[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 108 (Monday, July 21, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H7208-H7213]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ASSURED FUNDING FOR VETERANS HEALTH CARE ACT OF 2003
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
General Leave
Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on the subject of my special order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, it is no secret to anyone in this body, nor
to
[[Page H7209]]
the Nation's 25 million American veterans and their families, that the
health care system is critically underfunded.
The result is that tens of thousands of veterans are being forced to
work and one group of veterans is being denied access to VA care
altogether. The current funding process for veterans' health care is
broken. It simply does not work and, frankly, it never has.
The problem starts out at OMB where they consistently pare down the
Department of Veterans Affair's budget requests to accommodate the
other priorities of the White House. It moves on to this Capitol where
Congress must squeeze the veterans' programs into funding for a myriad
of other priorities of ill-advised tax cuts to the Space Station. It
ends with veterans waiting in lines, sick and disabled and living with
the year-to-year anxiety that comes from wondering if the VA will be
there when they ask for help.
In short, Madam Speaker, veterans, the individuals who defended this
country in time of war and kept us a free Nation, are forced by a cruel
funding process to continue fighting for what is rightfully theirs.
I and 117 of my colleagues so far, some of whom join me today,
believe enough is enough. There is no feasible alternative to
permanently fix this problem. Only one. And that is mandatory funding
of the VA spending, just like Medicare, just like the Department of
Defense, TRICARE and just like the Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program, the veterans deserve some consideration as the beneficiaries
of their plans.
The Nation's veterans organizations strongly agree. The American
Legion, AMVETS, Blinded Veterans Association, Disabled American
Veterans, Military Order of the Purple Heart, Paralyzed Veterans of
America, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vietnam Veterans of America and
others, including organizations that represent nearly 6 million
members, are speaking up across the Nation. They too are saying enough
is enough.
That is why I have introduced H.R. 2318, the Assured Funding for the
Veterans Health Care Act of 2003. The bill would require the Secretary
of Treasury annually to come before Congress to provide funding for the
VA's care, based on the number of enrollees in the system and medical
inflation.
What could be more appropriate than providing funding for veterans'
health care, based on the number who will need it, the demand and the
projected cost. Let us be absolutely clear. These projections and the
subsequent funding of them should be based on care for all eligible
veterans.
Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland).
Mr. STRICKLAND. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my friend and the
ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans). I want to thank the gentleman for
being such an advocate for veterans, but I also want to thank him for
introducing this legislation, the Assured Funding for the Veterans
Health Care Act of 2003.
What we are talking about here is simply having mandatory funding for
veterans programs so that the vets do not have to come to the Congress
year after year after year with hat in hands and ask for what they
need. But if this bill that the gentleman has introduced passes, and by
the way, I think it has 117 cosponsors at the present time, if it were
to pass, there would be a mandatory stream of funding. Veterans would
be able to have assurance that what they needed in terms of benefits
and health care would be there for them.
I would like to take a minute, if I can, just to put this debate
about mandatory funding in context and talk about what is at stake
here. We need to put mandatory funding in this budget because right now
funding for veterans' benefits is inadequate.
This is what we have seen happen in recent months: There are
hundreds of thousands of veterans who are waiting 6 months or more just
to get an appointment to see a doctor. Think about that. Would any
Member of this House of Representatives tolerate having to be put on a
waiting list and to wait 6 months or longer to see a doctor? I think we
would not. And I think it is a fair question to ask. Why should those
of us who serve in this body have access to health care in a more
timely manner than that which is made available to our veterans?
Another problem, veterans about a year and a half ago, had to pay $2
for each prescription they received. The VA increased that copayment
from $2 to $7 a prescription. And now the President has requested that
that copayment be increased from $7 a prescription up to $15 a
prescription.
And one of the most outrageous things that has happened, the VA
actually placed a gag order on their health care providers. The VA sent
out a memo to all of their network health providers saying, you can no
longer market VA services to veterans. In other words, you cannot
proactively tell veterans what they are entitled to receive. Think
about that. I mean, it is almost unbelievable that the Department that
is supposed to be looking out for veterans, protecting veterans,
servicing veterans, would actually put out a memo telling their doctors
and nurses and social workers that they could not participate in health
fairs, that they have could not send out newsletters telling veterans
what they are entitled to receive under the laws that have been passed
right here in this Chamber, that they could not make public service
announcements urging veterans to come in for services. And that gag
order is in effect tonight, and it is shameful. And it is in effect
because we do not have sufficient funding to pay all the costs of
veterans' benefits and veterans' health care.
