Congressional Record, Volume 152 Issue 74 (Monday, June 12, 2006)

[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 74 (Monday, June 12, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H3753-H3771]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4939, EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
ACT FOR DEFENSE, THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR, AND HURRICANE RECOVERY, 2006

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution
857, I call up the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 4939)
making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2006, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 857, the
conference report is considered read.
(For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of
June 8, 2006, at page H3587.)
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis)
and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) each will control 30
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
The supplemental provides $94.5 billion for the global war on terror,
disaster assistance, border security and avian flu preparedness. This
measure provides significant funding to fight the global war on
terrorism and support the troops. Funding for Operation Iraqi Freedom
and Operation Enduring Freedom are provided at $65.8 billion. This
includes funding earmarked by Congress for Humvees, Abrams tanks and
Bradley fighting vehicles.
Additionally, the conference report includes roughly $2 billion to
develop and procure countermeasures to prevent Improvised Explosive
Devices attacks on our troops.
Funding for disaster assistance is at the President's request of
$19.8 billion. Included in the funding is the following: $6 billion for
FEMA disaster relief; $5.2 billion for community and economic
development; $3.7 billion for various flood control repairs by the Army
Corps of Engineers; as well as $500 million for agriculture disaster
assistance for farmers, ranchers and producers affected by the 2005
hurricanes. The total is $3.4 billion below the Senate-passed bill.
Avian flu preparedness is funded at the President's request of $2.3
billion. Border security is funded at $1.9 billion. This funding
provides $708 million to deploy National Guard troops along the
Southwest border.
Additionally, $1.2 billion is provided to the Department of Homeland
Security to enhance border security. This funding also assumes the
hiring of 1,000 new Border Patrol agents, 4,000 additional detention
beds and various tactical and logistics support activities for the
Secure Borders Initiative.
Finally, the border security package also earmarks $20 million to
increase judges and attorneys at the Department of Justice to better
process violation of immigration laws.
The conferees worked exhaustively to knock out items not related to
the global war on terror and disaster assistance, as well as to reduce
the overall funding for this package.
You may recall the Senate-passed bill was $108.9 billion. The House-
passed bill was $91.9 billion. The House bill was passed on March 16.
Remember that, Mr. Speaker, March 16, prior to the President's formally
requesting funding for border security, avian flu preparedness or
levees. This package is $94.5 billion. The final conference report
before us is $14.4 billion below the Senate-passed bill.
The conference report excluded funding for a $700 million railroad
relocation project and no language compelling the DOD to cover
hurricane damage to shipyard facilities otherwise covered by private
insurance.

[[Page H3754]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.001

[[Page H3755]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.002

[[Page H3756]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.003

[[Page H3757]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.004

[[Page H3758]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.005

[[Page H3759]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.006

[[Page H3760]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.007

[[Page H3761]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.008

[[Page H3762]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.009

[[Page H3763]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.010

[[Page H3764]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.011

[[Page H3765]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.012

[[Page H3766]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH12JN06.013

[[Page H3767]]

