[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 90 (Thursday, June 30, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H5585-H5591]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR VETERANS MEDICAL SERVICES
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 3130) making supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2005 for
veterans medical services.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3130
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for fiscal year 2005:
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Veterans Health Administration
medical services
For an additional amount for ``Medical Services'',
$975,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2006.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Walsh) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) each will
control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh).
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this evening I bring to the floor a bill to provide
urgently needed funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs. During
the last week, it has become known to most of us that the Department is
in dire straits with regard to funding for medical services. It has
been pointed out to us in hearings that funding originally allocated
for capital expenditures is being diverted to pay for medical services,
and reserves which were intended to cover future requirements were
instead needed this year.
Based upon information provided by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
in a hearing today before the Committee on
[[Page H5586]]
Veterans' Affairs, as well as information provided on Tuesday when he
appeared before the Committee on Appropriations, I am asking the House
to pass this supplemental appropriations bill today in the amount of
$975 million. This amount is within the 302(a) allocation for 2005
available to the committee and therefore does not need to be offset.
In the coming weeks, the committee will work with the Department to
determine the implications for fiscal year 2006 of their recent changes
in workload and utilization. This will allow us to use the most
accurate information available to ensure that sufficient funding is
also provided when we complete the 2006 bill later this year.
To make it clear, this funding we are talking about tonight in this
supplemental is just for 2005. I expect full cooperation and disclosure
by the Department as we develop the final number for fiscal year 2006.
I do not expect, nor will I accept, partial or vague information or
misinformation. This process can only work well if we all work
together. That is what I expect of everyone involved in solving this
problem.
For today, the bill I bring to the floor provides the necessary
resources to ensure that all veterans receive the medical care
promised. This funding will also allow the Department to restore
funding to its capital accounts to ensure that maintenance and repairs
are completed and necessary equipment procured so that future care will
not be placed in jeopardy nor held in abeyance.
I regret that the Congress and the committee was not informed of the
very real problems at the Department earlier in the process. Having
said that, I look forward to working together with my friend and
colleague, the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards);
the Department of Veterans Affairs; the Office of Management and
Budget; and the Members of the other body to be sure that we do not run
into this situation again.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I will vote for this emergency funding bill for veterans
health care for two reasons: first, the VA desperately needs the $975
million right now to address a very serious shortfall in VA health care
funding, a shortfall that I wish had never occurred; second,
unfortunately, the House Republican leadership decided earlier this
evening that the House, Republicans and Democrats alike, would not even
be allowed to vote on the $1.5 billion emergency funding bill for VA
health care that the Senate has already passed on a unanimous basis 96
to zero earlier this week.
For the record, I want to say that I believe the $975 million
probably will not cover all of the hole that has been dug for veterans
health care for this year. I hope I am wrong; but I was not wrong
earlier this year, and I was not wrong last year when I said that the
present VA budget would provide cuts in real health care services to
veterans during a time of war.
Also I want to say for the record that I appreciate very much the
leadership of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), whose commitment
to America's veterans is genuine, deep, and consistent. Had he not
called hearings this week and brought the VA leadership before the
House in his Subcommittee on Military Quality of Life and Veterans
Affairs, and Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations, I do
not think we would be here on this floor tonight debating additional
emergency money for VA health care spending.
I want to commend my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Buyer), who worked very hard to bring to light this immediate
crisis that we are facing. His leadership on the House Committee on
Veterans' Affairs was instrumental in us being here today.
Having said that, I believe the American people and America's
veterans, Mr. Speaker, have a right to know how we got into this $1
billion hole for veterans health care during a time of war, and, most
importantly, need to help us understand how not to get into this hole
again.
This issue did not just come up. This problem did not just pop up
overnight or this week or last week. For 2 years, respected national
veterans organizations have been pleading with the administration and
Congress to provide adequate funding for the VA health care system.
Unfortunately, their pleas were often ignored by the Republican
leadership in the House.
As far back as February of 2004, the Republican chairman of the House
Committee on Veterans' Affairs, then the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Smith), signed a bipartisan letter saying that unless we funded $2.5
billion more than the administration budget request for VA health care,
real services for real veterans would have to be cut this year during a
time of war. Did the House leadership salute the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Smith) for standing up for veterans? No. In fact, they
fired him. They did not just take away his chairmanship of the VA
committee; they took him off the committee itself.
What was the crime of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith)? He
refused to support an inadequate budget resolution for VA health care
for 2005 which the Republican leadership had endorsed. He put his
loyalty to America's veterans above blind partisan loyalty to the House
leadership, and he was right to do so.
While America's veterans were honoring the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Smith), the House Republican leadership was punishing him.