Then something else that more and more veterans across this country
are just becoming aware of, the VA created a new classification for
veterans. They have call it Priority 8. And they say those who are in
Priority 8 are of higher income. Now, quite frankly, one can make as
little in my district as about $24,000 a year and be considered higher
income. And so these are called Priority 8 veterans, and they are being
told that they can not enroll in the VA health care system at all.
Think about that.
These are men and women who have served our country admirably. They
have been honorably discharged. Many of them are in great economic and
financial need. And because they make about $24-, $25,000 a year, the
VA is saying you are high income and so you do not qualify to
participate in the VA system.
{time} 2115
Does my colleague not think it is fair that the people in this
country know that he and I earn about $150,000 a year? I think that is
high income. I do not think $24,000 is high income. I think this is
really shameful what the VA has done here.
Right now, the House Committee on Appropriations has been considering
the fiscal year 2004 appropriations for the Department of Veterans
Affairs, and it does not look good. Despite assurances from the
leadership here in the House, in fact, they have held press conferences
saying, oh, we are going to treat the veterans in the right way,
despite those assurances, Republicans have abandoned their promises;
and they are going to increase the cost of prescription drugs for a
veteran.
The President asked for this in his budget. At a time when we were
getting ready to send our young men and women into harm's way, the
President sent a budget to this House, and he asked that veterans be
required to pay more money for a prescription drug. In fact, he wanted
that copayment to be doubled, more than doubled, from $7 to $15 a
prescription; and he also asked that this Congress impose an annual
enrollment fee on priority 7 and 8 veterans, an enrollment fee of $250
a year. Then the President asked that the cost of going to see a doctor
at a clinic be increased from $15 a visit to $20 a visit, and this
House is going along with that request.
Oh, but we were told, do not worry, because we have actually
increased funding for veterans health care next year; and we were told
it was going to be $3.4 billion, but it looks as if the Congress is
reneging on that promise as well, and the increase has been cut about
in half, down to $1.4 billion.
These are shameful acts in my judgment, and I want to tell my
colleagues that all of the veterans organizations in this country, and
I am talking about the American Legion, the VFW, the AMVETS, the
Disabled American Veterans, Vietnam Vets, they are pretty
[[Page H7210]]
upset about this. I have a letter which they sent out last Friday, and
it is from the National AMVETS, the Disabled American Veterans, the
Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Veterans of Foreign Wars; and
they say here: ``The VA-HUD Independent Agencies appropriations bill,
which calls for a $1.4 billion increase over last year and
approximately the President's request,'' basically this House is doing
what the President has requested. These groups say that is wholly
inadequate. It is inadequate to provide health care to sick and
disabled veterans, and it represents a flagrant disregard of promises
made to veterans by this Congress.
``So much for promises,'' they say in their letter. So much for
promises. Providing a wholly inadequate $1.4 billion increase calls
into question all the press conferences and the news releases touting
this Congress' commitment to the men and women who have served this
Nation.
So what we are asking for in the gentleman from Illinois' (Mr. Evans)
bill is that we make this funding mandatory. Just as other parts of our
Federal Government call for mandatory spending, we want veterans to
have the assurance that comes with mandatory funding.
These veterans service organizations that I mentioned tell me that
this is their number one legislative priority. There are lots of things
that veterans need; but nothing is more important to them than having
mandatory funding, so that year after year we can know how much money
our hospitals are going to get, our outpatient clinics, how much money
is going to be there to take care of our aging population of veterans.
I would just close my remarks by reminding my colleagues and others
once again that what this Congress is doing represents a following of
the directions that came to us from President Bush. He sent his budget
over here in January. As my colleague will recall, January was a time
when we were preparing for war. Talk is cheap. The gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Evans) knows that.
