[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 157 (Wednesday, September 28, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H8186-H8190]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        SOLID START ACT OF 2022

  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (S. 1198) to amend title 38, United States Code, to improve and 
expand the Solid Start program of the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                S. 1198

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Solid Start Act of 2022''.

     SEC. 2. SOLID START PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 
                   AFFAIRS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 63 of title 38, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subchapter:

        ``SUBCHAPTER II--OTHER OUTREACH PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES

     ``Sec. 6320. Solid Start program

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall carry out a program, 
     to be known as the `Solid Start program', under which the 
     Secretary shall--
       ``(1) build the capacity of the Department to efficiently 
     and effectively respond to the queries and needs of veterans 
     who have recently separated from the Armed Forces; and
       ``(2) systemically integrate and coordinate efforts to 
     assist veterans, including efforts--
       ``(A) to proactively reach out to newly separated veterans 
     to inform them of their eligibility for programs of and 
     benefits provided by the Department; and
       ``(B) to connect veterans in crisis to resources that 
     address their immediate needs.
       ``(b) Activities of the Solid Start Program.--(1) The 
     Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, 
     shall carry out the Solid Start program of the Department 
     by--
       ``(A) collecting up-to-date contact information during 
     transition classes or separation counseling for all members 
     of the Armed Forces who are separating from the Armed Forces, 
     while explaining the existence and purpose of the Solid Start 
     program;
       ``(B) calling each veteran, regardless of separation type 
     or characterization of service, three times within the first 
     year after separation of the veteran from the Armed Forces;
       ``(C) providing information about the Solid Start program 
     on the website of the Department and in materials of the 
     Department, especially transition booklets and other 
     resources;
       ``(D) ensuring calls are truly tailored to the needs of 
     each veteran's unique situation by conducting quality 
     assurance tests;
       ``(E) prioritizing outreach to veterans who have accessed 
     mental health resources prior to separation from the Armed 
     Forces;
       ``(F) providing women veterans with information that is 
     tailored to their specific health care and benefit needs;
       ``(G) as feasible, providing information on access to State 
     and local resources, including Vet Centers and veterans 
     service organizations; and
       ``(H) gathering and analyzing data assessing the 
     effectiveness of the Solid Start program.
       ``(2) The Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of 
     Defense, may carry out the Solid Start program by--
       ``(A) encouraging members of the Armed Forces who are 
     transitioning to civilian life to authorize alternate points 
     of contact who can be reached should the member be 
     unavailable during the first year following the separation of 
     the member from the Armed Forces; and
       ``(B) following up missed phone calls with tailored 
     mailings to ensure the veteran still receives similar 
     information.
       ``(3) In this subsection:
       ``(A) The term `Vet Center' has the meaning given that term 
     in section 1712A(h) of this title.
       ``(B) The term `veterans service organization' means an 
     organization recognized by the Secretary for the 
     representation of veterans under section 5902 of this 
     title.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Chapter 63 of such title, as 
     amended by subsection (a), is further amended--
       (1) by inserting before section 6301 the following:

              ``Subchapter I--Outreach Services Program'';

     and
       (2) in sections 6301, 6303, 6304, 6305, 6306, and 6307, by 
     striking ``this chapter'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``this subchapter''.
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 63 of such title is amended--
       (1) by inserting before the item relating to section 6301 
     the following new item:

              ``subchapter i--outreach services program'';

     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new items:

         ``subchapter ii--other outreach programs and activities

``6320. Solid Start program.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Takano) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.


                             General Leave

  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and to insert extraneous material on S. 1198.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise to support S. 1198, the bipartisan, bicameral, 
Solid Start Act.
  This bill is led by Senator Hassan, and in the House, this 
legislative effort is led by my Veterans Affairs' Committee colleague, 
Representative Slotkin.
  Now, we know that the transition from Active-Duty service to veteran 
status can bring not only new opportunities, but also substantial 
adjustment and stress. For some veterans, it can pose serious mental 
health challenges. In fact, the first year of transitioning out of 
military service is a very high-risk period for veteran suicide.
  VA initiated its Solid Start program to address the challenges new 
veterans may face during this period. VA now

