[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 77 (Tuesday, June 4, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H3044-H3088]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND VETERANS AFFAIRS, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014
general leave
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
on the bill under consideration and include extraneous material on the
consideration of H.R. 2216, and that I may include tabular material on
the same.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 243 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2216.
The Chair appoints the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) to
preside over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 1442
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 2216) making appropriations for military construction, the
Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2014, and for other purposes, with Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson) and the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Bishop) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
It is my privilege, along with my good friend from Georgia (Mr.
Bishop), to present to the House for its consideration the 2014
appropriations bill for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs.
One of the most important obligations this Congress has is to ensure
that our men and women in uniform have everything they need to do their
job without worry. We think of ourselves on this subcommittee as the
peace-of-mind committee for our military so that they can focus on
their missions, standing on the walls of Rome, protecting our freedom,
at the far corners of the world.
I think of all the appropriations bills we consider, we're honored to
bring this one to the House first because of its importance to our men
and women in uniform, to their families, and to our veterans who have
served our Nation. We want to be sure, as I say, that they have no
worries and that they don't ever have to look over their shoulder and
be concerned that the United States Congress and the American people
don't support them 110 percent, as we have done in this legislation,
which my colleague from Georgia and I have drafted arm-in-arm.
This is a bipartisan bill that we present to the House today to
ensure that the military construction needs of the armed services are
fully met. We have also done our best to ensure that when our men and
women in uniform retire and move into the Veterans Affairs system, they
will have the best medical care possible and that this backlog of
disability claims that's been plaguing us for a number of years will be
cleared as rapidly as possible.
We've done this in a way that's also fiscally responsible. We have
found every dollar we could that was left unspent from previous years
and returned that to the taxpayers. At the same time, we make sure that
our veterans and our men and women in uniform have everything that they
need to do their job.
Our committee has also been very committed to ensuring that their
families are taken care of and that the Defense Department schools on
bases are the best that they can be and in the best condition that they
can be in. I know all of us as parents are concerned about the quality
of our kids' education. The last thing that a man or woman who's
deployed at a United States base overseas--we don't want them to worry
about the caliber of the school that their children are attending. So
we've also placed emphasis on the ability of our military base
commanders to contract with the State in which they're located to set
up charter schools at their military bases if the base happens to be
located in an area where the local schools can't provide the quality
that they need.
We have in this appropriations bill, as I say, fully funded the
Department of Veterans Affairs. Some of this money is advance
appropriated. So while we've got a total funding level in this bill for
2014 of $73.3 billion, that's
[[Page H3045]]
$1.4 billion more than last year. We provide an additional $2.1 billion
more than last year for the Department of Veterans Affairs. But of that
increase, $1.9 billion was provided as an advance appropriation from
previous years.
The Congress began several years ago to appropriate funding in
advance for our Veterans Affairs Department to ensure that because of
the uncertainty and the unpredictability of the appropriations cycle,
again, we want our men and women in uniform and our veterans to have
absolute peace of mind and no worries as they serve our country or as
they move into retirement in the veterans hospital system, so we
advance appropriate some of this money.
Any reductions that we made in this bill, again, were done to make
sure that we're doing our part to control spending at a time of record
debt and deficit, which is at the top of our minds. As fiscal
conservatives, we want to ensure that we have done everything in our
power to reduce the debt and to reduce the burden that is passed on to
our children and grandchildren.
So we have not provided funding in the bill for 10 military
construction projects that the committee believed it lacked sufficient
justification for. And we funded only what the Department of Defense
expects to spend in fiscal year 2014 for six military construction
projects. We've also reduced the funding available for the Contingency
Construction account, which has not even been used since fiscal year
2008. Our marvelous staff did a good job in identifying $659 million in
unobligated balances from previous years for construction projects that
have been left unspent, and we're able to return that to taxpayers.
We have also reduced the Department of Veterans Affairs request for
funding in a program where they substantially overestimated their
projections. The scope of this committee's jurisdiction also includes
military memorials and cemeteries. We've made sure those are fully
funded and that our memorials and cemeteries here in the United States
and around the world are going to be well tended and that veterans, no
matter where they may be in the United States, will be able to get the
health care and benefits that they have earned by their service to this
country.
{time} 1450
We did everything we could in this bill to ensure that our men and
women in uniform are taken care of and that our veterans are taken care
of, but we are very concerned about the backlog in the disability
claims that the VA has accumulated. The VA has promised us that they
would have the backlog cleared up by the year 2015, so the bill
contains very strong language that holds the VA to account ensuring
that they will give the committee and the Congress detailed accounts
and reports to ensure that they stay on target. Mr. Kingston of Georgia
is going to offer an amendment later, which I intend to accept, to help
ensure that the VA holds themselves to the standard that they have set
for themselves to reduce the backlog.
And then, finally, Madam Chairman, I want to mention something that
we are particularly exercised about. Our committee chairman, Hal Rogers
from Kentucky, has told us a story that I have never forgotten of a
young man who I believe was wounded in Afghanistan--Iraq, who lost one
eye, lost eyesight in one eye. When he left the service to go into the
VA system, in order to save his remaining eye, he had to have medical
records that could be read by the VA doctors. And because of
bureaucratic inefficiency and pure idiocy, we've got a completely
separate set of medical records in the DOD and the Veterans
Administration. And for years, taxpayers have spent upwards of a
billion dollars or more over the last 10 years to get the Department of
Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs operating in a single,
using a single unified medical record so that when a young man like
this moves out of active service and into the VA, when it's a time-
critical surgery such as this young man needed to have to save his
eyesight, that the doctors in the VA could read those medical records
and get him the help that he needs. But, sadly, because of bureaucratic
inefficiency and refusal to cooperate--and, of course, we're all human
and we're all flawed, but there's this instinctive human, I think,
reaction to make sure you protect your own turf. Whatever it is, the VA
and the DOD have not adopted a unified medical record. As a result,
this young man lost his eyesight. He could not get the surgery he
needed in the VA, and he is now permanently blinded as a result of the
failure of these two departments to do their job.
Now, the week before last when we were considering this bill in
committee, the Secretary of Defense, Mr. Hagel, said that the DOD was
just going to go ahead and adopt their own medical record system
separate from the VA. This is just unacceptable. I ask all my
colleagues in Congress to work with Mr. Bishop and me and to work with
Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Lowey, with the members of the
Veterans' Affairs Committee, the members of the Armed Services
Authorizing Committee and the members of the Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee so that we develop identical, parallel language that
compels the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans
Affairs to come up with a single, integrated, unified medical record so
that no one will ever suffer the fate that this young man did who is
now permanently blinded because of bureaucratic inefficiency.
It's unacceptable. The Congress won't stand for it any longer, and
we've got strong language in this bill and will continue to work to
strengthen it to ensure that these men and women, as they move from
their days of uniformed service to the country into the VA, that it is
seamless, that it is easy, that they can get their disability claims
handled in a timely and efficient manner and that they can get their
medical records read quickly and efficiently by the doctors in the VA
system who do such a good job.
We deeply appreciate our extraordinary staff working together with my
good friend from Georgia (Mr. Bishop) in a truly bipartisan way. I'm
proud to present to the House, Madam Chairman, the 2014 Military
Construction and VA appropriations bill for approval by the House, a
bill that is fiscally conservative and responsible yet fully funds and
takes care of our men and women in uniform and our veterans in a way
that they deserve, because our men and women who have fought so
valiantly for this country deserve nothing less than the very best of
the United States Congress, and we've done that for them in this bill
today.
I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H3046]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.001
[[Page H3047]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.002
[[Page H3048]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.003
[[Page H3049]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.004
[[Page H3050]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.005
[[Page H3051]]
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, as you know, the allocation provides $73.3 billion
for the FY14 Military Construction-VA bill, which is $1.4 billion above
the FY13 and $1 billion below the request. In my opinion, the
allocation is what we could have expected had the Republican leadership
addressed sequestration.
Madam Chairman, I know some folks will say that title 2 of this bill
is exempt from sequestration and that is why the bill received a decent
allocation, but I just want to point out that the funding in the bill
largely mirrors the administration's request which does not reflect
sequestration, even for the portions of the bill that were not
exempted. I think that we all agree that we need to address the
sequester, and I hope that we do it in the near future, because if we
don't, the long-term effects will be devastating to our economy.
With that being said, I'm pleased to join Chairman Culberson as the
House takes up the FY14 appropriations bill for Military Construction,
Veterans Affairs, and related agencies. The MilCon-VA bill is
critically important to the strength and the well-being of our
military, our veterans, and the families who sacrifice so much to
defend our country. In fact, Mr. Chairman, I find it quite fitting that
we are debating this bill immediately after observing Memorial Day last
week.
Working with Chairman Culberson and the members of our subcommittee,
we have crafted a bill that will address the funding needs for military
construction and family housing for our troops and their families, as
well as other quality-of-life construction projects. In addition, it
will provide funding for many important VA programs, as well as
agencies like the Veterans Court of Appeals and the American Battle
Monuments Commission.
The bill before us today touches every soldier, sailor, marine, and
airman. In addition, the bill also will impact military spouses, their
children, and every veteran that participates in VA programs.
I want to commend the chairman for his work. Together, we sat through
numerous hearings, gaining valuable insight to the workings of all the
agencies under the subcommittee's jurisdiction. Also, we would like to
thank our subcommittee members and recognize them for their hard work
on this bill. I believe that the minority was treated fairly during
this process, and I want to thank the chairman for ensuring this
bipartisan result.
Chairman Culberson has already provided the funding highlights in the
bill, and I will not repeat them all, but I would like to point out a
few items that I believe are extremely important.
The bill before us today includes $797 million for the renovation and
replacement of 17 Department of Defense schools. I believe that
providing the funds for the DOD schools will help our servicemembers'
children get a quality education in safe facilities and will give our
servicemembers peace of mind.
I'm pleased that the bill includes $151 million for the third
increment of the Landstuhl Medical Center replacement in Germany. As
you know, a large portion of the serious casualties from Afghanistan
are treated there, and I'm pleased to see that we are making this
important investment.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is funded at $63.1 billion, and
overall, the subcommittee recommendation meets the discretionary budget
request in all areas of administrative expenses, research, information
technology, and facilities.
In addition, the bill contains $55.6 billion in advance
appropriations for medical services, medical support and compliance,
and medical facilities at the VA, which is $1.1 billion above the
amount included in FY13. Madam Chairman, I strongly believe that
advance funding provides timely and predictable resources for the
veterans' health care system, and I'm so glad that we have been able to
do it now for this 5th year in a row.
Now, I know that a lot of Members of this body are deeply concerned
about the claims backlog and the electronic health records challenge.
Trust me, the members of our committee, especially Chairman Culberson
and I, have spoken directly with Secretary Shinseki about these issues
numerous times, and I believe that our bill provides the resources and
the accountability needed to address these two problems:
First, the bill funds the general operating expenses for the VBA,
which will support 20,851 claims processors, which is 94 more than
FY2013, and all 94 new claims processors will work disability claims;
Second, the bill fully funds the Veterans Benefits Management System
at $155 million and the Veterans Claim Intake Program at $136.4
million.
{time} 1500
These two efforts should speed up the VA's efforts to take old claims
that are filed on paper and convert them into digital files that are
easily searchable by claims processors, thus speeding up the claims
process.
Second, we include a monthly reporting requirement every 30 days for
the VA to provide Congress with several statistics, such as the average
wait time at each regional office, rating inventory that has been
pending for 125 days, rating claims advocacy, and month-to-month
updates in changes in those statistics.
Third, we require a report on the VA's expedited claims initiative
that was announced just a few weeks ago. This report should give the
committee and the Congress insight into whether or not the Secretary's
new initiatives are having positive results.
Finally, the bill directs the VA and the Department of Defense toward
one integrated electronic health record system in bill language, and it
restricts the availability of funds for the development of a system
that meets the requirements of being single, joint, common, and
integrated with open architecture and is the sole system used by both
the Veterans Administration and the Department of Defense. This
initiative would ensure that veterans get their records to the VA
electronically, thus reducing the number of claims filed on paper and
speeding up the claims process.
Now, the committee's action--and I want to make this point clear--the
committee's action and this bill do not mandate the adoption of a
particular system, only that it be a single system that is used by both
Departments. I don't think that we should get into the business of
picking the software, but I do believe that by mandating a single
system between the Department of Defense and the VA, that veteran
claims in the future will not continue to fall victim to the slow
inefficiencies that we're dealing with today.
Madam Chair, I believe that we have a strong, bipartisan bill that
supports our military, their families, and our veterans. I would hate
to see the hard work of our committee up-ended by contentious partisan
riders intended to serve in scoring political points instead of those
that serve our Nation. I also believe that the most important parts of
this bill are the resources and accountability provided to assist the
VA in tackling this outrageous claims backlog.
So I say to my colleagues that our committee strongly shares the deep
commitment of this body to fixing the claims backlog issue. We looked
at numerous approaches and further believe that our bill has found the
optimal approach in dealing with this pressing concern of our veterans.
Before I close, Madam Chair, I would like to recognize the staff for
all of the hard work and time that they've put into this bill. From the
minority committee staff, I would like to thank Matt Washington, as
well as Michael Reed and Adam McCombs from my personal staff. From the
majority committee staff, I would like to thank Donna Shabazz, Sue
Quantius, Sarah Young, and Tracey Russell.
I would also like to thank Mrs. Lowey and Mr. Rogers, the chairman
and the ranking member, who served so valiantly and who are so
diligently trying to seek the well-being of our servicemen and -women,
their families, and our veterans.
At this time, Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, the House budget that we adopted set a
total spending limit of $967 billion in the 3 years that the
Republicans have had the majority in the House and the leadership of
Chairman Hal Rogers of Kentucky. For the first time since
[[Page H3052]]
World War II, we have reduced annual spending from year to year, each
year, under Chairman Rogers' leadership.
It's also, I think, important for the country to know that one of the
first and most important responsibilities of the chairman of the full
committee is to take that total spending number that's given to us by
Chairman Ryan's Budget Committee, that $967 billion--Chairman Rogers,
one of his first responsibilities is to take that $967 billion and use
his best judgment to allocate or divide that money among the
subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee. And it's a real tribute
to this good man's commitment, a demonstration of his commitment to our
men and women in uniform, a vivid illustration of the bipartisan nature
of this bill, that with the help of Ranking Member Lowey, that Chairman
Rogers gave this subcommittee for military construction and VA
allocation that enabled us to fully fund the request to the military
and the Veterans Affairs.
It is my privilege now, Madam Chairman, to recognize the
distinguished chairman of the full committee, Hal Rogers of Kentucky,
who has done so much to save our taxpayers' hard-earned dollars, and do
everything that can be done to help support our men and women in
uniform, and yield him as much time as he may consume.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman for the
generous introduction.
I rise in support of this, the first of 12 appropriations bills that
I hope to bring to the floor under regular order. Although we received
the President's budget nearly 2 months beyond the deadline, I have
every intention of drafting and considering all 12 appropriations
measures in a timely fashion and in the traditional open process that
allows all Members to have their say in how taxpayer dollars should be
spent.
As we kick off the appropriations season on the floor today, we face
some of the most challenging circumstances in recent memory--a tardy
Presidential budget, a divided Congress, the ham-handed cuts of
sequestration, and historically low funding levels.
Given our tight budget, my committee has and will continue to
prioritize funding in areas of the highest national need--our security
and enforcement of law. However, virtually all areas of the government
will face cuts this year, including critical national security
programs.
Clearly, this is an austere budget year, to put it mildly. Our top
line number is severely low and billions apart from the Senate's
number. It is my sincere hope that there will soon be a budget
compromise that will undo the harmful sequestration law and give us a
single common top line allocation that we can work with the Senate to
pass all of the funding of the government.
In spite of all this, I want to reiterate my commitment to regular
order. This is not a pie-in-the-sky endeavor. It's what our Founding
Fathers wanted and directed in the Constitution. Under regular order,
each of my esteemed colleagues in this body will have their chance to
put their stamp on this bill, to have their voices heard and
represented on these must-pass bills.
We have a lot of work to do in a very limited amount of time, so I
suggest we get down to it. Today, we are considering the Military
Construction and VA bill, a truly bipartisan effort that this entire
body can and should support.
This bill funds critical Department of Defense infrastructure that
gives our men and women in uniform the quality of life they deserve,
including hospitals, schools, and family housing. This bill also
includes $63.1 billion to provide our veterans with the benefits and
care they've earned for their service.
Notably, we support medical treatment for 6.5 million veterans,
including funding for traumatic brain injury treatment, suicide
prevention, and important mental health care programs.
This bill also addresses two of the VA's biggest problems, Madam
Chairman--the disgraceful disability claims backlog and the lack of a
seamless coordinated Department of Defense-Veterans electronic health
record system.
{time} 1510
The bill includes funding that will jump-start efforts to clean up
the backlog and force DOD and VA to get moving on a system that should
have been in place years ago.
But this is not the easiest of budget times. While most of the
funding in this bill is not subject to sequestration, we could not in
good conscience let a single dollar in this bill go to waste. Every
nickel and dime appropriated was carefully assessed to ensure these
funds are used properly, efficiently and responsibly.
We took the difficult but responsible step to reduce military
construction funding to offset the increases in VA spending, but we
made these reductions without affecting military readiness or
effectiveness. To make sure that our careful work in this bill does not
go to waste, we've implemented strict oversight protocols, and we have
included certain benchmarks to help guarantee that disability claims
are not piling up again and that we aren't throwing away precious
taxpayer dollars as we try to get this DOD-VA electronic health records
system up and running.
Before concluding, Madam Chairman, I would like to spend a half-
minute here thanking the chairman of the MilCon Subcommittee on our
committee, John Culberson, for his time and attention to this bill and
for his dedication and perseverance, as well as to thank the work of
the ranking member, Mr. Bishop. These two gentlemen of the House,
dedicated appropriators, have spent untold hours working with each
other to try to come to agreement on the items in this bill. It has
worked, and it is a good example, perhaps the best I can think of, in
which we see that bipartisanship in support of our military and our
veterans takes place. So I want to congratulate Mr. Culberson and Mr.
Bishop for a job well done, and we thank you for your bipartisanship.
Madam Chairman, I think this bill is one that Members on both sides
of the aisle can wholeheartedly support to keep our military in
fighting form and to give our veterans the benefits that they have so
sincerely earned, many of them in the loss of limb, some in the loss of
life. So I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. At this time, I yield 3 minutes to the ranking
member of the Appropriations Committee, who, along with the entire
leadership and Members on this side of the aisle, is committed to this
bipartisan work product in support of our military construction needs
and our veterans, the distinguished gentlelady from New York (Mrs.
Lowey).
Mrs. LOWEY. I would like to thank distinguished Ranking Member
Bishop. I would like to thank Chairman Culberson. I would like to thank
Chairman Rogers. I would like to thank all of the outstanding staffs
for putting together a really good bipartisan bill. It's an important
bill, and I know how hard you worked together to produce a really good
product, and we thank you.
This bill does represent a reasonable approach and continues a long
commitment to our veterans and our military facilities. It continues
the bipartisan tradition of providing funding levels that Members on
both sides of the aisle could agree are appropriate while avoiding
contentious legislative riders that complicate passage.
However, the Republican majority's refusal to go to conference to
forge a bipartisan agreement on the budget resolution is really
unacceptable. This imperils this year's appropriations process, making
it nearly impossible to move all 12 bills. Instead, it is likely that
we will consider in the full House only a few bills with reasonable
allocations, including MilCon-VA, while others are left in limbo
indefinitely until we pass a continuing resolution.
I am optimistic that this bill has a good chance of enactment as long
as we don't attach any controversial riders, but other important
priorities will assuredly suffer. While veterans programs are exempt
from sequestration, $73.3 billion provided in the bill largely mirrors
the administration's request and does not reflect sequestration even
for the portions of the bill that were not exempted. In fact, the
differences between this bill and the administration's request are
relatively small: an adjustment of $1.05 billion, due to bid savings
and other project adjustments, and the misguided decision not to
provide $185 million for the requested 2014 civilian pay raise.
If the MilCon-VA bill assumes the sequester cuts have been replaced,
why
[[Page H3053]]
can't we join with the administration and the Senate and assume it will
be addressed for the other bills?
On a positive note, this bill would better support our female
veterans who are struggling with the trauma of sexual assault and would
support those in need of prosthetics. It also continues to focus on the
mental health needs of our Nation's veterans.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I yield the gentlelady an additional 1 minute.
Mrs. LOWEY. The bill, which takes several steps related to the
shameful veterans claims backlog, would hire 94 additional claims
processors; provide $155 million for the Veterans Benefit Management
System and $136 million for the Veterans Claims Intake Program in order
to significantly speed up claims by converting old paper files into
digital files; restrict funds to force DOD and the VA to use a seamless
electronic health records system; and require the VA to provide monthly
reports.
We cannot accept any further excuses. The VA must make progress. This
is a good bill. I hope we can avoid adding contentious and unnecessary
legislative riders today, and I hope that the chairman from Kentucky's
optimism about sequestration reflected in the allocation for the first
bill is proven true.
I commend the chairman and ranking member once again on their good
work, and I urge your support.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry).
Mr. FORTENBERRY. First, let me thank Chairman Culberson for his
stalwart leadership on this important bipartisan measure. Let me also
thank Ranking Member Bishop as well for his leadership and support.
Madam Chair, many people in America want Congress to find
constructive solutions, seek good answers, overcome problems, and say
``yes'' to our essential needs. While Congress is stuck on certain
areas, this bill takes a bipartisan step forward in defense of our
country and in service to our veterans. This bill says ``yes'' in a
bipartisan manner to meet our Department of Defense infrastructure
needs and to properly care for those who have served us so well, our
veterans.
The bill spends a little bit less than the President asked for and a
little bit more than last year. Projects that are not justifiable are
removed, but others receive increases. The bill also pushes forward, as
we've heard, a seamless transition of care when our warfighters leave
active service by integrating their medical records and expeditiously
dealing with a very serious claims backlog. I am pleased as well that
my colleagues have continued funding for the headquarters construction
of the United States Strategic Command. STRATCOM is an important force
in protecting our Nation from nuclear threats.
Madam Chair, we need to continue to work hard and smart to reduce
budgets while also delivering essential policy services that are
necessary and fundamental at the Federal level. I think that this bill
accomplishes that goal. I think we also accomplish the goal of doing
what is just and what is right.
{time} 1520
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member of the
Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security and a distinguished
member of the MilCon-VA Subcommittee.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank my colleague for yielding.
Madam Chairman, I rise today in qualified support of the fiscal year
2014 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill.
I want to thank Chairman Culberson and Ranking Member Bishop for
their leadership and commend my colleagues on the Appropriations
Committee for a cordial, timely, and deliberative process.
I have to caution, however, that this bill's relatively generous
allocation must be viewed in the context of the overall fiscal year
2014 appropriations process. To get workable allocations for the two
appropriations bills we will consider this week, the majority has
drastically underfunded other critical appropriations bills, from
educational research, to health care, to repairing and maintaining our
Nation's crumbling infrastructure.
Earlier today, I joined with many colleagues to vote against the rule
providing for consideration of the bill before us, because the
resolution requires this body to carry out the fiscal year 2014
appropriations process within the framework of the so-called ``Ryan
budget,'' which doubles down on sequestration and will have devastating
consequences as our Nation continues its economic recovery.
So the overall appropriations process is in deep trouble. But the
bill before us gives the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs
adequate resources to address several critical challenges faced by our
military and veterans community. I'm particularly pleased the bill
would fully fund the President's request for military construction
projects at Fort Bragg, which is adjacent to my district.
The bill also provides critical funding for the Department of
Veterans Affairs to assure that those who have served our country
receive the benefits and services that they need and deserve. Our
subcommittee paid particular heed to the ongoing disabilities claims
backlog issue at the VA. The bill provides nearly $300 million for the
continued implementation of electronic management systems and improved
processing of both new and existing claims.
I'm also pleased the bill provides robust funding for medical and
prosthetic research, suicide prevention and mental health treatment,
addressing unacceptable levels of unemployment among veterans, and
pressing to end veteran homelessness.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. These are priorities, and this is a bill
I hope all of our colleagues will be able to support.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, at this time I yield 2 minutes to a
distinguished and valued member of our subcommittee, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart).
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong support of
the fiscal year 2014 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and
Related Agencies Appropriations bill.
Let me first of all thank Chairman Culberson and your staff. You've
done a spectacular job. This has been among the most inclusive
processes that I've ever been involved with. So thank you.
Madam Chairwoman, this bill includes almost $10 billion for critical
military construction projects, as well as imperative funding for the
NATO Security Investment Fund.
Our bill fully funds the fiscal year 2014 National Guard and Reserve
construction programs as requested, by the way, as well as fully
funding the family housing construction program.
The bill also includes $55.6 billion in fiscal year 2015 advanced
appropriations for VA medical care, the level approved in the House
budget resolution and the same, by the way, as was actually requested.
This bill provides targeted funding for various information
technology programs to ensure that the VA can tackle the enormous
backlog of compensation claims, something that this chair and Chairman
Rogers have already talked about.
These funds will provide the resources that the VA indicates it
requires to meet its goals of ending the disability compensation claims
backlog by 2015.
Additionally, it includes stringent reporting requirements for the VA
so the Members of Congress and the American people can have direct
oversight on the progress of the claims backlog.
The committee also included report language to address the issue of
prescription painkiller abuse.
This important bill also funds critical programs like the American
Battle Monuments Commission, the United States Court of Appeals for
Veteran Claims, as well as cemeterial expenses, including Arlington
National Cemetery.
So I thank the chairman and urge my colleagues to join me in
supporting this very important piece of legislation that has been done
in a very bipartisan way.
[[Page H3054]]
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar), a distinguished member of the
Appropriations Committee.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I've been concerned also, as my ranking
member and as the chairman also of the committee, the gentleman from
Texas, about the claims backlog that exists at the VA.
Veterans of all generations deserve a benefits system that is easy to
navigate and responsive to their needs. Currently, the VA is still
experiencing a huge backlog in processing claims. As of May 2013, the
VA claims totaled 843,000, with more than two-thirds that have been
pending over 125 days.
Currently, in my congressional district, we're working with over 205
veterans: 60 them are from Laredo, 30 of them from the valley, and 115
in San Antonio with outstanding claims with the VA that have been
unresolved for 18 to 24 months, which is unacceptable and shameful.
I am pleased that the chairman and the ranking member have worked in
a bipartisan manner to make sure the Veterans Benefits Administration
is able to support 20,851 claims processors.
Additionally, the bill includes the necessary funding so that old
claims filed on paper can be converted to digital files, making them
more accessible and researchable.
I also support the inclusion of the monthly reporting requirement of
the claims backlog, so that way we can put performance measures also to
make sure that we get rid of this backlog.