But health care costs a lot of money, and it does cost a lot of money
to provide needed health care to our veterans; but these are men and
women who have paid the price. They have served our country. They have
taken the oath. They have served honorably and admirably; and as they
chose to do that, to provide the service to their country, promises
were made to them, and our country has an obligation to keep those
promises; and the best way to keep those promises, I think, is to pass
my colleague's legislation, the legislation that he has entitled
appropriately Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2003.
Every Member of this House should sign on as cosponsors. We have, I
think, 117 cosponsors now, thanks to the gentleman's leadership. We
ought to have every Member, Democrat and Republican alike, in this
House sign on to this act. It is H.R. 2318, and I repeat that just in
case there may be some veterans who are listening and who would like to
communicate with their Senator and their House Member, H.R. 2318. It is
called the Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2003.
Madam Speaker, I would hope that veterans across this country would
recognize the importance of this legislation and would let their
representatives know how important it is to them, and perhaps they will
just decide to urge them to sign on as cosponsors.
I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for his leadership.
I admire him greatly. I was elected to this body for the first time,
took office in January of 1993. He and I were both younger men then;
but I admired him then for the dedication he had to serve our veterans,
and across the years my admiration for him has only grown, and I thank
him for introducing this vital legislation. I pledge to him that I will
do everything in my power to see that we get as many cosponsors as
possible, that we urge the leadership of this House to allow this
legislation to move forward; and I thank him for allowing me to
participate with him tonight.
Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the remarks, and at this time
I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished
gentleman for his yielding, and I thank him for his leadership. It is
an honor to work with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) as he has
worked for the issues of veterans not only because he is a passionate
legislator and a member of this body, an honored and esteemed member of
this body, but because he also is a Vietnam-era veteran and clearly
knows the sensitivity of these issues and the great need in these
issues.
Madam Speaker, I represent a veterans hospital and many veterans in
the State of Texas in the 18th Congressional District. We are honored
to have as one of our very fine medical institutions the veterans
hospital, and it is particularly of great importance to my constituents
and my community because during Tropical Storm Allison in 2001, when
the medical center found itself flooded in and many of its patients
were in need of transfer and need of additional assistance or many of
its equipment was not working, who rose to the occasion? It was the
veterans hospital, and of course, those who were committed to serving
veterans, who had the mindset, the charitable mindset, they had the
great knowledge and as well the caring attitude to open their doors and
as well to take many of the staff, they were also veterans themselves,
to be able to assist by providing beds for the patients who needed it.
They rose to the occasion.
Tonight I think it is important that we are on this floor to rise to
the occasion on their behalf. I support totally H.R. 2318 concerning
mandatory funding for veterans health care and am proud to be a proud
sponsor of this legislation, would encourage the Members of the House
and the other body, who have not yet found their way to this
legislation. I expect that it will be dropped by one of or our very
fine Senators in the other body, of course, and hope that we will be
able to move this legislation quickly through the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs and as well bring it to the floor.
We know that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) and the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) work well together. I would hope
that this would be the kind of legislation that has no problems, should
have no obstacles. It should move. I think I would be optimistic, I
would want it to be in the committee tomorrow or at the end of the week
so that as soon as we get back here in September we could quickly move
this legislation forward.
Let me tell my colleagues why, because there are many things that are
happening to our veterans, and we are getting more veterans as we speak
because, as my colleague well knows, we had a quarter of a million
troops stationed in Iraq. Now we have 140,000. Clearly there is
discussion as to whether or not we need more; but many of those troops
are going to be veterans soon, and right now as we speak, even though
they may not be retirees, we have several problems that are occurring.
We have problems with respect to veterans not being able to enroll in
hospitals right now. We have problems about the concurrent receipt
issue where veterans have to choose between disability pay and
retirement pay, dollar for dollar. What an insult to our veterans, and
there is H.R. 303 in which we are trying to correct that problem.
The work that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) is doing is
crucial as relates to health care. So I rise today in support of H.R.
2318, the Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2003. This
legislation is key to addressing shortfalls in the fiscal year 2003
budget appropriations for veterans health that could prove injurious to
our veterans. We have a duty to protect our veterans from
misunderstanding as to the new veterans administration medical care
budget proposed by the Bush administration.