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding and
for his very strong leadership on so many issues.
Once again, Mr. Speaker, the Republicans have abused their power. The
House and Senate voted to not have an open-ended commitment in Iraq by
unanimously passing the Lee-Allen amendment to not allow funding to
enter into formal military basing rights.
By eliminating this amendment from this conference report, the
Congress and the administration are admitting that they have no
intentions of ever bringing our troops home. If there are no plans for
a permanent military presence, as the President and the Defense
Secretary have repeatedly declared, then why in the world did the
Republican leadership strike this provision?
Once again, democracy has been thwarted. The majority of Americans
and Iraqis do not want permanent military bases in Iraq. By the end of
the year, this war will have cost over $350 billion and climbing.
By eliminating this provision, once again, we have given the
administration a blank check to stay in Iraq permanently.
Mr. Speaker, our amendment sent a strong signal that the United
States has no designs on Iraq permanently. Removing it behind closed
doors says just the opposite. Once again, this administration is
misleading the American people. This abuse of power must stop. The
House, the Senate, both bodies voted for this amendment. How in the
world could it be taken out when the majority of Americans do not want
to see a permanent presence in Iraq? It is time to get real about this
war, and it is time to ask the hard questions with regard to what our
long-term intentions are, and I believe that this would have said just
that. I think the American people deserve to know what our long-term
plans are.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased and proud to
yield 5 minutes to the chairman of the Subcommittee on National
Security, my permanent chairman of the Appropriations Committee, the
gentleman from Florida, Bill Young.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am going to be very brief here
and suggest that the chairman has already specified some of the details
of the defense part of this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say that it is long past time for the Congress
to have completed action on this legislation. The global war on terror
is going on every day. It is costing considerable money every day.
I want to remind the Members that the House passed our version of
this supplemental emergency supplemental on March 16, 3 months ago. It
is high time that we got to conference with the other body and
concluded this work.
The defense part of this package is basically what the House adopted
12 weeks ago. So I think it is a good product, and I hope that the
Members will find it acceptable and get us a nice, substantial vote.
Mr. Speaker, the conference agreement on the programs under the
jurisdiction of the Defense Subcommittee for the global war on terror
totals $65.792 billion, which is $1.765 billion below the House-passed
level and $103.9 million above the President's request.
The conference agreement provides $708 million for the National
Guard's border security support to the Department of Homeland Security.
As the House is aware, the President amended his original
supplemental budget submission in order to fund border security
activities. This resulted in a cut of almost $1.9 billion in Defense
spending for the global war on terror. I sincerely regret that
decision. However, the conferees were left with little choice but to
reduce the House-passed level in order to accommodate the President's
request.
Despite this reduction, we have still been able to meet the urgent
needs of our Armed Forces, including:
$805 million to ensure that Army tracked combat vehicles such as
Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles will be upgraded for the
units that will be rotating into Iraq in the next year, including $230
million for the Abrams Tank Integrated Management, or AIM program, to
support fielding of National Guard brigade combat teams;
$230 million for 3 V-22 aircraft and $126.6 million for 2 KC-130J
tanker aircraft, both for the Marine Corps;
$2.577 billion in additional equipment for the Marine Corps, based on
an assessment of their most pressing shortfalls;
$227.5 million in advance procurement for seven C-17 aircraft, a
down payment on maintaining production of this aircraft in fiscal year
2008;

A total of $37.9 billion in operation and maintenance funding for all
the services, in order to maintain war operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan; and
Almost $2 billion to procure and develop equipment to counter
Improvised Explosive Devices, or IEDs.
Let me also indicate for the record that the statement of the
managers incorrectly identifies the dollar level for the Tactical
Unmanned Aerial System program under the account, Other Procurement,
Army. The correct amount is $150,200,000, not $50,200,000 as specified
in the statement of the managers.
Regarding the provision in the Senate bill on Gulf shipyards, we've
dropped all the Senate language that would have abrogated existing
shipbuilding contracts and that would have required the Federal
Government to pay business interruption costs that should properly be
covered by private insurance companies. Instead we've provided funding
to improve the infrastructure of all Gulf Coast shipyards that have
Navy contracts and were affected by Hurricane Katrina. This will assist
those yards in recovering from the effects of the Hurricane, and lead
to efficiencies in shipbuilding that will help the companies, the
shipyard workers, the Navy, and ultimately the taxpayer.
Mr. Speaker, it is far past time the Congress completed action on
this legislation. The services need funding immediately, and I urge
adoption of the conference report in the House and swift action in the
other body.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
(Mr. SPRATT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, a few months ago this House passed a bill to
get tough with illegal immigration. It stiffened sanctions, it
increased penalties, and it promulgated a new get-tough approach to
illegal immigration.
It lacked, however, one essential, the resources to carry out this
new step-up in enforcement that it proposed. The bill took steps to
open up the door to State and local law enforcement so that you could
have local sheriffs and local law enforcement personnel more involved
in criminal alien assistance, but it still left the program proposed
woefully underfunded.
Some years ago I called Atlanta, the regional office of the INS, to
report what I thought was a serious immigration violation and to ask
for an investigation. I was told there were only two investigatory
agents in all of South Carolina, and they had to be used for criminal
matters, for really serious deportations.
The supplemental that came through this House in March, was passed on
March 16 and then went to the Senate, offered a golden opportunity to
do something about that shortcoming. The Senate, for its part, seized
that opportunity, beefed up enforcement and helped bolt down our
borders far better than they are now. The Senate seized the
opportunity. Senator Gregg offered an amendment. When the bill was
finally finished in the Senate, it added $2.548 billion for border
security and for port security in this country, both of which are
woefully underresourced at the present time.
The bill, as I said, included $1.9 billion of the $2.5 billion for
sealing off and securing our borders far better than they are now. The
Bush administration then proposed an additional amendment of $1.9
billion, but insisted that it supplant, not supplement but supplant,
the proposal that Senator Gregg had passed by a substantial margin on
the Senate floor.
Now, what is in the Bush package we don't oppose. We have, in fact,
been proposing more detention beds and more border security agents and
more effort there for some time now. So we don't oppose that $1.9
billion. But look at what Senator Gregg put in the bill, which was not
pulled out of thin air, basic meat and potatoes, practical requirements
that are needed if we are really going to bolt down our borders.
The P3 fleet, which serves as our border security's primary air
surveillance, is 40 years old. That is a Lockheed Electra platform, an
old turboprop