In the spring of 2004, House Republicans passed a fiscal year 2005
budget on a partisan basis, a budget that veterans groups, Democrats,
and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) had said would require
more than $1 billion in cuts to veterans health care services this
year. The insight of time has proven that Democrats, veterans groups,
including the DAV, American Legion and VFW, were right. The House
Republican leadership was wrong: wrong on veterans health care budget
resolutions and wrong to put partisanship above loyalty to veterans and
veterans health care.
Repeatedly over the past 2 years, House Democrats, myself included,
have asked the Republican leadership to join on a bipartisan basis to
stop real cuts in veterans health care services during a time of war.
Over a year ago, we tried genuinely to increase the veterans health
care budget for 2005. The leadership said no.
This year, veterans groups and Democrats pleaded with the Republican
leadership to provide more adequate funding for veterans health care.
On the 2006 budget resolution, they said no.
Then in May of this year, Democrats and veterans groups pleaded with
the Republican leadership one more time to add additional VA health
care spending to the Iraqi war supplemental appropriations bill. Once
again, the leadership said no.
That was not the last time they said no. The gentleman from Wisconsin
(Mr. Obey) tried to add an amendment in the Committee on Appropriations
increasing funding for VA health care so we would not get into this
hole, cutting services for veterans during a time of war. Again, the
answer was no.
That is not even the worst of it. The House leadership on a partisan
basis pressured Republican colleagues of mine this year to vote for a
House budget resolution, and, listen to this, vote for a House budget
resolution that would cut present services for veterans by $14 billion
over the next 5 years.
{time} 2230
Let me repeat that in case anybody did not hear it or believe it,
because it is a fact: the House leadership passed a budget resolution
in this very room earlier this year that would require a $14 billion
cut in present health care services to veterans. And, by the way, that
includes over 100,000 veterans of the Iraqi and Afghanistan wars who
have needed VA health care. I must wonder which Members of the House
leadership will include in their Fourth of July speeches the fact that
they pushed through this House a budget resolution this year to cut
veterans' health care services by $14 billion over the next 5 years. I
hope to join with my colleagues on a bipartisan basis in the years
ahead to undo what would be a terribly harmful cut to our veterans and
send a destructive message to our active duty servicemen and women
serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Having said all of that, we come today to face a shortfall that the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith),
[[Page H5587]]
the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs
predicted a year ago, and the VA, American Legion, VFW, and Democrats
predicted a year ago. I wish we were voting for a $1.5 billion increase
in emergency funding. I think our veterans deserve it. Certainly, the
Senate, on a unanimous vote, 96 to 0, endorsed that level of funding.
But, thanks to the goodwill and the genuine leadership of people such
as my colleague and friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), we
have a chance to take a step forward today, an important step forward,
in funding, more adequately funding veterans' health care, and for that
I am grateful. I hope we can work together, as the gentleman mentioned
a few minutes ago, on a bipartisan basis to see that we never, ever
again dig this kind of a hole for veterans' health care in time of war
or peace, but certainly we should never do it in time of war.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite).
Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank the
chairman for yielding me this time.
I rise today in very strong support of the Veterans' Health Care
Supplemental Appropriations Act. We are here tonight because the VA
needs $975 million for the remaining 3 months of fiscal year 2005.
Earlier today, Secretary Nicholson made it clear that the shortfall
resulted from faulty, outdated and, quite honestly, unrealistic
forecasting models.
I represent the highest number of veterans of any Member of this
body. I have very often taken on my own party to fight for increased
veterans' funding. And do you know what? They responded. We have
consistently provided more than what the VA has requested over the 3
brief years that I have been here. This side of the aisle has
recognized the problem, and we are acting swiftly to resolve it by
passing the supplemental today. I commend the Republican leadership for
their speedy response to a real need.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the other side of the aisle to stop the petty
bickering and mud-slinging and ask everyone to support this very
important bill. Republicans have increased veterans' funding over 43
percent since 2001. We will continue to fight to meet the needs of
veterans' health care and other veterans' needs, because we provide
solutions and action, not useless fingerpointing.
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, another Member from Florida engaged in
some political diatribe in committee and said she could not understand
why veterans vote for Republicans. Clearly, they vote for Republicans
because we are very quick to respond to a need and that we produce
solutions, not just useless rhetoric.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), the ranking member of the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, I support this measure, but I believe that it
does not go far enough. Already, the VA has acknowledged a $2.7 billion
problem next fiscal year.
Health care for veterans today is being affected by budgetary
shortfalls. Although the VA insists that $975 million is sufficient,
there also argued as recently as just only 2 days ago that any
additional funding was unnecessary.