About 25 million veterans, living veterans, nearly 19 million have
served during times of war. There are 19 million stories to tell and 19
million histories to preserve. However, time is of the essence. There
are only a few thousand World War I veterans left and World War II
veterans left. These World War I veterans are all more than 100 years
old. The average age of our World War II veterans is more than 77, and
we are losing 1,500 of them a day. We need to preserve not only their
tribute to us by fighting in World War II
[[Page H7211]]
and World War I, but certainly if they are in need of health care,
obviously we know that they would be, that we certainly would not want
to say no to those few remaining veterans of that era and then the
veterans that are now coming from the Korean War and all of the
conflicts that we have had through not only the Vietnam War but the
Persian Gulf and now Iraq.
Republican tax cuts and the shortfalls to the veterans health plan
will have a negative impact on the veteran community and the veterans
health care service facility of Texas and of the Nation. In the State
of Texas, there are approximately 1.721 million veterans. I believe my
State has one of the highest numbers or the highest numbers. Certainly
in my congressional district there are a large number of veterans with
whom I work on a regular basis.
Currently, 3,400 veterans are on the waiting list; and due to the war
in Iraq, we will have new veterans in need of services as relates to
health care. The Veterans Administration Medical Center in the 18th
Congressional District has seen an 18 percent increase in its need for
its services this year already. There must be additional funding to
meet that need.
I am adamantly opposed to any effort that would reduce accessibility
or the extent of health care to our veterans. The Republican budget
cuts also include cutting health care and education needs for our
veterans.
It is really, I believe, a questionable practice to suggest that a
veteran making $30,000 a year should have to be questioned regarding
accessing the veterans hospital services. It just does not make sense,
and the budget that we put forward would slash services to veterans who
make $30,000 a year or more. Can my colleagues imagine, $30,000 a
veteran, may have a family, needy in health care, people making $30,000
a year, may not have health insurance because of the cost and the
amount it takes to raise their families.
{time} 2130
If this present structure is in place now without this legislation,
without the full funding that our ranking member, the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Evans), has put forward in this very, very important
bill, then what we have are hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of
veterans, maybe even millions, who are not able to access health care
at the veterans hospitals, and this is what we promised them when they
went into the United States military, in a volunteer military.
As it speaks right now, it says we will provide the kind of
resources that are necessary for them. And yet here we are in 2003
denying them the right to have the resources that would allow the
veterans hospitals to provide care if they make over 30,000 a year.
I am astonished and I am also appalled at the taking away of
promises that we made to individuals who are willing to offer the
ultimate sacrifice, and that is their life.
Someone said to me that we do not have conscription, we do not have
a draft anymore. That occurred in the Vietnam War. Now we have a
volunteer military. That means that most of those who are in today got
up out of their hometown and went to the office where the military was,
whether Army, Navy, Coast Guard, or any of the others, and signed up to
be able to defend their country and to follow the orders of the
Commander in Chief or if this Congress would declare war.
They are in a war now that there was no declaration of, but they are
there fighting. They are there loyal to the United States. They have
taken an oath and they are sacrificing both their life and limbs on
behalf of the people of the United States of America. Those very young
men and women will ultimately become veterans. God hope they will come
home to their loved ones.
How dare we cut a budget and suggest that if they make $30,000 a
year, they cannot get health care?
But, really, in my district, I see individuals that are not in that
category, who cannot access health care because they are making moneys
of $31,000, $32,000 and $33,000 a year. Some of these individuals are
in desperate need. And I might add, even though we are talking about
full funding, some of the very people that are penalized overall with
the budget structure and the veteran structure in the hospital are my
homeless veterans, homeless veterans who because of the trials and
tribulations of war, yes, they came back to us, but even though they
came back to us they came back broken in mind and spirit. So, today, we
find thousands upon thousands of homeless veterans who also cannot get
resources because of the cuts in the veterans budget that impacts on
the veterans hospitals and thereby impacts on veterans' health care.
So this bill by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for full
funding makes a lot of common sense. In fact, it upholds the tradition
of this Nation that we care and love and nurture those veterans who
care about us; we care and love those individuals who are willing to
sign up on the bottom line, take the oath, and say I, swear loyalty to
the United States of America and so I am going into the United States
military; and if I am called to a place that would jeopardize my life,
I am willing to give the ultimate sacrifice.
Yet we here in the United States are failing to provide the kind of
regulations that would ensure that they could enroll, here we are de-
enrolling and not allowing veterans to get the kind of health care that
they need to take care of themselves.