[[Page H3768]]

plane, 20 years beyond the average life of even this type of plane.
Two months ago the entire fleet was grounded due to a safety issue
uncovered during a routine inspection. Senator Gregg would have put
money here, and emphatically we believe it should be put here. Outdated
vehicles, this is a harsh environment, this is a border, roadless
terrain that vehicles have to travel. There are nearly 1,700 vehicles,
virtually unusable due to the wear and tear of the desert, extreme
environments and high use. Senator Gregg's amendment would have put
money there.
Lack of sufficient patrol aircraft. We currently detect three out of
every 10 boats carrying smugglers. Of the boats detected by patrol
aircraft, 75 percent are stopped, apprehended. More aircraft obviously
are needed to act on actionable intelligence regarding human and drug
smuggling activities.
Finally, armed helicopters. You want to get tough? Only nine out of
150 helicopters are armed, allowing human and drug traffickers to cross
our maritime border virtually unimpeded. Armed helicopters could stop
100 percent of the illegal smugglers whom they encounter.
This is what is lacking and missing in this bill. It was there, taken
out in conference. As a result, this bill leaves security gaps, serious
gaps in our national security and our national borders and ports
underfunded. This is a real deficiency and a missed opportunity that
unfortunately this conference report did not seize.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady).
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this measure, not
only because it provides important support for our troops overseas, but
dramatically accelerates the security of our border here in America.
As importantly, because of the leadership of Chairman Lewis, because
of the leadership here in the House, this bill also includes critical
help for people and families and communities in east and southeast
Texas devastated by Hurricane Rita. This measure provides much needed
help to fund the Katrina students who are in our schools, provides much
needed help to reimburse our local governments at the same rate as
Louisiana, which will save our taxpayers and our smaller counties tens
of millions of very important dollars.
Finally, it provides help to rebuild the homes and roofs and
communities in south and east Texas devastated by Rita. Most people
don't know, we had almost 75,000 homes damaged or destroyed. Many of
them have temporary roofs today. Ten percent of our evacuees have not
yet returned due to Hurricane Rita.
Thanks to the leadership of Chairman Lewis, and subcommittee chairs,
Mr. Knollenberg, Mr. Rogers and Mr. Young, of the support of people
like my colleagues in east Texas, Congressmen Poe and Gohmert, freshman
legislators who have done a tremendous job representing their district,
the House leadership and our Texas appropriators, thanks to all of
them, our families and communities in east Texas are going to get the
help that they sorely need, truly deserve, and we are all very
grateful. Again, on behalf of the families and residents of east Texas,
I want to thank our appropriations leaders for their help. This is good
news this day for east Texas and southeast Texas.

