federal employees earn VA health
care benefits if they are service-connected disabled.
Some may argue that we cannot afford to pay for full concurrent
receipt. I would argue that we cannot afford not to authorize full
concurrent receipt. How can we expect to recruit troops for the
conflict we are about to wage if we continue the cycle of broken
promises?
Earlier this year, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and I
offered an amendment that would include a full concurrent receipt in
the Federal budget and it was paid for. We are already on record
supporting full concurrent receipt. H.R. 303, which would institute
full concurrent receipt, 402 cosponsors. It is long overdue.
Mr. Speaker, we need to instruct the defense authorization conferees
to do the right thing and insist they support full concurrent receipt.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the
distinguished member of the Committee on Armed Services.
(Mr. CHAMBLISS asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in strong support of
the motion to instruct from the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr.
Taylor).
This law is over 100 years old. It is time we fixed it. It is time
that we recognize a disability as a disability and a retirement as a
retirement. I urge strong support of the motion to instruct.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett), someone who has been a great
help on this issue.
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I want my colleagues to
imagine two brothers. They are twin brothers, they joined the military
at the same time, they go to war, they are both wounded, they are 60
percent disabled. One of them chooses to stay in the military and serve
his country; the other leaves the military and gets a job in the
private sector.
The inequity begins right now, because the person who leaves the
military starts drawing disability pay, and it continues until he
retires in the private sector. When he retires in the private sector,
the private sector retirement is not cut by his disability pay. But
that brother, that twin brother who chose to stay in the military does
not collect any disability until he retires, and even when he retires
and after the disability pay, they tell him that it has to be deducted
from his retirement.
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious how inequitable this is and how wrong it
is; and the fact that it is going to cost money to fix it is just more
testimony of how egregious this treatment has been of our disabled
veterans. We should have fixed this a long time ago. We do not need to
do it tomorrow. We need to do it today.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for time at this time, so
I will reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Maloney), a great member of the
Committee on Armed Services.
[[Page H7857]]
Mr. MALONEY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) for yielding me this time. I want to associate
myself with his remarks in urging the House to instruct the conferees
to adopt the Senate's concurrent receipt provisions in the fiscal year
2003 defense authorization bill.
The Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for 2003 contains a
provision to authorize military retirees who are 60 percent or greater
disabled to receive their full retirement pay as well as disability
compensation benefits by fiscal year 2007. The Senate bill, however, S.
2514, authorizes the concurrent receipt of retired pay and veterans
disability compensation immediately and for all disabled military
retirees with at least 20 years of service.
Concurrent receipt cannot come soon enough for the veterans of
Connecticut. Veterans have made possible the very existence and
continuation of our country and our way of life. Disabled veterans have
made a great personal sacrifice to the security of the United States
and are entitled to their due compensation as well as their retirement
benefits in full. So I join with the veterans of my State and my
colleagues on the House Committee on Armed Services in urging support
for this stronger, timely, and comprehensive Senate language.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), a true gentleman and my neighbor
and friend from my home State, the dean of our conference and the New
York State delegation and a former chairman of the Committee on
International Relations.
(Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I rise in strong support of the Taylor motion to instruct. I
think this is a long-overdue measure to provide equity for all of our
veterans who have had retirement and disability benefits, and I urge my
colleagues to fully support this measure.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Phelps).
Mr. PHELPS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi for
his leadership on this issue.
Just a few hours ago, I gave in good faith my full-fledged support to
the President to deal with Iraq in whatever manner possible. With that
commitment I also pledged my support for those in the military, the men
and women who have given their service with that commitment for
whatever action necessary, and I also pledged support to those that are
serving now. But also we should recognize even more those who have
already served. It is not right that we would penalize them. We should
be rewarding those who have disabilities because of their connection in
service, not penalizing them and their pensions because of their
service. Whose side are we on?
It is simple and clear. How can we ask those who serve that we are
asking to commit now, with new action possibly coming about soon, and
those who have already served that come back with injuries and who
barely escape losing their lives, and tell them that we cannot afford
to pay them what we owe them? That is a sad commentary on this country.
I stand with the gentleman from Mississippi and his motion to
instruct, and I hope all of us can unite in this one action.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), another great Northeasterner who, as
every Member of this House understands, has been a constant leader in
health care issues for both veterans and the civilian community.
Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
New York for yielding me this time.
I rise in strong support of this motion. Nothing is more humiliating
to me than to sit with a constituent whom I know is being treated in a
grossly unfair manner, and I have sat with disabled veterans who have
high costs associated with their disability, health care costs,
accommodation costs, and their disability has imposed limits and
hardships on their families. For them not to receive both their
military pension and their disability pension is indeed simply unfair,
and it is time we corrected that injustice; and I commend the members
of the committee on doing that here tonight.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the veterans of
San Diego County, I want to thank all of the people that worked on this
issue so hard over these years.
Mr. Speaker, during a Memorial Day breakfast last year, the President
remarked, ``America's veterans have earned not only honors, but
specific benefits, and those only become more necessary with the years.
My administration will do all it can to assist our veterans and to
correct oversights of the past.''
I believe that those were sincere words, and we must work together to
turn them into reality. Over 400 Members have pledged their support to
legislation to right an injustice and provide veterans with their well-
deserved benefits. I hope both the Congress and the administration will
accept the final version of the fiscal year 2003 National Defense
Authorization Act.
{time} 2300
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker I yield 45 seconds to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez).
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time
to me.
Mr. Speaker, let me urge colleagues on both sides of the aisle, this
is embarrassing. We need to do the right thing. It is not going to be
enough just to show the votes that are out there, we have to make it
happen.
I know I get sick and tired when I go back, because I know we are
doing the wrong thing. Those veterans are still approaching me and
asking me. I can tell them that we did the language, and the President
is supposed to do this and that, but we need to make it happen now.