This legislation being put forward, with 117 sponsors, assures
funding for veterans' health care. It ensures that there are no signs
at veterans hospitals that say ``No room at the inn.'' Can we do less
than to provide the opportunity for veterans to have full funding?
Let me close by simply acknowledging that my good friends will say
that they have given an increase in funding for health care, and yet I
think it should be acknowledged that that funding is $400 million short
of meeting veterans' needs. It is $400 million short of meeting
veterans' needs. That is why we have in place a policy that requires
veterans to be denied coverage or denied coverage of health care at
these hospitals if they make over $30,000 a year. I understand there is
also a proposal to impose a new $1,500 annual copayment on higher
income nonservice connected veterans who receive medical care from the
VA.
But let me just reinforce the fact these veterans have served their
Nation and their country. These veterans may have health problems now,
like diabetes and stroke and heart condition, they may have
Alzheimer's, and there is always this fine line of whether or not this
was service connected. We do not know if it is service connected. We
took 20 years to find out about Agent Orange from Vietnam. We are still
trying to find out about the Persian Gulf illness, and there have been
denials upon denials about whether it was related or connected. All of
that occurred.
If we are still trying to find out about Agent Orange, if we are
still trying to find out about the Persian Gulf, how do we know whether
diabetes, stroke and heart disease may not have been service connected.
So, therefore, we are denying these veterans the kinds of services they
need.
Let me also cite, Madam Speaker, that in a January, 2003, letter the
Disabled American Veterans, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S.,
Paralyzed Veterans of America, and AMVETS called on President Bush to
propose a veterans medical care appropriation of $25.4 billion.
However, the administration has not heeded this budget advice from
these veterans organizations.
We have paralyzed veterans who are paralyzed from the neck down.
These are individuals who need a high degree of health care. Many of
them are my constituents. And let me give a special tribute to the
Disabled Veterans of America and, as well, the U.S. Paralyzed Veterans
of America who come into my office every single year. And every single
year I make a commitment to them that we have got to do better by them.
This legislation, I believe, is the kind of legislation that clearly
speaks to the needs of veterans. It is sensitive and sympathetic. And I
do want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for his wisdom
in helping to provide for those veterans who cannot provide or speak
for themselves.
And may I remind my colleagues that as we discuss these veterans,
the toll of those dying in Iraq is going up, one by one by one. And
those who will come back will have been subjected to the trauma of war
for a long period of time. Some will reenlist but some will
[[Page H7212]]
become veterans. I would be appalled if they went to one of our
veterans hospitals and they said, ``There is no room at the inn.''
How can we be a Nation who believes in the equality of all, how can
we be a Nation that adheres to the Constitution that says we have
organized this Nation to create a more perfect union, and not support
in totality H.R. 2318? I rise to support this effort, and would hope
that someone is listening and that the leadership of this House will
come to the gentleman from Illinois immediately and ask that this bill
be brought to the floor of the House, and that we will provide for the
veterans who have provided for us.
I thank the gentleman for his service and thank him for giving me
the opportunity to share with my colleagues the importance of passage
of H.R. 2318.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2318, the Assured
Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2003. This legislation is
before us to address shortfalls in the FY 2003 budget appropriations
for veterans health care that could prove quite injurious. We have a
duty to protect our veterans from misunderstanding as to the new
Veterans Administration (VA) medical care budget proposed by the Bush
administration. Of our 25 million living veterans, nearly 19 million
have served during times of war. There are 19 million stories to tell
and 19 million histories to preserve. However, time is of the essence.
There are only a few thousand World War I veterans left and they are
all more than 100 years old. The average age of our World War II
veterans is more than 77 and we are losing 1,500 of them a day. We need
to preserve their great legacy now.