{time} 1945

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, if I can borrow this Republican mike, I yield
2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-
Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I like that bipartisan
approach. I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding.
I represent another component of the disaster impact of Hurricane
Katrina and Hurricane Rita, representing the city of Houston, and
certainly, we can put on the record the increased funding will go a
long way on what is a questionable issue, and that is, the framework
that FEMA has in dealing with the aftermath of any disaster, the
disaster recovery that continues on and on and that disaster recovery
includes the ongoing impact and need for funding for Katrina and Rita
survivors who are in the Houston area that are in our schools; the
continuing need for funding for senior citizens who are living in the
city of Houston who are now without ongoing funding for housing; the
questionable elimination of employment benefits that was requested in
terms of funding that was cut off just about a week or so ago, and then
the reimbursement that is necessary.
So I rise today to acknowledge the hard work of the appropriators in
particular on hurricane relief but also to raise the specter of concern
that there are still cities who have not benefited with respect to the
reimbursement; and in this instance, I would make the inquiry and the
request that if this is an emergency supplemental, these funds are
going to be disbursed, that we have an immediate response
administratively by FEMA to be able to address the reimbursement
requests that have already been made by cities such as Houston.
I am grateful that the collaborative work of the Harris County
delegation, which included Members from Houston, worked on vast areas
like southeast Texas; but I am making a request officially on this
floor on behalf of the city of Houston and other cities who have yet to
be reimbursed. Mr. Speaker, I would like to see these matters
reimbursed.
I simply close by saying that I hope in the supplemental that we will
find a way to increase the funding for border security, if necessary,
for all of our States.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express, once again, my disappointment,
and my chagrin, that we are sending forward a bill that so desperately
lacks funding for our most urgent national needs.
I appreciate the difficult work that my colleagues have engaged in
over the last few months. I acknowledge that at $94.5 billion, this is
the largest supplemental appropriations measure ever considered by
Congress. However, more than ever, this supplemental bill clearly
communicates where our country's priorities are right now, and where
they are not. Having just returned from Iraq and Afghanistan, I know
our troops and returning veterans need our help, and we will help!
Seventy percent of the funding in this report is for military
spending. I support our troops--however, I am disturbed that language
that would prohibit permanent borders in Iraq was eliminated. This is
outrageous.
This report appropriates $126 million to sustain the African Union
peacekeeping missions and eventual transition to an international
security force in western Sudan. The report also appropriates $24
million for migration and refugees assistance to respond to the
humanitarian crisis for Sudan and Chad.
Conference report includes $1.9 billion for border security needs, 48
million less than requested. This includes $1.2 billion for the
Department of Homeland Security and $708 million for the Defense
Department for the costs of deploying 6000 National Guard troops to the
border.
Appropriates $37.9 billion for activities related to military
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, $808 million LESS than the
president's request. This total includes $3 billion to train and equip
Iraqi security forces and $1.9 billion for Afghan personnel and the new
Afghan Army. The total is roughly $1 million less than requested.
The agreement provides a total of $19.8 billion for hurricane relief
and recovery, $6 billion of which is for FEMA. But I need to reaffirm
the need for cities such as Houston to be timely reimbursed for
expenditures used to help people in need.
The agreement provides $5.2 billion for the Housing and Urban
Development Department's Community Development Block Grant program,
with $4.2 billion dedicated to Louisiana, and another $1 billion
available to other states on a pro-rated basis.
Instead of pulling from a healthy account, such as Defense,
appropriators decided to pull money out of Veterans in order to help
hurricane recovery. Veterans health was hit by a blow from a measure
rescinding the $198 million in supplemental funds provided by the FY
2006 Defense Appropriations law and appropriates the funds instead to
the VA Medical Services account for expenses related to hurricane
recovery.
Among the provisions dropped from the report completely were measures
providing for port security funding, slated by the Senate for $648
million, and House language that blocked the use of funds to prohibit
registered and legal, but displaced, residents of the Gulf Coast region
from the right to legally vote in any official designated election of
the Gulf Coast region. We worked very hard for this lanaguage--this
deletion slaps the Voter Rights Act in the face.
The Defense Department's current monthly expense for Iraq is around
$8 billion, and $1 billion for Afghanistan. We should be budgeting
these expenses, not supplementing them again and again.

[[Page H3769]]