Finally, I know also my good friend will be having another amendment
that I support with him, which is that if the VA doesn't do its work, I
think some of those bureaucrats should have their pay cut; because if
the veterans are not getting their benefits, then I think that should
affect the bureaucrats also.
I want to the thank the chairman and the ranking member for all their
good work on this bipartisan bill, and I appreciate their efforts to
ensure that veterans receive their benefits.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, I yield myself just a moment to
particularly point out and thank my friend from Laredo.
Mr. Cuellar and I have worked together since 1986 in the Texas
Legislature. The people of the United States often read in the national
press that Democrats and Republicans don't get along. That's just
simply not true. Henry Cuellar and I have been the best of friends
since 1986. Mr. Bishop and I worked together beautifully on this
subcommittee. This bill is a great example of bipartisan cooperation,
and it's a privilege to work on this committee where we really don't
pay attention to party labels as we try to do what is best for the
country.
At this time, Madam Chairman, it's my privilege to yield 2 minutes to
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) for the purpose of a colloquy.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. First of all, I want to thank the chairman,
my colleague from Texas, for putting together this critical bill. I
know that Mr. Culberson has been a longtime advocate for the best care
possible for our Nation's veterans, and I thank the chairman of the
subcommittee for his continued leadership and, of course, that of the
ranking member, my Georgia colleague, Mr. Bishop.
Madam Chair, I rise today to bring attention to the recent tragic
events at the Atlanta VA Medical Center. According to an April report
by the inspector general and continued news stories, mismanagement and
lack of oversight at the Atlanta facility contributed to at least four
deaths. Additionally, the Atlanta VA Medical Center has admitted that
the combination of a large volume of patients and a lack of appropriate
tracking has led to patients ``slipping through the cracks.''
The mental health unit at the Atlanta VA Medical Center has been of
particular concern and is at the center of these recent tragedies.
Mental health is a critical component of care for our veterans, and as
our soldiers continue to return home from war, we must ensure that
they're receiving the attention and care that they deserve.
I would ask that as this bill moves forward, Madam Chair, to the
Senate and to conference, that the chairman and the ranking member join
me and the chairman of the authorizing committee to get answers from
the Department of Veterans Affairs as to why we have yet to see those
responsible held accountable and what changes the Atlanta VA Medical
Center is going to make.
And I ask that question of the subcommittee chair.
{time} 1530
Mr. CULBERSON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, I would say to the gentleman from
Georgia that both Mr. Bishop and I and the subcommittee are keenly
aware of these terrible tragedies in Atlanta and the very critical and
important inspector general's report, and we intend to aggressively
pursue the recommendations in the inspector general's report and work
with you and the delegation from Georgia to ensure that this does not
happen again.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Chair, I thank the chairman.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. May I inquire how much time remains on our
side?
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia has 12\1/2\ minutes remaining.
The gentleman from Texas has 6 minutes remaining.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. At this time I'm delighted to yield 2 minutes
to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the distinguished ranking member and
distinguished chairman, and I know that they have worked
collaboratively together on behalf of our veterans, so I rise in
recognition of the important work that they have done and to compliment
them for the work that involves fully funding the military construction
and certainly something that rises every moment that I'm amongst
veterans. Just recently, as I was in a town hall meeting and had the
Veterans Affairs Department represented, the question came up about
benefits. I was glad that the initiative that has been offered, all of
us embraced it. All of us have been fighting to stop this backlog and
to move this backlog forward. And now we see the funding of this
initiative, and it is most important.
I am also glad that there's a focus on jobs for veterans. I will say
that we need to do more, because when you talk to our veterans of
various wars, particularly the Vietnam War, there's always the sense of
lack of employment, along with those who come in from Iraq and
Afghanistan.
But I do want to raise the point of what we have deemed ourselves
into. We've deemed ourselves into a Ryan budget that causes a great
deal of suffering: a cap of $967 billion versus the mark of $1.58
billion that would be more helpful that was produced by the consensus
during the Budget Control Act. Basically, we are ignoring the suffering
of the middle class, and we're allowing the sequestration to run
rampant over those who are in need.
I can particularly say to you that teachers and schools in Texas are
losing $67.8 million in education for children with disabilities; $51
million for 620 teachers. Head Start is going kaput with 4,800 children
losing their seat. Military readiness is being challenged in Texas with
52,000 civilian Department of Defense employees furloughed. In law
enforcement and public safety funds, Texas will lose $1.103 million.
And then when we look at the United States, we go far and beyond
that. We're looking at the fires in the West, the devastation of what
happened in West, Texas, and the tornadoes. And we see, for the Coast
Guard, there's a 25 percent reduction. This is a crisis.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30
seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. This is a crisis not only in the making, Madam
Chair, but it is a crisis that is going forward. Whether we're talking
about the National Institutes of Health or the Centers for Disease
Control, my main concern is that the middle class is suffering from the
sequestration.
The Ryan budget cannot be deemed the appropriations cap as we go
through this process of appropriations. There is a desperate need of
responding to the middle class, allowing for the continuation of job
creation, making
[[Page H3055]]
sure that we do not lose 125,000 in section 8 vouchers, rural rental
assistance, or the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.
NEGATIVE IMPaCT OF SEQUESTration
The middle class are suffering and they need help. We need to stop
the sequestration--now.
In Texas--
The state of Texas will greatly be affected by sequestration in the
following ways:
Teachers and Schools: Texas will lose approximately $67.8 million for
primary and secondary education, putting around 930 teacher and aide
jobs at risk. In addition about 172,000 fewer students would be served
and approximately 280 fewer schools would receive funding.
Education for Children With Disabilities: Texas will lose
approximately $51 million for about 620 teachers, aides, and staff who
help children with disabilities.
Head Start: Head Start and Early Head Start services would be
eliminated for approximately 4,800 children in Texas, reducing access
to critical early education.
Military Readiness: In Texas, approximately 52,000 civilian
Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay
by around $274.8 million in total.
Law Enforcement and Public Safety Funds: Texas will lose about
$1,103,000 in Justice Assistance Grants that support law enforcement,
prosecution and courts, crime prevention and education, corrections and
community corrections, drug treatment and enforcement, and crime victim
and witness initiatives.
Job Search Assistance: Around 83,750 fewer Texans will get the help
and skills they need to find employment as Texas will lose about
$2,263,000 for job search assistance, referral, and placement, meaning.
Child Care: Up to 2300 disadvantaged and vulnerable children could
lose access to child care, which is also essential for working parents
to hold down a job.
Vaccines for Children: In Texas around 9,730 fewer children will
receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus,
whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B due to reduced funding for
vaccinations.
Violence Against Women Grants: Texas could lose up to $543,000 to
provide services to victims of domestic violence, resulting in up to
2,100 fewer victims being served.
Public Health: Texas will lose approximately $2,402,000 to help
upgrade its ability to respond to public health threats including
infectious diseases, natural disasters, and biological, chemical,
nuclear, and radiological events. In addition, Texas will lose about
$6,750,000 in grants to help prevent and treat substance abuse,
resulting in around 2,800 fewer admissions to substance abuse programs.
And the Texas State Department of Public Health will lose about
$1,146,000 resulting in around 28,600 fewer HIV tests.
In the U.S.A.--
Across-the-board cuts from sequestration began in March, and the
detrimental effects are gradually coming into focus. These cuts are
diminishing the effectiveness of federal initiatives, with a direct
impact on the lives of virtually every American. Highlights of specific
cuts to vital services and investments that have been documented to
date are outlined below.
Public Safety
1. Wildland Fire: U.S. Forest Service understaffed and under-equipped
for fire season with 500 fewer firefighters, 50-70 fewer fire engines,
and 2 fewer aircraft.
2. U.S. Coast Guard: 25 percent reduction in training, maintenance
and drug interdiction patrols.
3. Extreme Weather: A 3-6 month delay in NOAA's weather satellite
launch will increase costs and risk of inaccurate forecasts.
4. U.S. Park Police: Up to 10,640 combined furlough days for officers
leave national landmarks understaffed and increase response time for
emergencies.
5. Food Safety: Fewer FDA inspections, increasing risk of food-borne
illness, even as Congress demands stricter food safety standards.
Health
1. National Institutes of Health:
$1.5 billion cut from life-saving research projects,
Estimated loss of more than 20,000 jobs and $3 billion in economic
activity.
2. Centers for Disease Control: $285 million cut from research to
detect and combat disease outbreaks, facilitate immunizations, plan for
public health emergencies, conduct HIV/AIDS tests, and more.
3. Environmental Health: More than 3,200 furloughs and layoffs delay
cleanup from nuclear weapons development in Washington, New Mexico,
Kentucky and Tennessee.
Housing
1. Section 8 Vouchers:
a. 125,000 fewer vouchers.
b. 750 Public Housing Authorities terminating tenants within 3
months.
2. Rural rental assistance: 15,000 aid recipients affected, usually
elderly, disabled, or single mothers.
3. Community Development Financial Institutions Fund: Up to thousands
fewer units of affordable housing built.
Education and Science
1. Head Start and Early Head Start:
70,000 children will lose access,
Thousands of layoffs of teachers and aides.
2. Impact Aid: $68 million cut from schools that educate 950,000
children of military members, or who are otherwise federally connected,
resulting in layoffs and larger class sizes.
3. Research: 1,000 fewer National Science Foundation grants and
thousands fewer jobs.
National Security
1. Defense: $37 billion in FY13, largest drag on broader economic
growth, includes:
a. Cancelled deployment of aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman,
b. Cancelled Army training rotations,
c. Grounded Air Force squadrons,
d. 800,000 civilian employees facing furloughs of 11 days, and
e. Reduced equipment and facilities maintenance.
2. Defense Health Program (DHP): $2.6 billion reduction will result
in TRICARE funding being exhausted by August and delayed payments of
TRICARE contracts.
The Judiciary and Legal Representation for Low-Income
Americans
1. Public defenders: Up to 15 furlough days per public defender will
delay trials and force courts to hire private attorneys for defendants
at $125 per hour.
2. Judiciary: 20 percent reduction in electronic monitoring & drug
testing of offenders.
3. Violence Against Women Grants: $20 million cut from grants for
prevention and prosecution of violence against women.
Senior Citizens
1. Senior nutrition: 4 million fewer meals for low-income seniors.
2. Social Security Administration:
3,300 additional staff lost, increasing backlog of disability claims
by nearly 100,000 and increasing processing time of claims to more than
one year.
82,000 fewer continuing disability reviews, which save $9 for every
$1 spent.
3. Medicare: Thousands of cancer patients turned away by cancer
clinics due to cuts in provider payments.
Commerce and Economic Security
Small Business: lending guarantees drastically reduced.
Oil and gas drilling permits: 300-400 fewer oil & gas drilling
permits processed, 150 fewer leases issued, resulting in $150 million
loss to taxpayers.
Customs Border Protection: Wait times at land border ports of entry
up to 6x longer.
National Parks and public lands: Reductions in 900 permanent and
1,000 seasonal positions will reduce public access and result in
hundreds fewer trained firefighters.
Unemployment compensation: 10.7 percent cut in weekly benefits.
Fiscal Malpractice Results in Job Loss and Stunted Economic Growth--
The Federal Reserve announced, ``Fiscal policy is restraining economic
growth.'' The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and independent
economists forecast sequestration costing 750,000 jobs and a 0.6
percent reduction in growth in 2013. While many agree we can find
additional spending cuts in the long-term, such large cuts now--instead
of phasing them in responsibly when the economy is stronger--amounts to
fiscal malpractice.
Squeaky Wheel ``Fixes'' Exacerbate Long-Term Problems--Congress acted
to prevent furloughs of food inspectors and air traffic controllers,
and departments and agencies are using limited transfer and
reprogramming authority to mitigate other immediate problems caused by
cuts. These gimmicks merely kick the can down the road, sparing short-
term pain through one-time savings that delay long-term needs like
construction, maintenance, and training.
These expenses will have to be repaid in future years even as the
sequester cuts deeper into the overall budgets for these agencies.
While industries' bottom lines were protected from flight delays and
fewer meat inspections, infrastructure at airports will suffer this
year, increasing needs in the future, and this year's fixes do nothing
to address the cuts required of these same programs in the coming
years.
Responsible Fix is Needed--In just two short months of sequester
cuts, the impacts are hurting our economy, increasing financial burdens
on families, and forcing the federal government to make false choices
between essential services. We simply cannot afford 10 years of job
loss and stunted economic growth. Congress must replace these mindless
cuts with a sensible and balanced plan to promote growth and reduce the
long-term deficit and debt.
Mr. CULBERSON. I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H3056]]
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Farr), the ranking member of the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Agriculture and a valuable member of the Subcommittee
on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs.
Mr. FARR. Madam Chair, I thank Ranking Member Bishop for that kind
introduction. And, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your leadership on
this committee. I have been on this committee since I've been on the
Committee on Appropriations, and I'm really excited about the ability
for us to respond to the quality of life for people in uniform and
their families.
This is the committee that helps the families with housing, with
health care, with child care, with the benefit packages that the
military allows. It's very, very important because we also have the
responsibility for the Department of Veterans Affairs. It's the only
one-stop in an entire Congress, because the Senate has no comparable
committee where both the responsibility of the Active Duty and the
veterans are in one place. You know, in this country you can't be a
veteran unless you've first been a member of the Department of Defense,
so it's a continuum of care.
If you add up the budgets of both the Defense Department and veterans
and our military construction, it's the largest of all the budgets that
the appropriations does, so it is important that we pay a lot of
attention to detail. We have a lot of issues dealing with not only
Active Duty military and their living conditions, but also conditions,
serious conditions with veterans and the backlog that veterans have.
I think we're on the road to solving that problem. California has the
worst backlog in the office in Oakland, but the Secretary has been
paying a lot of attention and putting a lot of technology into it. I
want to commend the chair and the ranking member of this committee for
the leadership they've provided in trying to solve it.
I also want to commend, I think the Department of Defense has the
best capital outlay program. It's called the FYDP. It stands for fiscal
year improvement plan or something like that. What it does, all of the
services, whenever they need anything constructed, they have to go in
and compete against each other, and so it's on merit. Then the project
with the most merit moves to the top of the list. We have been able to
take care of that in a very responsible way.
Mr. CULBERSON. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for the purpose of
a colloquy.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I thank Mr. Bishop for his courtesy. I
also would really like to thank you, Chairman Culberson, for your
excellent work on this bill. This is a massive undertaking.
One aspect here that I want to focus on is the policies. The Pentagon
has set its sight on good policies. Not only do our troops benefit, but
so does the American public. Nothing demonstrates this more than the
recent Defense Department's Unified Facilities Criteria, UFC 2-100-01.
Behind this strange-sounding title is the Pentagon's installation
master planning document for over 500 installations around the world,
four times the amount of space of Walmarts. This document, updated for
the very first time since 1986, has the potential to positively impact
every military servicemember and their families by making our military
bases more welcoming, more connected, and more livable.
However, the UFC is only guidance for each branch of the military. In
order for it to have a positive and transformative impact, we will need
to see strong implementation guidance from each service branch. I
believe this is a priority for the Department of Defense. Delay and
deviation would only serve to harm or set back our military families
who deserve nothing but the best.
As such, I deeply appreciate the opportunity to work with the
chairman and ranking member to include language urging the Department
of Defense to provide an assessment of the progress and barriers to the
implementation of UFC 2-100-01.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I am happy to yield to the gentleman.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. The gentleman from Oregon raises a really
important issue that the subcommittee will look into and will work to
address in some way as we move through this process.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Terrific. Thank you very much.
{time} 1540
If I have time remaining, I was curious if the chairman of the
subcommittee feels comfortable with working with us to make some
progress on this implementation.
Mr. CULBERSON. Of course we will do all we can to work together.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. I really appreciate the opportunity to
work with you on this and look forward to making this progress for our
military families. Thank you very much.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, we have no further speakers on
this side.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, it's a pleasure to bring this bill to
the House and to recommend it to every Member of the House to support
this bipartisan bill to make sure that our men and women in uniform--as
my good friend, Sam Farr, said, this is such a privilege to be on this
committee, the only one in Congress that can ensure the quality of life
and peace of mind of our men and women in uniform and our men and women
who, once they've served our country, move into the VA system. And I
would urge the adoption of the bill by the Members of the House.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Madam Chair, Jeff Calaicovo is a military
veteran living with his loving wife in Ft. Lauderdale. He is an
American hero who received two Purple Hearts for his courage and
service during the Vietnam War. Jeff fought for, and suffered for this
country, spending five months in a burn ward as a result of his
exposure to Agent Orange.
Today, Jeff suffers from PTSD, loss of hearing and other medical
complications that should be covered by his veterans' benefits. But our
claims system failed him.
Jeff first initiated his claim in May 2011. Until his case was
brought to my office's attention, he had made little progress towards
receiving the benefits he deserves.
My staff worked with Jeff over many months so that he finally will
begin receiving his benefits after waiting nearly two years.
Sadly, Jeff's story is not unique. The average wait time for claims
processing is 292 days with some regional offices averaging 450 days.
Having just returned from visiting our service men and women in
Afghanistan, and as the mother of a Marine veteran, I know first-hand
the sacrifices our troops make for our freedoms. Our veterans have
fought for this country and it is time we fight for them.
That is why I have joined my colleagues in enacting a number of
measures that will help eliminate the veterans' claims backlog once and
for all, in H.R. 2216, the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2014.
These measures include finally requiring the DOD and the VA to move
towards one integrated electronic system, requiring more frequent
reporting to Congress on the status of claims processing, and boosting
VA funding to allow for 94 new claims processors to tackle head on the
disability claims backlog.
I am confident these new measure will put us on the road towards
eliminating an unacceptable problem that has neglected our America
heroes.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Chair, I rise today to express my strong
support for funding veterans' programs. However, I am very concerned
that this bill is part of a Republican budget that would shortchange
other critical priorities--like education, nutrition and housing
assistance, healthcare and medical research.
I voted in favor of H.R. 2216, the Military Construction--VA
Appropriations bill for FY 2014 because I believe it is critical that
we keep our promises to our veterans. Today's legislation provides
$157.8 billion for veterans' programs and military construction in FY
2014, including the over $73 billion in advance appropriations for
veterans' health care approved in last year's appropriations measure.
It also contains $55.6 billion in advance FY 2015 funding for VA
medical programs.
Among other critical priorities, it provides over $290 million to
help the VA eliminate the disability claims backlog by 2015, including
funding for the VA's paperless process claims system. It provides $344
million for the Pentagon and the VA to implement a joint integrated
electronic health records system. These funds are critical: the VA has
nearly
[[Page H3057]]
900,100 Pending disability claims and, of those, 72 percent have been
pending for over 125 days. That is unacceptable; the backlog is causing
serious hardships for veterans and families throughout our country, and
it is imperative that we work with the VA to ensure that the backlog is
eliminated and all claims are processed in a fair and timely manner.
While I am proud to support critical funding for those who served our
nation, I have serious concerns about the implications this bill
carries for the rest of the appropriations process. The Republican
Budget sets the lowest cap on discretionary spending in a decade. Non-
defense discretionary spending would be reduced even below the levels
required under the sequester. Because of those limits, the adequate
funding of this bill will result in inadequate funding of other
spending bills down the line. Those other bills fund national
priorities including education, nutrition and housing assistance, and
programs to spur job growth. We cannot afford to abandon those
important initiatives.
The White House warned, in its veto threat for this legislation, that
enacting this bill ``while adhering to the overall spending limits in
the House Budget's top line discretionary level for fiscal year (FY)
2014, would hurt our economy and require draconian cuts to middle-class
priorities.'' I couldn't agree more. We need to set a realistic
spending ceiling so that all of our national priorities receive
adequate funding.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment who has
caused it to be printed in the designated place in the Congressional
Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 2216
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 military
construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related
agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and
for other purposes, namely:
TITLE I
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Military Construction, Army
For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment
of temporary or permanent public works, military
installations, facilities, and real property for the Army as
currently authorized by law, including personnel in the Army
Corps of Engineers and other personal services necessary for
the purposes of this appropriation, and for construction and
operation of facilities in support of the functions of the
Commander in Chief, $1,099,875,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2018: Provided, That of this amount, not to
exceed $64,575,000 shall be available for study, planning,
design, architect and engineer services, and host nation
support, as authorized by law, unless the Secretary of Army
determines that additional obligations are necessary for such
purposes and notifies the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress of the determination and the reasons
therefor.
Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps
For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment
of temporary or permanent public works, naval installations,
facilities, and real property for the Navy and Marine Corps
as currently authorized by law, including personnel in the
Naval Facilities Engineering Command and other personal
services necessary for the purposes of this appropriation,
$1,616,281,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018:
Provided, That of this amount, not to exceed $89,830,000
shall be available for study, planning, design, and architect
and engineer services, as authorized by law, unless the
Secretary of Navy determines that additional obligations are
necessary for such purposes and notifies the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of the
determination and the reasons therefor.
Military Construction, Air Force
For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment
of temporary or permanent public works, military
installations, facilities, and real property for the Air
Force as currently authorized by law, $1,127,273,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That of
this amount, not to exceed $11,314,000 shall be available for
study, planning, design, and architect and engineer services,
as authorized by law, unless the Secretary of Air Force
determines that additional obligations are necessary for such
purposes and notifies the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress of the determination and the reasons
therefor.
Military Construction, Defense-Wide
(including transfer of funds)
For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment
of temporary or permanent public works, installations,
facilities, and real property for activities and agencies of
the Department of Defense (other than the military
departments), as currently authorized by law, $3,707,923,000,
to remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That
such amounts of this appropriation as may be determined by
the Secretary of Defense may be transferred to such
appropriations of the Department of Defense available for
military construction or family housing as the Secretary may
designate, to be merged with and to be available for the same
purposes, and for the same time period, as the appropriation
or fund to which transferred: Provided further, That of the
amount appropriated, not to exceed $237,838,000 shall be
available for study, planning, design, and architect and
engineer services, as authorized by law, unless the Secretary
of Defense determines that additional obligations are
necessary for such purposes and notifies the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of the
determination and the reasons therefor: Provided further,
That of the amount appropriated, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, $38,513,000 shall be available for payments
to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for the planning,
design, and construction of a new North Atlantic Treaty
Organization headquarters.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Page 4, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $38,513,000)''
Page 5, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $38,513,000)''.
Page 63, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $38,513,000)''.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, my amendment would zero out our
contribution to the brand-new NATO headquarters in Brussels and
transfer that amount, more than $38 million, to the spending reduction
account to help us deal with our debt.
This line item within the bill is the very definition of ridiculous.
The U.S. is furloughing civilian military personnel and sacrificing our
own military readiness here at home, policies with which I disagree.
And yet, here we are, sending millions of dollars overseas to build a
lavish new headquarters for the international bureaucrats in NATO.
Madam Chairman, the planned NATO headquarters is an unfortunate
example of excess and waste. While every NATO member-nation is cutting
back on overall spending, the new headquarters remains on track as a
monument to bureaucracy. In total, the building will cost well over $1
billion to build, and it's taken 13 years just to finalize the plans.
If we are serious about confronting our spending problem, we must
fundamentally re-evaluate our priorities. We don't need to help NATO
build a new headquarters. We need to ask what are we doing in NATO in
the first place. The Cold War is over. It's time to stop policing
Europe and start worrying about our deficit.
I encourage all Members to support this commonsense amendment to help
us reduce our spending and to pay off our unsustainable debt.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. I share my colleague from Georgia's passion and
commitment to reduce the deficit to avoid passing on this debt to our
children. This bill has bipartisan support. It has been put together
very carefully to ensure that we're supporting our men and women in
uniform, and I'm looking forward to finding ways to save money in other
parts of the appropriations bill and in the parts of the budget that
are actually, truly crushing our kids with debt and deficit.
It's the social safety net that has grown so tremendously that is
causing the greatest burden on our kids, the Social Security and
Medicare and Medicaid. The growth of these programs has been so
astronomical it's swallowing up almost all of our national income on an
annual basis. And that's where we need to focus our attention is saving
those programs from bankruptcy. In fact, that's where we will really
save the big money for our children in the future.
Medicare is in such dire straits that if you're 54 years of age or
younger, the Medicare hospital fund can only pay about 50 cents on the
dollar of the benefits that have been promised. So the
[[Page H3058]]
Medicare program, for all intents and purposes, for people that are 54
years of age or younger, is bankrupt.
And the Social Security program, if you're 47 years of age or
younger, that program is bankrupt because it can only pay about 60
cents on the dollar.
So we've got to, as a Congress, in order to save our Nation from
bankruptcy, to save our kids from crushing levels of taxation, to
prevent this mountain of debt from being passed on to our children,
save Medicare and Social Security from bankruptcy. And that's what
Congressman Ryan, chairman of the Budget Committee is working on.
Congressman Sam Johnson from the Ways and Means Committee is working on
legislation to save Social Security, and that's where we're going to
save the big money.
On things like NATO, we have over 600,000 troops in Europe. We have
127 military installations. I am no fan of the United Nations, but NATO
has served a vital role since the end of World War II in preserving the
peace in Europe. We've expanded NATO membership now to the former
countries of Eastern Europe that were behind the Iron Curtain.
It was NATO and the leadership of President Ronald Reagan and the
resolute courage of our men and women in uniform that led to the fall
of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Iron Curtain. But for NATO,
but for that strategic alliance, we may still be facing Communist
Russia. Today the Soviet Union is gone, the Iron Curtain is gone, and
many of those nations that were once in the Soviet Bloc are members of
NATO.
So with great respect for my colleague from Georgia and his
conservative commitment to balance the budget, let us focus on saving
Social Security and Medicare from bankruptcy, first and foremost, as
the most effective, long-term way to save the Nation from bankruptcy
and to get us back on track to a balanced budget.
Look for other opportunities to save money in our multiple
appropriations bills that are coming up, but not at the expense of a
great strategic alliance that has served this Nation well since the end
of World War II.
I'd urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I'd like to join my distinguished chair in
opposition to this amendment.
I certainly appreciate and understand the gentleman from Georgia's
commitment to reducing the deficit. The deficit is something that is
undermining the economic foundation of this Nation. It is like a cancer
that is eating away at us, and we have to do all that we can to reduce
that deficit and get us on track to a balanced budget.
However, I suspect that this amendment, while well intentioned, may
be penny-wise and pound-foolish because NATO, this account from which
these funds will be taken, supports a strategic alliance that has
helped to protect the American people.
Just over the last decade, NATO has been our strategic partner in the
war against terrorism in Iraq and in Afghanistan and in our efforts to
protect the American people and to protect us abroad.
{time} 1550
We simply cannot afford to turn our backs on our allies who have
stuck with us and who have supported us in our efforts to protect this
world from the bad actors in the war against terrorism. And as a result
of that, I reluctantly oppose the gentleman's amendment, while
understanding and commending him for his commitment toward deficit
reduction.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Military Construction, Army National Guard
For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation,
and conversion of facilities for the training and
administration of the Army National Guard, and contributions
therefor, as authorized by law, $315,815,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That of the
amount appropriated, not to exceed $24,005,000 shall be
available for study, planning, design, and architect and
engineer services, as authorized by law, unless the Director
of the Army National Guard determines that additional
obligations are necessary for such purposes and notifies the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of
the determination and the reasons therefor.