[[Page H8187]]

contacts veterans at three different periods in that first year to 
check in, remind veterans of benefits and services for which they are 
eligible, and connect them to resources.
  Women veterans, like all veterans, deserve to know about all of the 
benefits and services they have earned with no exceptions. I have heard 
today that some Republican Members of this House are suddenly looking 
to oppose this veteran suicide prevention bill, and all because it has 
16 words that simply ensure women veterans are told about the range of 
benefits and services for which they are eligible; 16 words, when we 
are talking about 16 veteran suicide deaths a day.
  We are talking about benefits like the GI bill, and compensation for 
toxic exposure presumptions, breast cancer screening, treatment for 
military sexual trauma, and, yes, the freedom to discuss their options 
around pregnancy.
  All benefits they have earned through their service because they 
chose to serve our Nation. Well, I would say to my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle to take your fight against women veterans 
elsewhere.
  Criminalizing, infantilizing, and denying women veterans--take your 
fight elsewhere.
  There is no bar that prevents VA providers from discussing a single 
benefit with male veterans, but my colleagues want a double standard 
for women veterans. This is about two lines in an entire bill meant to 
help veterans who have recently left Active Duty. All veterans.
  Republicans won't pass this bill unless we delete women from it. I 
refuse to do that. Women veterans are veterans.
  A conversation with a woman veteran about coming to the VA could 
prevent her death from suicide. It could also prevent needless 
suffering and possible death from health conditions, including 
pregnancy.
  Republicans have gotten so extreme with their fear of women having 
autonomy over their own bodies and lives that they are willing to play 
political games with veterans' lives and tank a veteran suicide 
prevention bill.
  I would also remind those considering blocking this bill that this 
very same language has already passed in the House. Back on June 23 of 
this year, this Chamber passed the STRONG Veterans Act of 2022. It 
passed under a simple voice vote.
  The Senate unanimously passed the Solid Start Act after VA's new rule 
on abortion counseling and services had been announced.
  September is National Suicide Prevention Awareness Month, and this 
legislation would help us better connect veterans with the resources 
needed to save lives. Sadly, each day, we are losing roughly 16 
veterans to suicide.
  I am not willing to let 16 words about women's freedom to discuss 
their own benefits contained in this legislation prevent us from saving 
the lives of 16 veterans who die by suicide each day. I thank Senator 
Hassan and Representative Slotkin for their work on this important 
issue, and I am pleased we could take up this bill during Suicide 
Prevention Month.
  Madam Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on S. 
1198, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOST. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in reluctant opposition to S. 1198, the 
Solid Start Act of 2021. The Solid Start program was created by 
President Trump in 2019 to better support veterans as they transition 
out of the military.
  I know firsthand that leaving the military can be tough. When I left 
the military as a young marine, the only TAP program that I got was a 
tap on the back and a ``see ya later.''
  I am glad that things have improved a lot since then. The Solid Start 
program has helped improve servicemembers' transitions even more.
  I am a real big fan of the Solid Start program. The STRONG Act, my 
bill with Chairman Takano, includes identical language to this bill and 
would permanently authorize the Solid Start Program. The STRONG Act 
passed the House in June with my full support.
  However, earlier this month, Secretary McDonough announced that VA 
would begin providing abortions. I believe it is not only immoral, but 
it is also illegal. Congress prohibited VA providing abortions in 1992. 
Congress has never repealed that prohibition. Just so you know, it has 
never been superseded.
  Secretary McDonough has claimed that he is taking this action in 
defense of women's health, setting aside the fact that abortion is not 
healthcare. By making that claim, the Secretary has made it clear that 
he views women's health as one and the same with abortion.
  Madam Speaker, this bill would require VA to provide women veterans 
with, ``information that is tailored to their specific healthcare and 
benefit needs.''
  We have offered if they would remove that language to just say 
``veterans,'' that would not include information about abortion, given 
the Secretary's views, that is unacceptable to me and to many others.
  Our democracy is based on the rule of law, and I wish the Secretary 
would follow the law, especially when it is a matter of life and death. 
If he did, I would fully support this bill just like I did in June, 
before the VA's new illegal rule.
  Instead, I regret that I must oppose it today, and I urge my 
colleagues to oppose the bill.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me just respond, that every day my colleagues are making threats 
to file a lawsuit to stop the interim final rule. Like the ranking 
member believes, as do many on his side of the aisle, that the interim 
final rule is illegal based on the 1992 law. I will remind him that in 
1996, Congress authorized the VA Secretary to define the medical 
benefits package. So I disagree with his interpretation of this interim 
final rule as being illegal.
  Let me mention one thing further, that I have not seen any lawsuit 
yet filed, even though he asserted that he would seek to have this rule 
stayed. I am assuming that the delay in filing, since the hearing that 
we had, is because he is still looking for a perfect judge to hear it.
  In the meantime, they are highjacking this opportunity to once again 
blind and gag women veterans under the premise that veterans should not 
be allowed to know the healthcare options and benefits that are 
available to them.
  This is not only an insult to veterans but to the veterans service 
organizations that have endorsed and supported this bill.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan 
(Ms. Slotkin), my good friend who serves on the Disability Assistance 
and Memorial Affairs Subcommittee.
  Ms. SLOTKIN. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Solid 
Start Act, a truly bipartisan bill that I originally introduced on 
Veterans Day in 2020.
  This bill requires the VA to connect with veterans during their first 
year when they transition out of service to ensure they are aware of 
the benefits and resources that they have earned.
  I was thrilled to see this bipartisan legislation pass the Senate 
twice, both times by unanimous consent. It passed the House as part of 
the STRONG Veterans Act with overwhelming support by voice vote.

