[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 190 (Wednesday, December 12, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S15224-S15225]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            VETERANS AFFAIRS

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, as chairman of the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs I have tried to advance two pieces of legislation--the 
Veterans' Traumatic Brain Injury and Other Health Programs Improvement 
Act of 2007 and S. 1315, the Veterans Benefits Enhancement Act of 2007.
  Once again, Members on the other side are objecting to moving forward 
with these bills--they are setting up a procedural roadblock. These 
bills deserve to be heard and debated and discussed, and I welcome 
that, but Republicans will not allow that to happen. Let me make that 
point again--we are only asking for debate. Not for the immediate 
passage of the bills that the Senate simply pass the bills as reported 
by the committee. Surely it is not too much to ask that the Senate be 
allowed to do its business.
  Earlier today, the former ranking member of the committee, Senator 
Larry Craig, made the latest objection for himself and for the 
Republican leadership.
  This is new territory for a VA bill. When Senator Craig was chairman 
of the committee, he and I negotiated on a variety of legislative 
initiatives leading up to our markup but could not reach agreement on a 
number of matters. At the markup, I offered amendments on a number of 
the issues about which I had strong feelings. I did not, however, 
continue to pursue those matters on the floor. And I most assuredly did 
not do anything to block Senate consideration of the legislation that I 
had sought to amend. In fact, as ranking member, I worked with then-
chairman Craig to gain passage of the legislation by unanimous consent.
  There is much in S. 1233, the committee's omnibus VA health bill, 
that needs to be enacted, like an increase in the reimbursement rate 
for veterans who must travel long distances for VA care, and vital 
provisions to help veterans from becoming homeless. Never, in my 
memory, have we let a disagreement on one provision stand in the way of 
passing a legislative package, especially at such a critical time.
  Senator Craig feels most strongly about allowing middle-income 
veterans to enroll for VA health care. In 2003, the Bush administration 
shut the doors to these veterans, and since that time, hundreds of 
thousands of veterans have been turned away. I want to be clear that 
these veterans are not asking for a free ride. Indeed, they will be 
required to make copayments for their care. What they are asking for is 
entry into the system. We estimate that 1.3 million veterans want this 
opportunity. And some in this body are standing in their way.

[[Page S15225]]

  Many veterans have been denied VA health care under the current ban. 
Take, for example, California, where over 22,500 veterans have been 
denied enrollment; or Texas, where 23,800 have been denied access since 
2003. This phenomenon is not limited to the larger States--17,000 
veterans in Pennsylvania; 12,300 in Illinois; 36,000 in Florida; and 
over 14,000 in North Carolina have all been denied VA health care.
  Also, I want to clarify that we are not talking about allowing 
veterans with ``upper-income'' entry into VA care. While the 
administration, and some of my colleagues, characterize Priority 8 
veterans as ``higher-income,'' that is not necessarily the case. The 
current income eligibility threshold for VA health care is under 
$28,000 a year--which can hardly be classified as a ``high-income'' 
salary. In my home State of Hawaii, where the cost of living is one of 
the Nation's highest, the average salary for a veteran who has been 
denied is $39,300 a year.
  It is not just in Hawaii, but in many other States as well. For 
example, in South Carolina, the threshold is $31,650 a year; in North 
Carolina, $32,000 a year is considered low-income. These are not 
meaningless numbers--the dollar values represent the hard work of 
veterans who have served honorably and are now earning well below the 
median income for their area.
  No, these are not poor veterans. But one devastating illness without 
health care coverage, and make no mistake about it, they will be 
impoverished.
  Many of these veterans do not have any other form of health 
insurance. A recent study conducted by researchers at Harvard 
University found that nearly 1.8 million veterans are uninsured. This 
suggests that there are veterans in Priority 8 who are stuck in the 
middle between not making enough money to afford their own private 
insurance and making too much to qualify for VA care. No veteran who 
served their country honorably should be denied care when they need it 
because they were fortunate enough not to have been wounded in combat.
  I also urge Members to read the text of the contested provision 
relating to Category 8 veterans. If the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
sees opening up enrollment as too much of a financial burden, the 
Secretary could simply publish a decision in the Federal Register to 
again block these veterans. Congress is not seeking to overstep the 
Secretary's authority to determine who can come through VA's doors.
  Finally, Senator Craig calls the inclusion of enrollment for middle-
income veterans, a ``last minute'' addition. I say with a smile, that 
while time does seem to stand still in the Senate, I would remind my 
colleague that the bill enabling full enrollment was introduced last 
April, it was the subject of a hearing last May, and was marked up by 
the committee in June. This is not something that can be characterized 
as a ``last-minute'' change.
  Now I turn briefly to address concerns raised about S. 1315, the 
committee's omnibus veterans benefits legislation. The proposed 
Veterans' Benefits Enhancement Act of 2007 is a comprehensive bill that 
includes benefits for a broad constituency of servicemembers and 
veterans, particularly those who are service-disabled. Provisions in 
this bill would also improve benefits for World War II Filipino 
veterans, virtually all of whom are now in their 80s or 90s.
  While not providing Filipino veterans living outside the United 
States with benefits identical to those provided to veterans living in 
the United States, I am satisfied that the provisions in S. 1315 are 
equitable and should be adopted. It is important to note that S. 1315 
would fix a historical wrong.

  Filipino veterans served under the command of the United States 
military during World War II. They were considered by the Veterans' 
Administration, the predecessor of the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
to be veterans of the United States military, naval and air service 
until that status was revoked by the Rescission Acts of 1946. 
Therefore, as a matter of fundamental fairness and justice, Filipino 
veterans' benefits should be similar to those of other veterans.
  Those who oppose the pension provision in S. 1315 argue that the 
pension that would be provided through this legislation is too high. 
However, pension benefits are designed to allow wartime veterans and 
their survivors to live in dignity--above the poverty level. I am 
satisfied that the levels of pension designated in this bill would 
allow these veterans to live with such dignity, while finally giving 
them the recognition that they so richly deserve.
  I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to take a good 
look at the facts surrounding the provisions contained in both S. 1233 
and S. 1315 that some on the other side are objecting to, and to 
realize that opposing these bills on the current basis provided 
effectively denies valuable and meaningful benefits to our Nation's 
veterans.
  In closing, I again stress that all we are seeking is a time 
agreement that will allow for debate. For those who believe that there 
are provisions in these two bills that should not be approved by the 
Senate, offer amendments, debate the merits, let the Senate vote. That 
is the least we can do as we seek to meet the needs of our Nation's 
veterans.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  Mr. SALAZAR. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________