Military Construction, Air National Guard
For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation,
and conversion of facilities for the training and
administration of the Air National Guard, and contributions
therefor, as authorized by law, $107,800,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That of the
amount appropriated, not to exceed $13,400,000 shall be
available for study, planning, design, and architect and
engineer services, as authorized by law, unless the Director
of the Air National Guard determines that additional
obligations are necessary for such purposes and notifies the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of
the determination and the reasons therefor.
Military Construction, Army Reserve
For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation,
and conversion of facilities for the training and
administration of the Army Reserve as authorized by law,
$174,060,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018:
Provided, That of the amount appropriated, not to exceed
$14,212,000 shall be available for study, planning, design,
and architect and engineer services, as authorized by law,
unless the Chief of the Army Reserve determines that
additional obligations are necessary for such purposes and
notifies the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress of the determination and the reasons therefor.
Military Construction, Navy Reserve
For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation,
and conversion of facilities for the training and
administration of the reserve components of the Navy and
Marine Corps as authorized by law, $32,976,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That of the
amount appropriated, not to exceed $2,540,000 shall be
available for study, planning, design, and architect and
engineer services, as authorized by law, unless the Secretary
of Navy determines that additional obligations are necessary
for such purposes and notifies the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of the
determination and the reasons therefor.
Military Construction, Air Force Reserve
For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation,
and conversion of facilities for the training and
administration of the Air Force Reserve as authorized by law,
$45,659,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018:
Provided, That of the amount appropriated, not to exceed
$2,229,000 shall be available for study, planning, design,
and architect and engineer services, as authorized by law,
unless the Chief of the Air Force Reserve determines that
additional obligations are necessary for such purposes and
notifies the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress of the determination and the reasons therefor.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment Program
For the United States share of the cost of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program for
the acquisition and construction of military facilities and
installations (including international military headquarters)
and for related expenses for the collective defense of the
North Atlantic Treaty Area as authorized by section 2806 of
title 10, United States Code, and Military Construction
Authorization Acts, $199,700,000, to remain available until
expended.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Page 8, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
to $0)''.
Page 63, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $199,700,000)''.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. My amendment would totally zero out the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program and transfer
its nearly $200 million into the spending reduction account.
The world has changed dramatically since the creation of NATO. Its
mission, as stated by the first Secretary General, Lord Ismay, is ``to
keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.'' I have
a hard time seeing how this is relevant to our post-Soviet world and a
post-Cold War world.
[[Page H3059]]
In this modern age and in this time of domestic fiscal emergency, it
makes no sense for the United States to manage the defense of Europe
through NATO. And it certainly makes no sense for us to pay such a
large share of it. It's time for us to wind down our involvement with
NATO instead of making up new justifications for this defense warfare.
Madam Chair, our Nation is broke. We have an unsustainable debt.
We're spending money that's going to crush our children's future and
make their future much dimmer than it is today. We have to reallocate
our resources and put them towards what's going to deal with this
unsustainable debt. We've got to stop this out-of-control spending.
Both parties are guilty of doing so.
Though some would say nearly $200 million is just a paltry amount,
when our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are not getting the
finances that they need and when Americans are struggling just to make
ends meet and we have an economy that is really hurting and jobs are
not being created and students are not having jobs when they graduate
from college, we have to deal with this debt that's unsustainable. This
$200 million would be transferred into the spending reduction account
and help us to start--just a small start--to stop this out-of-control
spending. It's absolutely critical that we do so.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment
and move to strike the last word.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, I oppose this amendment because I
share the gentleman's concern about the debt and the deficit. As I
mentioned a moment ago, the way we're going to save the country from
bankruptcy and protect our kids from this crushing debt burden that
they're about to inherit to is rescue Social Security and Medicare from
their certain bankruptcy, which is just around the corner. The
Republican constitutional conservative majority of this House is
working hard to develop legislation to save those two programs from
bankruptcy. But this amendment would zero out the funding that the
Congress has invested in the acquisition and construction of military
facilities and installations for NATO.
NATO has been a vital part of our Nation's security since the end of
World War II. We have over 600,000 men and women in uniform in Europe
who depend on the resources that this Congress provides to them, in
part, through the work of NATO. We have 127 military installations in
Europe that depend, in part, on the work that is done through our
contribution to NATO.
If the gentleman offers an amendment later on, for example, on the
foreign operations part of the bill to cut funding for the United
Nations, I look forward to supporting that because I have no particular
love for the United Nations. They vote against us at every chance they
get. We contribute the majority of money that the United Nations
receives and they happily vote against us at every opportunity.
But when it comes to NATO, that's of strategic importance to the
security of the United States. And while I share the gentleman's
passion to cut the deficit and the debt, let's save it for cutting the
United Nations and foreign aid, other than for Israel. I'm wearing
proudly my pin of the two lone star States, the State of Texas and the
State of Israel. Except for our funding for the great State of Israel,
which we need to preserve and protect, I look forward to helping the
gentleman cut foreign aid and cut funding for the United Nations, but
not for NATO.
I urge the House to reject this amendment.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CULBERSON. I will happily yield to my friend from Georgia.
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I appreciate the comments from my dear friend
from Texas. He and I have been involved in trying to cut spending in
many ways for a long period of time. In fact, I have a freestanding
bill to zero out spending for the United Nations. I want to get the
U.N. out of the U.S. and the U.S. out of the U.N. And so that's to
come, I promise you. That will be coming. I'll give you that
opportunity.
And you're exactly right, Social Security and Medicare need to be
fixed so that our senior citizens and poor people have the proper help
that they need. And I'm all for that, too. But we've got to cut where
we can. I'm a marine. I was deployed to Afghanistan last year as a Navy
reservist. And I believe in a strong military. I believe in peace
through strength. And we've got to have the strongest military in the
world. I don't believe our military should ever be in a fair fight. We
need to be in a fight that's overwhelming.
But NATO is a relic of the Cold War. It's a relic that we need to
look at. And when we have such a huge debt--almost $17 trillion--we
need to cut wherever we can, whenever we can. I think it's extremely
important for us to reorder our priorities, particularly across the
world, and getting rid of this money for NATO is a way of doing that.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, reclaiming my time, the gentleman is
correct that $200 million is a lot of money, but we have to preserve
our investment in NATO. I would point out that the former Soviet Union
is sending submarines into the Gulf of Mexico. The former Soviet Union,
now Russia, is aggressively sending their strategic nuclear bombers
pushing up against the outer limits of our airspace around Guam and
around Alaska.
{time} 1600
So the Russians are no longer overtly and openly Communist, but they
are not necessarily our friends. They and the Communist Chinese are
aggressively attacking the United States in the cyberworld. If a state
of war could be declared in the cyberworld, a state of war already
exists. The Communist Chinese have already attacked us and are at war
with the United States over the Internet and over in Russia, as well.
They are not our friends. And we, of course, are going to look for
every opportunity to work together with them, but NATO is a vital part
of America's strategic security.
I urge defeat of the gentleman's amendment and yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Again, I certainly understand and commend the
gentleman for his commitment and his passionate support for reduction
of the debt and the deficit, and I think that we on this side of the
aisle join him in that quest. However, again, I submit that this
amendment is probably one that is penny-wise and pound-foolish. We have
an alliance with the countries in NATO. Those countries have been our
staunch supporters in Operation Iraqi Freedom, our efforts in
Afghanistan; and, of course, each of those NATO countries has a
developing presence of al Qaeda just as we in the United States. So
it's very, very important that we maintain that strategic alliance.
This amendment would cut our share of the responsibility for NATO
which we share with the other member countries. And I think that since
we are deriving a mutual benefit that we should have a mutual
responsibility to support, this joint support, and I think that it
would not be wise for us to withdraw our aspect of that support. We
should assume our responsibility with our allies for the mutual support
and the mutual benefits.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
The amendment was rejected.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Family Housing Construction, Army
For expenses of family housing for the Army for
construction, including acquisition, replacement, addition,
expansion, extension, and alteration, as authorized by law,
$44,008,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018.
Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Army
For expenses of family housing for the Army for operation
and maintenance, including debt payment, leasing, minor
construction, principal and interest charges, and insurance
premiums, as authorized by law, $512,871,000.
[[Page H3060]]
Family Housing Construction, Navy and Marine Corps
For expenses of family housing for the Navy and Marine
Corps for construction, including acquisition, replacement,
addition, expansion, extension, and alteration, as authorized
by law, $73,407,000, to remain available until September 30,
2018.
Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps
For expenses of family housing for the Navy and Marine
Corps for operation and maintenance, including debt payment,
leasing, minor construction, principal and interest charges,
and insurance premiums, as authorized by law, $389,844,000.
Family Housing Construction, Air Force
For expenses of family housing for the Air Force for
construction, including acquisition, replacement, addition,
expansion, extension, and alteration, as authorized by law,
$76,360,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018.
Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
For expenses of family housing for the Air Force for
operation and maintenance, including debt payment, leasing,
minor construction, principal and interest charges, and
insurance premiums, as authorized by law, $388,598,000.
Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
For expenses of family housing for the activities and
agencies of the Department of Defense (other than the
military departments) for operation and maintenance, leasing,
and minor construction, as authorized by law, $55,845,000.
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund
For the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement
Fund, $1,780,000, to remain available until expended, for
family housing initiatives undertaken pursuant to section
2883 of title 10, United States Code, providing alternative
means of acquiring and improving military family housing and
supporting facilities.
Chemical Demilitarization Construction, Defense-Wide
For expenses of construction, not otherwise provided for,
necessary for the destruction of the United States stockpile
of lethal chemical agents and munitions in accordance with
section 1412 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act,
1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521), and for the destruction of other
chemical warfare materials that are not in the chemical
weapon stockpile, as currently authorized by law,
$122,536,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018,
which shall be only for the Assembled Chemical Weapons
Alternatives program.
Department of Defense Base Closure Account
For deposit into the Department of Defense Base Closure
Account, established by section 2906(a) of the Defense Base
Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (10 U.S.C. 2687 note), as
amended by section 2711 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112-239), $451,357,000,
to remain available until expended.
Administrative Provisions
Sec. 101. None of the funds made available in this title
shall be expended for payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee
contract for construction, where cost estimates exceed
$25,000, to be performed within the United States, except
Alaska, without the specific approval in writing of the
Secretary of Defense setting forth the reasons therefor.
Sec. 102. Funds made available in this title for
construction shall be available for hire of passenger motor
vehicles.
Sec. 103. Funds made available in this title for
construction may be used for advances to the Federal Highway
Administration, Department of Transportation, for the
construction of access roads as authorized by section 210 of
title 23, United States Code, when projects authorized
therein are certified as important to the national defense by
the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 104. None of the funds made available in this title
may be used to begin construction of new bases in the United
States for which specific appropriations have not been made.
Sec. 105. None of the funds made available in this title
shall be used for purchase of land or land easements in
excess of 100 percent of the value as determined by the Army
Corps of Engineers or the Naval Facilities Engineering
Command, except: (1) where there is a determination of value
by a Federal court; (2) purchases negotiated by the Attorney
General or the designee of the Attorney General; (3) where
the estimated value is less than $25,000; or (4) as otherwise
determined by the Secretary of Defense to be in the public
interest.
Sec. 106. None of the funds made available in this title
shall be used to: (1) acquire land; (2) provide for site
preparation; or (3) install utilities for any family housing,
except housing for which funds have been made available in
annual Acts making appropriations for military construction.
Sec. 107. None of the funds made available in this title
for minor construction may be used to transfer or relocate
any activity from one base or installation to another,
without prior notification to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.
Sec. 108. None of the funds made available in this title
may be used for the procurement of steel for any construction
project or activity for which American steel producers,
fabricators, and manufacturers have been denied the
opportunity to compete for such steel procurement.
Sec. 109. None of the funds available to the Department of
Defense for military construction or family housing during
the current fiscal year may be used to pay real property
taxes in any foreign nation.
Sec. 110. None of the funds made available in this title
may be used to initiate a new installation overseas without
prior notification to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress.
Sec. 111. None of the funds made available in this title
may be obligated for architect and engineer contracts
estimated by the Government to exceed $500,000 for projects
to be accomplished in Japan, in any North Atlantic Treaty
Organization member country, or in countries bordering the
Arabian Sea, unless such contracts are awarded to United
States firms or United States firms in joint venture with
host nation firms.
Sec. 112. None of the funds made available in this title
for military construction in the United States territories
and possessions in the Pacific and on Kwajalein Atoll, or in
countries within the United States Central Command Area of
Responsibility, may be used to award any contract estimated
by the Government to exceed $1,000,000 to a foreign
contractor: Provided, That this section shall not be
applicable to contract awards for which the lowest responsive
and responsible bid of a United States contractor exceeds the
lowest responsive and responsible bid of a foreign contractor
by greater than 20 percent: Provided further, That this
section shall not apply to contract awards for military
construction on Kwajalein Atoll for which the lowest
responsive and responsible bid is submitted by a Marshallese
contractor.
Sec. 113. The Secretary of Defense shall inform the
appropriate committees of both Houses of Congress, including
the Committees on Appropriations, of plans and scope of any
proposed military exercise involving United States personnel
30 days prior to its occurring, if amounts expended for
construction, either temporary or permanent, are anticipated
to exceed $100,000.
Sec. 114. Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense
for construction in prior years shall be available for
construction authorized for each such military department by
the authorizations enacted into law during the current
session of Congress.
Sec. 115. For military construction or family housing
projects that are being completed with funds otherwise
expired or lapsed for obligation, expired or lapsed funds may
be used to pay the cost of associated supervision,
inspection, overhead, engineering and design on those
projects and on subsequent claims, if any.
Sec. 116. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any
funds made available to a military department or defense
agency for the construction of military projects may be
obligated for a military construction project or contract, or
for any portion of such a project or contract, at any time
before the end of the fourth fiscal year after the fiscal
year for which funds for such project were made available, if
the funds obligated for such project: (1) are obligated from
funds available for military construction projects; and (2)
do not exceed the amount appropriated for such project, plus
any amount by which the cost of such project is increased
pursuant to law.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 117. In addition to any other transfer authority
available to the Department of Defense, proceeds deposited to
the Department of Defense Base Closure Account established by
section 207(a)(1) of the Defense Authorization Amendments and
Base Closure and Realignment Act (10 U.S.C. 2687 note)
pursuant to section 207(a)(2)(C) of such Act, may be
transferred to the account established by section 2906(a)(1)
of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (10
U.S.C. 2687 note), to be merged with, and to be available for
the same purposes and the same time period as that account.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 118. Subject to 30 days prior notification, or 14
days for a notification provided in an electronic medium
pursuant to sections 480 and 2883 of title 10, United States
Code, to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress, such additional amounts as may be determined by the
Secretary of Defense may be transferred to: (1) the
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund from
amounts appropriated for construction in ``Family Housing''
accounts, to be merged with and to be available for the same
purposes and for the same period of time as amounts
appropriated directly to the Fund; or (2) the Department of
Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund from
amounts appropriated for construction of military
unaccompanied housing in ``Military Construction'' accounts,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same period of time as amounts appropriated
directly to the Fund: Provided, That appropriations made
available to the Funds shall be available to cover the costs,
as defined in section 502(5) of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, of direct loans or loan guarantees issued by the
Department of Defense pursuant to the provisions of
subchapter IV of chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code,
[[Page H3061]]
pertaining to alternative means of acquiring and improving
military family housing, military unaccompanied housing, and
supporting facilities.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 119. In addition to any other transfer authority
available to the Department of Defense, amounts may be
transferred from the accounts established by sections
2906(a)(1) and 2906A(a)(1) of the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990 (10 U.S.C. 2687 note), to the fund
established by section 1013(d) of the Demonstration Cities
and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 3374) to
pay for expenses associated with the Homeowners Assistance
Program incurred under 42 U.S.C. 3374(a)(1)(A). Any amounts
transferred shall be merged with and be available for the
same purposes and for the same time period as the fund to
which transferred.
Sec. 120. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds made available in this title for operation and
maintenance of family housing shall be the exclusive source
of funds for repair and maintenance of all family housing
units, including general or flag officer quarters: Provided,
That not more than $35,000 per unit may be spent annually for
the maintenance and repair of any general or flag officer
quarters without 30 days prior notification, or 14 days for a
notification provided in an electronic medium pursuant to
sections 480 and 2883 of title 10, United States Code, to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress,
except that an after-the-fact notification shall be submitted
if the limitation is exceeded solely due to costs associated
with environmental remediation that could not be reasonably
anticipated at the time of the budget submission: Provided
further, That the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is
to report annually to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress all operation and maintenance
expenditures for each individual general or flag officer
quarters for the prior fiscal year.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Griffith of Virginia
Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 18, line 8, strike ``$35,000 per unit'' and insert
``$15,000 per unit''.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia. Madam Chair, this is a simple little
amendment. Currently, any expenditures for flag officers' general
housing on base has to be reported if there is an expenditure in excess
of $35,000. This lowers this number down to $15,000. It doesn't mean
they can't do the work. It just means that if they're going to spend
more than $15,000, they have to file a report with Congress before they
do so.
In this day and age where we're trying to make sure that we're
spending the taxpayers' money wisely, this seems to be appropriate. My
wife and I put a roof on our house a couple of years ago for about
$15,000. If they need more than that, that's fine, but make a report to
Congress. If there's something terribly wrong with the flooring and it
costs more than $15,000, they can report it. But most repairs to a home
can be done under $15,000.
This is just simply saying, hey, tell us what you're doing so that we
can have a more transparent expenditure and a more transparent
government.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. We'd be happy to accept it. I think it's more than
reasonable to report that you're going to expend more than $15,000.
Certainly, we want to help make sure that our officers have everything
that they need, but it would be nice to have them report it. And I
would be willing to accept the gentleman's amendment if my colleague
from Georgia is in agreement.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Griffith).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. FATTAH. I just wanted to come to the floor. I have had the
opportunity to serve on this subcommittee under the leadership of my
great friend from Texas and our ranking member, Congressman Bishop from
Georgia.
{time} 1610
The focus of the work is in a bipartisan process to come up with the
best possible set of proposals to move our country forward to respond
to our needs in terms of military construction.
I rise today, in particular, to thank the two leaders of the
subcommittee, and in particular, the chairman for his great leadership
on veterans benefits. I had breakfast with General Shinseki, and the
staff of the VA I think has been clearly moved by the ranking member
and the chairman's insistence that we deal with the challenges around
the backlog.
I want to particularly note the great work in this bill on
neuroscience and brain disorders. The chairman and I began some work
together in the CJS appropriations process a year and a half ago, which
has moved our country, I think, forward in terms of dealing with some
600 different brain diseases and disorders in a much more aggressive
fashion, and we compliment the President on the brain initiative. Right
here in this VA bill there are actual concrete steps being taken to
deal with posttraumatic stress, to deal with traumatic brain injury.
And I had a Nobel Prize laureate, who has done work on TV, really come
just to say that the focus we put on this has been so important because
some 40 percent of our injured veterans have some type of traumatic
brain injury or posttraumatic stress challenges that they face. I
visited the Intrepid Center.
So I didn't want this moment to pass without thanking the two leaders
of the subcommittee for their work. I could go on and on about the
Epilepsy Centers of Excellence, but I know I only have a few minutes,
so I'll cease here. I want to thank them, because it won't necessarily
be recorded. But in the lives of tens of thousands of our veterans and
servicemen, differences in their life circumstances will be made for
the positive because of what's in this bill. So thank you, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Sec. 121. Amounts contained in the Ford Island Improvement
Account established by subsection (h) of section 2814 of
title 10, United States Code, are appropriated and shall be
available until expended for the purposes specified in
subsection (i)(1) of such section or until transferred
pursuant to subsection (i)(3) of such section.
Sec. 122. None of the funds made available in this title,
or in any Act making appropriations for military construction
which remain available for obligation, may be obligated or
expended to carry out a military construction, land
acquisition, or family housing project at or for a military
installation approved for closure, or at a military
installation for the purposes of supporting a function that
has been approved for realignment to another installation, in
2005 under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of
1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C.
2687 note), unless such a project at a military installation
approved for realignment will support a continuing mission or
function at that installation or a new mission or function
that is planned for that installation, or unless the
Secretary of Defense certifies that the cost to the United
States of carrying out such project would be less than the
cost to the United States of cancelling such project, or if
the project is at an active component base that shall be
established as an enclave or in the case of projects having
multi-agency use, that another Government agency has
indicated it will assume ownership of the completed project.
The Secretary of Defense may not transfer funds made
available as a result of this limitation from any military
construction project, land acquisition, or family housing
project to another account or use such funds for another
purpose or project without the prior approval of the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. This
section shall not apply to military construction projects,
land acquisition, or family housing projects for which the
project is vital to the national security or the protection
of health, safety, or environmental quality: Provided, That
the Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional
defense committees within seven days of a decision to carry
out such a military construction project.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 123. During the 5-year period after appropriations
available in this Act to the Department of Defense for
military construction and family housing operation and
maintenance and construction have expired for obligation,
upon a determination that such appropriations will not be
necessary for the liquidation of obligations or for making
authorized adjustments to such appropriations for obligations
incurred during the period of availability of such
appropriations, unobligated balances of such appropriations
may be transferred into the appropriation ``Foreign Currency
Fluctuations, Construction, Defense'', to be merged with and
to be available for the same time period and for the same
purposes as the appropriation to which transferred.
[[Page H3062]]
Sec. 124. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used for any action that relates to or promotes the
expansion of the boundaries or size of the Pinon Canyon
Maneuver Site, Colorado.
Sec. 125. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), none of
the funds made available in this Act may be used by the
Secretary of the Army to relocate a unit in the Army that--
(1) performs a testing mission or function that is not
performed by any other unit in the Army and is specifically
stipulated in title 10, United States Code; and
(2) is located at a military installation at which the
total number of civilian employees of the Department of the
Army and Army contractor personnel employed exceeds 10
percent of the total number of members of the regular and
reserve components of the Army assigned to the installation.
(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply if the
Secretary of the Army certifies to the congressional defense
committees that in proposing the relocation of the unit of
the Army, the Secretary complied with Army Regulation 5-10
relating to the policy, procedures, and responsibilities for
Army stationing actions.
(including rescission of funds)
Sec. 126. Of the unobligated balances available for
``Military Construction, Army'', from prior appropriations
Acts (other than appropriations designated by law as being
for contingency operations directly related to the global war
on terrorism or as an emergency requirement), $89,000,000 are
hereby rescinded.
(including rescission of funds)
Sec. 127. Of the unobligated balances available for
``Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps'', from prior
appropriations Acts (other than appropriations designated by
law as being for contingency operations directly related to
the global war on terrorism or as an emergency requirement),
$49,920,000 are hereby rescinded.
(including rescission of funds)
Sec. 128. Of the unobligated balances available for
``Military Construction, Defense-Wide'', from prior
appropriations Acts (other than appropriations designated by
law as being for contingency operations directly related to
the global war on terrorism or as an emergency requirement),
$358,400,000 are hereby rescinded.
(including rescission of funds)
Sec. 129. Of the unobligated balances available for
``Military Construction, Army'', from prior appropriations
Acts (other than appropriations designated by law as being
for contingency operations directly related to the global war
on terrorism or as an emergency requirement), $50,000,000 are
hereby rescinded.
(including rescission of funds)
Sec. 130. Of the unobligated balances available for
``Military Construction, Defense-Wide'', from prior
appropriations Acts (other than appropriations designated by
law as being for contingency operations directly related to
the global war on terrorism or as an emergency requirement),
$16,470,000 are hereby rescinded.
(including rescission of funds)
Sec. 131. Of the unobligated balances available for
``Military Construction, Air National Guard'', from prior
appropriations Acts (other than appropriations designated by
law as being for contingency operations directly related to
the global war on terrorism or as an emergency requirement),
$45,623,000 are hereby rescinded.
(including rescission of funds)
Sec. 132. Of the unobligated balances made available in
prior appropriation Acts for the fund established in section
1013(d) of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan
Development Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 3374) (other than
appropriations designated by law as being for contingency
operations directly related to the global war on terrorism or
as an emergency requirement), $50,000,000 are hereby
rescinded.
Sec. 133. Discretionary appropriations in this title are
hereby reduced by $4,668,000.
Sec. 134. Notwithstanding section 116, the Secretary of
Army may obligate from any available military construction
funds such additional funds that the Secretary determines are
necessary to complete the Explosive Research and Development
Loading Facility, Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey.
Sec. 135. For an additional amount for ``Military
Construction, Navy and Marine Corps'', $75,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, such funds may be
obligated and expended to carry out planning and design and
construction of projects that (1) are of critical importance
to the Armed Forces, (2) will be conducted within the 50
States, and (3) were contained in the fiscal year 2014
portion of the future-years defense program submitted to
Congress under section 221 of title 10, United States Code,
for fiscal years 2013 through 2017 and are also contained in
the fiscal year 2015 portion of the future-years defense
program submitted under such section for fiscal years 2014
through 2018: Provided further, That not later than 30 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress an expenditure plan for funds
provided under this heading.
TITLE II
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Veterans Benefits Administration
compensation and pensions
(including transfer of funds)
For the payment of compensation benefits to or on behalf of
veterans and a pilot program for disability examinations as
authorized by section 107 and chapters 11, 13, 18, 51, 53,
55, and 61 of title 38, United States Code; pension benefits
to or on behalf of veterans as authorized by chapters 15, 51,
53, 55, and 61 of title 38, United States Code; and burial
benefits, the Reinstated Entitlement Program for Survivors,
emergency and other officers' retirement pay, adjusted-
service credits and certificates, payment of premiums due on
commercial life insurance policies guaranteed under the
provisions of title IV of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act
(50 U.S.C. App. 541 et seq.) and for other benefits as
authorized by sections 107, 1312, 1977, and 2106, and
chapters 23, 51, 53, 55, and 61 of title 38, United States
Code, $71,248,171,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That not to exceed $9,232,000 of the amount
appropriated under this heading shall be reimbursed to
``General Operating Expenses, Veterans Benefits
Administration'' and ``Information Technology Systems'' for
necessary expenses in implementing the provisions of chapters
51, 53, and 55 of title 38, United States Code, the funding
source for which is specifically provided as the
``Compensation and Pensions'' appropriation: Provided
further, That such sums as may be earned on an actual
qualifying patient basis, shall be reimbursed to ``Medical
Care Collections Fund'' to augment the funding of individual
medical facilities for nursing home care provided to
pensioners as authorized.
readjustment benefits
For the payment of readjustment and rehabilitation benefits
to or on behalf of veterans as authorized by chapters 21, 30,
31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 39, 41, 51, 53, 55, and 61 of title 38,
United States Code, and for the payment of benefits under the
Veterans Retraining Assistance Program, $13,135,898,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That expenses for
rehabilitation program services and assistance which the
Secretary is authorized to provide under subsection (a) of
section 3104 of title 38, United States Code, other than
under paragraphs (1), (2), (5), and (11) of that subsection,
shall be charged to this account.
veterans insurance and indemnities
For military and naval insurance, national service life
insurance, servicemen's indemnities, service-disabled
veterans insurance, and veterans mortgage life insurance as
authorized by chapters 19 and 21, title 38, United States
Code, $77,567,000, to remain available until expended.
veterans housing benefit program fund
For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, such sums as
may be necessary to carry out the program, as authorized by
subchapters I through III of chapter 37 of title 38, United
States Code: Provided, That such costs, including the cost of
modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That
during fiscal year 2014, within the resources available, not
to exceed $500,000 in gross obligations for direct loans are
authorized for specially adapted housing loans.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the
direct and guaranteed loan programs, $158,430,000.
vocational rehabilitation loans program account
For the cost of direct loans, $5,000, as authorized by
chapter 31 of title 38, United States Code: Provided, That
such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall
be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974: Provided further, That funds made available under
this heading are available to subsidize gross obligations for
the principal amount of direct loans not to exceed
$2,500,000.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct loan program, $354,000, which may be paid to
the appropriation for ``General Operating Expenses, Veterans
Benefits Administration''.
native american veteran housing loan program account
For administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan
program authorized by subchapter V of chapter 37 of title 38,
United States Code, $1,109,000.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Madam Chair.