                              {time}  2030

  First, I would like to thank my Veterans Advisory Board back in 
Michigan and the other stakeholders in my district who have helped to 
craft this bill. I would like to thank The American Legion, Disabled 
American Veterans, and the VFW for their support, and the countless 
veterans and veteran families in the district who gave me their 
feedback to help us craft this bill.
  It comes directly from their experience where, overwhelmingly, the 
sentiment was in that first year of separation, veterans do not 
understand all of the resources from education to healthcare that they 
are eligible for.
  Madam Speaker, 40 percent of the veterans in Michigan are unconnected 
totally from the VA and the resources they are entitled to. This 
statistic, coupled with the experience of navigating those challenges 
in the VA, are unacceptable. Every veteran I know has their own story 
as they transition out of the military, whether it has been 3 years or 
three decades.

[[Page H8188]]

  I watched this up close with my husband after 30 years of Active Duty 
in the Army. Newly separated veterans encounter changes in job status, 
lifestyle, housing, healthcare, and education. It is a period of 
enormous change, and also a period of vulnerability. Tragically, rates 
of veteran suicide are higher in those tumultuous first years than 
later after separation.
  Veterans are entitled to a variety of resources, but they only can 
access them if they know about them. That is why I introduced the Solid 
Start Act with my Republican friend, Congressman Joyce.
  This bipartisan bill codifies a pilot program, as Mr. Bost said, that 
was initiated under President Trump, and it shows great promise. But as 
we stand here tonight, this bill has now been unexpectedly thrown into 
jeopardy, and it is entirely because of political gamesmanship. Right 
now, at the last minute, before we vote on this bill, the Pro-Life 
Caucus from the other side of the aisle has acted to stop the bill from 
moving to prevent the 16 words that are on this page. This language has 
been in the bill since its inception when we created this: ``Providing 
women veterans with information that is tailored to their specific 
healthcare and benefit needs.''
  To be clear, if we pass this bill, then it goes to the President's 
desk to be signed into law.
  But just so we understand what was meant with the idea of providing 
women and veterans with information tailored to them, it is pregnancy 
and mental health care, maternity care, mammogram, breast health, 
breastfeeding and lactation, menopause, gynecological cancer, pre-
pregnancy health, chronic pelvic pain, birth control, osteoporosis, 
prosthetics for women, intimate partner violence, disordered eating, 
and sexual assault. I can go on. There is a very long list of specific 
health issues that are specific to women.
  Instead, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are holding 
this bill hostage. The 16 words that they apparently now object to are 
essential for women's healthcare and are already covered by the VA. 
None of this is controversial. None of this is objectionable. It 
doesn't change one thing about veterans' benefits or services. It makes 
no changes to what they are entitled to. All it does is require the VA 
to reach out to servicemembers three times in their first year from 
separation. It increases outreach to veterans.
  So let's talk about what this is really about.
  Earlier today, a letter went out from Ranking Member Bost and the 
Pro-Life Caucus saying that Members, while they supported it 
previously, should now turn against it. After publicly supporting this, 
they are now leaving it.
  And why?
  Because they are concerned about VA policy. They are concerned about 
the VA's decision to provide veteran women with access to abortion when 
they have been raped, when they are the victims of family incest, or 
when a doctor confirms that the pregnancy is a risk to the health or 
the life of the mother.
  It is not abortion on demand and not extreme policies. These are very 
basic, commonly accepted instances when a woman veteran has gone 
through hell and has no other option.
  The other side of the aisle, to be clear, is objecting to this bill 
because they object to any exceptions whatsoever on abortion. It is a 
political game. It is literally putting politics ahead of the 18 
million veterans and 200,000 each year who separate.