I do not know what we tell the homeless people in this country who
would get no assistance if the committee bill would be dropped. We want
to know how much money we could have saved by closing down State
nursing homes and all the other innovative programs that the VA has
been in favor of. If we cannot run a first-class hospital system, then
shame on us for not fighting for the defending people of our Nation as
much as we fight for other wars for people from foreign lands.
I thank my colleagues and urge quick passage supplemental funding.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Brown), a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
New York for yielding me this time.
No one wants to be told that the Department needs nearly $1 billion
more than anticipated, but the Secretary of Veterans Affairs has
frankly come forward and acknowledged that their budget model has been
simply overpowered by a host of factors, including an unexpected surge
in demand this year.
The numbers that we discuss is important, because they have a real
impact in all of our districts and for our constituents who have served
this great Nation. The consequences of chronologically underestimating
the funding requirements, in my mind, are simply unacceptable.
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on
Veterans Affairs, my job now and our collective job tonight is to fix
this problem. I want to commend my chairman, my good friend from
Indiana (Mr. Buyer) for his leadership and having the courage to dig
deep into this issue and address this in a head-on way. I also want to
commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) for his efforts in
moving quickly to get this measure to the floor tonight. Together, with
our Senate colleagues, I hope we can move forward in a bipartisan
manner to get these much-needed funds into the hands of those who
provide the quality care to our veterans every day across this great
Nation.
I think it is critical that we continue the dialogue with the VA that
we have started so that we can ensure that the health care needs of our
veterans continue to be met in a reliable and timely fashion. Equally
important, I want to continue to work with the Secretary and the
administration to refine the budget process for coming years, making
sure that we avoid similar shortfalls in the future.
As the chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, I want to assure all
of the veterans that are out there tonight that we are going to be
absolutely sure that their health care needs are met in a timely
manner.
With that in mind, Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues here in
the House to support this resolution.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Reyes), a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3130, the day-late-
and-dollar-short legislation.
Where were we last year when Secretary Principi said that he was
underfunded by $1.3 billion? Where were we in March when I sat here in
this very same seat and asked to fund $1.3 billion out of the
supplemental fund? Earlier tonight, we could have funded our veterans
at the same level as the Senate did last night, at $1.5 billion, but
no, we could not do it the right way, we could not do the right thing.
So tonight as an American, I am angry; as a veteran, I am outraged;
and as a Member of Congress, I am ashamed. Angry, outraged, and ashamed
that our only option is a supplemental of $975 million when we need
$1.5 billion. I am angry because in this House, if you need an
emergency supplemental, no problem. If you need another one, no
problem. Need yet another emergency supplemental? Again, no problem.
But do not even think about an emergency amendment of $1.3 billion for
veterans' health care. No, all $300 billion has been spoken for, and no
veteran need apply.
Mr. Speaker, I am outraged as a veteran because, like emergency
supplementals, if you need a tax cut, no problem. Need another one? No
problem. Want a third? No problem again. What a deal. The richest 1
percent in this country get a gold mine; our veterans get the shaft.
As a Member of Congress, Mr. Speaker, I am ashamed and frustrated.
Why? Because we have consistently failed to stand up for our veterans
and have failed to stand up to an administration that continues to
mislead and deceive, an administration that adopted Pinocchio as their
mascot and has trampled on the rights and the needs of our veterans.
Just once, I wish we would do the right thing for our veterans: fund
them at $1.5 billion.
I do support this legislation, a day late and a dollar short.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I just am thunderstruck by the rhetoric that I just heard. Stomping
and trampling on the rights of our veterans? That is really beneath the
dignity of this institution. Everyone I
[[Page H5588]]
know, and I know most Members in this body, has the greatest respect
for our veterans, the greatest respect. The gentleman asked the
rhetorical question, I believe it was a rhetorical question, where were
we last year when Secretary Principi asked for an additional $1.3
billion? Mr. Speaker, we were there. When we completed our budget, our
appropriation for 2005, we put an additional $1.3 billion in, based on
that request.
So let us try to dampen the rhetoric and stick to the facts.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Gilchrest), one of our Nation's veterans.
Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee
for yielding me this time, and I thank him for bringing this
supplemental to the floor this evening. I am also encouraged that I am
sure all of my colleagues will vote for this today.
I want to make sure that another voice is heard. I am a veteran, as
there are many veterans on this floor. I have been in Navy hospitals, I
have been in veterans' hospitals, and I have gone through the veterans'
health care system.
I also want to say that in the last 10 years, in my district, there
have been three health care clinics for veterans built just in those 10
years that provide excellent care. We have a veterans' hospital for the
psychiatric problems that veterans often experience that go from
Alzheimer's to posttraumatic stress syndrome from Vietnam and other
conflicts, to people with schizophrenia. Nothing is perfect. There are
no utopias on the planet. We need to provide this supplement until the
end of this fiscal year, and make sure we do not make the same mistake
in the next fiscal year. But we have done a great deal, and we will
continue to work hard for the veterans of this country, and we have.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Maine (Mr. Michaud), a member of the House Committee on Veterans'
Affairs.