As our veterans return home from Iraq and Afghanistan after 10 years
of conflict, it's critical that they're able to get the care they need
and deserve. Part of that care must be greater access to complementary
and alternative medicine. Unfortunately, based on conversations I've
had with veterans back in my district and with practitioners of
alternative medicine, and letters I've received, it's too often
difficult for the veterans to utilize complementary and alternative
medicine through the VA system, even though research is showing that a
holistic approach to treatment, including complementary and alternative
medicine, can make a significant impact. A recent survey conducted by
the Samueli Institute, which
[[Page H3063]]
shared its findings at a Senate Veterans' Affairs hearing 2 weeks ago,
demonstrated how the effectiveness of drugless self-care and
integrative practices for treatment of these conditions had immediate
and long-lasting impacts.
Many VA practitioners have taken note and are doing their best to
integrate these practices. Many veterans are seeking out these
services. Both, sadly, are encountering institutional barriers and
limited availability.
Given the steadfast commitment of this committee to do all it can to
increase the quality of care for our veterans, I would sincerely
request the chairman and ranking member to address this issue as the
bill proceeds through the process.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I would be happy to yield.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. The gentleman from Oregon, again, raises a
very important issue that the subcommittee will look into, and we will
do our best to address in some way as we move forward through this
process.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you.
Mr. CULBERSON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman.
Mr. CULBERSON. I agree with my colleague from Georgia, and we look
forward to working closely with you to be sure that we continue to
address these vital issues.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the hard work of the committee and the
willingness to work with us, to be able to make sure our veterans have
access to these services, and look forward to working with you to make
it happen.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Veterans Health Administration
medical services
For necessary expenses for furnishing, as authorized by
law, inpatient and outpatient care and treatment to
beneficiaries of the Department of Veterans Affairs and
veterans described in section 1705(a) of title 38, United
States Code, including care and treatment in facilities not
under the jurisdiction of the Department, and including
medical supplies and equipment, bioengineering services, food
services, and salaries and expenses of health care employees
hired under title 38, United States Code, aid to State homes
as authorized by section 1741 of title 38, United States
Code, assistance and support services for caregivers as
authorized by section 1720G of title 38, United States Code,
loan repayments authorized by section 604 of the Caregivers
and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010 (Public Law
111-163; 124 Stat. 1174; 38 U.S.C. 7681 note), and hospital
care and medical services authorized by section 1787 of title
38, United States Code, $45,015,527,000, plus reimbursements,
shall become available on October 1, 2014, and shall remain
available until September 30, 2015: Provided, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs shall establish a priority for the provision
of medical treatment for veterans who have service-connected
disabilities, lower income, or have special needs: Provided
further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall give priority funding for
the provision of basic medical benefits to veterans in
enrollment priority groups 1 through 6: Provided further,
That notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs may authorize the dispensing of
prescription drugs from Veterans Health Administration
facilities to enrolled veterans with privately written
prescriptions based on requirements established by the
Secretary: Provided further, That the implementation of the
program described in the previous proviso shall incur no
additional cost to the Department of Veterans Affairs.
medical support and compliance
For necessary expenses in the administration of the
medical, hospital, nursing home, domiciliary, construction,
supply, and research activities, as authorized by law;
administrative expenses in support of capital policy
activities; and administrative and legal expenses of the
Department for collecting and recovering amounts owed the
Department as authorized under chapter 17 of title 38, United
States Code, and the Federal Medical Care Recovery Act (42
U.S.C. 2651 et seq.), $5,879,700,000, plus reimbursements,
shall become available on October 1, 2014, and shall remain
available until September 30, 2015.
medical facilities
For necessary expenses for the maintenance and operation of
hospitals, nursing homes, domiciliary facilities, and other
necessary facilities of the Veterans Health Administration;
for administrative expenses in support of planning, design,
project management, real property acquisition and
disposition, construction, and renovation of any facility
under the jurisdiction or for the use of the Department; for
oversight, engineering, and architectural activities not
charged to project costs; for repairing, altering, improving,
or providing facilities in the several hospitals and homes
under the jurisdiction of the Department, not otherwise
provided for, either by contract or by the hire of temporary
employees and purchase of materials; for leases of
facilities; and for laundry services, $4,739,000,000, plus
reimbursements, shall become available on October 1, 2014,
and shall remain available until September 30, 2015.
medical and prosthetic research
For necessary expenses in carrying out programs of medical
and prosthetic research and development as authorized by
chapter 73 of title 38, United States Code, $585,664,000,
plus reimbursements, shall remain available until September
30, 2015.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Blumenauer
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Page 31, line 18, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(reduced by $35,000,000) (increased by
$35,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I do appreciate the
courtesy that the chair and ranking member have evidenced. I appreciate
the fact that the gentleman from Texas--we've worked not only on these
issues, but he's played a critical role on another issue near and dear
to my heart dealing with international water, and it's a pleasure to
work again.
Those efforts have saved countless lives abroad, and today, with this
amendment, it's my hope that we can partner to improve and hopefully
save lives right here at home.
I helped organize, found and chair the Congressional Neuroscience
Caucus. It's clear from our work that we find America standing on the
precipice of discovery in neuroscience research that will lead to a
higher quality of life for the 50 million Americans affected by
neurological illnesses every year.
{time} 1620
Conditions in neuroscience have already dwarfed other areas of health
care expenditures, and that's before the waves of baby boomers turning
65 at a rate of 10,000 per day for another 14 years are going to drive
it even further. There are more people with brain disorders than all
cancers and heart problems combined; and as society ages, this number
will increase exponentially as will the cost to the health care system
and the economy.
But the importance of neuroscience isn't just about the numbers. It's
about improving the quality of life for those affected by neurological
trauma, and no one is more deserving of these breakthroughs than the
returning servicemembers affected by traumatic brain injuries or
posttraumatic stress disorder.
As stated by General Peter Chiarelli, now the CEO of One Mind for
Research and the 32nd chief of staff of the Army, TBI and PTSD have
accounted for 36 percent of the disabling injuries suffered by soldiers
in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is convinced, as I think most of us in
Congress are, that we must do all we can to help our veterans because
these invisible wounds have devastating and long-lasting impacts.
The amendment before the committee is identical to the one that I and
Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers, who is my cochair of the Neuroscience
Caucus, offered and had adopted in last year's MilCon-VA appropriations
bill.
The amendment aims to ensure that the Veterans Administration
continues to have the resources it needs to find innovative new
medicines and enhanced diagnostics for what can truly be termed an
``epidemic.'' The amendment does not increase or decrease any accounts
in the appropriations bill. It simply requires that no less than $35
million of the Medical and Prosthetic Research account goes towards
posttraumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury so that we can
expedite the cure for Active Duty personnel and veterans suffering from
the effects of brain and psychological trauma incurred during their
service.
The amendment, I hope, symbolizes a commitment from this Congress
that, even in the midst of sequestration and tight budgets, we will not
yield on this critical issue and area of funding.
In meeting with neuroscientists, I am always amazed to hear how this
one
[[Page H3064]]
area of research often leads to positive, but unexpected,
breakthroughs. For example, in researching depression, scientists found
out that Prozac can help stroke victims recover motor skills more
quickly.
The account, the Military and Prosthetic Research, funds many
critical areas of research with direct and indirect links to PTSD, and
this complementary amendment ensures that these links are made and that
research is shared to everyone's benefit. It's a commitment to using
resources in a way that allows one scientific inquiry to seek out other
areas of impact that will lead to breakthroughs in TBI and PTSD. These
items demand our special attention because their effects can so easily
harm a soldier's family and loved ones if not properly diagnosed. Early
detection and prevention prevents chaos, hardship and, indeed, in some
cases, a further loss of life.
We must remember our duty to the wounded warriors who face a long
journey to recovery. These harms may not be as visible as a missing
limb, but can be even more damaging to a veteran's future. I urge my
colleagues to support this amendment--a commitment from Congress to our
servicemembers. We will continue to do all we can in developing new
medicines and technology to improve the lives for those in need. I
appreciate the extraordinary courtesy of the subcommittee, and
respectfully urge adoption of the amendment.
Mr. CULBERSON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, I have no objection to the amendment.
I want to acknowledge and thank the gentleman from Oregon for his
long labors and support of this important work to identify and cure
these invisible injuries that many of our soldiers have suffered as a
result of concussion, as a result of the circumstances of battle in
which they find themselves.
We appreciate your good work, sir, and I will continue to work with
you. I thank you for the amendment. I have no objection.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. The gentleman's amendment would require that
no less than $35 million goes towards traumatic brain injury and
posttraumatic stress disorder research from the Medical and Prosthetic
Research account. I want to bring to the attention of this House that
$32 million was already included for this purpose.
I do have some concerns regarding the amendment. I understand what
the gentleman is trying to do, and I agree that PTSD and traumatic
brain injury are the two major problems that the VA needs to focus on.
Tens of thousands of veterans have suffered traumatic brain injury.
Most are mild concussions that get better within a few months, but
serious ones and multiple concussions can raise the risk of dementia
and other problems. The gentleman points that out rightly.
With the tight budgets that we are facing, I am concerned, however,
where the reduction would come from. For example, this account also
provides for the research for prosthetics, for women's health, and for
gulf war veterans illness. So I just want to make sure that the
gentleman is aware that his amendment could cause shortfalls in other
areas of research that are vital to the health care needs of our
veterans.
I do assure the gentleman that the subcommittee and the committee
will work hard to try to make sure that traumatic brain injury and PTSD
are adequately addressed with our resources available for funding
research there.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
National Cemetery Administration
For necessary expenses of the National Cemetery
Administration for operations and maintenance, not otherwise
provided for, including uniforms or allowances therefor;
cemeterial expenses as authorized by law; purchase of one
passenger motor vehicle for use in cemeterial operations;
hire of passenger motor vehicles; and repair, alteration or
improvement of facilities under the jurisdiction of the
National Cemetery Administration, $250,000,000, of which not
to exceed $25,000,000 shall remain available until September
30, 2015.
Departmental Administration
general administration
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary operating expenses of the Department of
Veterans Affairs, not otherwise provided for, including
administrative expenses in support of Department-Wide capital
planning, management and policy activities, uniforms, or
allowances therefor; not to exceed $25,000 for official
reception and representation expenses; hire of passenger
motor vehicles; and reimbursement of the General Services
Administration for security guard services, $403,023,000, of
which not to exceed $20,151,000 shall remain available until
September 30, 2015: Provided, That funds provided under this
heading may be transferred to ``General Operating Expenses,
Veterans Benefits Administration''.
general operating expenses, veterans benefits administration
For necessary operating expenses of the Veterans Benefits
Administration, not otherwise provided for, including hire of
passenger motor vehicles, reimbursement of the General
Services Administration for security guard services, and
reimbursement of the Department of Defense for the cost of
overseas employee mail, $2,455,490,000: Provided, That
expenses for services and assistance authorized under
paragraphs (1), (2), (5), and (11) of section 3104(a) of
title 38, United States Code, that the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs determines are necessary to enable entitled veterans:
(1) to the maximum extent feasible, to become employable and
to obtain and maintain suitable employment; or (2) to achieve
maximum independence in daily living, shall be charged to
this account: Provided further, That of the funds made
available under this heading, not to exceed $123,000,000
shall remain available until September 30, 2015.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Gallego
Mr. GALLEGO. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Page 33, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $5,000,000) (increased by $5,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GALLEGO. Madam Chair, I would like to thank my long-time friend,
even from the Texas Legislature, Representative Culberson, the chairman
of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction and
Veterans Affairs, as well as Representative Bishop, the ranking
Democrat on the subcommittee, for their work on these important issues.
I rise today to offer an amendment to H.R. 2216, the appropriations
bill for the Department of Veterans Affairs. The amendment is for the
brave men and women who have served our country--our veterans.
It's simple. It's common sense. It highlights job training for
veterans, helping them to find employment. Within the general operating
expenses for the Veterans Benefits Administration account, this would
support funding for veterans to become employable and maintain their
jobs to meet the workforce needs of the 21st century.
Over the next 4 years, 1 million veterans are expected to transition
into the workforce from the armed services. This makes this specific
account vital to the lifeblood of decreasing our unemployment rate for
veterans once they return home. 1.6 million veterans call Texas home,
and 64,000 of these men and women reside in the 23rd Congressional
District. These men and women have obtained tremendous skill sets while
serving our country, and yet many have difficulty finding employment
after they've completed their service. Nearly 700,000 veterans are
unemployed. The jobless rate among our veterans is at 6.2 percent.
Among veterans who served after 9/11, that rate increases to 7.5
percent.
These men and women have served this country, and they have put their
lives on the line. It is our turn to serve them. Let's make certain
that Congress focuses on training our veterans to meet the workforce
needs of the 21st century. We should make the transition from military
service to the workforce as seamless as possible. Lastly, this
amendment doesn't present any budgetary issues, and the Congressional
Budget Office confirms that the amendment doesn't score. Additionally,
it doesn't have a net change in funding levels.
[[Page H3065]]
I encourage my colleagues to stand up for veterans' employment and to
support my commonsense amendment. I look forward to working with all of
you to get veterans back to work.
{time} 1630
Mr. CULBERSON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GALLEGO. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to the amendment.
The gentleman is absolutely right. We're all committed to making sure
that when our veterans return home, they are fully employed and well
taken care of.
I thank my friend from the Texas Legislature, Mr. Gallego, for
offering his amendment, and we have no objection.
Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). The gentleman is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I rise in support of the gentleman's
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, after returning home from the war, veterans are now
fighting for jobs back home. According to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, last year's unemployment rate for veterans was 12.1
percent, a significantly higher figure than the 8.7 percent
unemployment rate for nonveterans. Even more staggering is that 19.1
percent of young veterans between the ages of 20 and 24 are unemployed.
All veterans, because of their service, have basic skills, and the
only thing that they're missing is formal job training to match their
abilities with the specific needs of an employer. This is another issue
on Secretary Shinseki's plate. I believe that anything that we can do
to help veterans gain employment we should do.
I thank the gentleman for raising this issue, and I support the
amendment and yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gallego).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last
word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Mr. Chairman, the sacrifices of the few,
our military veterans, provide the freedom for the many.
We know that it is our military veterans, who only make up just 1
percent of our population, that provide 100 percent of our freedom. But
far too many of our veterans seeking the disability assistance that
they rightly earned are running into a severe backlog at the Department
of Veterans Affairs.
Nationwide, there are close to 800,000 pending disability claims at
the VA, and almost 550,000 of these claims have been pending for over
125 days. At the Oakland VA in Oakland, California, which serves the
15th Congressional District, which I represent, the constituents in my
district have been waiting, on average, a staggering 552 days. Over 81
percent of the constituents have been waiting over 125 days. This is
the longest average wait time across the United States. These numbers
are a national disgrace, and I'm ashamed that the veterans who have
served our country and have fought so hard have to wait so long.
Our military spends $1.8 billion a year recruiting young Americans to
join our military. We spend it on NASCAR, Super Bowl ads, and we send
our recruiters out to our schools to have our young men and women join
in the honorable profession of defending our country, but we are
neglecting the needs of the veterans. We're failing to keep the
promises we make after they serve.
This weekend I had the opportunity to go to a Salute to New Recruits
who are going into the military. I looked at those young, bright faces
of young men and women who are going to go off to serve their country,
and I told them, You are doing something that is very brave and very
noble, but I hope that your families and you stand up for the benefits
that you are rightfully earning.
Right now what we're seeing at the VA is shameful, Mr. Chairman. It's
shameful that we would treat our veterans like this and not give them
the benefits that they've earned. We're failing to live up to that
solemn pledge that we've made to our Nation's wounded warriors. That's
why this bill is so important. It reaffirms our commitment to caring
for the men and women who made sacrifices to serve in uniform.
It contains commonsense solutions to eliminate the disability claims
backlog by mandating that the VA modernize the disability claims
process, and it also ensures greater efficiency and accountability on
the part of the VA.
It would fully fund the President's requested budget to allow for an
increase of the staff levels at the Veterans Benefits Administration.
These funds would support an additional 94 claims processors, all of
whom will work solely on disability claims, helping to address the
heart of the backlog.
Increasing staff levels, as we know, however, is not a silver bullet.
Creating a more efficient and responsive VA is also necessary if the
disability claims process is going to be fixed. Today, the VA spends,
on average, 175 days waiting for the Department of Defense to send them
a veteran's record, mostly because these records are still kept in the
form of paper files. It's time we bring this process into the 21st
century.
In addition to moving away from paper files, it's clear that it would
be far better for servicemembers and veterans, as well as taxpayers,
for the DOD and the VA to maintain one integrated system for electronic
health records. This bill seeks to move the DOD away from paper and
towards an integrated system that can be used both for DOD and the VA.
It also fully funds the Veterans Claims Intake Program, which is
working to convert all those paper records the VA receives into digital
files.
Mr. Chairman, the constituents of the 15th Congressional District who
served so honorably should not have to wait 552 days for their
disability compensation cases to be processed.
Those parts of the bill that I outlined will help to improve
veterans' access to the benefits that they have earned and enable us to
better live up to President Lincoln's promise in his second inaugural
address:
To care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his
widow and his orphan.
President Lincoln's words happen to be at the core of the VA's
mission statement. Words, however, are not enough. Congress must act
swiftly to fix the VA backlog with practical solutions and fulfill our
pledge to veterans. We must leave no veteran behind when they come
back. We must make sure that when we say ``thank you for your service''
to a veteran, that we mean it and we follow up with a meaningful and
responsive claims process. The funding in this bill helps move us in
that direction.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Amendment Offered by Amodei
Mr. AMODEI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Page 33, line 5, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(reduced by $44,000,000)(increased by
$44,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Nevada is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. AMODEI. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to thank
Chairman Culberson and Ranking Member Bishop for their effort on
bringing forth a good bill that addresses the needs of our veterans and
maintains our commitment to providing them with the benefits that they
earned and deserve.
I rise with this amendment for the first time since I've been in this
body because of the existing claims backlog, which is over 600,000
claims nationwide.
As a member of the primary committee of jurisdiction and the primary
subcommittee of jurisdiction on the House Veterans' Affairs Committee,
I can tell you that, in dealing with this number of claims, we are not
making mission in the Department of Veterans Affairs. I can also tell
you that the proposal to spend $44 million, according to the Veterans
Affairs testimony in front of our committees, to clear 50,000 of
[[Page H3066]]
those claims in the backlog is, quite simply, more of the same. That's
about $900 a claim and will leave you with 550,000 claims when it's
done this year.
I appreciate the opportunity of coming technology, but I can tell you
this: if you represent a district that's in California, New York,
Arizona, Indiana, Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Texas, Ohio,
Maryland, another Texas hit, Boston or Mississippi, which is the
majority of Members in this House, then guess what; you've got a
majority of those claims in your district offices.
I say it's time for this House to take action and say this: don't cut
a single regional office's budget. This amendment does not attempt to
do that. This amendment says take that $44 million and allocate it for
personnel in those 15 offices that all have over a year of processing
time.
By the way, while we're mentioning that, I want to give you a quote
that is from Under Secretary Hickey that basically says:
Quite frankly, we have a resource allocation model that
doesn't make any sense.
That's before the Veterans' Affairs Committee.
Let's try something new. Let's put the staffing where those offices
are that are in need of it most. Two of them are in California and two
of them are in the Lone Star State. Chicago also needs help. You name
it. Let's try that instead of just doing what we have been doing. It
adds no money to the bill, and it also does not take any money away
from existing offices.
{time} 1640
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say this. Even though
staffing at the VA's 58 regional offices has increased by almost 300
people since September 2010, because of turnover and loss of more than
2,000 workers temporarily paid through stimulus funds, the VA regional
offices are severely understaffed. Overtime will not be the answer. At
a majority of the regional offices, including those in New York,
Chicago, Los Angeles, Waco, and Oakland, the VA presently employs fewer
people than it did 2 years ago, according to their own internal
documents.
Let's take the leadership on this issue and do something that's a
little different than, quite frankly, a resource allocation model which
the determined Under Secretary says makes no sense.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I have no opposition to the gentleman's
amendment and share his frustration and concern, as Mr. Bishop and I
and the subcommittee have done in this bill repeatedly throughout the
series of our hearings to literally pound on the VA to get them to move
more rapidly on this backlog.
We have included, Mr. Bishop and I, in this bill, very powerful and
strong reporting language that we're going to get detailed information
on a level that we've never seen before from the VA. In fact, later
today we're going to have an amendment from Mr. Kingston of Georgia
that I will support that will hold the VA to the same standard as the
private sector in that either they meet their performance levels that
they have set for themselves or they will not be paid, as they are in
the private sector. You miss your goal, you don't get your full
compensation.
We are addressing this in a number of different ways. I think the
gentleman's amendment is helpful and constructive in driving home the
point to the VA that it's absolutely vital that we get this backlog
disposed of and that we expect the VA to live up to the time line that
they've promised us, and that's to eliminate the backlog within the
next 24 months by the year of 2015.
And so we have no opposition to the gentleman's amendment, and we
appreciate his concern for ensuring that our men and women in uniform
receive the disability benefits that they have so rightly earned.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I think this is a subject on
which we need to tread very, very, very carefully. As we all know, the
VA announced that it's mandating the use of overtime for claims
processors at the 56 regional offices as part of a ``surge'' aimed at
eliminating the disabilities claims backlog.
This effort is the latest in a series of measures that the VA has
adopted in recent months in response to sharp criticism and to the
cajoling by Members of this Congress and the public over the number of
claims pending from veterans seeking disability compensation. That
number, which was over 900,000 earlier this year, had fallen to 843,000
as May 13, with more than two-thirds of those having been pending for
over 125 days. I believe that Secretary Shinseki should and I believe
that Secretary Shinseki is using every option available to him to make
progress in eliminating this backlog.
Furthermore, the overtime measure is on top of the VA's recent
announcement that it's giving priority to claims that have been pending
for longer than a year. I believe that the increased overtime
initiative coupled with the expedited claims initiative will provide
more veterans with more expedited decisions on their claims and will
help us to achieve our goal of eliminating the claims backlog. I
believe that this overtime initiative correctly shows that the
Secretary's commitment is there to end the problem of the backlog. And
so I think we should tread very carefully in this regard.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Amodei).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. AMODEI. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada will
be postponed.
Ms. BROWNLEY of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last
word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. BROWNLEY of California. Mr. Chairman, this bill is one of the
most important that the House will consider all year. It provides
critical funds for military training facilities, improves living
conditions for our troops and their families, and addresses the needs
of our Nation's veterans.
As ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on
Health, however, I wanted to bring your attention to a serious issue.
As you know, the advance appropriations process ensures that the VA
health care funding is not delayed by Congress' failure to pass the
appropriations bills on time. For the past 3 years, the GAO has been
required to review the accuracy of the administration's projections for
advance funding for veterans' health care programs. The report helps
Congress evaluate VA projections for advance appropriations and ensures
the VA receives the funding needed for veterans' health care.
Unfortunately, this GAO reporting requirement is scheduled to sunset
on September 30. I believe this requirement should be extended, and a
number of veterans service organizations have expressed concerns about
this issue as well.
As the bill moves forward, I ask the committee to review this issue
and continue the reporting requirement.
On another note, one of our most important obligations is to ensure
adequate training and support of our troops. That is why one of my
first stops as a Member of Congress was to Naval Base Ventura County.
For fiscal year 2014, the Navy has requested funding for several
important projects at Point Mugu and Port Hueneme, including military
housing, training, and maintenance facilities. This bill provides
funding for base infrastructure improvements, but it is a decrease from
last year and also below the DOD request.
On behalf of my constituents serving at Naval Base Ventura County, I
would like to express my hope that these reductions do not come at the
expense of the much-needed infrastructure improvements at Point Mugu
and Port Hueneme.
As a VA committee member, I am also pleased that H.R. 2216 funds
veterans' benefits and programs. It provides $43.6 billion for VA
medical services to serve about 6.5 million veterans.
[[Page H3067]]
It supports mental health care services, suicide prevention activities,
traumatic brain injury treatment, homeless veterans' programs, and
rural health initiatives. It continues work on an integrated DOD-VA
electronic health record system, the paperless claims process system,
digital scanning of health records, and transparent reporting on our
progress with the claims backlog for VA benefits.
Finally, it funds construction and renovation of hundreds of VA
health clinics, medical residences, and nursing homes. Support of our
servicemembers, veterans, and their families is of the highest
importance. However, we must be mindful of the entire budget picture.
Like many of my colleagues, I am concerned that we are operating
under inadequate discretionary budget caps that will not allow us to
provide sufficient funding later in the appropriations process for
programs that are important to middle class families and seniors, such
as education and health care programs.