Republican tax cuts and the shortfalls to the veterans' health plan
will have a negative impact on the veteran community and the veteran-
service healthcare facilities of Texas. In the State of Texas, there
are approximately 1.721 million veterans. Currently, 3,400 veterans are
on the waiting list and due to the war in Iraq we will have new
veterans in need of services. The Veterans' Administration Medical
Center in the 18th Congressional District of Texas has seen an 18
percent increase in its need for its services this year already. There
must be additional funding to meet that need. I am adamantly opposed to
any efforts that would reduce the accessibility or the extent of health
care to our veterans. The House Republican budget cuts veterans'
benefits, including health care and education, by $14.6 billion. The
Republican budget cuts veterans programs in order to finance additional
tax cuts that we cannot afford. To pay for those tax cuts, we will be
leaving thousands of veterans who were disabled during their brave
service to this country without the medical services they require--
which is an atrocity and a national embarrassment. At a time when our
economy is suffering, the Republican Party wants to take from the poor
and disabled to give to the rich. The Republican budget would slash
services to veterans who make $30,000 a year or more. If there budget
stands without prophylactic measures like H.R. 2318, a large economic
burden would befall thousands of veterans who will then be forced to
bear their medical expenses on their limited incomes. We must renew our
commitment to our Nation's veterans who have already given to us.
The Bush administration claimed that the proposed veterans budget
requests a record-setting ``$25.5 billion for medical programs.''
Unfortunately, in reality, the administration really asks Congress
to appropriate $22.75 billion for veterans' medical care, which is
$2.75 billion less than the reported record-setting reported total. Of
the $25.5 billion the Bush administration claims the budget will
provide for veterans' medical care, $794 million will only shift
administrative costs to the VA from the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM). In Congressional District 18, Harris County alone in for 1998,
total Veterans Administration patient care costs rose to $240,868,665
and $1,071,793,244 for of all of Texas. An extrapolation of this figure
with inflationary factors gives but a glimpse of the national shortfall
for our veterans. Another $1.28 billion of the administration's request
is intended to offset unavoidable cost increases like inflation, higher
pharmaceutical prices, and federal pay raises. In sum, the supposed $2
billion ``increase'' won't give our veterans any health care relief as
promised.
The proposed increase in the medical care appropriation for fiscal
year 2003 is approximately $100 million more than the $1.3 billion
Congress appropriated for fiscal year 2002 which the administration
acknowledges is $400 million short of meeting veterans' needs. This
paints a dismal picture in light of the fact that five of the VA's 22
networks have already projected shortfalls in funding for veterans'
medical care by the year's end. The administration already plans to
request a $142 million supplement for funding to continue to treat non-
service connected, higher income veterans. It plans to find another
$300 million in ``management efficiencies.'' As also proposed by the
administration, the FY 2003 VA medical care budget will require the VA
to find an additional $316 million in management savings in order to
meet veterans' demand for health care. This prospect promises to cause
funds to be taken away from another weakly budgeted project to cover
the gaping holes created by this scheme.
The administration budget also assumes Congress will pass a Bush
proposal to impose a new $1,500 annual co-payment on higher income,
non-service connected veterans who receive medical care from the VA. If
Congress were to reject this proposal, the VA would require an
additional $1.15 billion in appropriations to cover the cost of
providing this care. More than $400 million of the reported budget
increase for veterans' medical care is projected to come from increased
collections by the VA, particularly veterans' co-payments. With the
recent increase from $2 to $7 in the amount veterans are charged by the
VA for a prescription, much of this ``increase'' in funding for medical
care is being paid by veterans themselves. This is outrageous. The Bush
administration veterans' medical care appropriation falls short of the
request made to President Bush by veterans' organizations by nearly $2
billion. In a January 2003 letter, the Disabled American Veterans, the
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S., Paralyzed Veterans of America and
AMVETS, called on President Bush to propose a veterans' medical care
appropriation of $24.5 billion. However, the administration has not
heeded this budget advice from our veterans' organizations.
The administration's budget emphasizes the need to reduce the huge
backlog in claims for benefits submitted by veterans. During the first
4 months of fiscal year 2002, the number of rating cases awaiting a
decision for over 180 days increased from 172,294 to 204,006. Our
veterans are waiting for the VA to reduce claims processing time
without sacrificing decision-making quality or the shirking of the VA's
statutory duty to assist veterans in developing their claims.
The current administration's budget needs re-examination of its
misguided priorities that will cause us to provide inadequate funding
for health care for the men and women who have served our Nation in
uniform in order to allow tax cuts that will primarily benefit
wealthier Americans.