  It is our responsibility to honor the veterans, male and female. I 
find it disturbing that you would play politics in this way. I ask the 
other side of the aisle to reconsider and support this bill.
  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOST. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
because I would like to take this time to respond to a few things that 
were not said correctly.
  One, no one has said anything about a lawsuit, especially from the 
ranking member.
  Two, the Hyde amendment says: rape, incest, life of the mother. When 
you put life and health of the mother, then it expands what can be 
distorted and where we are at, and it opens to the point of long-term 
abortion, and that has actually been verified by the VA.
  There is not a whole list there that we want to remove. We want it to 
say: If we believe that men and women are all veterans and should be 
considered, then they should be advised as veterans.
  But by putting that particular language in at this time after the 
administration has violated the law of 1962--now the chairman said 
there is another law, but if you look at that law, that law never goes 
directly to abortion. And if it was directed towards abortion, then 
they would have put it in the law. They would have put it in the law. 
They wouldn't have made that broad statement. That is why it is a 
misinterpretation of the VA.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend for 
yielding.
  Madam Speaker, as the former chairman of the House Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs and the prime author of 14 major laws to assist 
veterans, including the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act 
and several healthcare laws as well, I have always deeply respected and 
strongly supported the unique mission of VA healthcare.
  Comprised of 172 medical centers and over 1,100 outpatient clinics, 
the VA operates the largest integrated healthcare network in the entire 
world. VA medical personnel--371,000 professionals and support staff--
are absolutely committed to healing, nurturing, and rehabilitating.
  So it is beyond disappointing that President Biden issued an illegal 
rule--I was here when section 106 of the Veterans Healthcare Act of 
1992 was enacted, and it couldn't have been clearer--to turn the 
lifesaving, life-enhancing mission of the VA into new venues for 
abortion on demand.
  And the word health--Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton couldn't have made 
it more clear, and Doe v. Bolton with the companion opinion issued by 
the Supreme Court, they defined health. They used the World Health 
Organization's definition, and it is everything including any kind of 
mental stress. So it is completely wide-open, abortion-on-demand 
language. It is not rape, incest, and life of the mother. Health is 
included in Biden's rule.
  The new Biden VA abortion rule authorizes and forces taxpayers to 
fund the violent death of unborn baby girls and baby boys by what?
  By beheading, dismemberment, forced expulsion from the womb, deadly 
poisons, and other methods at any time until birth.
  Abortion, Madam Speaker, is not healthcare unless one construes the 
precious life of an unborn child to be analogous to a tumor to be 
excised or a disease to be vanquished.
  For decades, Madam Speaker, abortion advocates have gone to 
extraordinary lengths to ignore, trivialize, and cover up the battered 
baby victim. But today, thanks to ultrasound, unborn babies are more 
visible than ever before. Today, science informs us that birth is an 
event--albeit an important one--but it is not the beginning of life. 
Modern science and medicine today treats unborn children with 
disability or disease as a patient in need of diagnosis and treatment, 
not death by abortion.
  Unborn babies are society's youngest patients and deserve benign, 
life-affirming medical interventions and not medicines that kill. The 
weakest and most vulnerable unborn babies deserve our respect, empathy, 
protection, and love.
  The legislation before us today will be used to promote the VA's new 
abortion-on-demand mission.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose it, and, hopefully, we 
will see a change in the policy sometime in the near future that 
President Biden has issued.
  Mr. BOST. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 9\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, before I yield an additional 3 minutes to 
the gentlewoman from Michigan, let