I ask both Democrats and Republicans, let us vote on this. Let us
make sure we do the right thing. I ask the conference committee that,
after they look at this vote, that they go out there and stick to their
guns and make it happen.
The reality is that these veterans have fought; they have been there.
It is the fair thing for us to do. They have been our heroes. If we can
declare war, this is the time for us to stand up. This is the time to
make it happen.
I ask very seriously after this vote and after we make it happen, let
the conference committee take a stand, and let us support them.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the
gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).
Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding
time to me.
Just a few hours ago, this body overwhelmingly voted to give our
President the authority to go to war in Iraq. The least we can do is
give the same level of overwhelming support to our veterans.
It is time to keep our promises to the men and women in our Armed
Forces, the men and women who made a career of the military service,
the men and women who have paid their taxes and were promised a
pension. It is time to keep our promises.
If Members want a list of offsets, I would be happy to go over those.
The bottom line is, it is time to do what is fair. It is time to keep
our promises to our veterans.
Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, the hour is late. Obviously, the sentiment of this House
and its Members is, as I have suggested in my opening remarks, very,
very clear. It is a sentiment we all join in.
As a member of the Committee on Armed Services, as a conferee, as I
know the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) understands, we are
working on both sides of the aisle in both Houses of Congress to do all
that we possibly can within the fiscal as well as the political
realities of this bill.
Mr. Speaker, finally, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this
motion as a very clear indication of our ultimate objective.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of
the time.
[[Page H7858]]
Mr. Speaker, I thank all of the Members for their help tonight,
Democrats and Republicans. We will send a message to the conferees: It
is time, after 17 years of the efforts of the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Bilirakis), to do the right thing for those people who were
injured serving us.
They paid the price for us; it is time for us to pay what is due to
them.
Ms. CARSON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, Concurrent receipt is the
offsetting military retired pay, dollar-for-dollar, by the amount of
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) service-connected disability
compensation.
I am appalled that this Congress has not been able to grant veterans
what they have earned. The Senate version of the Defense Authorization
bill completely eliminates the current offset between military retired
pay and VA disability compensation.
Our men and women who have given of themselves deserve more for their
sacrifices than an excuse about funding.
How dare those people who accept the freedom these brave people
declare that any reason is good enough to deny them their due.
402 House members have cosponsored H.R. 303, a bipartisan bill that
would permit concurrent receipt in precisely the same manner as the
Senate language to the Defense Authorization. The Taylor Motion
appropriately insists that the House conferees accept the Senate
provision which would eliminate the current offset entirely and allow
veterans to collect full retirement pay and disability compensation to
which they are entitled.
I am sure there is overwhelming support for veterans. Vote in favor
of this motion to instruct.
Let's prove our appreciation for the veterans who preserved the land
of the free.
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, I rise today to express my
support for the so-called concurrent receipt provision in the Senate
Defense Authorization Act that would allow all disabled military
retirees to receive both their military retired pay and their VA
disability compensation. As we know, current law requires that the two
are offset so, in effect, our disabled veterans are paying for their
own disability! We must correct this unfair practice.
I am extremely dismayed with the word we have been hearing that the
Administration is threatening to veto this bill if this concurrent
receipt provision is included. Thousands of our disabled veterans are
being cheated out of the pensions and disability compensation they have
earned and that are their due!
I urge all members to, first, support concurrent receipt of military
retired pay and VA disability compensation and, then, to contact the
President and impress upon him the importance of this legislation.
Disabled veterans did not hesitate when called to serve. Disabled
veterans returned home with wounds they did not have when they were
called to duty. It is imperative that we meet our obligation to these
brave men and women who have given so much to our nation. Please do
what is right and support concurrent receipt.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Taylor
motion to instruct conferees on the Defense Authorization bill. Many of
our retired military personnel have made tremendous sacrifices while
defending our nation. As Congress debates entering a new military
conflict, I find the timing of the Administration's reluctance to
support this provision ill-chosen. Under current regulation, veterans
must essentially pay their own disability compensation out of their
retirement benefits. No other profession restricts the concurrent
payment of disability and retirement benefits
One of my constituents, who served in the Army for nearly 20 years
and fought in Vietnam where he was injured, must deduct his $864
monthly disability compensation from the $1650 monthly retirement
benefit for which he is eligible. The Senate language would put $864
more dollars into this veteran's pocket each month. I am aware of many
veterans who would benefit from this change.
I urge the conferees to include the Senate-passed language which
would immediately assist the veterans in my district. They cannot
afford to wait another four years for full relief. We owe it to these
individuals to provide the entire compensation they deserve.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Without objection, the
previous question is ordered on the motion to instruct.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct
offered by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 391,
noes 0, not voting 40, as follows:
[Roll No. 463]
AYES--391
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Andrews
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blumenauer
Boehlert
Bonilla
Bono
Boozman
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeMint
Deutsch
Dingell
Doggett
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Frank
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kerns
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Lynch
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Miller, Jeff
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Owens
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
Riley
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 (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
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)
Watson (CA)
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--40
Berman
Blagojevich
Blunt
Boehner
Bonior
Clay
Combest
Cooksey
Coyne
DeLay
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dooley
Ehrlich
Fossella
Ganske
Gephardt
Gillmor
Gutierrez
Hoeffel
Houghton
Jenkins
King (NY)
LaFalce
Lipinski
Manzullo
Matsui
[[Page H7859]]
McKinney
Murtha
Ortiz
Oxley
Reyes
Roukema
Smith (MI)
Stark
Stump
Sununu
Taylor (NC)
Waxman
Young (AK)
{time} 2325
Mr. MORAN of Kansas changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the motion to instruct was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________