Mr. MICHAUD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support addressing the funding crisis that is
hurting veterans, so I will vote for this measure this evening, but I
am deeply disappointed that we are not providing the VA with an
additional $1.5 billion. Because this amount is less than the $1.5
billion offered by the Senate, veterans will be in limbo, forced to
wait for the care that they have earned. I will vote ``yes'' because I
want veterans to get a measure of relief as soon as possible, but we
can do better in this House, and we all know it.
Mr. Speaker, we should not even be here. We would not be here if the
VA, the administration, and the leadership had listened to the veterans
groups and the members of the Committee on Veterans Affairs who warned
about this problem in recent years. Let us make no mistake: this
shortfall is definitely hurting our veterans.
At Togus VA Medical Center, they ran out of money for medical care,
so they had to divert their maintenance fund. Now, when their own brick
building is crumbling, they cannot fix the problem. Instead, workers
had to put up scaffolding to keep bricks from falling on the heads of
sick veterans and their medical staff. This is a disgrace. This is what
this shortfall is doing for our veterans.
We also know that even the funding that will be approved this evening
still leaves a major gap. For example, I am concerned that this
supplemental may not address the shortfall funding for mental health
services. Today, I asked Secretary Nicholson whether the $975 million
would cover the gap in service for mental health care, including
substance abuse.
{time} 2245
He would not give me a clear yes or no answer. So we are left
wondering again if this supplemental will solve the full shortfall in
veterans health care. I am also concerned that the supplemental offered
does not deal with the half a million veterans who are barred from
seeking care from the VA. Since January of 2003, this administration
has instituted a policy of banning a group of veterans referred to as
Priority 8 veterans from enrolling in health care. This is wrong.
So in closing, I will vote to support this measure because it is the
first step in correcting the outrageous problem, but it should never
have been in the first place.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would just like to respond to a couple of the points made by the
gentleman who just spoke. The first is that we have provided in the
2005 bill $2.11 billion for mental health for our veterans. That is a
very substantial amount of money. And in the 2006 budget, we have
proposed $2.2 billion, and we fenced it so that that money cannot be
used for any other purpose. That has never been done before in a
veterans appropriations bill. And I am very proud that our subcommittee
took that action, and it was a bipartisan action.
The second point is that we have before us a straightforward stand-
alone supplemental bill that provides just under $1 billion for the
Veterans Administration health administration for this year, for 2005,
only for 2005. And so it is very simple. If we pass it, and send it to
the Senate they can act on it tonight or tomorrow as a stand-alone
bill, identical bill, and the President could sign it tomorrow before
the Fourth of July, and that is what I hope happens because I believe
we will get broad support. I cannot imagine anyone voting against this
bill.
But the Senate bill, and the Senate has not passed a bill that
includes this funding. They have not. Out of committee they have passed
an interior appropriations bill for the 2006 fiscal year that has a
$1.5 billion attachment to it for veterans affairs. That bill is a 2006
bill. It will not even take effect in law until 2006, which will not
help the 2005 budget at all. This is the vehicle to use. And I am very
hopeful that once we pass it and send it to the Senate with a strong
unanimous or bipartisan voice from the House that it will become law.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Oregon (Ms. Hooley), also a member of the House Veterans Affairs'
Committee.
Ms. HOOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding who has
been such a champion of veterans.
Mr. Speaker, veterans care is in a state of crisis. As the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) pointed out earlier in the evening, veterans
at the Portland VA Medical Center in Oregon have arrived at the short-
stay unit only to see this sign which says, ``We regret to inform you
that due to budget issues, we can no longer supply meals to patients.
Please bring a meal from home if you are going to be in the short-stay
unit. We apologize for any inconvenience.''
Well, this is not about the food. But it is about our health care for
veterans. We have had to close beds because we are 150 people short at
the VA hospital. This is no way to treat our heroes. The Portland VA
does a wonderful job. It is not their fault. This is our
responsibility.
I have been working on this issue for years calling for more funding
for VA health care. If the leadership had allowed a vote on an
amendment I tried to offer with the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Baird) to add $1.3 billion to the supplemental for VA health care, we
would have dealt with this issue months ago. This did not have to
happen. Not one soldier who puts his or her life on the line should
have to worry about health care.
While I am glad that we are finally acknowledging the financial needs
of the VA, I cannot help but be disappointed that even now, when we
know they are desperate for additional funding, we are still not giving
them all of the money they need to serve our veterans.