I am pleased that so many of the needs of my neighbors in Houston are
addressed, such as housing and hurricane recovery funding, but I am
saddened by the story that the numbers depict. Someday, I want to say
that the Emergency Supplemental bill support unexpected needs of the
country in times of crisis, rather than a supplemental and overdue bill
of items that should have been debated with the rest of the budget
resolution.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
Mass death on the installment plan, that is what this supplemental
vote to keep our troops in Iraq is all about.
Today, Iraqi civilian casualties number well over 100,000. Iraqi
civilian injuries could be over 1 million, but who is keeping track?
Some act as though the Iraqis are not real people with real families,
real hopes and real dreams and loves of their own.
We have lost nearly 2,500 of our own brave soldiers. Up to 48,000
troops have suffered physical or emotional injuries, which could scar
them and their loved ones for life.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Steglitz says the war could cost
$2 trillion; $2 trillion for war while the American people are told we
do not have enough money for job creation, education, health care, and
Social Security.
The administration went into Iraq without an exit strategy, not
because they are incompetent, but because they have no intention of
leaving.
We are spending hundreds of millions building permanent bases in
Iraq. The administration recently announced deployment of no less than
50,000 troops far into the future. We are looking at a permanent
occupation of Iraq.
And so a long cadence of lies has led to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and
Haditha, soon to be replaced by more lies and more tragedies.
What can you say when you are watching your Nation descend sleep
walking into something like the lower circles of hell in Dante's
Inferno?
You can say stop it: enough blood is enough blood. You can say stop
it: bring our troops home. You can say no to any more funds for this
war and begin a period of truth and reconciliation about 9/11 and Iraq.
Begin the healing of the soul of America.
The Bible says: ``He who troubleth his own house shall inherit the
wind.'' Our House has been troubled by this war based on lies. What
will our inheritance be?
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I intend to vote for this piece of legislation because I
think we do need to distinguish between supporting our troops and
supporting the war in Iraq. I continue to believe that the war in Iraq
is the dumbest war since the War of 1812; but at the same time, we
obviously want our troops to be as well-equipped as is humanly
possible, and we hope that this bill will take a decent step in that
direction.
Having said that, I want to make three points about my concerns about
this bill. Number one, it continues a fiction that this war must be
financed through ``emergency spending.'' That is simply a gimmick that
allows the entire cost of this war, some $450 billion by the time the
defense bill, which is going to be considered by the Appropriations
Committee tomorrow, is spent. By that time we will have spent $450
billion, and yet we continue to pretend that it is an unexpected
contingency which means that it is handled outside of the normal limits
of the budget. That does not fool anybody except the American people,
unfortunately; and that is what it is designed to do, to mask the full
costs of the war.
Secondly, it is outrageous, in my view, that this Congress eliminated
both Senate provisions and the single House provision which made it
clear that the Congress did not want in any way to allow the impression
to continue to exist that we intend to have a permanent presence in
Iraq. The fact is over 70 percent of Iraqis continue to believe,
despite the protestations of the President and the Secretary of
Defense, they continue to believe that America intends to have a long-
term permanent presence in Iraq, and we need to disabuse them of that
fact in order to take the target off the backs of our soldiers.
Thirdly, as the gentleman from South Carolina has indicated, we will
have spent $450 billion on this war by the end of the year, and yet the
Congress is refusing to spend an additional $2.5 billion to provide
further strengthening and thickening of our efforts at border security
and port security.
This bill has a significant increase in funds for personnel as far as
border security is concerned; but it shortchanges the equipment, it
shortchanges the aircraft, it shortchanges the facilities, it
shortchanges the construction efforts, it shortchanges all of the
nonpersonnel items that go into providing solid border security on both
the northern and southern borders.
There is no excuse whatsoever for this Congress to be providing over
$40 billion in tax cuts to people who make over $1 million a year,
while refusing to spend adequate amounts of money to secure our borders
both the north and the south.
I want to make one other point.
It infuriates me to hear the White House say we will do whatever is
necessary to secure the borders of the United States at the same time
that the President has consistently refused to support adequate
appropriations to do just that.
And I want to tell, I want to close by telling a story that I have
told many times because I think the American people need to know about
it.
Right after 9/11, when this Capitol Hill was hit by anthrax, this
committee was then chaired by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young),
and when we could not get into our offices, I called Bill and I said,
Bill, as long as we cannot do anything useful in our office, why do we
not consult each of the security agencies of our government to see what
they think we need on an emergency basis to deal with homeland security
problems. We talked to the CIA, the FBI, the CDC, the NSA, you name it;
and we got from each of them their estimate of what we needed to
provide immediately to beef up our homeland security, border security,
and port security operations.
We then went down to the White House to talk to the President. The
President came in. We were seated around the table. Before we could say
a word, he said, well, I understand some of you want to spend more
money than I do on homeland security. I just want you to know, if you
appropriate $1 more than I have asked for, I will veto the bill. I have
got time for four or five comments and I am out of here.
So Senator Byrd made clear what he thought of that attitude. Senator
Stevens pointed out to the President that we had already agreed that if
there was any item on the list that the President did not want we would
automatically strike it.
And then finally it came my turn to speak, and I said to the
President, Mr. President, I have been coming down here for over 30
years. This is the first time any President has ever told me his mind
was closed before the subject was even open, and I want you to know
since you are being hard nosed on the subject, I am going to be too. I
asked him four questions about Federal installations that we had been
told by his own security people were gravely at risk of terrorist
attack, their words not mine, and I asked the President if he had been
briefed; if he had, I wanted to know what he had been told because I
know what I had been told and it scared the dickens out of me. And to
put it kindly, if he had been briefed, he gave no evidence thereof. I
did not expect him to. He is a busy man, but I did expect him to have
an open mind.
And we walked out of that room after the President said that, without
listening to a single argument, he would veto any money we added for
homeland security, and that has been the case ever since.
Each year, whatever strengthening we have had on the border, of ports
has come at the insistence of the Congress of the United States,
overcoming the objections of the President; and we have tried on both
sides of the aisle from time to time, we have tried to add more money
than the President asked for for border security and for port security.
This is just the latest chapter in the efforts of some Members of
Congress to almost get a double hernia trying to do enough heavy
lifting in order to get sufficient money into this budget so we do have
a secure border on the south