Unfortunately, too often the President is simply unwilling to work
with Congress to develop a fair budget. This means veterans' programs
consistently fall prey to political considerations that have little to
do with veterans. This year, funding lost to the tax cut will have a
direct effect upon the amount of funds that remain available for
discretionary priorities, like veterans' health care. H.R. 2318 will
provide a veritable bandage for the scar that the administration's
budget will create on the brow of our Nation's heroes.
Absent protective legislation to provide mandatory funding and the
concurrent passage of the Republican's budget would mean there would be
no additional funds available to implement the Homeless Veterans
Comprehensive Assistance Act to work toward the goal of eliminating
chronic homelessness in a decade. Furthermore, the Capital Assets
Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) program, a comprehensive
planning and evaluation process undertaken by the VA to assess the best
use of its physical infrastructure would become a ``de facto'' closure
commission with no ability to respond to veterans' needs for primary
care, long-term care, and mental health projected by its own models.
There would be little money leftover for any of the system's
desperately needed construction and improvement projects.
Even more horrifying than the simple health care system problems, the
scheduled cuts for veterans' benefits would carry far-reaching negative
implications. The administration's budget for 2004 makes no provision
for additional service-connected disability benefits resulting from the
present war with Iraq. As we know from the last war in the Persian
Gulf, war results in adverse health effects and justifiable claims for
service-connected disability compensation. It does acknowledge the
expected increase in veteran's claims and an expected worsening of the
disabilities of some service-connected veterans. Under these
circumstances, cuts in mandatory spending can only be made by cutting
benefits to veterans with service-connected disabilities. With a death
toll of 152 U.S. troops since the start of the Iraqi War that is rising
on a daily basis, it is incumbent upon our government to plan ahead for
expenses that will stem from these deaths--as a courtesy to our fallen
heroes at the very least.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2318 and the
mandatory funding called for to bandage the wound to be caused by the
administration's misguided budget proposal.
Mr. FILNER. Madam Speaker and colleagues, I rise today in support of
guaranteed funding for veterans' health care as found in H.R. 2318.
[[Page H7213]]
This bill replaces the current ``discretionary'' funding process with
a reliable, predictable, and rational way to assure that the funding
that is needed for our veterans will be there! Guaranteed funding takes
into account inflation and increased enrollment for VA health care and
provides the money to meet these needs.
Currently, the Members of the Veterans' Affairs Committee and many of
our other colleagues must join together with organizations like the
Disabled American Veterans, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the
Veterans of Foreign Wars, AMVETS, the American Legion and others to
fight for a budget to provide health care for veterans--a budget that
is worthy of our veterans. And we must do this every year!
And unfortunately, every year we fall far short of our goal.
Veterans' health care needs are pitted against many other priorities of
Congress and the administration, and we end up with less money than we
need. The result, as many of you know, is disastrous. Right now, an
entire group of veterans is being denied access to the VA health care
system. And over 200,000 other veterans are waiting for a first
appointment or an initial follow-up for health care, many waiting for
more than 6 months.
This year, the House passed a budget resolution that cut $25 billion
from veterans' benefits. Twenty-five billion dollars! Although the
final budget resolution is better, it is unclear how veteran's health
care will fare when pitted against all the other programs in the VA-
HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriations bill--programs like low-income
housing, the space program, environmental protections, urban
development, and inner-city projects. These are worthy, but we should
not have to limit services to veterans in order to fund them. That is
why this legislation is so vital.
Other federal health care programs like Medicare, the Defense
Department's Tricare for Life, and the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Program are being provided with guaranteed funding. Why not
our Nation's veterans?
Not only is the current ``discretionary'' funding unfair to veterans
of past wars, but the lack of guaranteed funding sends an alarming
message to current and future members of the Armed Forces. Recruitment
and retention of service members is vital to the security of our
country.
This bill responds to the recommendations of the President's Task
Force to Improve Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans. This
task force recently testified before the House Veterans' Affairs
Committee to the ``growing mismatch between funding and demand in VA
health care''.
H.R. 2318 will address this mismatch, and will help the VA to keep
pace with increasing medical costs and an increasing patient
population.
Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her charitable
remarks. I appreciate working with her and will be engaged with her in
fighting these cuts that have been announced by the administration and
look forward to working with her in this regard.
____________________