While this bill is not perfect, it does provide critical funding for
our Nation's military construction projects and for our Nation's
veterans, and I intend to support the final passage of this bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
information technology systems
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses for information technology systems
and telecommunications support, including developmental
information systems and operational information systems; for
pay and associated costs; and for the capital asset
acquisition of information technology systems, including
management and related contractual costs of said
acquisitions, including contractual costs associated with
operations authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United
States Code, $3,683,344,000, plus reimbursements: Provided,
That $1,026,400,000 shall be for pay and associated costs, of
which not to exceed $30,792,000 shall remain available until
September 30, 2015: Provided further, That $2,161,653,000
shall be for operations and maintenance, of which not to
exceed $151,316,000 shall remain available until September
30, 2015: Provided further, That $495,291,000 shall be for
information technology systems development, modernization,
and enhancement, and shall remain available until September
30, 2015: Provided further, That amounts made available for
information technology systems development, modernization,
and enhancement may not be obligated or expended until the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs or the Chief Information
Officer of the Department of Veterans Affairs submits to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a
certification of the amounts, in parts or in full, to be
obligated and expended for each development project: Provided
further, That amounts made available for salaries and
expenses, operations and maintenance, and information
technology systems development, modernization, and
enhancement may be transferred among the three sub-accounts
after the Secretary of Veterans Affairs requests from the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress the
authority to make the transfer and an approval is issued:
Provided further, That amounts made available for the
``Information Technology Systems'' account for development,
modernization, and enhancement may be transferred among
projects or to newly defined projects: Provided further, That
no project may be increased or decreased by more than
$1,000,000 of cost prior to submitting a request to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress to
make the transfer and an approval is issued, or absent a
response, a period of 30 days has elapsed: Provided further,
That none of the funds made available under this Act may be
obligated or expended for the development or procurement of
an electronic health record unless the health record will be
a single, joint, common, integrated health record with an
open architecture that will be used by both the Department of
Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense: Provided
further, That funds made available for such an integrated
electronic health record may not be obligated or expended
until the Secretaries of the Departments of Defense and
Veterans Affairs jointly certify in writing to the Committees
on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress that the
proposed integrated electronic health record will be the sole
electronic health record system used by each Department and
that it meets the requirements established in the previous
proviso: Provided further, That not more than 25 percent of
the funds made available for the integrated electronic health
record may be obligated or expended until: (1) the Government
Accountability Office confirms to the Committees, after
reviewing the Secretaries' certification, that the proposed
integrated electronic health record system does in fact meet
the requirements established in this paragraph; and (2) the
Secretaries of the Departments of Defense and Veterans
Affairs submit to the Committees, and such Committees
approve, a plan for expenditure that: (A) defines the budget
and cost baseline for development and procurement of the
integrated electronic health record; (B) identifies the
deployment timeline for the system for both Departments and
the performance benchmarks for deployment; and (C) identifies
annual and total spending on such efforts for each
Department: Provided further, That the funds made available
under this heading for information technology systems
development, modernization, and enhancement, shall be for the
projects, and in the amounts, specified under this heading in
the report accompanying this Act.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Culberson
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be considered as read.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 35, line 11, strike ``Act''and insert ``heading''.
Page 35, line 13, strike ``unless'' and all that follows
through ``Department:'' on page 36, line 16, and insert the
following: ``except for a health record as set forth in the
Joint Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2013-2015 of the
Department of Veteran Affairs and Department of Defense,
Joint Executive Council:''.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
{time} 1650
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today with an amendment to
clarify the House Appropriations Subcommittee's intent with regard to
the integrated electronic health records system that we want the
Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs to adopt.
This issue necessarily involves two appropriation subcommittees and
two authorizing committees, Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs. We
have talked with our friends on the authorizing committees and agree
that the best way forward is for language to be included in each one of
these bills that conveys a unified position.
I am confident that all parties in Congress and in the Department of
Defense and Veterans Affairs share the same goal of having an
integrated, unified health record.
My amendment removes some of the specificity of the original House
language, but retains the reference point of an integrated record. This
allows all sides to continue to spend more time to develop mutually
acceptable language that we can carry in the National Defense
Authorization Act and other legislation as we move forward with this
bill as well, which clearly defines the intent of Congress that we will
have an integrated record with its capability of helping our men and
women in uniform when they move out of active service into the VA.
We are unshakeable in our commitment, as a Congress, to make certain
that we solve this problem as quickly as humanly possible. I can tell
you that the subcommittee, the committees of jurisdiction, the entire
Congress is tired of the delays. We're tired of postponement. We're
tired of disputes. This has to be solved immediately.
And I'm going to continue to work aggressively with our colleagues on
the authorizing committee and with our good friends on the Defense
Appropriation Subcommittee, all of us together, arm-in-arm, regardless
of party, from all parts of the country, to make sure that we get one
single, unified, integrated electronic medical record as fast as
humanly possible.
So that's the reason I offer this amendment today, and I urge its
support.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I believe that this amendment
reflects the apparent obstruction of the Department of Defense on the
electronic health record issue; and let me explain to you how we got
here.
The 2008 National Defense Authorization Act directed the two
Departments to develop a single electronic health
[[Page H3068]]
record system that will follow a servicemember from the time he or she
enlisted in the military to the time they exited the VA care, by 2009.
However, after a number of management, oversight, and planning snags
and snafus, and the cost estimates that grew from $4 billion to now
nearly $12 billion, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and VA
Secretary Eric Shinseki decided to alter their plans to focus on making
that current electronic health record system more interoperable.
Just recently, Secretary Hagel, the Department of Defense, made the
decision to modernize the Defense Department's electronic health record
through purchase of commercial software. A recent memo released by the
Department of Defense makes no reference to the integrated electronic
health records; and it seems more of the same go-it-alone, stovepipe
approach that has been favored by the Pentagon in the past.
In addition to the Department of Defense's memo, it also made no
mention of the congressionally mandated role of the Interagency Program
Office set up to run the integrated electronic health records project
and staffed by more than 300 personnel from both Departments.
Finally, by going the commercial route, I believe the Department of
Defense has opened up its latest electronic health records scheme to
protest and subsequent delays.
With all these issues I laid out, some still want to think that the
Department of Defense should be free to do whatever it pleases.
Mr. Chairman, paper is a problem, and we cannot keep letting
servicemembers leave the Department of Defense with paper records.
Please know that this situation will be addressed further as we move
through the process.
And we support the gentleman's amendment. I think it is timely. I
think it is necessary.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk that would
strike section 413 of this bill.
First of all, I have great respect, even affection, for the chairman
of the subcommittee and the ranking member, and their exemplary staff,
Mr. Washington. But section 413 of this bill, Mr. Chairman, would
prohibit funds to construct, renovate, or expand any facility in the
U.S. for the purposes of housing Guantanamo detainees.
According to a recent GAO report, there are prisons in the U.S. that
could hold the Guantanamo detainees as safely and securely as the
security conditions at the Guantanamo facility. The Department of
Defense and the Department of Justice both operate detention facilities
comparable to Guantanamo Bay and currently hold convicted terrorists
and other felons connected to terrorism.
The GAO report, however, noted that existing facilities would need to
be slightly modified, and current inmates would need to be relocated
perhaps. But this would prohibit that.
I can't imagine that there are Members of this Chamber that believe
that indefinitely detaining individuals at Guantanamo Bay for the rest
of their lives, without access to a fair trial, comports with American
standards of justice.
Now, first of all, a few words about Gitmo itself. Eighty-six percent
of the Guantanamo detainees were captured in exchange for a bounty. A
majority of these young men never actually committed an act of violence
against the United States or its allies. Five percent were perhaps
members of al Qaeda. So let's assume that 5 percent were, because there
seems to be some indication that they were; but 95 percent were not.
From a national security standpoint, Gitmo has been too easily used
as a rallying cry and a recruitment tool for our enemies. For that
reason, its continued existence really is a direct threat to our
national security.
Language such as is in this bill has constrained the President's
options for closing this detention facility. President Obama still
retains the authority to significantly decrease the prison's
population, though, should he choose to do so. He could waive the
certification requirements if receiving countries take actions to
substantially mitigate the risk that a detainee were to re-engage in
terrorism. That would clear the release of at least 86 detainees, about
half of the entire prison's population.
Since Guantanamo was opened, the statistics indicate that about 13
percent may have become recidivists. But less than 5 percent of
President Obama's transfers have.
Military strategy often dictates that by releasing lower-threat
detainees, you mitigate the risk of radicalizing more. We released many
foot soldiers in Afghanistan who are far worse than the Guantanamo
detainees.
But what is most relevant to this bill's language is that 46
detainees have been designated for indefinite detention, either because
they are too dangerous to release, or they can't be charged in a court
due to evidentiary standards.
The President did establish a Periodic Review Board, but the panel
has never been formed. Frankly, the President should do that.
But those detainees that cannot be transferred, I think, should be
tried in courts here in the United States. The problem is, given the
limitation that Congress has wrongly placed on such transfers, that
can't be done today, notwithstanding the fact that our Federal courts
have tried more than 1,000 terrorists.
The United States already holds 373 individuals convicted of
terrorism in 98 facilities across the country. There are six Department
of Defense facilities where Guantanamo detainees could be held in the
United States that are currently at a combined 48 percent capacity. In
other words, less than half the capacity is being used.
Believing that they will never leave Cuba, more than 100 are
protesting their indefinite detention the only way that they can, with
a hunger strike. Thirty-seven detainees are currently being tube-fed.
It's a procedure that requires a lubricated plastic tube to be inserted
down a detainee's nose and into their stomach while they're being
restrained. They are then held in a chair for about 2 hours to force
them to digest the liquid.
The fact is that the President can't do what he needs to do as long
as section 413 remains in this bill, and that's why my amendment would
remove this restriction.
I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1700
Mr. VARGAS. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. VARGAS. Today, I rise in support of the efforts to address the
increasing backlog of veterans disability claims in the FY 2014
Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill. We must
do everything in our power to ensure that the men and women who have
served honorably in the armed services receive the full benefits they
have earned protecting our Nation and our freedoms abroad. It is a
shame that our veterans have to wait an average of 321 days to receive
a response from the Department of Veterans Affairs after filing a
claim.
In my district, I have the privilege of representing the southern
portion of San Diego County and all of Imperial County in California.
San Diego is the home to the third-largest veteran resident population
in the Nation. Current processing times have tripled in the area since
2009, with over 28,500 pending disability claims being processed and an
average wait time of 334 days.
As we continue to wind down our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan,
more and more men and women will be seeking the benefits they are owed.
We must continue to find workable solutions for these heroes and their
families. This bill presented today provides more than $290 million to
help the VA meet its goal of ending its disability claim backlog by
2015. In order to meet this deadline, funds will be provided for the
digital scanning of health and benefit files and for the development of
a
[[Page H3069]]
paperless process claim system. Additionally, $344 million will be
appropriated to the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs to
implement a single, integrated health record system used by both
Departments. Both of these measures are needed to speed up the
processing and to modernize our record-keeping system.
We must also hold the VA accountable for its results, and I am glad
to see that the monthly reporting requirements on the process of the
expedited claims initiative for veterans is included in this bill.
During the final throes of the Civil War, President Lincoln affirmed
the government's obligation to care for those injured during the war
and to provide for the families of those who perished on the
battlefield. With the commitment ``to care for him, who shall have
borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan,'' President Lincoln
laid the foundation for our moral responsibility to our Nation's
veterans. Let's continue to work in this tradition by reducing the
backlog and the wait times of disability claims for the veterans and
their families across our Nation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the
remainder of the bill through page 59, line 18, be considered as read,
printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Texas?
There was no objection.
The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:
office of inspector general
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General,
to include information technology, in carrying out the
provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C.
App.), $116,411,000, of which $6,000,000 shall remain
available until September 30, 2015.
construction, major projects
For constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of
the facilities, including parking projects, under the
jurisdiction or for the use of the Department of Veterans
Affairs, or for any of the purposes set forth in sections
316, 2404, 2406, and chapter 81 of title 38, United States
Code, not otherwise provided for, including planning,
architectural and engineering services, construction
management services, maintenance or guarantee period services
costs associated with equipment guarantees provided under the
project, services of claims analysts, offsite utility and
storm drainage system construction costs, and site
acquisition, where the estimated cost of a project is more
than the amount set forth in section 8104(a)(3)(A) of title
38, United States Code, or where funds for a project were
made available in a previous major project appropriation,
$342,130,000, of which $322,130,000 shall remain available
until September 30, 2018, and of which $20,000,000 shall
remain available until expended: Provided further, That
except for advance planning activities, including needs
assessments which may or may not lead to capital investments,
and other capital asset management related activities,
including portfolio development and management activities,
and investment strategy studies funded through the advance
planning fund and the planning and design activities funded
through the design fund, including needs assessments which
may or may not lead to capital investments, and salaries and
associated costs of the resident engineers who oversee those
capital investments funded through this account, and funds
provided for the purchase of land for the National Cemetery
Administration through the land acquisition line item, none
of the funds made available under this heading shall be used
for any project which has not been approved by the Congress
in the budgetary process: Provided further, That funds made
available under this heading for fiscal year 2014, for each
approved project shall be obligated: (1) by the awarding of a
construction documents contract by September 30, 2014; and
(2) by the awarding of a construction contract by September
30, 2015: Provided further, That the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs shall promptly submit to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a written report on
any approved major construction project for which obligations
are not incurred within the time limitations established
above.
construction, minor projects
For constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of
the facilities, including parking projects, under the
jurisdiction or for the use of the Department of Veterans
Affairs, including planning and assessments of needs which
may lead to capital investments, architectural and
engineering services, maintenance or guarantee period
services costs associated with equipment guarantees provided
under the project, services of claims analysts, offsite
utility and storm drainage system construction costs, and
site acquisition, or for any of the purposes set forth in
sections 316, 2404, 2406, and chapter 81 of title 38, United
States Code, not otherwise provided for, where the estimated
cost of a project is equal to or less than the amount set
forth in section 8104(a)(3)(A) of title 38, United States
Code, $714,870,000, to remain available until September 30,
2018, along with unobligated balances of previous
``Construction, Minor Projects'' appropriations which are
hereby made available for any project where the estimated
cost is equal to or less than the amount set forth in such
section: Provided, That funds made available under this
heading shall be for: (1) repairs to any of the nonmedical
facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of the
Department which are necessary because of loss or damage
caused by any natural disaster or catastrophe; and (2)
temporary measures necessary to prevent or to minimize
further loss by such causes.
grants for construction of state extended care facilities
For grants to assist States to acquire or construct State
nursing home and domiciliary facilities and to remodel,
modify, or alter existing hospital, nursing home, and
domiciliary facilities in State homes, for furnishing care to
veterans as authorized by sections 8131 through 8137 of title
38, United States Code, $82,650,000, to remain available
until expended.
grants for construction of veterans cemeteries
For grants to assist States and tribal organizations in
establishing, expanding, or improving veterans cemeteries as
authorized by section 2408 of title 38, United States Code,
$44,650,000, to remain available until expended.
Administrative Provisions
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 201. Any appropriation for fiscal year 2014 for
``Compensation and Pensions'', ``Readjustment Benefits'', and
``Veterans Insurance and Indemnities'' may be transferred as
necessary to any other of the mentioned appropriations:
Provided, That before a transfer may take place, the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall request from the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress the
authority to make the transfer and such Committees issue an
approval, or absent a response, a period of 30 days has
elapsed.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 202. Amounts made available for the Department of
Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 2014, in this Act or any
other Act, under the ``Medical Services'', ``Medical Support
and Compliance'', and ``Medical Facilities'' accounts may be
transferred among the accounts: Provided, That any transfers
between the ``Medical Services'' and ``Medical Support and
Compliance'' accounts of 1 percent or less of the total
amount appropriated to the account in this or any other Act
may take place subject to notification from the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs to the Committees on Appropriations of both
Houses of Congress of the amount and purpose of the transfer:
Provided further, That any transfers between the ``Medical
Services'' and ``Medical Support and Compliance'' accounts in
excess of 1 percent, or exceeding the cumulative 1 percent
for the fiscal year, may take place only after the Secretary
requests from the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses
of Congress the authority to make the transfer and an
approval is issued: Provided further, That any transfers to
or from the ``Medical Facilities'' account may take place
only after the Secretary requests from the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress the authority to
make the transfer and an approval is issued.
Sec. 203. Appropriations available in this title for
salaries and expenses shall be available for services
authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code;
hire of passenger motor vehicles; lease of a facility or land
or both; and uniforms or allowances therefore, as authorized
by sections 5901 through 5902 of title 5, United States Code.
Sec. 204. No appropriations in this title (except the
appropriations for ``Construction, Major Projects'' and
``Construction, Minor Projects'') shall be available for the
purchase of any site for or toward the construction of any
new hospital or home.
Sec. 205. No appropriations in this title shall be
available for hospitalization or examination of any persons
(except beneficiaries entitled to such hospitalization or
examination under the laws providing such benefits to
veterans, and persons receiving such treatment under sections
7901 through 7904 of title 5, United States Code, or the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.)), unless reimbursement of the
cost of such hospitalization or examination is made to the
``Medical Services'' account at such rates as may be fixed by
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
Sec. 206. Appropriations available in this title for
``Compensation and Pensions'', ``Readjustment Benefits'', and
``Veterans Insurance and Indemnities'' shall be available for
payment of prior year accrued obligations required to be
recorded by law against the corresponding prior year accounts
within the last quarter of fiscal year 2013.
Sec. 207. Appropriations available in this title shall be
available to pay prior year obligations of corresponding
prior year appropriations accounts resulting from sections
3328(a), 3334, and 3712(a) of title 31, United States Code,
except that if such obligations are from trust fund accounts
they shall be payable only from ``Compensation and
Pensions''.
[[Page H3070]]
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 208. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
during fiscal year 2014, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
shall, from the National Service Life Insurance Fund under
section 1920 of title 38, United States Code, the Veterans'
Special Life Insurance Fund under section 1923 of title 38,
United States Code, and the United States Government Life
Insurance Fund under section 1955 of title 38, United States
Code, reimburse the ``General Operating Expenses, Veterans
Benefits Administration'' and ``Information Technology
Systems'' accounts for the cost of administration of the
insurance programs financed through those accounts: Provided,
That reimbursement shall be made only from the surplus
earnings accumulated in such an insurance program during
fiscal year 2014 that are available for dividends in that
program after claims have been paid and actuarially
determined reserves have been set aside: Provided further,
That if the cost of administration of such an insurance
program exceeds the amount of surplus earnings accumulated in
that program, reimbursement shall be made only to the extent
of such surplus earnings: Provided further, That the
Secretary shall determine the cost of administration for
fiscal year 2014 which is properly allocable to the provision
of each such insurance program and to the provision of any
total disability income insurance included in that insurance
program.
Sec. 209. Amounts deducted from enhanced-use lease
proceeds to reimburse an account for expenses incurred by
that account during a prior fiscal year for providing
enhanced-use lease services, may be obligated during the
fiscal year in which the proceeds are received.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 210. Funds available in this title or funds for
salaries and other administrative expenses shall also be
available to reimburse the Office of Resolution Management of
the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Office of
Employment Discrimination Complaint Adjudication under
section 319 of title 38, United States Code, for all services
provided at rates which will recover actual costs but not
exceed $42,904,000 for the Office of Resolution Management
and $3,360,000 for the Office of Employment and
Discrimination Complaint Adjudication: Provided, That
payments may be made in advance for services to be furnished
based on estimated costs: Provided further, That amounts
received shall be credited to the ``General Administration''
and ``Information Technology Systems'' accounts for use by
the office that provided the service.
Sec. 211. No appropriations in this title shall be
available to enter into any new lease of real property if the
estimated annual rental cost is more than $1,000,000, unless
the Secretary submits a report which the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress approve within 30
days following the date on which the report is received.
Sec. 212. No funds of the Department of Veterans Affairs
shall be available for hospital care, nursing home care, or
medical services provided to any person under chapter 17 of
title 38, United States Code, for a non-service-connected
disability described in section 1729(a)(2) of such title,
unless that person has disclosed to the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs, in such form as the Secretary may require, current,
accurate third-party reimbursement information for purposes
of section 1729 of such title: Provided, That the Secretary
may recover, in the same manner as any other debt due the
United States, the reasonable charges for such care or
services from any person who does not make such disclosure as
required: Provided further, That any amounts so recovered for
care or services provided in a prior fiscal year may be
obligated by the Secretary during the fiscal year in which
amounts are received.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 213. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
proceeds or revenues derived from enhanced-use leasing
activities (including disposal) may be deposited into the
``Construction, Major Projects'' and ``Construction, Minor
Projects'' accounts and be used for construction (including
site acquisition and disposition), alterations, and
improvements of any medical facility under the jurisdiction
or for the use of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Such
sums as realized are in addition to the amount provided for
in ``Construction, Major Projects'' and ``Construction, Minor
Projects''.
Sec. 214. Amounts made available under ``Medical
Services'' are available--
(1) for furnishing recreational facilities, supplies, and
equipment; and
(2) for funeral expenses, burial expenses, and other
expenses incidental to funerals and burials for beneficiaries
receiving care in the Department.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 215. Such sums as may be deposited to the Medical
Care Collections Fund pursuant to section 1729A of title 38,
United States Code, may be transferred to ``Medical
Services'', to remain available until expended for the
purposes of that account.
Sec. 216. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs may enter into
agreements with Indian tribes and tribal organizations which
are party to the Alaska Native Health Compact with the Indian
Health Service, and Indian tribes and tribal organizations
serving rural Alaska which have entered into contracts with
the Indian Health Service under the Indian Self Determination
and Educational Assistance Act, to provide healthcare,
including behavioral health and dental care. The Secretary
shall require participating veterans and facilities to comply
with all appropriate rules and regulations, as established by
the Secretary. The term ``rural Alaska'' shall mean those
lands sited within the external boundaries of the Alaska
Native regions specified in sections 7(a)(1)-(4) and (7)-(12)
of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, as amended (43
U.S.C. 1606), and those lands within the Alaska Native
regions specified in sections 7(a)(5) and 7(a)(6) of the
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, as amended (43 U.S.C.
1606), which are not within the boundaries of the
Municipality of Anchorage, the Fairbanks North Star Borough,
the Kenai Peninsula Borough or the Matanuska Susitna Borough.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 217. Such sums as may be deposited to the Department
of Veterans Affairs Capital Asset Fund pursuant to section
8118 of title 38, United States Code, may be transferred to
the ``Construction, Major Projects'' and ``Construction,
Minor Projects'' accounts, to remain available until expended
for the purposes of these accounts.
Sec. 218. None of the funds made available in this title
may be used to implement any policy prohibiting the Directors
of the Veterans Integrated Services Networks from conducting
outreach or marketing to enroll new veterans within their
respective Networks.
Sec. 219. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall submit
to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress a quarterly report on the financial status of the
Veterans Health Administration.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 220. Amounts made available under the ``Medical
Services'', ``Medical Support and Compliance'', ``Medical
Facilities'', ``General Operating Expenses, Veterans Benefits
Administration'', ``General Administration'', and ``National
Cemetery Administration'' accounts for fiscal year 2014 may
be transferred to or from the ``Information Technology
Systems'' account: Provided, That before a transfer may take
place, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall request from
the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress
the authority to make the transfer and an approval is issued.
Sec. 221. Of the amounts made available to the Department
of Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 2014, in this Act or any
other Act, under the ``Medical Facilities'' account for
nonrecurring maintenance, not more than 20 percent of the
funds made available shall be obligated during the last 2
months of that fiscal year: Provided, That the Secretary may
waive this requirement after providing written notice to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 222. Of the amounts appropriated to the Department of
Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 2014 for ``Medical
Services'', ``Medical Support and Compliance'', ``Medical
Facilities'', ``Construction, Minor Projects'', and
``Information Technology Systems'', up to $254,257,000, plus
reimbursements, may be transferred to the Joint Department of
Defense-Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
Demonstration Fund, established by section 1704 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(Public Law 111-84; 123 Stat. 3571) and may be used for
operation of the facilities designated as combined Federal
medical facilities as described by section 706 of the Duncan
Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2009 (Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4500): Provided, That
additional funds may be transferred from accounts designated
in this section to the Joint Department of Defense-Department
of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund upon
written notification by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 223. Such sums as may be deposited to the Medical
Care Collections Fund pursuant to section 1729A of title 38,
United States Code, for health care provided at facilities
designated as combined Federal medical facilities as
described by section 706 of the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law
110-417; 122 Stat. 4500) shall also be available: (1) for
transfer to the Joint Department of Defense-Department of
Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Demonstration Fund,
established by section 1704 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84;
123 Stat. 3571); and (2) for operations of the facilities
designated as combined Federal medical facilities as
described by section 706 of the Duncan Hunter National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law
110-417; 122 Stat. 4500).
(including transfer of funds)
Sec. 224. Of the amounts available in this title for
``Medical Services'', ``Medical Support and Compliance'', and
``Medical Facilities'', a minimum of $15,000,000, shall be
transferred to the DOD-VA Health Care Sharing Incentive Fund,
as authorized by section 8111(d) of title 38, United States
Code, to remain available until expended, for any purpose
authorized by section 8111 of title 38, United States Code.
(including rescissions of funds)
Sec. 225. (a) Of the discretionary funds made available to
the Department of Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 2014, the
following amounts which became available on
[[Page H3071]]
October 1, 2013, are hereby rescinded from the following
accounts in the amounts specified:
(1) ``Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Services'',
$1,400,000,000.
(2) ``Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Support and
Compliance'', $100,000,000.
(3) ``Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Facilities'',
$250,000,000.
(b) In addition to amounts provided elsewhere in this Act,
an additional amount is appropriated to the following
accounts in the amounts specified to remain available until
September 30, 2015:
(1) ``Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Services'',
$1,400,000,000.
(2) ``Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Support and
Compliance'', $100,000,000.
(3) ``Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Facilities'',
$250,000,000.
Sec. 226. The Secretary of the Department of Veterans
Affairs shall notify the Committees on Appropriations of both
Houses of Congress of all bid savings in major construction
projects that total at least $5,000,000, or 5 percent of the
programmed amount of the project, whichever is less:
Provided, That such notification shall occur within 14 days
of a contract identifying the programmed amount: Provided
further, That the Secretary shall notify the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress 14 days prior to
the obligation of such bid savings and shall describe the
anticipated use of such savings.
Sec. 227. The scope of work for a project included in
``Construction, Major Projects'' may not be increased above
the scope specified for that project in the original
justification data provided to the Congress as part of the
request for appropriations.
Sec. 228. The Secretary of the Department of Veterans
Affairs shall provide on a quarterly basis to the Committees
on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress notification of
any single national outreach and awareness marketing campaign
in which obligations exceed $2,000,000.
Sec. 229. The Secretary shall submit to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a reprogramming
request if at any point during fiscal year 2014, the funding
allocated for a medical care initiative identified in the
fiscal year 2014 expenditure plan is adjusted by more than
$25,000,000 from the allocation shown in the corresponding
congressional budget justification. Such a reprogramming
request may go forward only if the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress approve the request
or if a period of 14 days has elapsed.
(including rescission of funds)
Sec. 230. Discretionary fiscal year 2014 appropriations in
this title are hereby reduced by $24,000,000: Provided, That
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall allocate this
reduction within the accounts to which the reduction is
applied: Provided further, That $156,000,000 are hereby
rescinded from the fiscal year 2014 funds appropriated in
title II of division E of Public Law 113-6 for ``Department
of Veterans Affairs, Medical Services'', ``Department of
Veterans Affairs, Medical Support and Compliance'', and
``Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Facilities'':
Provided further, That the Secretary shall allocate this
rescission among the three accounts.
