[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 115 (Wednesday, July 22, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5441-S5442]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         AMENDMENTS TO VA BILL

  Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, we were sworn in--you and I both--in 
January, and I know we have both gone to our States and traveled across 
our States to get an idea of the pressing problems our States and our 
Nation face. One of the areas I have focused most of my attention on is 
veterans affairs, particularly the hospitals and the services we are 
providing veterans across the State.
  I am concerned that we have a problem with priorities. I am concerned 
that maybe the focus isn't where it needs to be to make sure we take 
care of the most pressing problems for our veterans. Whether it is the 
Choice Act, whether it is just providing ambulatory care, PTSD, mental 
health, or a number of other things, we have shortages, and we need to 
get the Veterans' Administration focused on solving the most pressing 
problems.
  I decided we needed to produce some amendments that would have been 
heard today in the Committee on Veterans' Affairs for a bill that would 
affect the VA. Why would I want to do that? Because when out of the 
blue a proposal for some $500 million in unanticipated costs could 
potentially be considered today, I get worried. And I will talk later 
about the various things that make me worry about what would be lost if 
we were to reprioritize half a billion dollars, with all the things we 
already have on our plate that deal with the VA.
  But the amendments some of my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle were talking about earlier today were my responsibility. They 
referred--I guess in deference--to Republicans. The reality is that 
they were amendments that came out of my office, and I want to talk a 
little about what these amendments were. They were referred to as 
political games, but three of them were very focused on good 
government. One of them was to make sure we do not implement policy 
that moves a priority or moves something ahead of the line of the other 
critical priorities we have for our veterans. All it said was that we 
would not fund this project until we had certification that the most 
pressing priorities--which I will talk about in a few minutes--had 
actually been addressed.
  Another amendment was just about reporting--how does this project 
work? All too often we pass policies here and we never measure the 
results. That is what is wrong with Washington. We don't think through 
the full consequences of a lot of the policies we implement. So it was 
simply to provide a reporting mechanism so we could follow up on this 
policy and see what it costs and the real benefits over time.
  The last amendment is something I know the Presiding Officer has 
problems with because he is a very successful businessman. In business, 
we would never think about balancing the books for this year and next 
year based on what the business is going to do 10 years from now, but 
that is exactly what nearly half of the $500 million that was to be 
used for this bill would have done. It is reaching all the way out to 
2025 to assume that some savings achieved there could be used to pay 
for something today. That is not the way we need to be budgeting in 
Washington. We have an $18 trillion deficit--or I should say debt--and 
a lot of that is this kind of thinking that has been going on in 
Washington for too long--and I might add, under Democratic and 
Republican leadership. We have to change.
  The other amendments were fairly straightforward too. So three 
amendments on good government and accountability and responsible 
budgeting. The other three were things I think most Americans would 
agree with.
  One would simply prevent taxpayer funds from being used--the whole 
bill, I should have mentioned, has to do with providing in vitro 
fertilization coverage for veterans. One of the amendments simply said: 
You cannot use taxpayer funds to do any form of sex selection with 
respect to determining which embryo may be able to come to life versus 
the other ones that couldn't. Another amendment has to do with 
something as simple as not having the VA work with organizations that 
take the organs of human aborted babies and sell them. Those are the 
sorts of amendments we were talking about. It wasn't to kill in vitro 
fertilization. I know of many friends and others who have actually 
benefited and brought babies into the world through in vitro 
fertilization. This was about making sure we did it in a responsible 
manner.
  But the heart of my problem goes back to the long list of broken 
promises that sooner or later this Congress has to fulfill for our 
veterans. Let's talk a little about those. We are talking about taking 
half a billion dollars and spending it on some priority that is not 
even on the books today.
  What about these priorities? I worry about the 120,000 claims 
currently in the VA backlog. These are people who served our country 
who are looking for medical help and who are in the backlog waiting for 
treatment. What about that priority?
  What about the 22 veterans on average a day committing suicide, most 
of them related to PTSD? We passed the Clay Hunt Suicide Prevention Act 
as a first step toward trying to address this chronic problem. At the 
time we passed it, we all acknowledged that the funding we gave it 
wasn't enough, but it was a start.
  What about additional funding for men and women who are suffering 
from various traumas they experience in service to our Nation? That is 
a priority we need to be absolutely certain is provided for.
  I also worry about the unemployment problems. I think 75 percent of 
the Iran and Afghanistan veterans are dealing with unemployment once 
they transition from military service into the private sector. What 
about initiatives to get them back to work, take care of them and their 
families?
  I could go on and on.
  At Camp Lejeune in my great State of North Carolina, we have 
identified something that occurred over many years--exposure to toxic 
substances which have been linked to cancer. I had a meeting just last 
week with the Secretary of the VA. Only 13 percent of the requests for 
coverage are being fulfilled. We think it should be closer to 50 or 60. 
What about the funding for those folks who contracted cancer as a 
result of toxic substances at Camp Lejeune? Don't they deserve to be 
somewhere higher in the priority list?
  I could go on and on.
  There are the wait times, the critical medical services they need.

[[Page S5442]]

  Today, the promises we made to veterans should be our top priority. 
At some point in time, it may make sense to add another half a billion 
dollars for this medical treatment that has been proposed by my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle but not until we are 
absolutely certain that the promises we have already made are going to 
be fulfilled. That is all we attempted to do today.
  In some respects, I regret that my colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle considered it political. I don't consider it political. I 
don't think it is political when you are trying to live within your 
means or making sure the policies you are implementing actually work 
the way you intended or when you are actually spending money over the 
next year or two versus 10 years from now. I think that is responsible 
government.
  The gimmicks and the old rhetoric in this Chamber need to stop. We 
need to start focusing on fulfilling promises first and foremost to the 
men and women who have served our country bravely and defended our 
freedom. That is what my proposed amendments were about, and that is 
what they will be about if this measure ever comes up again because if 
I can fulfill no other promise, my promise to the men and women who 
have served this Nation will be paramount in all the things I do in my 
service here over the next 5\1/2\ years in the U.S. Senate. This was a 
threat to my being able to fulfill that promise, and I am glad we are 
going to be able to move on.
  I thank the Chair.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Perdue). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Scott). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________