As a result of this budget shortfall, the Portland VA Medical Center
is delaying all non-emergency surgery by at least six months. For
example, veterans in need of knee replacement surgery won't be treated
because of the budget shortfall. Recent visitors to the short care stay
unit were surprised to see a handwritten sign declaring that ``due to
budget issues, we can no longer supply meals to patients,'' and asking
patients to bring a meal from home.
The facility is reducing staff as a cost-cutting measure and is now
short at least 150 hospital staff, including nurses, physicians, and
social workers. As a result of budget cuts for staffing, the VA has cut
the number of medical
[[Page H5589]]
beds available to care for veterans. And for fiscal year 2005, the
facility needed $13 million for medical and clinical equipment but only
received $2 million.
But this should not come as a surprise to us. All you have to do is
visit the VA health care facilities to see the overcrowded waiting
rooms, the worn equipment, to know that they need additional funding.
And we've been saying this for years.
Just this March, the Republican leadership of the House refused to
allow us to debate and vote on an amendment that I tried to offer that
would have added $1.3 billion to the Supplemental Appropriations bill
specifically for Veterans Health Care. Had we been allowed to debate
whether the VA needed supplemental funding in March, or any of the
numerous other times that House Democrats have tried to raise the
issue, we could have dealt with this problem long before it became a
crisis.
Not one soldier who puts his or her life on the line should have to
worry about getting health care when he or she returns from battle. But
how are we supposed to provide adequate health care to these new
veterans when we can't even meet the needs of our current veterans? Our
veterans deserve better.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Davis).
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, tonight we are scrambling
around to make up for a shortfall in veterans funding that was caused
by the poor planning of this administration. The VA medical system
cares for the brave men and women who have risked life and limb to
serve this country without questioning why. Let us not forget that the
VA's medical system serves as a back up to the Defense Department
during national emergencies and as a Federal support organization
during major disasters.
Please consider my district, the city of San Diego. Our VA Medical
Center is well managed, but is being forced to divert millions of its
maintenance funds to partially cover its operating expenses while our
communities' veterans sit on waiting lists of over 750 patients.
Mr. Speaker, we are the keepers of the promise to America's veterans.
We are obligated to address this funding crisis quickly and prevent it
from happening again. The lives of countless men and women who defend
it, or our own lives, may very well depend on it.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, we should not be in this hole. We did not have to be in
this hole. I am glad we are taking a partial step to get out of this
hole, a hole that we put veterans in, veterans who have served our
country in combat, veterans who have been unfortunately denied care
this year that they had a right to receive because of inadequate
funding in the past. I am glad we are moving forward.
I wish we were moving forward with a $1.5 billion emergency funding
bill passed unanimously by the United States Senate. I do not know why
the House leadership felt 96 Members of the Senate, including the
Senate Republican leadership, were being too generous to veterans. I do
not think they were being too generous to veterans. But I am glad we
are taking a step forward. And I do genuinely appreciate the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Walsh) and the gentleman from Indiana's (Mr. Buyer)
work on this effort.
The most important thing we need to do tonight is learn the lesson of
how we got in this hole and how not to get into it again. I have heard
some say, well, we have increased veterans funding over the last few
years so we should be happy with that and veterans should not complain
about it, in effect. But the fact is that there has been an increase of
250,000 veterans a year each year for the last 4 or 5 years into the VA
health care system.
You add that to VA health care inflation, drug cost inflation, and
the fact is that we have not kept up with even current services for
veterans in the budgets we have passed in the last 2 years. For some,
not so much in tonight's debate, but in other debates this week, who
have suggested, well, these are Democrats being partisan, well, some of
those charges were leveled when we said a year ago and 5 months ago and
2 months ago that this budget was going to provide a shortfall for
funding.
But let us take it out of the debate of Republicans versus Democrats.
Let us go to the respected Disabled American Veterans. Alan Bowers, the
national commander of the DAV said, not last week or last month, he
said on March 23 of 2004 about the 2005 budget resolution, ``The VA
will be required to delay medical care for some veterans and deny it
all together for other sick and disabled veterans just to enable it to
meet inflationary costs.''
To the veterans of this Nation it is incomprehensible that our
government cannot afford to fund their medical care and benefit
programs at a time it can afford generous tax cuts costing hundreds of
billions of dollars more.
Let us go beyond the Disabled American Veterans. Let us look at the
legislative directors of Paralyzed Veterans of America, the AMVETS, the
Veterans of Foreign Wars. This is what they said about the 2005 budget
resolution passed on a partisan basis in this House over the objection
of Democrats. They said passage of the budget resolution as presented
``would be a disservice to those men and women who serve this country
and who are currently serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world
in our fight against terrorism.''