TITLE III
RELATED AGENCIES
American Battle Monuments Commission
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the
American Battle Monuments Commission, including the
acquisition of land or interest in land in foreign countries;
purchases and repair of uniforms for caretakers of national
cemeteries and monuments outside of the United States and its
territories and possessions; rent of office and garage space
in foreign countries; purchase (one-for-one replacement basis
only) and hire of passenger motor vehicles; not to exceed
$7,500 for official reception and representation expenses;
and insurance of official motor vehicles in foreign
countries, when required by law of such countries,
$57,980,000, to remain available until expended.
foreign currency fluctuations account
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the
American Battle Monuments Commission, such sums as may be
necessary, to remain available until expended, for purposes
authorized by section 2109 of title 36, United States Code.
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses for the operation of the United
States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims as authorized by
sections 7251 through 7298 of title 38, United States Code,
$35,272,000: Provided, That $2,500,000 shall be available for
the purpose of providing financial assistance as described,
and in accordance with the process and reporting procedures
set forth, under this heading in Public Law 102-229.
Department of Defense--Civil
Cemeterial Expenses, Army
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses, as authorized by law, for
maintenance, operation, and improvement of Arlington National
Cemetery and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery,
including the purchase or lease of passenger motor vehicles
for replacement on a one-for-one basis only, and not to
exceed $1,000 for official reception and representation
expenses, $70,685,000. In addition, such sums as may be
necessary for parking maintenance, repairs and replacement,
to be derived from the ``Lease of Department of Defense Real
Property for Defense Agencies'' account.
Armed Forces Retirement Home
trust fund
For expenses necessary for the Armed Forces Retirement Home
to operate and maintain the Armed Forces Retirement Home--
Washington, District of Columbia, and the Armed Forces
Retirement Home--Gulfport, Mississippi, to be paid from funds
available in the Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund,
$67,400,000, of which $1,000,000 shall remain available until
expended for construction and renovation of the physical
plants at the Armed Forces Retirement Home--Washington,
District of Columbia, and the Armed Forces Retirement Home--
Gulfport, Mississippi.
Administrative Provision
Sec. 301. Funds appropriated in this Act under the heading
``Department of Defense--Civil, Cemeterial Expenses, Army'',
may be provided to Arlington County, Virginia, for the
relocation of the federally owned water main at Arlington
National Cemetery, making additional land available for
ground burials.
TITLE IV
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 401. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 402. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used for any program, project, or activity, when it is
made known to the Federal entity or official to which the
funds are made available that the program, project, or
activity is not in compliance with any Federal law relating
to risk assessment, the protection of private property
rights, or unfunded mandates.
Sec. 403. No part of any funds appropriated in this Act
shall be used by an agency of the executive branch, other
than for normal and recognized executive-legislative
relationships, for publicity or propaganda purposes, and for
the preparation, distribution, or use of any kit, pamphlet,
booklet, publication, radio, television, or film presentation
designed to support or defeat legislation pending before
Congress, except in presentation to Congress itself.
Sec. 404. All departments and agencies funded under this
Act are encouraged, within the limits of the existing
statutory authorities and funding, to expand their use of
``E-Commerce'' technologies and procedures in the conduct of
their business practices and public service activities.
Sec. 405. Unless stated otherwise, all reports and
notifications required by this Act shall be submitted to the
Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs,
and Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives and the Subcommittee on Military
Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies of
the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.
Sec. 406. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States Government except pursuant to a transfer
made by, or transfer authority provided in, this or any other
appropriations Act.
Sec. 407. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used for a project or program named for an individual
serving as a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of
the United States House of Representatives.
Sec. 408. (a) Any agency receiving funds made available in
this Act, shall, subject to subsections (b) and (c), post on
the public website of that agency any report required to be
submitted by the Congress in this or any other Act, upon the
determination by the head of the agency that it shall serve
the national interest.
(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to a report if--
(1) the public posting of the report compromises national
security; or
(2) the report contains confidential or proprietary
information.
(c) The head of the agency posting such report shall do so
only after such report has been made available to the
requesting Committee or Committees of Congress for no less
than 45 days.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Sec. 409. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act
may be used to maintain or establish a computer network
unless such network blocks the viewing, downloading, and
exchanging of pornography.
(b) Nothing in subsection (a) shall limit the use of funds
necessary for any Federal, State, tribal, or local law
enforcement agency or any other entity carrying out criminal
investigations, prosecution, or adjudication activities.
Sec. 410. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be distributed to the Association of Community Organizations
for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries or successors.
Sec. 411. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used by an agency of the
[[Page H3072]]
executive branch to exercise the power of eminent domain (to
take the private property for public use) without the payment
of just compensation.
Sec. 412. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used by an agency of the executive branch to pay for
first-class travel by an employee of the agency in
contravention of sections 301-10.122 through 301-10.124 of
title 41, Code of Federal Regulations.
Sec. 413. (a) In General.--None of the funds appropriated
or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense in
this Act may be used to construct, renovate, or expand any
facility in the United States, its territories, or
possessions to house any individual detained at United States
Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the purposes of
detention or imprisonment in the custody or under the control
of the Department of Defense.
(b) The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to
any modification of facilities at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(c) An individual described in this subsection is any
individual who, as of June 24, 2009, is located at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and who--
(1) is not a citizen of the United States or a member of
the Armed Forces of the United States; and
(2) is--
(A) in the custody or under the effective control of the
Department of Defense; or
(B) otherwise under detention at United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Moran
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Strike section 413.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, section 413 prohibits any funds, no matter
how small they might be, to renovate or expand any facility in the U.S.
for the purposes of housing Guantanamo detainees. The fact is that the
Department of Defense does have six facilities where Guantanamo Bay
detainees could be held in the United States. Those facilities are
currently operating at only 48 percent capacity.
Mr. Chairman, if we were to look deeply into this issue of detention
at Guantanamo Bay, we would conclude: number one, that this detention
facility doesn't meet the standards of justice that our American
jurisprudence system demands; number two, the vast majority of people
at Guantanamo Bay should have been released. Even the Bush
Administration recognized by their actions, that the vast majority of
the 779 people that were put there should never have been detained,
because they released most of them; number three, the best place for
them to be detained and then tried is in the United States; and number
four, the continuance of the Guantanamo Bay facility represents an
immediate security threat to the United States because it is a rallying
cry and a recruitment tool for our enemies.
Right now, there are more than a hundred detainees that are
protesting what appears to be an indefinite detention the only way they
can--through hunger strikes. Thirty-seven of them are being tube-fed
through their noses into their stomach. They're held for about 2 hours
to make sure that this liquid stuff is digested.
Guantanamo has become an immediate humanitarian crisis. It needs to
be addressed urgently because the rest of the world can't understand
why we don't do the right thing by those detainees who still are at
Guantanamo Bay, whom we have cleared. In fact, the Bush administration
cleared them for release because they had no evidence on them.
President Obama has asked the Congress to lift restrictions on detainee
transfers. He's asked DOD to identify a site in the United States for
military commissions.
{time} 1710
They will appoint a senior envoy charged with transferring detainees
to third countries and he's got to lift the restriction on transfers to
Yemen. He's going to staff the periodic review board for those that
cannot be transferred. I think he should use the certification and
waiver provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act to transfer
detainees from Guantanamo beginning with the reported 86 detainees
already cleared for transfer.
But he can't do what he needs to do for our national security as long
as the language of section 413 is in this bill. That's why my amendment
would remove this restriction. What we're doing does not comport with
America's system of justice or with fairness. And as I say, I believe
it's a direct threat to our national security.
So, Mr. Chairman, I would urge that we remove this language by voting
for my amendment. We have Department of Defense facilities, they're
being underused in the United States, and that's the way that we could
clear up a situation that we never should have created in the first
place.
At this point--well, can I reserve time in order to respond to Mr.
Culberson?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman may not reserve time. Does the
gentleman yield back?
Mr. MORAN. I suspected not. So at this point I will yield back, and
I'm anxious to hear from the chairman of the subcommittee.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the
gentleman's amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, this language is in the bill because it
has strong, bipartisan support. The American people do not want these
terrorists, these criminals, captured either on battlefields overseas
or who have sworn to kill innocent American men, women and children
housed in American prisons.
In the Second World War, Nazi soldiers--saboteurs--landed on Long
Island and on the beaches of Florida carrying explosives with the
intent of killing innocent Americans. Franklin Roosevelt, as President,
when they were captured, they were held and tried in the military, and
within 90 days they were executed. The prisoners at Guantanamo Bay,
quite frankly, are being treated much more leniently than I think they
should be, than most Americans think they should be.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strenuous opposition to the gentleman's
amendment. I'd like to, if I could, yield the remainder of my initial
time in opposition to my good friend, the chairman of the Commerce,
Justice, Science Subcommittee, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
Mr. WOLF. I rise in opposition to my good friend's--and we are good
friends--amendment. Let me tell you why. One, at the outset, in the
President's first term, an executive order declared the intention to
close Guantanamo Bay and bring the detainees to the United States. That
proposal was rejected by the Congress overwhelmingly on a bipartisan
basis.
Similar language is carried in a Commerce, State, Justice bill on the
subcommittee on which I serve. These provisions reflect a consensus of
this and previous Congresses.
But let me tell you some of the real reasons why this is a bad and
even, I would say, a dangerous amendment.
Several of these men who have been released from Guantanamo have gone
back into the battlefield and have killed Americans. Secondly, Director
Mueller, and I don't have the letter here, but I will give it to my
friend, said this could have an impact on local jails, the locality of
the jails. Do you remember the Blind Sheikh Rahman when Officer Pepe
was stabbed in the eye with regard to an escape? To bring people like
this into the United States could have an impact not only on the jail
but also on the community.
To bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to the United States would cost
roughly, if you recall, $250 million a year. Moussaoui, who was tried
in the gentleman's district in Alexandria, it literally upset
Alexandria, and if you take the same timeframe that Moussaoui was tried
in, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's trial would go on for 4 years, would cost
$1 billion--$250 million a year.
Do you remember when this idea first came out, Mayor Bloomberg said
nothing, and Chuck Schumer said nothing, and then all of a sudden
everything broke loose and Mayor Bloomberg came out against it and
Senator Schumer came out against it.
Lastly, the Bureau of Prisons, we had to give Holder the ability to
reprogram money because they were going to furlough prison guards. They
were going to furlough prison guards. So to bring people like this in
to put this stress on the Bureau of Prisons would be absolutely crazy.
Let me just debunk another thing. For people who say, and I heard the
[[Page H3073]]
President say it, that Guantanamo causes terrorism, Guantanamo Bay
Prison was not there when 9/11 took place. The Blind Sheikh who was
involved in trying to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993, there was
no Guantanamo. It's a hoax to say that. What you say is not true. It's
false. To say that Bin Laden and people like that, we're going to say,
oh, well, the Congress and the administration they're going to close
down Guantanamo, we're going to close down al Qaeda, we're going to
close down all the terrorism, it just doesn't make any sense.
This is a bad amendment. The gentleman is a good friend, but it's a
bad amendment, and it's a very dangerous amendment and it would cost a
lot of money and, quite frankly, I think would endanger the locality.
If you vote for this amendment, you'd better be prepared. What
locality wants to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to their local
neighborhood. What locality wants to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to
their county, to their State? I say none. I urge a ``no'' vote on the
amendment.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I would just also say that bringing
these terrorists in to the United States we would be giving them
American constitutional rights, a very precious, very special privilege
that is reserved for the people of the United States. These people
should be tried in military court and treated as prisoners of war and
the criminals and the cowards that they are. And I urge a ``no'' vote
against the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I stand today also concerned about the policy
on Guantanamo Bay detention facility. And as I listened to my colleague
and as I consider the speech from the President last week, it is very,
very clear that there needs to be additional debate on this subject.
Also I understand that the House Armed Services Committee will be
holding discussions on this very important issue in the coming days as
they begin marking up the National Defense Authorization Act.
And so I say to my colleagues that this issue deserves a more
vigorous debate but that this is not the proper venue to hold that
debate. As I stated in my opening remarks today, this bill was crafted
and brought to the floor as a result of bipartisan work and compromise
due to the committee's commitment to our servicemembers, their families
and to all of our veterans.
This is a deeply, deeply controversial issue that I believe requires
much more in-depth discussion than we can have here today. And I
respectfully submit that this appropriations bill is not the
appropriate venue for discussion and action on this very, very
controversial policy. Today is not the time, and this bill, I submit,
is not the place.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Sec. 414. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to execute a contract for goods or services,
including construction services, where the contractor has not
complied with Executive Order No. 12989.
Sec. 415. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of
understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant
to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation
that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any
Federal law within the preceding 24 months, where the
awarding agency is aware of the conviction, unless the agency
has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and
has made a determination that this further action is not
necessary to protect the interests of the Government.
Sec. 416. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of
understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant
to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation
that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been
assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies
have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being
paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the
authority responsible for collecting the tax liability, where
the awarding agency is aware of the unpaid tax liability,
unless the agency has considered suspension or debarment of
the corporation and has made a determination that this
further action is not necessary to protect the interests of
the Government.
Sec. 417. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to wind down or otherwise alter the implementation of
a program, project, or activity in anticipation of any change
(including any elimination or reduction of funding) proposed
in a budget request, until such proposed change is
subsequently enacted in an appropriation Act.
spending reduction account
Sec. 418. The amount by which the applicable allocation of
new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives under section 302(b) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 exceeds the amount of
proposed new budget authority is $0.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Farr
Mr. FARR. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement Veterans Health Administration directive
2011-004 regarding ``Access to clinical programs for veterans
participating in State-approved marijuana programs''.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
{time} 1720
Mr. FARR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have a very simple
amendment. As most Members know, 19 States and the District of Colombia
have enacted laws that provide for the legal access to medical
marijuana. Two of those States provide access to marijuana for more
than medicinal purposes.
In checking out the rules within the VA on the matter of medical
marijuana, it turns out that there is a policy in force, which is
called Directive 2011-004, that specifically ``prohibits VA providers
from completing forms seeking recommendations or opinions regarding a
veteran's participation in a State marijuana program.''
My amendment denies the VA any funds to implement that prohibition,
thus freeing up the VA doctors to assist VA patients in accessing
medical marijuana outside of the VA system. All this amendment does is
make it possible for the VA doctors to provide medical advice to the VA
patients on the relative pros and cons of medical marijuana if they
want to have that discussion. For those doctors who wish to offer
recommendations to VA patients on accessing medical marijuana, they are
no longer prohibited from doing so.
Essentially, the VA order is a censorship in those 19 States and the
District of Columbia saying that doctors can't even have this
discussion, yet the civilians going to a civilian doctor can have that
discussion. So what we're doing is removing the ability for the VA to
enforce that provision thinking that that's fair.
This is a very controversial, I know, issue of medical marijuana, but
in those States that have made it the law of that State, then veterans
ought to be treated equally with civilian patients in being able to
have access to the total array of applicable medical devices, including
the use of medical marijuana.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate my colleague, Mr. Farr, bringing this forward. I agree
with what he said, except for one item. And that is that somehow
medical marijuana is intensely controversial. What we're finding is
that with the American public it's no longer really that controversial.
As he said, 20 jurisdictions, 19 States and the District of Columbia,
have approved medical marijuana to be available to their citizens. Over
1 million Americans are people who are legally entitled to have the
qualities of medical marijuana.
[[Page H3074]]
It has long been recognized that it has therapeutic values. They use
it to deal with chronic paralyzing pain, the nausea associated with
chemotherapy, symptoms of multiple sclerosis. There are many
applications that are going to make a difference to our veterans
dealing with traumatic brain injury or PTSD.
Now, it is ironic that when we are trying to have a veterans health
system that deals with the total patient--and the committee just
supported an amendment that I had earlier to help give them alternative
therapies--that we would prohibit a VA doctor from even discussing a
therapy that is perfectly legal in 20 jurisdictions.
What is the rationale here to prohibit the doctor from being able to
have that conversation, forcing our veterans to go outside the system
and incur additional costs? I think it is a misguided policy in the
extreme.
We are in the process now where the majority of Americans think that
marijuana should be legalized; and if you ask the question, ``Should we
respect the decisions of States?'' that majority gets even bigger. Over
60 percent say the Federal Government ought not to interfere.
But here, the Veterans Administration is prohibited from giving
candid advice to people in our system, people who could benefit, like
the over 1 million legal medical marijuana patients. I think that's
inappropriate. I think it's unfortunate. I think we should do
everything we can to try and relieve the pain and suffering that our
veterans are incurring; and if it means having a conversation with a VA
doctor about something perfectly legal in their community, I think
that's the least we could do.
I commend the gentleman for bringing the amendment forward, and I
hope that the day will come when we provide this service to veterans
who would like information about it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there further debate on the amendment?
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Kingston
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act
may be used to pay more than 75 percent of the salary of any
senior Department of Veterans Affairs official during the
period beginning on July 1, 2014, and ending on September 30,
2014, unless as of July 1, 2014, the percentage of disability
compensation claims that are more than 125 days old is less
than or equal to 40 percent.
(b) In this section, the term ``senior Department of
Veterans Affairs official'' means the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs, the Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and any
Under Secretary or Assistant Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KINGSTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This bill provides $43.6
billion for medical treatment for the 6.5 million veterans today who
use the VA. It increases funding for processes, such as the electronic
health record system and the disability claims process, the paperless
environment, and yet that's what we did last year and the year before.
Nonetheless, today, as we sit here, the VA has 865,265 claims in
their backlog; 66\1/2\ percent of these claims have been pending for
more than 125 days. The current claim to be processed, the current
amount of time is 292 days, and some offices report some claims that
have been pending for 450 days.
This is not acceptable. But every year we provide more money for the
VA to process claims, and every year the backlog gets more.
So what this amendment does is it takes a different approach. It
takes an approach that's used in the private sector on a regular basis
for compensation. It says to the senior members of the VA that if they
don't have the claims backlog reduced by 40 percent by next July, the
senior leadership will have a pay cut of 25 percent. Mr. Chairman, this
follows their own goal. All it says is that if you don't make your own
goal, there will be a 25 percent pay reduction for the senior
management of the VA.
I think everyone in Congress has a VA office with problems in their
own district. In Decatur, Georgia, a VA hospital that serves 86,000
patients in the State of Georgia has a backlog of over 4,000--or 4,000
patients have fallen through the cracks. Three deaths occurred over the
past 2 years when the VA lost track of mental health patients and
referred it to a contractor while not keeping a close eye on them while
they were supposed to be monitored.
{time} 1730
One may have committed suicide because he could not see a doctor and
had an overdose of his treatment. There are other atrocities that have
happened in that one VA clinic. Again, Mr. Chairman, this is not
adequate. This is not acceptable. For our veterans, we need to treat
them better.
I am a member of the Armed Services Committee and often say that the
American soldier needs to have the best equipment and the best training
that's out there because we want them to fight and win wars; but we
also want them to come home and live normal lives, so we need to make
sure that our treatment of the American military does not end in a
theater of war but continues throughout the rest of their lives. As the
claims or as the injuries that they incurred while rendering service to
the Nation haunt them for the rest of their lives, we need to be there
for them for their medical treatment.
This amendment sends a very strong signal to the VA that we are
serious that this backlog will be cleaned up and that, if not, there
will be a price to pay.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. I believe Mr. Kingston has correctly identified the
problem in the private sector. If you don't meet a performance goal,
you're going to suffer a cut in pay. You can be discharged from your
job. Mr. Kingston correctly points out that the VA set their own
standard. They have set this goal of eliminating the backlog by the
year 2015. Mr. Kingston's amendment simply says that, if they don't
meet their own standard--their own yardstick, a measurement of success
in reducing the backlog--that there will be a pay cut of 25 percent to
the senior leadership that is responsible for setting this goal, that's
responsible for leading the VA and executing this goal.
Congress is, frankly, tired of the delays, tired of the excuses, and
we want our veterans to receive what they have earned. We want to be
sure that they are given compensation for the injuries they suffered in
the course of service to the United States of America, so I urge the
adoption of Mr. Kingston's amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I could not agree more with the gentleman from
Georgia that the claims backlog is absolutely unacceptable.
I think the chairman of the full Appropriations Committee, the
ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee, the chairman of
our subcommittee, and yours truly as the ranking member of the
subcommittee have met with and have criticized and have done everything
that we could possibly do to try to bring to the attention of the
Veterans Administration and the Secretary of the need to have this
backlog addressed, and I do think we address that in this bill; but I
must rise in opposition to this amendment.
When I talk to veterans, the number one issue that they always have
is the claims and claims backlog. The number one issue being worked on
by my staff in southwest Georgia is VA claims and the claims backlog. I
believe that what we have done in this bill will finally do something
about the backlog.
Now let me just put a pin right there for a moment. The backlog,
while inexcusable, does have some basis.
[[Page H3075]]
Just a couple of years ago, this Congress, in an effort to support
our Vietnam era veterans, made it possible for the Agent Orange claims
to be covered by the VA even though that had been an ongoing issue for
the two decades that I've been a Member of Congress. As a result of
that, there was a great surge of VA claims by Vietnam veterans, which
added to the backlog. Add to that the returning veterans from Iraq and
now from Afghanistan, which has added even more to that backlog,
resulting in the now almost 850,000 claims when, 2 years ago, before
the Agent Orange claims, we had just about eliminated that backlog.
I think that, even though there is some justification, the backlog is
inexcusable, but in this bill that we are debating right now, we've
done something about the backlog:
First, the bill fully funds the general operating expenses by the
VBA, which will support 20,851 claims processors, which is 94 more than
in last year's bill, and all 94 of these new claims processors will
work disability claims. The bill fully funds the Veterans Benefits
Management System at $155 million and the Veterans Claims Intake
Program at $136.4 million. These two efforts should speed up the VA's
efforts to take old claims that are filed on paper and convert them
into digital files that are easily searchable by the claims processors,
thus speeding up the claims process;
Second, we include a monthly reporting requirement for the VA to
provide Congress with several statistics, such as the average wait time
at each regional office, the rating inventory that has been pending for
125 days, rating claims accuracy, and month-to-month updates of any
changes in those statistics;
Third, we require a report on the VA's expedited claims initiative
that was announced just a few weeks ago. This report should give the
committee insight into whether or not the Secretary's new initiative is
having a positive result.
I believe that we should let the measures in this bill take effect
before we turn to these more drastic measures. I understand the
frustration that the gentleman feels and that is felt by most of the
Members of this Congress, and I understand the frustration that is felt
by our veterans and even by the Secretary, who is quite frustrated. I
am open to all reasonable methods to solve the problem, but I believe
that we should avoid measures like this as it is unnecessarily
punitive, and I believe that the measures that we have put forth in
this bill will adequately get results, accountability, and ultimately
meet our objective of eliminating the claims backlog by 2015.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. I ask unanimous consent to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. I yield to my good friend, the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Kingston).
Mr. KINGSTON. I thank the gentleman from Texas for the time.
To my friend from Georgia, who I know is just as fervent as we are in
terms of cleaning up the backlog, I would say the only part with which
we are in disagreement is this approach, again emphasizing that this
committee has provided the adequate funding to reduce the backlog. We
did it last year, and we did it the year before, and we did it the year
before that.
What we are doing with this amendment is what the private sector does
every single day--it bases compensation on performance. We are saying,
if you don't perform to your own guidelines, there will be a
compensation penalty for it.
Congress has reduced its expenses, depending on the committee,
anywhere from 8 to 14 percent. We have not had a COLA in several years
now. In fact, the only way the United States Senate passed a budget
this year was because of an amendment that was offered, called ``no
budget, no pay,'' and the House passed a budget, too, under that
threat. One way you do get people's attention is to say, You have got
to perform in your job or there will be a salary cut. That's all we're
doing.
For the men and women who put their lives on the line for our country
that we could have this debate today and that we can go about our lives
tomorrow and the next day and raise families in a free and independent
country, we owe it to them. A backlog of 800,000 claims is not
acceptable, and we are tired of talking about it. This amendment takes
the final step. We are going to make a change. We are going to get that
backlog cleaned up.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, it's common sense that your performance
should be tied to your pay, so I urge the adoption of the gentleman
from Georgia's amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
The amendment was agreed to.
{time} 1740
Amendment Offered by Ms. Kuster
Ms. KUSTER. I have an amendment at the desk and offer that amendment
at this time.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used for any conference (as described in the Office of
Management and Budget memorandum M-12-12, ``Promoting
Efficient Spending to Support Agency Operations'', dated May
11, 2012) for which the cost to the agency exceeds $500,000.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New Hampshire is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. KUSTER. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is straightforward. It would
prohibit the Federal Government from spending more than $500,000 of the
funds appropriated by this bill on any single conference. This
amendment would simply enforce the Obama administration's May 11, 2012,
Office of Management and Budget memorandum promoting efficient
spending.
I understand the need for the VA and other agencies to invest in
workforce development, and I recognize the role that conferences can
play in improving services for our constituents. But from the GSA to
the IRS, time and again we have seen Federal agencies misuse public
funds at conferences and make expenditures of questionable value. In
recent years, this problem has extended to the VA.
In 2011, the VA spent over $6 million on just two conferences. This
prompted an investigation by the Department's Inspector General, who
documented numerous examples of excessive cost and unnecessary and
unsupported expenditures, including over $49,000 for a parody video,
over $97,000 for unnecessary promotional items, and over $43,000 in
awards paid to the staff managing these conferences.
We can all agree that the VA should focus its limited resources on
its core mission: serving those brave men and women who have worn the
uniform and served our country.
There are so many worthwhile uses for VA funding, from eliminating
the egregious claims backlog, to improving support for survivors of
military sexual trauma, to expanding access to health care services in
rural communities such as in my district in the northern town of
Colebrook, New Hampshire, on the Canadian border.
I commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their support
for America's veterans.
Out of respect for our constituents during these times of enhanced
fiscal responsibility and in service to our veterans, I urge my
colleagues to support this commonsense amendment.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Kuster).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Rothfus
Mr. ROTHFUS. I have an amendment at the desk printed as No. 3 in the
Congressional Record.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to pay a
performance award under section 5384 of title 5, United
States Code.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5
minutes.
[[Page H3076]]
Mr. ROTHFUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to stand with our Nation's
veterans and their families.
We owe our veterans a debt of gratitude that can never be repaid. As
public servants, we have a solemn obligation to make sure that our
veterans receive the respect, support, and care that they have earned
and rightly expect.
That responsibility extends to employees and executives of the
Department of Veterans Affairs. Unfortunately, the VA has failed
veterans in western Pennsylvania and around the Nation.
This failure has resulted in the outrageous disability claims backlog
and the unconscionable death of five veterans at the VA Pittsburgh
Health Care System. In light of these unresolved problems, no one in
the senior leadership of the VA should be paid a performance bonus.