[[Page H8189]]

me just say that if the minority is so insistent and is fervent in 
their belief that this interim final rule is illegal, I do not 
understand why there has been no lawsuit filed to enjoin the rule.
  This is very peculiar that with such passion and with such fervor 
they argue that this rule is illegal.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan 
(Ms. Slotkin).
  Ms. SLOTKIN. Madam Speaker, there has been a lot of talk on the other 
side of the aisle, and I just want to be clear. No one in this room is 
in the judicial branch, and no one in this room that I am aware of is a 
medical doctor.
  If you believe that the provisions that the VA has put forward have a 
legal problem, then you have the right to take up that case and put it 
through the courts. We are the legislative branch. We make laws, and we 
pass laws. We are not judge and jury. Take it to a court if you are 
concerned. That is your right.
  In terms of making decisions on behalf of women, if you want to take 
a veterans' bill and make it about abortion, then let's do it. What you 
are saying, and you are saying it in front of the American people, is 
that you believe a veteran who has been raped, who is the victim of 
incest, or who is having a dangerous miscarriage does not deserve 
access to abortion.
  You are saying--unless you correct me and tell me what you believe a 
woman deserves to have when she has been raped, the victim of incest, 
or is in the middle of a dangerous miscarriage, if you can't state it 
then be clear you believe in no exceptions for women--a cold, 
heartless, and violent approach to women's health.
  You want to ban all abortions. That is your goal. Many of you have 
been open about that, and if you flip the House, we know that you will 
put forward a full ban on all abortions for all States. You have been 
clear about it.
  If you want to turn a veterans' bill into an abortion bill, then 
let's do it. Not one of you are a medical doctor. Not one of you.
  What the VA guidelines say is that if you have been raped or are the 
victim of incest or a medical professional deems that your pregnancy is 
a risk to your health. The one in four women in this country who has 
had a miscarriage, probably many women in this room, that you are a 
better judge of who gets to decide the future of their life and not a 
medical doctor? Who do you think you are?
  You are politicians. We are all on this floor elected officials and 
not medical professionals. If it were your wife or your daughter who is 
suffering through a miscarriage, are you going to tell her she can't 
until her fever gets high enough or until she is bleeding harder?
  That is what is happening in the State of Texas right now. If that is 
what you want for veterans, shame on you. Shame on you.
  I am sorry we built this bill to be bipartisan. I sought your support 
particularly, sir, and you are making it a political issue.
  Shame on you. You all have pictures of veterans in your office. You 
are proud to show your pride in our veterans. It should be the most 
bipartisan issue in the world, and you are making it political. Shame 
on you.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Mr. BOST. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me tell you, Madam Speaker, if I may, the question is not on 
rape, incest, or life of the mother. It is on health, which could then 
go to mental health which could spin off to late-term abortions.
  This is a very personal issue to a lot of people, and I am sure it is 
to everyone on both sides of the aisle. But I have to question who in 
this room has ever held a child who has been born after 25 weeks in the 
womb? I have. I held one granddaughter who died in the womb and one who 
died in my arms after she was out of the womb.
  What the VA has done with this rule by tweaking it, they think it is 
for the right reasons--right or wrong--which you consider, rape, 
incest, life of the mother, it is not. It is rape, incest, life and 
health of the mother, which will allow for those late-term abortions.
  Madam Speaker, that is life. Our Constitution is very clear. It is 
very clear: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the first 
being life.