No Member of this House questions any other Member's respect for
veterans. But we are not talking about good feelings tonight. Good
feelings and good intentions do not fund veterans health care. We are
talking about budget priorities. And we on the Democratic side of this
House believe that adequate funding for veterans health care should
trump tax cuts for billionaires. It seems to me that the leadership of
America's major veterans organizations agree with us.
I hope, perhaps, from this day forward we can go together on a
bipartisan basis to see that we do not ever, ever, ever again cut real
services for America's veterans during a time of war.
I encourage my colleagues to vote for this resolution, despite my
deep disappointment that the House Republican leadership would deny us
even the right to vote on the $1.5 billion emergency funding for
veterans hospitals that 96 Senators in a unanimous vote said was needed
by our Nation's former service men and women.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), the distinguished chairman of the
Veterans Affairs' Committee and himself a veteran of the Gulf War.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Walsh) for his leadership in bringing this supplemental, being
responsive to the administration's requests. I would also like to thank
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards), the ranking member, for working
cooperatively with the gentleman from New York as he has done since he
assumed this position. The gentleman's leadership is important and it
is valuable.
Yesterday, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) and I kind of joked
with each other when I came up to the gentleman and I said, what is the
powerball? And the gentleman looked at me and said, what? And I said
what is the powerball, because if the gentleman could actually guess
what the number should be for the veterans budget, the gentleman should
also know what the powerball is. We kind of had fun, we had some
laughter amongst each other because what we are dealing with is hard.
It is difficult. There are people that are a lot smarter than me and
that have Ph.D.s in how to do the actuarial studies.
And it is rather interesting that the VA, for the longest time, I
want to share with my colleagues what had been done was that the VA
would formulate the health care portion of their budgets using
historical trend analysis, inflation, and then they would also take
into consideration new initiatives. Then the VA said, well, we ought to
change that. Let us improve workload projection capabilities, and let
us do some better forecasting.
And so they go out and they hire Milliman Incorporated, which is an
outside actuarial firm that provides expertise and guidance to the top
private health companies in America. Well, that sounded like a pretty
good idea to do. Then what we learned on June 23 in the Full Committee
on Veterans' Affairs as we get into the issue on health care modeling,
I know you say, my gosh, why are you talking about this? This is pretty
important. What we learn about the modeling is, is that
[[Page H5590]]
model wrong that the VA is using to protect the budgets? How come we
get into these positions? What we learned is it is not necessarily that
the model is in error. The model that is used in the private sector and
that is used to guide the VA is adjusted for these private firms on an
annual basis.
The VA uses this model and stresses it. They stress the model to
project between 2.5 and 3.5 years out. Now, that is not right. So what
we are going to do, and the gentlemen from New York (Mr. Walsh) and the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) and myself and the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Brown) and the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud),
we are going to work together here because we are going to stop this
stuff going on. If they recognize that the data is old and stale and
that their assumptions are not right and they are not doing annual risk
adjustments, then we are going to have to do it for them. Right?
So it is important for us to continue our oversight. So when this was
brought out in the hearing last week, the administration, the testimony
of Dr. Perlin was we have some work around solutions. Well, we listened
to it. And then we began to talk among ourselves, Republicans and
Democrats alike, listening to evidence and stories from our own
districts and said, you know, this does not feel right and we should
take some action.
{time} 2300
The administration responded. What we said to the administration was,
and I share with my colleagues in the Senate because their immediate
response, we were not even done with our hearing in the House and the
Senate calls a press conference and says we are going to fund it at 1.5
or 1.6.
They are making up numbers over in the Senate. We are not going to
make up numbers here in the House. I have heard some of my dear friends
on the Democrat side say, I am really disappointed it is not $1.5
billion. Where do you get $1.5 billion? We cannot make it up.
If our responsibility to the taxpayer is to get the number right,
then let us get the number right. So when we asked the Secretary to
come over and testify and he did this morning, we said we want an exact
number and that is exactly what he delivered to us.
So of the $975 million supplemental, this morning he said I need $273
million to fund health care for returning Operation Iraqi Freedom,
Operation Enduring Freedom veterans, including members of the Guard and
Reserve. They also needed $226 million to continue funding of the
shared Federal and State VA long-term care nursing home program. They
need another $200 million to fund unanticipated increases in the health
care for priorities 1 through 6 veterans. He needed $95 million to fund
unanticipated energy, fuel, and utility costs. He needed $84 million to
buy emergency medical equipment and $39 million to pay for the increase
in health care benefits for dependents of 100 percent service connected
veterans as the need has increased at a rate greater than expect.
And there is another number that no one has talked about. You know
what it is? Accounts receivables. So I asked the VA, you came and told
us you need $975 million. What is your accounts receivables? What in
the final quarter of 2005 do you anticipate that you are going to
collect? $325 million.