Today, over 865,000 veterans around the Nation are waiting to receive
disability benefits from the VA. Of those veterans, almost 576,000 are
considered part of the VA backlog, meaning their claims have been
pending for more than 125 days.
On average, our Nation's veterans must wait between 316 and 327 days
for their first-time disability claims to be processed. Wait times in
major population centers and in my district are often longer. For
example, veterans must wait 642 days in New York, 619 days in Los
Angeles, 542 days in Chicago, 517 days in Philadelphia, and 625 days in
Pittsburgh.
The number of veterans who have been forced to wait more than a year
to receive their benefits has grown by more than 2,000 percent over the
last 4 years, despite significant increases in the VA's budget during
the same time period.
In addition, a study conducted by the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review found
that veterans who disagree with the VA's initial decision must wait
even longer. That study found that it takes an average of 1,040 days
for the agency to make decisions in appeals cases. That's almost 3
years.
In fact, some veterans wait so long that they die before their claims
are processed. The Trib-Review study found almost 3,000 cases between
2009 and 2013 in which veterans or their surviving spouses died before
getting decisions on their disputed claims.
Western Pennsylvania veterans have recently seen even more egregious
failures of the VA firsthand in the death of five veterans due to an
outbreak of Legionnaires' disease. The VA Inspector General found that
the systemic failure of the Pittsburgh VA to follow its own safety
protocols and a breakdown in communication resulted in these
unconscionable deaths.
Four days after the Inspector General's report was released, the
regional director of the Pittsburgh VA was awarded an almost $63,000
bonus and presented with the Presidential Distinguished Rank award.
In total, the VA gave its senior executives bonuses totaling $2.8
million in 2011 and $2.3 million in 2012. Paying bonuses to executives
of an organization with this kind of abysmal performance record is
ridiculous. In the private sector, this level of performance
achievement is rewarded with a pink slip, not a bonus check.
Rather, this hard-earned taxpayer money should be properly directed
towards fixing the problems at the VA and ensuring that our veterans
receive the first-rate service and care they rightfully deserve. VA
executives need to take responsibility, fix these problems, and do
their jobs.
I urge my colleagues to stand with our veterans and their families
and support the Rothfus-Roby-Tipton-Kelly-Huelskamp amendment.
Mrs. ROBY. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ROTHFUS. I yield to the gentlewoman from Alabama.
Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to rise in support of the
gentleman's amendment and I just want to add--and you've heard the
statistics--that the number of backlogged cases--each case represents a
veteran who may have earned a benefit but is currently being denied
because of bureaucratic delay.
In the last 4 years, the number of VA claims pending for longer than
a year has grown by 2,000 percent.
An award of a bonus should be a special recognition of success and
accomplishment, not a right or a routine payment.
Mr. Chairman, I don't consider a backlog of over 1.2 million cases to
be cause for celebration or reward. I consider it a catastrophe that
must be fixed. Restricting the ability to award bonuses until that
backlog is cleared is a commonsense good-government policy. I'm pleased
to support my colleague's amendment. It is a strong step in that
direction.
Mr. ROTHFUS. Reclaiming my time, I urge my colleagues to stand with
our veterans and their families by supporting this amendment and yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting Chair. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to lend my support for the
underlying bill we are debating today that addresses critical health
care, housing, education, and unemployment needs for our soldiers who
are deploying and our veterans who are returning from the battlefield.
The Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
Appropriations measure is one of the most important pieces of
legislation Congress considers annually. It provides the necessary
funding to house, train, and equip our brave men and women in uniform,
support our military families, and maintain our military base
infrastructure. Put simply, no one should stand ahead of our men and
women in uniform or our Nation's veterans when it comes to making
Federal funding decisions.
Critical to this discussion is the priority placed on investments in
medical care for our Active Duty servicemembers and veterans.
I appreciate that the committee continues the precedence set in past
years of providing advanced appropriations for the VA.
{time} 1750
Allowing for advanced appropriations provides a platform for long-
term planning and investment in critical programs that meet the
emerging needs of our servicemembers and military families.
I want to personally thank the committee for providing these
resources that will allow our VA hospitals, including those in my
district, to prepare adequately for the number of veterans returning
home from deployment. This approach will provide flexibility to
capitalize on emerging technology and treatments that will ensure our
warriors here at home are receiving the very best health care possible.
As well, I would like to thank the committee for its important work
to ensure that we are maintaining investment in our military
installations. I applaud the inclusion of $35.8 million for the
construction of housing units at Naval Station Great Lakes, located in
my district. This funding will allow more servicemembers to receive the
training they need, while not overburdening them with complicated,
temporary housing conditions.
This forward-looking investment is one that illustrates how we can
further utilize existing military infrastructure to achieve
efficiencies in training and services. I want to again thank the
committee for its work on this important bipartisan bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, we are all outraged in regards
to the claims backlog and the incidences of poor quality health
services and safety. The current claims backlog is, as we have said
over and over today, unacceptable. There is no question that the VA has
failed to successfully deliver one of its key missions--to provide
timely ratings of disability.
Given this failure, it is hard to imagine how VA leaders responsible
for disability claims rating and the claims processing transformation
could warrant high performance ratings and substantial bonuses. It is
also clear that some VA health facilities have had serious issues that
put the health, safety, and well-being of veterans at risk. This, too,
is unacceptable. Where these failures have occurred, it is hard to
[[Page H3077]]
imagine how the VA leaders of these facilities could have received high
performance ratings and substantial bonuses.
However, this amendment will not provide any solution in the short
term, and in the long term it may have adverse consequences and
compound the very problem that it attempts to address.
Many VA workers are compassionate and hard workers. The previous
amendment that was adopted, which was adopted by this body by voice
vote, referenced models from the private sector by cutting pay,
reducing the pay by 25 percent until the backlog is reduced. However,
if you follow that same model from the private sector, bonuses are the
converse of that so that when those backlogs are reduced, and if there
is exceptional work that goes in to reducing that backlog by those
responsible at the VA, then appropriate bonuses could be granted.
This amendment, I submit, would make the VA a less attractive option
than other agencies when it comes to recruiting and retaining quality
executive leaders, and it will not have the very talent it needs to
solve the problems that it faces today, like the claims backlog and the
health care deficiencies.
Furthermore, the SES pay and bonuses are governed by title 5 of the
United States Code and administered by the Office of Personnel
Management. Any change to title 5 to address VA would then also apply
to all other Federal agencies. Attempting an across-the-board, one-
size-fits-all fix will penalize those dedicated VA executives who are
working hard, and well, to find solutions to the VA's problems.
So I urge our colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, that's the
Rothfus amendment, not because we don't have the challenges and the
obligation to eliminate this backlog and to do it forthwith, but
because I think we are going a little bit too far in attempting to
create a disincentive for people, not solving this backlog.
I think that recruitment and retention of people in the VA, talented
people, talented executives who can effectively solve the challenges
that we face, like eliminating the backlog, will be undermined if this
amendment should become law.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HUELSKAMP. I move to strike the last word, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kansas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HUELSKAMP. Mr. Chairman, I won't take quite that long, but I
appreciate the opportunity to visit about this amendment. I have always
thought bonuses and performance awards to employees should only be
given out to those who go above and beyond the expectations laid out in
their job description. An end-of-the-year bonus should never be an
assumed addition to an employee's paycheck, but the Department of
Veterans Affairs apparently takes a very different approach to
performance awards for many of their employees, particularly top-level
administrators and supervisors.
As a member of the VA Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee,
we've held multiple hearings on the mismanagement and negligence of
Federal employees at the VA. What's worse, many of these individuals
have been rewarded for their behavior.
We're all aware of the situation at the VA Pittsburgh health care
system and the outbreak of Legionnaires' disease, but how many of us
know that the individual in charge received a bonus for the very year
that we potentially had five deaths from that outbreak that could have
been prevented?
At another hearing conducted by our Oversight Investigations
Committee, I recently asked a VA bureaucrat who had missed deadlines
and overspent on VA construction projects of over a billion dollars to
explain why he deserved $55,000 in bonuses. In our exchange, he had no
idea--claimed to have no idea why he received this bonus; and,
actually, neither did I, Mr. Chairman.
Earlier this afternoon, much more troubling, we had another VA
Oversight hearing where it was revealed that potentially up to 20
million veterans' records have been hacked and perhaps accessed by
foreign state actors, and the individual in charge of the security
during these last 4 years when this apparently occurred has received
over $87,000 in bonuses. This has become a trend within the VA
departments, and I believe taxpayer dollars would be better directed
towards protecting the sensitive records of our veterans and their
dependents and improving veterans' health care options.
I support this amendment. I am glad my colleague from Pennsylvania
has offered it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I want to express my support for this
amendment. I share the gentleman's intense frustration with the VA for
their failure to meet their own guidelines and their own deadlines for
eliminating the backlog, and I urge adoption of the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Rothfus).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson
Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the
following new section:
SEC.___. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to enter into a contract with any offeror or any of
its principals if the offeror certifies, as required by
Federal Acquisition Regulation, that the offeror or any of
its principals:
(A) within a three-year period preceding this offer has
been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against it
for: commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection
with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public
(Federal, State, or local) contract or subcontract; violation
of Federal or State antitrust statutes relating to the
submission of offers; or commission of embezzlement, theft,
forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records,
making false statements, tax evasion, violating Federal
criminal tax laws, or receiving stolen property; or
(B) are presently indicated for, or otherwise criminally or
civilly charged by a governmental entity with, commission of
any of the offenses enumerated above in subsection (A); or
(C) within a three-year period preceding this officer, has
been notified of any delinquent Federal taxes in an amount
that exceeds $3,000 for which the liability remains
unsatisfied.
Mr. GRAYSON (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent
to waive the reading.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Florida?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, this amendment strengthens existing
provisions in the bill by preventing the award of contracts of money
allocated under this bill to offerers or principals of offerers who,
within the 3-year period preceding the offer, have been convicted or
had a civil judgment rendered against them for such action as fraud,
theft, bribery, making false statements, tax evasion, and so on.
{time} 1800
It would be unconscionable, Mr. Chairman, if we allowed taxpayer
money to be given to contractors who have been convicted of such things
as bribery; and, therefore, I offer this amendment to prevent that.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Runyan
Mr. RUNYAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the
following new section:
Sec. 419. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to propose, plan for, or execute a new or additional
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. RUNYAN. Mr. Chairman, my amendment states that none of the funds
made available by this act may
[[Page H3078]]
be used to propose, plan, or execute a new or an additional round of
base realignment and closure, otherwise known as BRAC.
We all recognize the budget pressures we face. A round of BRAC
closures now will entail a large up-front cost. We should direct these
limited dollars to addressing the current mission and readiness needs
supporting our warfighters.
For that reason, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment,
which helps ensure these funds address current needs. I know that many
Members of this Chamber want Congress to continue to have oversight of
our base and force structure, and my amendment ensures that we do so.
I thank the chairman and members of the subcommittee for working with
me on this important amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I just want to express my support for
the gentleman's amendment and urge its adoption by the House.
I yield back the balance of my time
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Runyan).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Murphy of Florida
Mr. MURPHY of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to award any contract in an amount greater than
$1,000,000 for which the Department of Defense did not
receive at least two offers.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. MURPHY of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an
amendment to the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs
appropriations bill that would boost competitive bidding across defense
construction projects.
The Department of Defense manages hundreds of billions of dollars in
contracts each year, 43 percent of which are noncompetitively awarded.
The Government Accountability Office has reported that the Department
of Defense does not keep accurate records of which contracts received
multiple bids or why sole-sourced contracts are awarded. This is not
good government.
Competition works because it drives down cost while giving consumers
greater choice. It is the cornerstone of our free-market economy and
needs to be integrated throughout the government.
I recently introduced the SAVE Act with my colleague, Representative
David Joyce from Ohio, to root out wasteful and duplicative government
spending. The bipartisan legislation would implement several
commonsense solutions outlined by the GAO to reduce up to $200 billion
in spending over the next 10 years.
One of the 11 measures in my bill encourages the robust use of
competitive bidding to reduce contract costs across all agencies.
Today's amendment is an extension of the SAVE Act. It would prevent
the Department of Defense from spending the taxpayers' money on
contracts over $1 million that have not received at least two
competitive bids.
With the national deficit currently at almost $17 trillion, and the
current deficit over $600 billion annually, it is clear that we must
rein in government spending, but we must do it in a strategic way,
cutting programs that are wasteful, duplicative, or ineffective; and
this amendment would do just that.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
support this commonsense and cost-saving amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Murphy).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Terry
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the
following new section:
Sec. 419. None of the funds made available by this Act,
including the funds made available for ``Construction, Major
Projects'', may be used to increase the funding for any major
medical facility project (as defined in subsection (a)(3)(A)
of section 8104 of title 38, United States Code), which is
under construction as of the date of the enactment of this
Act, above the amount specified in the prospectus described
in subsection (b) of such section 8104 and the detailed
estimate of cost described in paragraph (1) of such
subsection.
Mr. TERRY (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
to waive the reading.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Nebraska?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Nebraska is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, the Terry amendment requests that none of
the funds made available by this act, including the funds made
available for the Construction and Major Projects account, be used to
increase funding for any major medical facility project that is under
construction as of the date of enactment of this act.
A major medical facility project, as defined by section 8104 of Title
38 in the U.S. Code, is a project that involves a total expenditure of
more than $10 million. This includes the cost overruns of new VA
hospitals.
Take the new VA Hospital in New Orleans that was originally supposed
to cost $625 million, but a new GAO report shows that the cost overruns
at this particular facility is $370 million, pushing that to a near-
billion-dollar hospital.
The Navy Times recently reported about a GAO report that clearly
illustrates this problem and should greatly disturb everyone. The
Government Accountability Office found that the VA Hospital
construction projects in Denver, Las Vegas, New Orleans, and Orlando
are, on average, experiencing delays of 35 months and cost overruns of
around $366 million. This comes out to about, with the expected costs
and the overruns, almost a billion dollars per hospital.
My amendment is designed to stop these cost overruns. In the Omaha
metropolitan area, eastern Nebraska and western Iowa, there's about
112,000 underserved veterans in Omaha that are all too familiar with
the cost overruns and delays associated with the building of VA
hospitals.
We have an almost 70-year-old facility in Omaha that is in dire need
of replacement. The infrastructure's decrepit; it's rusting away. The
HVAC system is so poor that we can't use many of the rooms. And then on
top of that, our seven operating rooms have been shut down recently.
Unfortunately, there's no telling when the VA is going to get to it.
The veterans in Omaha are being told that there's no money left.
This isn't just Omaha; this is occurring in California, Texas, and
all over the world. This is unfair to the seniors to have this level of
cost overruns and mismanagement.
So that's the purpose and reason behind this amendment, to start
making them focus on the bidding process, do it right, and not simply
just have a bid and then make all the additions and changes afterwards
that drive up the costs. And so I urge support for this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I would rise in support of the
gentleman's amendment. I share his concerns; and that's why, in section
227 of our bill, we included language that's very similar. And I look
forward to supporting the gentleman's amendment and working with him in
conference to make sure there's no duplication.
The committee is also concerned about increases in costs beyond that
originally specified on the project, and that's why we included the
section and why I welcome the gentleman's amendment and urge its
adoption.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Engel
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
[[Page H3079]]
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used by the Department of Defense or the Department of
Veterans Affairs to lease or purchase new light duty vehicles
for any executive fleet, or for an agency's fleet inventory,
except in accordance with Presidential Memorandum--Federal
Fleet Performance, dated May 24, 2011.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5
minutes.
{time} 1810
Mr. ENGEL. On May 24, 2011, President Obama issued a Memorandum on
Federal Fleet Performance that requires all new light-duty vehicles in
the Federal fleet to be alternate fuel vehicles, such as hybrid,
electric, natural gas, or biofuel, by December 31, 2015. My amendment
echoes the Presidential Memorandum by prohibiting funds in the Military
Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act from being used to lease or purchase new light-duty vehicles,
except in accord with the President's Memorandum.
Our transportation sector is by far the biggest reason we send $600
billion per year to hostile nations to pay for oil at ever-increasing
costs. But America does not need to be dependent on foreign sources of
oil for transportation fuel. Alternative technologies exist today that,
when implemented broadly, will allow any alternative fuel to be used in
America's automotive fleet. The Federal Government operates the largest
fleet of light-duty vehicles in America. According to GSA, there are
over 660,000 vehicles in the Federal fleet, with over 14,000 being used
by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
By supporting a diverse array of vehicle technologies in our Federal
fleet, we will encourage development of domestic energy resources,
including biomass, natural gas, agricultural waste, hydrogen, renewable
electricity, methanol, and ethanol. Expanding the role these energy
sources play in our transportation economy will help break the leverage
over Americans held by foreign government-controlled oil companies and
will increase our Nation's domestic security and protect consumers from
price spikes and shortages in the world oil markets.
Let me say that the gentlewoman from Florida, Congresswoman Ros-
Lehtinen, and I have a bill that would mandate that by a certain date
all vehicles made in America would be flex-fuel vehicles. It would cost
$100 or even less to make each vehicle flex-fuel. Other countries have
it. America should not be behind other countries. We will be
introducing this legislation shortly.
So I ask that my colleagues support the Engel amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Tipton
Mr. TIPTON. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amounts otherwise provided by this Act are
revised by reducing the amount made available for
``Department of Veterans Affairs--Departmental
Administration--General Administration'', and increasing the
amount made available for ``Department of Veterans Affairs--
Departmental Administration--Information Technology
Systems'', by $10,000,000.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today with an amendment to reduce
wasteful spending by the Department of Veterans Affairs on conferences
and use the money to be able to assist the VA backlog of processing
disability claims for veterans. Two-thirds of all veterans who file
disability claims with the VA must wait longer than 125 days to be able
to receive their benefits. I have seen this firsthand from constituents
in my district. People have contacted my office in sheer exasperation
by the lack of response and endless delays by the VA in processing
their claims.
This isn't a statistic we're talking about. This is literally
peoples' lives. Many of the veterans on the backlog are in desperate
need of care, care that has been delayed by needless lag of
bureaucratic backlogs in the Department of Veterans Affairs. This is
deplorable, Mr. Chairman. The VA backlog has grown by over 2,000
percent over the last 4 years, despite an increase in the budget of
more than the 20 percent. As of March 28 of this year, the VA reported
that there are over 606,007 backlogged claims and 865,989 total claims.
Nearly 900,000 veterans who have sacrificed for our country are not
getting their benefits. They're not getting the care that they need.
Our veterans deserve better.
Despite the inability of the VA to be able to process claims in a
timely manner, the agency continues to waste money on unnecessary
conferences. In September of 2012, the VA Office of the Inspector
General released a report highlighting abuses by the VA at conferences.
That report included numerous troubling findings. According to the
report, the VA spent more than $6.1 million on two human resource
conferences in Orlando, and nearly $100,000 on unnecessary promotional
items like bags, pins, and water bottles. In addition to these, the
report included information on many more instances of waste, fraud, and
abuse at the VA.
Following the release of the OIG report, Congressman Jeff Miller,
chairman of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, stated ``it can
be reasonably concluded that 10 to 15 percent of VA's conference
spending is wasteful, amounting to $10 to $15 million a year, at the
least.'' I wholeheartedly agree with Chairman Miller. That is why today
I'm proposing this amendment to target $10 million in wasteful spending
on conferences from the Secretary's $403 million budget and
reprioritize these funds to be able to assist with addressing the VA
backlog.
It's time that the VA focus their efforts on serving our veterans and
processing their claims in a reasonable amount of time--not in 125 days
or more. The VA must reduce the backlog, and it won't get it done by
wasting time and taxpayer dollars at conferences. It's time that the
benefits work for our veterans rather than our veterans having to be
able to work for their benefits.
I urge my colleagues to be able to support this commonsense
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Murphy of Florida
Mr. MURPHY of Florida. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the
following new section:
Sec. 419. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to maintain or improve Department of Defense real
property with a zero percent utilization rate according to
the Department's real property inventory database, except in
the case of maintenance of an historic property as required
by the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et
seq.) or maintenance to prevent a negative environmental
impact as required by the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. MURPHY of Florida. I rise today to offer an amendment to the
Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill that
would eliminate wasteful spending on unused facilities, which could
save tens of millions of dollars in fiscal year 2014 alone.
The Department of Defense has hundreds, possibly thousands of
buildings and structures that it has rated at zero percent utilization.
This is an incredible number of useless facilities the Department of
Defense is paying to maintain. Federal agencies, as a whole, must do a
better job at managing their facilities. Taxpayers cannot continue
paying for unused and underused buildings while the Nation is at record
debt levels. That is not good government and that is not smart
spending.
That is why I joined with Representative David Joyce of Ohio to
introduce the SAVE Act to root out the up to $200 billion in wasteful
and duplicative government spending over the next
[[Page H3080]]
years. This amendment is an extension of one of the 11 commonsense
solutions included in the bipartisan SAVE Act, preventing the
Department of Defense from spending money on facilities that the
Department itself has rated at zero percent utilization.
Mr. Chairman, we all agree that we must rein in government spending.
The best place to start is by rooting out waste. My amendment is a
commonsense solution to do just that, and I urge my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle to support this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Murphy).
The amendment was agreed to.
{time} 1820
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word and enter
into a colloquy with the gentleman from Georgia, the ranking member of
the committee.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. GARCIA. The President's budget request included $3.6 million for
the Special Operations Boat Docks in Key West, Florida. These
improvements will help ensure that the Special Forces Underwater
Operations School, which trains more than 300 servicemembers and
conducts support training for troops preparing for deployments, can
continue to meet its critical role in our Nation's defense.
The Appropriations Committee recommended no funds for the project. As
I understand it, the subcommittee made that recommendation with no
prejudice against the boat dock project. Having determined that the
Army had sufficient military construction funds available to complete
the project without additional appropriations, the committee
recommended no additional funds to undertake the project.
I yield to my friend from Georgia to ask if it is a fair
characterization of the committee's recommendation.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I would agree with the gentleman from Florida.
The Army does have sufficient funds in bid savings and in unobligated
balances from prior military construction appropriations to undertake a
$3.6 million project. I would be happy to work with the gentleman to
see if the Army would use those existing funds on this project.
Mr. GARCIA. I thank the gentleman, and I look forward to working with
him.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Amendment Offered by Mr. King of Iowa
Mr. KING of Iowa. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. 419. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement, administer, or enforce the prevailing
wage requirements in subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40,
United States Code (commonly referred to as the Davis-Bacon
Act).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate being recognized. I
bring this amendment to the floor out of a sense of fiscal
responsibility and a sense of duty to the people that go out and work
hard every day and return a value for every dollar, for every hour they
invest, a value returned on production.
I have spent my life in the construction industry. We have paid
Davis-Bacon wage scales, I believe, in each year that I have been in
business, and we were a merit shop operation. So I have both sides of
experience to this. I have worked underneath Davis-Bacon wage scales,
and I have worked in competition with them.
Davis-Bacon is rooted back in the early 1930s. There was a decision
made by a couple of people from New York, both Republicans I might add.
They let me down then before I was born. They wanted to provide
protectionism for their people in New York and lock out minorities that
would be coming from the South to build Federal buildings during that
era of the Great Depression in New York. It remains the last vestige of
Jim Crow laws that's designed to protect and lock out minorities from
the construction industry as far as labor is concerned.
My records on this is it costs a lot of money to have Davis-Bacon
wage scales imposed. And our King Construction records show over the
years that there is somewhere between 8 and 38 percent increase in the
costs that we have to bid a project when we make the adjustment for
Davis-Bacon. According to Beacon Hill, there's a 9 to 37 percent
increase. I just simply use a 20 percent increase as a rule of thumb to
discuss the amount of cost that is extra.
So it's this: if we're going to have federally mandated union scale
that turns out to be the increase in price for every Federal
construction project that has $2,000 or more in it, the result of that
is then that if we're going to build only 4 miles of road instead of 5;
only four bridges instead of five; only four military facilities
instead of five; only four sets of barracks instead of five; only four
training facilities instead of five, we can get 20 percent more
production out of the dollars that we have and maintain the quality and
maintain that sense of responsibility and have a trained workforce, and
we can bring more trainees into the process and we'll employ, according
to the study I have in front of me here, an average of about 25,000
more minorities each year within the construction business that's
there.
What we have instead is we have some people that are in the industry
that sit down once a year and they take a look at the records and they
decide, well, let's see, let's pay a little bit more to the people here
in labor because we don't want to compete outside of our particular
industry. We'll raise these wages and we'll transfer that to the
taxpayers. It is not a prevailing wage; it is a mandated union scale.
That is the effect of it, Mr. Chairman.
I have lived under this for at least 28 years that I operated King
Construction. We're now in about our 38th or 39th year of business. We
have deep experience with it; and the quality of the work does not
suffer, neither does the finishing, neither does the completion,
neither does the bonding. All of this construction industry works
better when you have real competition instead of some kind of mandated
wage scale. Plus, eliminating the enforcement of Davis-Bacon wage scale
brings efficiency in and it brings competition in. It's an impossible
and onerous Federal regulation to seek to try to regulate. No one can
sit in government and determine what a prevailing wage is.
It upsets the relationship between management and workers. And I've
been on both sides of that, on all four sides of it, as a matter of
fact. It reduces the efficiency of the crews that are there because it
reduces your ability to be flexible with the assignment of workforce
and their flexibility to self-assign.
For every possible financial reason, you cannot be fiscally
responsible or a fiscal conservative and oppose this amendment, Mr.
Chairman. It must be supported by a country that's going deeply in
debt. We're borrowing over 40 cents out of every dollar that we spend.
Meanwhile, we can save 20 cents out of every dollar in this MilCon
appropriation bill simply by eliminating the enforcement of the Davis-
Bacon wage scale on it.
So I urge in the strongest terms possible the adoption of this
amendment which would eliminate the effect of the last vestige of Jim
Crow law with regard to where military construction is concerned, save
20 percent, someplace between 9 and 37 according to Beacon Hill. And we
can build five facilities instead of four. This is the right way to go
to support my amendment.
I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
I respect my good friend, but I am totally baffled by the comparison
of Davis-Bacon to Jim Crow laws. I think it's totally inapplicable.
Davis-Bacon is a pretty simple concept, and it's a fair one. What the
Davis-Bacon Act does is protect the government as well as the workers
in carrying out the policy of paying decent wages on government
contracts.
[[Page H3081]]
The act requires that workers on federally funded construction
projects be paid no less than the wages paid in the community for some
of the work. It requires that every contract for construction to which
the Federal Government is a party in excess of $2,000 contain a
provision defining the minimum wages paid to various classes of
laborers and mechanics.
Mr. Chairman, the House has taken numerous votes on this issue, and
on every vote this body has voted to maintain Davis-Bacon requirements.
Last year, we avoided including divisive language like this, and it's
my hope that we stop attacking the working class and defeat the
amendment before us today and move on to more important matters.