[[Page H3770]]

and a secure border on the north, and we still are a long way from
being there.
So while I will vote for this bill, I regret very much that it is
woefully short in terms of the funding that it needs to truly provide
full security on either border. I hope this country does not some day
pay a very high price for that, but I worry each day that it will.
With that, I would ask the gentleman if he has any more speakers. If
not, I am prepared to yield back.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers.
I would yield back as well except just to make a comment about your
comment, and that is to say first and foremost, the gentleman made some
very interesting comments that I have a good deal of empathy for, but
beyond that, this bill would not be here in this timely fashion, in
this form, in a bipartisan spirit if the gentleman had not been very,
very cooperative in this effort, and I appreciate that.
Mr. JEFFERSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the latest
supplemental appropriation for hurricane relief.
We cannot move forward with rebuilding our city unless we are sure
that such a disaster cannot happen again. For this reason, we must
ensure the integrity of our flood control and hurricane protection
system, which so disastrously failed during Katrina last year. To date,
the Corps of Engineers has been directly appropriated a total of $3.3
billion. This amount not only funds the reconstruction of flood control
projects that were damaged by Hurricane Katrina, but also the
restoration of these projects to their design specifications of
Category Three protection, which had lapsed over the course of time.
Over $500 million of this total will go to the construction of
previously authorized new projects. The current supplemental provides
$3.7 billion, which more than doubles the amount previously given to
the Corps. This funding will help to ensure that the city is protected
against future storms of Katrina's magnitude.
Our long-term goals for rebuilding and improving the community can
only be achieved with significant support from the Federal government.
The Community Development Block Grant program has been used with great
success in the past when confronting disaster-stricken areas and has
proven to be an invaluable tool for recovery. A total of $11.5 billion
went to the five states impacted by last year's storms, of which
Louisiana received $6.2 billion. The flexibility of this program
provides our local government officials with the resources they need to
aid businesses and provide services to residents. Over 220,000 homes
were damaged as a result of this storm and are in continuing need for
relief. In this bill, an additional $5.2 billion in overall CDBG funds
is allocated. $4.3 billion tent to fund Louisiana's ``Road Home''
project enabling our citizens to return to their homes and begin
rebuilding their lives. This funding is a welcome addition to the
recovery efforts and will assist all those affected by the storms in a
very real and profound manner.
This bill provides $285 million for hurricane-related education
programs. Funding will focus on direct assistance to displaced
elementary and secondary school students, a group that is perhaps the
most helpless of all the hurricane's victims. Previously, $1.6 billion
was provided in the last supplemental to aid the devastated educational
system not only in New Orleans, but in I the entire Gulf South. The
relocation of much our city's population into other areas has placed a
strain on school systems across the country. This funding bolstered the
school systems that were kind enough to take in large numbers of
displaced students.
Department of Defense personnel, along with the Coast Guard and other
Homeland Security agencies, performed much of the heroic search and
rescue operations that saved the lives of thousands of citizens.
Because of their sacrifices and hardships, and our appreciation for
those actions, we are assuring that their needs will be met. DoD
received $4.4 billion in previous supplemental appropriations, covering
their storm-related activities as well as repairs to damaged facilities
and equipment. This bill gives them an additional $1.5 billion to
ensure the presence of the Armed Services in the Gulf South.
The medical community in New Orleans has been decimated by the
effects of Hurricane Katrina. The capacity of hospitals in the city is
down to less than a thousand beds, a reduction of over 75 percent from
its capacity prior to the storm. Today's supplemental provides $550
million for a new VA Hospital in New Orleans. Not only will this assure
that New Orleans remains a viable outlet for the health needs of
veterans across the Gulf coast states, but it will also serve as a
valuable training outlet in conjunction with the Tulane and LSD medical
centers. Together with the $550 million previously allocated to the