So basically what we have, if you are in business we have a cashflow
problem. We also have a shortfall. So they have accounts receivables
out there and they have a bogey, a deficit. So when we say okay, we are
going to do an infusion. So we do an infusion of $975 million, you know
what? The number is higher than that. Because it is $975 million plus
the $325 million of accounts receivables. It is $1.3 billion is the
infusion. That is the monies available for the VA in the final quarter.
That is the exact number.
So I am hopeful that when we pass this bill, and I agree with the
gentleman from New York (Chairman Walsh). I do not think there is going
to be one vote against this because we will all speak together in a
unified voice. We will send this to the other body and say this bill
comes to a total of $1.3 billion in available resources that the VA can
use in the final quarter and those monies that you cannot use we will
move over into 2006. We will continue to work on the 2006 number. We
will work on that budget amendment.
The next thing we will do is the VA is working on the 2007 budget
because they have responsibilities to get that transferred soon to OMB.
We will get all this worked out because this Secretary owns that 2007
budget and he owns the 2006 budget and he owns this mistake and he
understands that.
I urge all of my colleagues in a bipartisan fashion and in a big
voice, let us wake up the other body. We pass it tonight. They can pass
exactly what we have here, and we can make a tremendous impact on the
veterans community. Let us pass this bill.
I congratulate the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh).
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my great
disappointment about the fact that the Republican majority has refused
to allow Representative Edwards the opportunity to offer his bill to
provide $1.5 billion in emergency funding for veterans health care.
Instead, we are being asked tonight to vote up or down on a bill that
will provide only part of the funds that are desperately needed to
provide essential care to those who served our country so well. Full
funding is critically needed by the Veterans' Administration to
overcome its massive budget shortfall caused by the Bush
Administration's war in Iraq and the Republicans' shameful budget.
Last Friday, the Washington Post reported that the Bush
Administration finally acknowledged that it is short $1 billion for
covering current needs at the Department of Veterans Affairs, despite
repeated efforts by House Democrats to adequately fund VA healthcare.
Even that admission is likely to be short of the mark. Earlier today,
the Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee reiterated that
the Senate would quickly pass a $1.5 billion emergency supplemental if
the House would first approve the measure. Unfortunately, the
Republican majority has offered a bill that provides only $975 million,
and then denied us the opportunity to offer an amendment to increase
that level. To shortchange our veterans during a time of war is not
only shocking, it is greatly disrespectful to the brave men and women
who have volunteered their service to defend our country.
The shortfall that the VA is experiencing has resulted in some VA
medical facilities no longer scheduling appointments for veterans,
others not filling vacancies of medical and nursing staff, and others
having to close operating rooms or not replace basic medical equipment,
such as hospital beds.
Because of the Republicans' refusal to provide sufficient funding,
many of the 50,000 veterans who are currently waiting in line for
medical appointments will be forced to continue their wait. It is
shameful that the Republicans in Congress have once again failed our
veterans. It is apparent that the Republicans do not represent the
priorities of the American people. At a time of war, Americans want the
Congress to offer bipartisan support and services for our veterans and
their families. They do not want us to shortchange military families
and they certainly believe that taking care of our Nation's veterans
should be a higher priority than providing tax breaks for millionaires.
The Republicans should have done the right thing and worked with the
Democrats on this nonpartisan issue.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this supplemental,
but not of the process that brought it to the floor.
Last Friday, the Washington Post reported that the Bush
Administration acknowledged that it is short $1 billion for covering
current needs at the Department of Veterans Affairs this year, despite
repeated efforts by House Democrats to fund VA healthcare. In response,
the Senate voted unanimously on Wednesday to give the VA an extra $1.5
billion this year to cover the health care shortfall. But House
Republicans today offered just $975 million, meaning additional work
will have to be done to correct this serious problem.
But the problem we face is larger than dollars and cents. There is an
emerging credibility gap, one that Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Nicholson would do well to address and quickly. It simply strains
credulity to suggest, as some in the House have this week, that neither
the Secretary nor his staff could have foreseen this problem. Mr.
Nicholson's predecessor, former VA Secretary Anthony Principi, who is
currently chairing the Base Realignment and Closure Commission,
certainly had no difficulty giving the Congress honest assessments on
the VA's needs. Indeed, Secretary Principi was too forthright for White
House officials, who were undoubtedly both embarrassed and angered by
his candor during the last Congress.
You remember the story, I'm sure. At the annual VA budget hearing on
February 4, 2004, in response to a question by my friend and colleague
from Illinois, Mr. Evans, then-
[[Page H5591]]
Secretary Principi acknowledged that he needed at least $1.2 billion
more to meet the medical needs of America's veterans than President
Bush had requested in his Fiscal Year 2005 budget submission to
Congress. My friend from Illinois showed his usual courage and
tenacity, and fought to get Secretary Principi the money they both
knew--the money we all knew--was needed to properly care for our
veterans. And even if this supplemental funding is provided, there will
still be at least a $600 million shortfall in VA funding this fiscal
year.