Davis-Bacon wages actually save construction costs. A study of more
than 4,000 new schools, some built with prevailing wage and others not,
found that there were no significant differences in construction costs
associated with prevailing wage requirements. A repeal in Davis-Bacon
wages has consistently been shown to increase costs because of the poor
construction resulting in repairs, revisions, and project delays and
consequently substantial cost overruns all as a result of the increase
in employing unskilled, unqualified workers on projects.
For example, when President Bush suspended Davis-Bacon wages during
the Hurricane Katrina building efforts, construction costs went up due
to the dramatic increase in the employment of unqualified workers.
Opponents of the prevailing wage claim that the government can save
billions by eliminating them. But they ignore how the Davis-Bacon Act
has proven to increase workforce productivity and result in cost-
effective projects. For example, a study of 10 States when nearly half
of all highway and bridgework in America is done showed that when high-
wage workers were paid double the wage of low-wage workers, they built
74.4 more miles of roadbed and 32.8 more miles of bridges for $557
million less.
Repealing Davis-Bacon wages dramatically decreases the economic
benefits to the local community. For example, studies have shown that
Davis-Bacon wages generate more than two times the amount spent on the
construction project itself in the local community since the workers
spend part of their income in local businesses and pay local taxes, all
of which recirculates throughout the economy.
Driving wages down will not help to balance the Federal budget. A
Florida analysis such as the Bluegrass Institute study fails to take
into account the spin-off economic benefits of maintaining prevailing
wages. Davis-Bacon improves the skill level and the training of all of
the workers. Opponents of prevailing wage regulations assume that
repealing the law and lowering wages will not erode training nor lead
to an exodus of skilled workers.
{time} 1830
They are wrong, because it has that exact effect. Davis-Bacon
increases training opportunities for all workers, both union and
nonunion.
Finally, a Davis-Bacon wage is usually not a union wage. The Davis-
Bacon prevailing wage is based on surveys of wages and benefits paid to
various job classifications of construction workers in the community
without regard to union membership. According to the Department of
Labor, a whopping 72 percent of the prevailing wage rates issued in
2000 were based upon nonunion wage rates. A union wage prevails only if
the Department of Labor survey determines that the local union wage is
paid to more than 50 percent of the workers in the job classifications.
Let me just say that we have in the past avoided including divisive
language in our bill, and it is my hope that we can stop attacking the
working class and we can defeat this amendment.
I urge all of the Members in this House to vote ``no.'' Davis-Bacon
is good law, it produces good results, and it is cost effective for the
taxpayers of the United States.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, the MilCon-VA bill should be one of the
least controversial measures this committee considers. I am deeply
disappointed that instead of seeking to pass the most bipartisan bill
possible, some would prefer to weigh down the bill that funds veterans
and military construction with divisive riders.
Not only is this procedurally problematic, but it's completely wrong
on substance. Repealing Davis-Bacon has consistently, as my colleague
has shown, been shown to increase costs. Poor construction results in
repairs, revisions, project delays, and cost overruns. Let's not add an
unnecessary policy rider that will not be included in the final
version.
Again, this is probably one of the most bipartisan bills that we have
considered. I have applauded the chair and the ranking member for
working so closely together to produce a really important bill that
helps our veterans. Why weigh this down with this divisive rider? Let's
vote against this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of
my colleague, Mr. King's amendment, to H.R. 2216, the Military
Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act. This amendment
would ensure that no funds made available by H.R. 2216 could be used to
implement, administer, or enforce the Davis-Bacon Act requirements for
government contracts.
Mr. Chairman, the Davis-Bacon Act is an anachronistic law that was
enacted during the Great Depression to prevent wayfaring contractors
from lowballing local construction bids. In defense of my colleague,
Mr. King's characterization, the sponsors of the Davis-Bacon Act
originally intended for it to actually discriminate against
nonunionized Black workers in favor of White workers belonging to
White-only unions. Mr. King is correct--and that's in all deference to
everyone in this debate--but this is indeed a vestigial remnant of the
Jim Crow era and has no place in our military construction contracts
and should be abandoned.
Furthermore, the Davis-Bacon Act results in billions of wasted
taxpayer dollars every year. This act requires Federal construction
contractors to pay their workers ``prevailing wages,'' which could be
as much as 1\1/2\ times greater than their basic pay rate. This results
in artificially high costs of construction, which are ultimately
shouldered by American taxpayers.
Contractors wishing to offer a lower bid would still be required by
law to pay their employees the prevailing wage and file a weekly report
of the wages paid to each worker. This has a particularly negative
effect on small businesses, as they are often unable to compete due to
Davis-Bacon wage and benefit requirements, which reduces competition
and further inflates contract rates.
Moreover, Mr. Chairman, Davis-Bacon was enacted before the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the National Labor Relations Act. According to the
GAO, these acts have rendered Davis-Bacon obsolete and unnecessary.
There are a number of laws passed by this body that protect
construction workers without the discriminatory intent and effect of
Davis-Bacon.
During this time of fiscal austerity and responsibility, Congress
must do all it can to lower Federal contract costs and decrease the
burden on American taxpayers. This amendment is intended to stop the
hemorrhage of wasteful spending and rein in our debt.
I would urge my colleagues to support this amendment by Mr. King that
would, again, ensure no funds made available by H.R. 2216 could be used
to implement, administer, or enforce the wasteful Davis-Bacon Act, and
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of
the gentleman from Georgia and the gentlelady from New York who spoke
previously on this, and I rise in strong opposition to the gentleman
from Iowa's
[[Page H3082]]
amendment that would prevent Davis-Bacon from being enforced on
projects under this act.
It is a shame, I believe, that this funding bill--which provides
needed facilities for our servicemembers and benefits to our veterans--
is being exploited to undermine hardworking Americans, but here we have
it.
Ironically, however, in contravention with some of the things that
have been said here on the floor under this amendment, Davis-Bacon
requires that workers of every color and every gender be paid based on
their work, not on the color of their skin, not on their gender. That
flies in the face of some of the accusations that have been put out for
the original purpose of this.
I do agree with the gentleman from Iowa that there were two
Republicans who did originally sponsor this back in 1931, but I
disagree that the danger, that the evil that it was trying to fight
against back then, has gone away. As a matter of fact, it is just a
race to the bottom that would ensue if we got rid of Davis-Bacon.
Like the gentleman from Iowa, I have worked on Davis-Bacon jobs. I
was an ironworker for 18 years--very proud to work with the men and
women of the building trades--and I've worked on jobs where some of the
workers were union and some of the workers were nonunion; but the
important thing was that we were not exploited by trying to pit us
against each other in a race to the bottom based on the wages that we
earned.
Since 1931, the Davis-Bacon Act has required Federal contractors to
provide workers the local ``prevailing local wage.'' What happens is
that's not the union wage, and in many cases, as the gentleman from
Georgia has pointed out, it's the nonunion wage, but it is determined
by a survey of the Department of Labor of the wages in that area.
The danger that it's meant to deal with is that, in some areas of the
country where there's no work and folks are dealing with the recession
or depression-like conditions in the construction industry,
unscrupulous contractors can go down there where workers don't have any
shot of going to work and they can take them at very low wages and
transport them to another area of the country that has work and then
depress the wage base in that area. That's what Davis-Bacon is meant to
deal with, and that's still the situation that we have today and the
danger that we guard against.
On these federally funded construction projects, Davis-Bacon protects
these workers by preventing wage exploitation while still ensuring that
the value for the taxpayer dollar and work quality are not compromised.
This amount would bar funding to administer these wage requirements.
Without Davis-Bacon protection, unscrupulous contractors will be free
to exploit those tradesmen and -women who, despite a slight recovery in
their jobs numbers, still today face high levels of unemployment.
{time} 1840
Mr. Chairman, I want to speak for a moment about my time as an
ironworker and about my involvement with the men and women of the
building trades. These people are incredibly hardworking, they are
immensely skilled, and they work in a dangerous industry. They truly
care about the craftsmanship, and they are dedicated to getting the job
done and doing it right, and working side by side with them was a true
honor for me.
Generations of trades workers, by the sweat of their brows and the
toil of their hands, built our great Nation. They deserve our respect,
as does the work that they do. Protecting Davis-Bacon does just that.
The amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa will not create
jobs, it will not house our military, and it certainly will not result
in better care and services for our veterans. All it will do is take
away critical wage protections and open our workers to exploitation in
a race to the bottom.
I urge my colleagues to stand behind our American workers and to
stand behind our veterans and oppose this amendment. I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. CULBERSON. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Foxx). The gentleman from Texas is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of the
gentleman's amendment.
It is just common sense that the free market and competitive open
bidding process is going to result in a savings to taxpayers. Davis-
Bacon artificially drives up the cost to taxpayers at a time when we
simply cannot afford it. With record debt, record deficit and at a time
when all of us as stewards of the Treasury need to do everything we can
to protect our constituents' hard-earned tax dollars, I strongly
support the gentleman from Iowa's amendment, which is to make sure that
we have a competitive bidding process in which the lowest price and,
obviously, free market wages in this environment in the 21st century
are going to be fair wages with good compensation and good benefits. We
truly don't need to pay higher wages in an era of record debt and
deficit.
I would, Madam Chairman, like to yield to the gentleman from Iowa.
Mr. KING of Iowa. I appreciate the gentleman from Texas for yielding.
First, in response to some of the remarks that were made that Davis-
Bacon wages are based on surveys, well, technically they are based on
surveys, but merit shop employers often do not answer those surveys
because union organizers show up to organize their employees very
shortly after that. It's not always a wise decision to turn your wage
records in to the Department of Labor, because in many environments
that just about guarantees union organizers coming in to try to drive
the wages up more.
The statement about the cost of Davis-Bacon wages actually saving
money in Katrina reconstruction, that's a new one for me. My
recollection is that George Bush initially after Katrina suspended
Davis-Bacon wages so that the money could be best applied to get the
cleanup and then the reconstruction done down in New Orleans, in that
area, under Katrina. He shortly thereafter lifted that order, so I
don't know how a study could show how much money was actually saved. If
my memory is correct, it never really was implemented for any length of
time that would be appreciable. I don't know of a study that shows that
imposed union scale Davis-Bacon wages actually saves the taxpayers
money unless that study might be funded by the unions themselves.
There is no argument that this is the last remaining Jim Crow law,
the law that was designed to lock Black Americans out of the union
trades in New York, particularly in New York City. The vestiges of that
remain today, and I think it's worthy to go back and look at a study
and see what representation of the ethnic population is represented
within these construction trades in places like New York City. It would
be very constructive, I think, to look at that.
Also, labor is a commodity. The value of it needs to be determined by
supply and demand in the marketplace, Madam Chair. And just like gold
or oil or corn or beans, where I come from, you're not going to get the
real wages out of that unless you let competition determine that.
And I, as an employer for all of these years, want to pay the best
wages I can, I want to provide the best benefits that I can, I want to
hire the best people that I can, and in doing so, your people are your
company, and when you hire good people and you pay them a good wage,
you get to keep them. What I set up a business model on was hiring
people in a seasonal business to work 12 months out of the year, not
seasonally, not going into the union hall and pulling somebody out and
putting him to work for a few days and putting him back again, but
saying to him, You can have a career here, and I'll give you 12-months'
work for 12-months' pay, and I'll give you a benefits package.
I want to compete with that, but when the Federal Government comes in
and tells you that somebody on a shovel has to be paid this and that
somebody on a backhoe has to be paid this and that somebody on a motor
grader has to be paid this, you will see them machine hopping during
the day because they'll always be maneuvering to get on the machine
that pays the highest wages, not the one that does the best for
efficiency to get the job done.
[[Page H3083]]
I've had to go in and police that, and I've had to go in and build a
spreadsheet that calculates the movement of everybody on our jobs going
on in order to determine that I can comply with the Federal
Government's requirement that I pay the wages that they demand and
insist, instead of the simplicity of saying, Here is what I'll offer
you for pay and benefits.
They've sometimes come to me and have said, What's my job?
I'll define your job for you. Help me make money, and I'll pay you
for that, and I want to reward you by trying to give you enough money
in benefits to keep you.
That's how free markets work. We cannot be out here setting up a
union scale imposed by some people who are sitting in a backroom, which
is what happens, by the way. We can't be supporting the last vestige of
Jim Crow laws. We can't be letting the Federal Government decide what
job categories are going to be paid what wages when we just want to put
people to work and let them develop a skill and develop their trades.
So the machine hopping is something that gives me a lot of heartburn.
Even if we have an actual representation of prevailing wage, it's still
not representative of supply and demand because many States have passed
their many Davis-Bacon laws, and the market has been so distorted that
we don't today have a concept of what that cost is, Madam Chair. So I
urge the adoption of my amendment.
Mr. CULBERSON. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KILDEE. I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. KILDEE. I come from Flint, Michigan, a working class community. I
represent Flint-Saginaw-Bay City, and it's a community that's proud of
the fact that in this area--and it's true across the country--the
notion has been that, if you work hard, if you train yourself, if you
focus on a trade or go to school, you'll be paid a wage or a salary
commensurate with the contribution that you make to the work that
you're doing.
We live in a time when we're seeing decreasing compensation for the
value that the worker brings to the working place. Between 1945 and
1975, we saw worker productivity rise in this country by 97 percent,
and we saw household income rise in that same 30-year period by 95
percent. There was some parity in the contribution that workers made
and the compensation that they received. You fast-forward to the last
30-year period, and we've seen a period of economic growth and
expansion, increased productivity--80 percent over the last 30 years--
but in real wages, a 10 percent increase in productivity.
One of the reasons that we've seen such a drop is that we are not
compensating the average workers for the quality and the work that they
do and that they contribute to the highly productive society that we
live in. This is yet another attempt to continue the race to the
bottom, where we continue to see real wages go down and productivity
continue to rise.
I have done a tremendous amount of work in local development. As a
public and private citizen, I have been involved in lots and lots of
construction projects involving hundreds of millions of dollars, and I
will tell you one thing: there is absolutely nothing sacrificed by
making sure that the people who do this important work are paid wages
that are fair and that fit the marketplace. It is not only good for
those families that benefit from a decent and fair wage, but it
supports those local employers and those small businesses that we all
talk about every day that we're trying to support.
Where does the money come from into communities that support those
folks?
It comes from the fact that the workers have a decent living wage
that allows them to pay their bills, set a little money aside for their
families and contribute to a local economy. Davis-Bacon wages
contribute to the ability for workers to be trained as well.
This is the wrong direction for this country. This is certainly the
wrong direction in this particular budget connected to the work that
our Nation does when what we fought for in this country was a society
that rewards people for the quality and the quantity of their hard work
and their training that they put to work in doing these tough
construction jobs particularly. When we're already seeing private
sector wages go down, we ought not as a Nation participate in this race
to the bottom.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa will be
postponed.
{time} 1850
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed, in the following order:
An amendment by Mr. Broun of Georgia.
An amendment by Mr. Amodei of Nevada.
An amendment by Mr. Moran of Virginia.
An amendment by Mr. King of Iowa.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in the series.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Broun) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 151,
noes 269, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 188]
AYES--151
Amash
Bachmann
Bachus
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Brady (TX)
Brooks (AL)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Camp
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Cotton
Daines
Davis, Rodney
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Franks (AZ)
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffith (VA)
Guthrie
Hall
Harris
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kilmer
King (IA)
Kingston
LaMalfa
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Maffei
Marchant
Massie
Matheson
McCaul
McClintock
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller, George
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Nolan
Olson
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Ross
Royce
Ruiz
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stockman
Stutzman
Tiberi
Tipton
Upton
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
NOES--269
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Andrews
Barber
Barletta
Bass
Beatty
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crawford
[[Page H3084]]
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gerlach
Gosar
Grayson
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Issa
Johnson, E. B.
Joyce
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
Lamborn
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meeks
Meng
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (KY)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Wenstrup
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--13
Becerra
Campbell
Cramer
Granger
Hastings (FL)
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Keating
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Palazzo
Watt
{time} 1917
Messrs. RIGELL, KELLY of Pennsylvania, ALEXANDER, GOSAR, GARY G.
MILLER of California, BOUSTANY, HINOJOSA, RUSH and Ms. GABBARD changed
their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. POE of Texas, GUTHRIE, JOHNSON of Ohio, HUNTER, McCAUL, OLSON
and MEEHAN changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Amodei
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada
(Mr. Amodei) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 248,
noes 172, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 189]
AYES--248
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Bass
Bera (CA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Calvert
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Engel
Enyart
Farr
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Forbes
Foster
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallego
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Hahn
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hinojosa
Honda
Horsford
Huelskamp
Huffman
Hultgren
Hurt
Israel
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Keating
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Latham
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Long
Lowenthal
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lynch
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Meng
Messer
Mica
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Pastor (AZ)
Pearce
Perry
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Radel
Rahall
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schneider
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Valadao
Vela
Velazquez
Walden
Walorski
Waters
Waxman
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--172
Amash
Andrews
Bachmann
Barrow (GA)
Beatty
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Camp
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSantis
Deutch
Dingell
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Flores
Fortenberry
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Garcia
Grayson
Green, Al
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hanabusa
Hartzler
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Holding
Holt
Hoyer
Hudson
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Issa
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kuster
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Levin
Lewis
Loebsack
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Massie
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Negrete McLeod
Noem
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (MI)
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stockman
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Upton
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Yoho
NOT VOTING--13
Becerra
Campbell
Cassidy
Granger
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Palazzo
Watt
{time} 1923
Mr. NOLAN changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Ms. WATERS and Messrs. LYNCH, McINTYRE, GARRETT, and BONNER changed
their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Moran
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the
[[Page H3085]]
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) on which further proceedings were
postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 170,
noes 254, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 190]
AYES--170
Amash
Andrews
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera (CA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Garamendi
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Heck (WA)
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--254
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Cleaver
Coble
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallego
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peters (MI)
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Rahall
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shea-Porter
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Vela
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--9
Campbell
Granger
Hastings (FL)
Higgins
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Watt
{time} 1928
Ms. GABBARD changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment Offered by Mr. King of Iowa
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr.
King) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 192,
noes 231, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 191]
AYES--192
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Daines
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guthrie
Hall
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Reed
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stockman
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tipton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--231
Andrews
Barber
Barletta
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
[[Page H3086]]
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gerlach
Gibson
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hanna
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Hultgren
Israel
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matheson
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinley
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Richmond
Roskam
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stivers
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--10
Campbell
Diaz-Balart
Granger
Hastings (FL)
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Ros-Lehtinen
Watt
{time} 1933
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
This Act may be cited as the ``Military Construction and
Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2014''.
Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise
and report the bill back to the House with sundry amendments and with
the recommendation that the amendments be agreed to, and that the bill,
as amended, do pass.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Hultgren) having assumed the chair, Ms. Foxx, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2216)
making appropriations for military construction, the Department of
Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2014, and for other purposes, and, pursuant to House
Resolution 243, she reported the bill back to the House with sundry
amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole, with a recommendation
that the amendments be adopted and that the bill, as amended, do pass.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mr. ENYART. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. ENYART. I am opposed in its present form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. ENYART moves to recommit the bill H.R. 2216 to the
Committee on Appropriations with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
Page 22, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $9,200,000)''.
Page 33, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $9,200,000)''.
Mr. ENYART. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this amendment to
H.R. 2216 to increase funding for veterans claims processors so that we
can reduce the disgraceful backlog of claims waiting to be processed.
This is the final amendment to the bill, which will not kill the bill
nor send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will immediately
proceed to final passage, as amended.
We have been fighting two wars for over 10 years, which has resulted
in a large number of veterans returning home with both physical and
mental injuries.
{time} 1940
In addition, veterans who served in Vietnam and the gulf war are
getting older, and many are discovering health issues that are related
to their service. The result is that currently there are over 900,000
veterans' disability claims waiting to be processed. The average wait
for that backlog is now 9 months.
We are talking about American heroes like Michael Boren of Energy,
Illinois. Michael is a veteran in my district who was in danger of
losing his home because the VA took 19 months to track down his
paperwork and process his claim. Veterans like Michael are in your
district, and you've heard their stories, just as I have. Too many
veterans are threatened with home foreclosure, having their cars
repossessed, having their credit cards cut off, all because of the VA
backlog. It's shameful.
We must act to speed up the process so that disabled, honorably
discharged American veterans are not waiting without income for months
and years. This motion to recommit adds $9.2 million to hire 94
additional VA claims processors. This doubles the number of claims
processors in the base bill. The amendment is fully offset from
unobligated and unused funds and funds from military construction.
This vote serves as a lifeline to countless veterans who can no
longer wait for this problem to be solved.
When I look out at this House, I look down the center aisle. I look
at the right side and see my colleagues, my friends in the party of
Dwight David Eisenhower; I see the party of Teddy Roosevelt; I see the
party of Abraham Lincoln.
When I look at the left side, I see my friends who represent the
party of Harry S. Truman; the party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt; the
party of Woodrow Wilson--great wartime leaders, all.
Those great Presidents knew the meaning of commitment to the troops
that we sent to defend and protect our Nation. Today, we stand in their
shadows. We in Congress committed to send these brave men and women in
harm's way for our country. Folks in the Active Duty service, in the
Guard, and in the Reserve, they have served us honorably; they have
served their commitment proudly. Now we must complete our commitment to
veterans in our time.
To paraphrase President Lincoln, many of the votes we cast here in
Congress will be little noted, nor long remembered. But the veterans,
veterans up there in that gallery, veterans back in your district,
veterans all across this Nation will remember this vote; their families
will remember this vote. Today, we vote to fulfill the promise of a
great Nation to those who have served that great Nation. This is a vote
to serve them.
Vote ``yes'' on this final amendment to help veterans get the
benefits they have earned and they deserve. Vote ``yes'' on this motion
to recommit.
When I step down from this podium, I will walk up that center aisle,
not to the right, nor to the left, but up that center aisle, and cast
my vote ``yes'' for this amendment, because it is for the veterans and
for our great Nation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair reminds Members to refrain from
referring to occupants in the gallery.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the motion to recommit.
[[Page H3087]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CULBERSON. Our third-highest priority in the Constitution is to
provide for the common defense. This bill, more than any other, has
been done in a bipartisan way; this bill more than any other is vitally
important to the peace of mind, to the quality of life of our men and
women in uniform when they're on Active Duty standing on the walls of
Rome defending our freedom and protecting us and putting themselves in
harm's way, and the peace of mind and comfort of their families back in
the United States and around the world where they're deployed, and when
they become veterans and move into the veterans system.
We in this subcommittee, more than any other in the House, have been
bipartisan, arm-in-arm, doing everything in our power to help ensure
that no man or woman wearing the uniform of the United States should
ever worry for one moment about the quality of their life, about the
quality of their health care. We think of ourselves as the peace-of-
mind committee for the men and women in uniform defending the United
States. There's been no more bipartisan bill than this one, there's
been no more open bill than this one, there's been no more open process
for amendment than the appropriations process.
It is possible, in fact, for you to walk down here on the floor and
with a yellow notepad and a pen write an amendment and walk down and
hand it to the Clerk at any point during the debate on this bill and
have it considered by the House. Yet we got this amendment 3 minutes
and 45 seconds before the debate began. It reflects so poorly on the
House of Representatives for the minority to present an amendment that
we would have happily worked with you on to have accomplished in a bill
in an amendment form had you just brought it down to the floor.
In fact, we have given the Veterans Affairs Secretary everything that
he's asked for. The Veterans Administration has been given massive
increases in funding to handle the claims backlog. In fact, Congressman
Kingston of Georgia just offered an amendment, which the House has
approved, which will cut the salary of the senior leadership of the VA
by 25 percent if they don't meet their own deadlines on reducing the
backlog.
The United States Congress has literally done everything. We've given
them every dollar, everything they have possibly asked for. We've
offered you every opportunity to just walk down here and amend the
bill, yet you give it to us 3 minutes and 45 seconds before the debate
begins. This ought to be exhibit A of why we need a rule in the House
that all amendments ought to be published at least 24 hours in advance
on the Internet, especially a motion to recommit as embarrassing,
frankly, as this one.
I am happy to yield my time to the chairman of the Veterans
Committee, Mr. Miller.
Mr. MILLER of Florida. I thank the chairman very much for yielding
his time. And I do think it's important that the Members know that the
committee under both Democrat and Republican chairmen have given every
dollar, every person, every piece of equipment, every software that the
Department of Veterans Affairs has asked for. And to do this at the
12th hour is not the way to make a difference in what we are trying to
do.
Our committee, the authorizing committee, has made it their number
one focus; and Members here know this. Mike Michaud and I together have
worked with our committee members and other Members across the floor
trying to make sure that the backlog is taken care of. This is purely a
political stunt and not one that we should vote for.
Mr. CULBERSON. I urge Members to defeat this motion to recommit and
vote ``no.''
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. ENYART. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 5-
minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by a 5-minute
vote on the passage of the bill.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 198,
noes 227, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 192]
AYES--198
Andrews
Barber
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matheson
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--227
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Radel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
[[Page H3088]]
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--8
Campbell
Granger
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Watt
Wolf
{time} 1955
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 421,
nays 4, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 193]
YEAS--421
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
O'Rourke
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Radel
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NAYS--4
Bass
Conyers
Miller, George
Nolan
NOT VOTING--8
Campbell
Granger
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Watt
Wolf
{time} 2004
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Personal Explanation,
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday afternoon, June 4, 2013, I
was required to return to my congressional district in Houston, Texas,
in order to attend a memorial service for four members of the Houston
Fire Department who lost their lives in the line of duty on Friday, May
31, 2013. This tragedy was the deadliest incident in terms of the
numbers of firefighters lost in the history of the Houston Fire
Department. As the senior Member of the Houston congressional
delegation and a senior Member of the Committee on Homeland Security,
attending the memorial service was directly related to my
representational, legislative, and committee responsibilities.
Because of this excused absence I was not present for rollcall votes
188 through 193.
Had I been present I would have voted as follows:
1. On rollcall No. 188, I would have voted ``no.''
Broun Amendment, which eliminates funding for an on-going NATO
headquarters project (a cut of $38,513,000) and applies the savings to
the spending reduction account.
2. On rollcall No. 189, I would have voted ``no.''
Amodei Amendment, which takes overtime funding from 41 VA regional
offices and concentrates it in the 15 offices with the worst backlog.
3. On rollcall No. 190, I would have voted ``aye.''
Moran Amendment, which language prohibiting the use of funds to
construct, renovate or expand any facility in the United States to
house any individual detained at United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the purposes of detention or imprisonment.
4. On rollcall No. 191, I would have voted ``no.''
King (IA) Amendment, which prohibits the use of funds to implement,
administer, or enforce the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires federal
contractors to pay locally prevailing wages
5. On rollcall No. 192, I would have voted ``aye.''
Democratic Motion to Recommit H.R. 2216.
6. On rollcall No. 193, I would have voted ``aye.''
Final Passage of H.R. 2216, Military Construction and Veterans
Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2014.
____________________