Social Services Block Grant program, the healthcare infrastructure of
the city is well on its way back to full strength.
Mr. Speaker, the challenges we face in rebuilding our community
demand a great deal of attention. This supplemental appropriation is a
welcome addition to the recovery process and an indication that we in
Congress are committed to helping those affected in New Orleans and in
all other hurricane-affected areas.
But Mr. Speaker before I close I would be remiss if I did not remind
my colleagues the challenges remaining after Katrina are still
daunting. Moreover there is one aspect in terms of our recovery and
rebuilding that has not been addressed fully by this Congress and that
is healthcare in New Orleans. According to a recent issue of U.S. News
& World Report, the New Orleans area is now home to one million people,
just under the pre-Katrina population of 1.3 million. But the
healthcare resources necessary to adequately serve that level of
population have not returned: only half of the previous 4,000 hospital
beds are available; there is no Level I trauma center; there are 34
nursing homes, down from 63; and 19 clinics, down from 90.
The area's only certified Level I trauma unit is still closed (the
35-bed, limited trauma unit opened recently cannot provide full Level I
trauma services), and the number of staffed hospital beds in the City
of New Orleans was estimated to be about 80 percent less in February
2006 than before Hurricane Katrina. Moreover, to date, many patients
are still getting primary care and rudimentary emergency services
provided in tents that have now been set up by Charity Hospital in an
old department store.
Mr. Speaker we cannot allow for New Orleans's healthcare system to
die-on-a-vine. For as the statement goes: ``Justice delayed is Justice
denied.'' Healthcare delayed is healthcare denied. Thus, Mr. Speaker I
implore my colleagues on the relevant committees to hold hearings and
investigate the problems we are facing. Furthermore, I ask that
Congress consider one more legislative package that would focus solely
on rebuilding our health care system and the associated social
services.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer my strong support
for the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the
Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery conference report. I
especially want to thank Speaker Hastert, Chairmen Lewis and Chairman
Kolbe for providing critically needed funding in this bill to help the
Colombian Navy fight the war against drugs and global terrorism in our
own hemisphere.
The bill provides monies to purchase one fully and properly equipped
DC-3 Marine Patrol Aircraft (MPA) for maritime interdiction of drugs
headed towards the United States. This DC-3 will be flown by the
professional and proven Colombian Navy, and it will help better monitor
and interdict drugs which are killing our kids and financially
supporting internal terrorism in Colombia--often aimed at Americans--
and violence along the Mexican border where an estimated 90 percent of
the cocaine from Colombia is entering our country.
Unfortunately, because budget limitations are always a major factor
in conference, the Conferees were unable to fund the two properly and
fully equipped DC-3s added to the House passed War Supplemental on a
strong 250 to 172 bi-partisan vote last March 30th. Two aircraft would
have enabled the Colombia Navy to cover both their Pacific and
Caribbean coasts.
One aircraft is infinitely better than no aircraft, but we know that
one MPA is not enough since the drug traffickers move narcotics north
to the USA both from the Pacific an Caribbean coasts. If we cover only
one coast, they will just move their deadly trade to the other coast.
We need two Marine Patrol Aircraft in the region and I appreciate the
assurances we have received from both Appropriations and House
leadership staff that the Fiscal Year 2007 foreign operations FMF
monies for Colombia, in addition to the plus-up of the aid for the
Colombian National Police helicopters, will also obligate the monies or
the second MPA for the Colombian Navy. Again, I want to thank Speaker
Hastert, Chairman Lewis and Chairman Kolbe for making this happen.
Two MPAs will get the job done on both the Eastern Pacific and
Caribbean coasts and once in place, I am confident these aircraft will
help indict these illicit drugs long before they reach the Mexican
American border and the street of our communities.
I strongly urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the conference
report.
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my
disappointment that the Republican Leadership caved to political
pressure and failed to protect critical mental health funds for
treatment of our Veterans, as originally provided by the Senate in the
emergency supplemental spending bill.