What does this shortfall mean in human terms? It means not enough
psychiatric nurses to care for veterans with post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD) and other psychiatric disorders. It means some veterans
will not get prosthetic devices they need to function in the real
world. It means that hospital administrators will have to raid medical
care accounts in order to pay for equipment repairs to keep air
conditioners functioning and electrical systems working. It means
longer clinic waiting times for veterans seeking appointments. All of
these shortages are both unacceptable and avoidable.
If we can find the money to buy the hardware to send our men and
women into battle, there's no excuse for us not to find the money to
pay for their wounds of war after they come home. Shortchanging
America's veterans on America's birthday is truly a manifestation of
Tom Paine's sunshine patriotism. I urge my colleagues to not only
support this supplemental, but to demand that the President and the
House leadership provide the full funds the VA needs to care for our
wounded warriors.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the supplemental
appropriations for veterans' medical care. This measure corrects the $1
billion shortfall in veterans' health care funding, which was belatedly
acknowledged by the Bush Administration last week. House Democrats have
been standing with America's veterans fighting to increase support for
veterans' health care. Republicans have consistently chosen other
priorities and voted against veterans' healthcare, leading to a
shortfall that did not have to happen.
This measure is a first step to correcting this gross underfunding of
our veterans' health care system. However, additional steps need to be
taken to comprehensively address this serious problem. I am troubled
that many of our Nation's veterans are unable to receive the health
care they need in a timely fashion. Without adequate funding, veterans
will continue to stand in line, waiting for the services they have
earned. Let us keep our promises to our veterans and servicemembers who
have fought for our country. I will continue to fight for funding that
meets our active and retired military personnel's health care needs.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the
supplemental appropriation of $975,000,000 that will fill the huge gap
that was left by the Administration's FY 2005 request for the Veteran's
Administration health care system. While my veteran constituents such
as a 23-year old male who now suffers from kidney and liver failure due
in part to administrative failings in the Veterans Healthcare
Administration. The paltry funding levels set by the Administration and
codified by the Republican Congressional Leadership have caused young
soldiers like my constituent to suffer unnecessarily and cause their
parents to shed tears. I just visited this young man at the Walter Reed
Medical Center last week, and his condition reminded me of the very
irresponsible work of this Administration.
Hundreds of thousands of veterans just like my young constituent are
being told that they cannot enroll in VA health care. When the current
Administration decided to ban new Priority 8 veterans from enrolling in
January 2003, it estimated that by 2005 the number of affected veterans
would be 522,000. Some veterans' hospitals are reporting shortages of
medical supplies. Furthermore, the number of Operation Iraqi Freedom
veterans lined up for treatment is expected to rise dramatically as the
poorly managed war effort causes physical and mental ailments to
increase exponentially.
In the 18th Congressional district of Texas alone there are more than
38,000 veterans and they make up almost ten percent of this district's
civilian population over the age of 18. Yet, despite these large
numbers we often forget about our veterans. We do this in part because
our men and women of the armed services come home from war and lead
normal productive lives; often our veterans go unnoticed in the general
population. However, our veterans are not normal people; they are truly
extraordinary individuals who have changed the course of our lives in
ways that we may not even realize. I hope we will always keep this
thought in mind; we cannot forget to celebrate our veterans, for if we
forget to honor them, we forget all that makes this nation truly great.
There are over 26,550,000 veterans in the United States, the great
majority of whom rely upon these services to maintain a healthy
standard of living. In the 18th Congressional District alone there are
there are more than 38,000 veterans and they make up almost ten percent
of the district's civilian population over the age of 18. These
veterans rely upon the great services offered at the Michael E. DeBakey
VA Medical Center in Houston. Of course any great medical facility is
only as good as its health care personnel.
Mr. Speaker, today's vote is the first step to correcting an enormous
underfunding of our veterans. However, this amount does not match that
offered by the other body--therefore, the problem has not been solved,
and soldiers like my young constituent at Walter Reed will continue to
suffer the dire and potentially fatal consequences.
This body must increase funding to $1.5 billion so that our debt to
those who have sacrificed for us is paid. Even if my colleagues pass
this measure, these men and women will not receive the benefits before
July 4! The amount offered by the House Republicans did not match the
figure that passed in the other body. It is truly shameful that we must
watch our Republican colleagues give piecemeal care to our veterans
when the needs are so urgent.
For the reasons above stated, I support this measure, but I ask that
my colleagues continue to press for full funding at the level passed in
the other body
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3130.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________