[[Page H3771]]

Although this supplemental bill will fund many important priorities,
it also includes billions of dollars in wasteful spending while
ignoring the very practical, immediate mental health needs of our
veterans returning from service in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I commend my colleague, Senator Akaka, for his leadership in amending
the original House passed version to include an additional $430 million
to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The $430 million sum was
specifically designed to supplement direct health care, mental health
care, and transition services at the VA, but was misguidedly removed by
conferees and is no longer present in this final conference report.
To assist our veterans in readjusting to civilian life, the amendment
would have included $80 million for Vet Centers, a readjustment
counseling service provided by the VA. Over the years, Vet Centers have
provided services to a total of 118,811 Operation Iraqi Freedom/
Operation Enduring Freedom veterans. So far this fiscal year, Vet
Centers have provided services to 70,547 of these veterans.
Unfortunately, this conference report virtually flat-lines the Vet
Center budget.
The Senate amendment also included $168 million for the VA's
comprehensive Mental Health Plan. This plan establishes a stronger
network of primary and mental health care providers in order to better
care for the over one third of our returning veterans who have
experienced some sort of readjustment issue.
Finally, the Senate amendment provided $182 million for the shortfall
in service at VA hospitals, where new veterans waiting for their first
clinic appointment to be scheduled has doubled this year. Over the
course of 2 years, the number of new enrollees waiting for veterans'
health care has increased by over 400 percent.
Time after time, we have been told by mental health advocates that
the VA's capacity is simply inadequate. Recent studies have shown that
35 percent of Iraq veterans have sought mental health services, with
19.1 percent of Iraq veterans and 11.3 percent of Afghanistan veterans
reporting a mental health problem. We must be prepared for the VA to
handle this demand.
Our returning men and women in uniform deserve adequate healthcare
and transition assistance, which our country promised to them when they
volunteered to serve, and is our duty as a nation to provide.
Mr. Speaker, this failure to provide comprehensive assistance for
veterans' healthcare should be a wake-up call for those in support of
our troops who cannot count on this Administration or the Republican
leadership to look out for our veterans needs.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to support the
conference report on the Iraq/Afghanistan War. I welcome this chance to
especially thank both Speaker Hastert, along with Chairmen Lewis and
Kolbe for their strong support to also provide aid to the Colombian
Navy to fight yet another war against drugs and global terrorism in our
own hemisphere.
The bill provides monies to purchase one fully and properly equipped
DC-3 Marine Patrol Aircraft (MPA) for maritime interdiction of drugs
headed our way. This asset will be utilized by the professional and
proven Colombian Navy. This asset will help better monitor and
interdict drugs supporting the internal terrorism in Colombia often
aimed at Americans, violence along the Mexican border where an
estimated 90 percent of the cocaine from Colombia is entering our
country, and in our communities.
While in the original House-passed war Supplemental we provided on a
strong 250 to 172 bi-partisan vote last March 30th enough monies for at
least two properly and fully equipped DC-3s for the MPA function for
the Colombian Navy so that they could cover both their Pacific and
Caribbean coasts, we know budget limitations became a major factor at
the conference.
We also know that one MPA is not enough since the drug traffickers
move narcotics north to the USA both from the Pacific and Caribbean
coasts. If we cover only one coasts, they will just move their deadly
trade to the other coast. We cannot let that happen. We need two Marine
Patrol Aircraft.
However, we have assurances from both Appropriations and House
leadership staffs that the FY `07 foreign operations FMF monies for
Colombia in addition to the plus-up of the aid to the Colombian
National Police helicopters, will also obligate the monies for the
second MPA for the Colombian Navy. That is good enough for me.
This will get the job done to promptly fill the MPA gap on both the
Eastern Pacific and Caribbean with two MPAs, and help get these illicit
drugs long before they reach the Mexican border and our communities
here at home.
I urge adoption of the conference report.
Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I yield back my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bass). Without objection, the previous
question is ordered on the conference report.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the conference report.
Pursuant to clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question
will be postponed.

____________________