                              {time}  2045

  You can't, if you have ever held a child like that when they died in 
your arms, say that is not life.
  Unfortunately, it is not us that is making the decision. It is 
political. It is the Biden administration, Madam Speaker, and they have 
done it through taking the VA.
  Anybody that can question me on my support of veterans is out of 
their mind. I have served. My father served. My grandfather served. My 
son served. My grandson served. And guess what? As of last week, my 
granddaughter is now in Navy boot camp.
  I will stand for the veterans, but I will not stand for the death of 
children regardless of who this administration is or what they believe 
is a good political move.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Roy), my good friend.
  Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I appreciate my friend's service, and I 
appreciate his passion on this issue.
  I listened here as my colleagues want to lecture us about making 
decisions about life. Who are my colleagues to decide when life begins? 
Talking about where the doctors are in the room, who are my colleagues, 
where is God in the room about determining when life begins?
  It is my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who have out-of-
step views about the extent of abortion in this country to terminate 
life right up to the point of birth. It is out of step with the 
entirety of the world. It is a radical position, and the entirety of 
this country knows it.
  What we are talking about right now, when we used to be able to have 
some peaceful debates in this body, we had the Hyde amendment 
recognizing our differences on the issue and trying to pull it out of 
the debate of funding, but my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
refuse to respect the Hyde amendment.
  Now, you have an administration making up law. My colleague on the 
other side of the aisle wants to lecture about where you go to have a 
dispute about law. Oh, run to the courts, they say. Run to Article III.
  Well, we are Article I, dadgummit, and we make decisions about the 
law every single day. As a Member of this body, I introduced the 
ARTICLE ONE Act under President Trump, questioning executive authority.
  I subpoenaed records from the White House, questioning unaccompanied 
alien children data because I believe in the primacy of Article I.
  But we should, dadgummit, on a bipartisan basis believe that we need 
to make these decisions, and you don't have the VA arbitrarily making 
law and stepping over the 1992 law, which has never been repealed. It 
has never been set aside, and to suggest that it has makes a mockery of 
the laws that we pass. We should agree on that on a bipartisan basis.
  The ranking member is speaking for all of us when he says we are 
trying to stand up in support of the Solid Start program, but it has 
now been turned on its head by a radical decision by the executive 
branch, so now we are no longer going to support this program as it 
exists.
  As the chairman said, 16 words are the hang-up. Then change the 16 
words, and let's fix what needs to be fixed to honor what we know is 
the law from the 1992 law.
  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, what the gentleman from Texas is 
suggesting that we do is delete women from S. 1198. That, I will not 
do.
  Yes, I strongly believe in Article I. The accusation that Secretary 
McDonough issued a radical rule, well, what is this so-called radical 
rule he is mentioning that he has issued? The rule that Secretary 
McDonough issued, the interim final rule, says that abortion is 
available based on the 1996 law, which gave him the authority to define 
medical benefits available at the VA. That is very clear what Congress 
did.
  It is under that authority that this Secretary has made not a radical 
rule but simply a rule which allows veteran women to enjoy the same 
rights that they had when they were serving in the military as Active-
Duty servicemembers. Women serving in the military have access to 
abortions when they have been raped, when they are victims of incest, 
and, yes, when their pregnancies pose a danger to their life.

[[Page H8190]]

  Who is trying to play God here are the Members on the other side of 
the aisle who wish to deny women who have worn the cloth of this 
country, who have served our country, who fought for all of our 
freedoms, to deny them the freedom to be able to consider the full 
range of medical procedures that they need in order to preserve their 
own life.
  What is extreme here is that they want to deny women to even be able 
to access abortion counseling, counseling which may save their lives.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOST. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, I think it is important to realize that DOD actually 
follows the Hyde amendment, which is rape, incest, and the life of the 
mother, which is exactly what the chairman just quoted.
  What the VA does is rape, incest, and life and health, including 
mental health, of the mother, which can be a claim that maybe I am 
under stress, all of these things. That is why we need clarification. 
Not only do we need clarification, but we need to follow the law.
  The argument that the other law allows the VA Secretary to make these 
decisions, it never mentioned abortion in there. I think that would 
have done that.
  Madam Speaker, I am encouraging my Members to vote ``no'' on this 
bill. I would love to be able to vote on this bill when we get this 
problem straightened out. I believe our veterans deserve to have the 
other benefits that are here and available in the bill.
  As everybody knows, I did vote for it in the other form before the VA 
stepped down this path.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, again, I ask for my colleagues to join me 
in passing S. 1198.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Takano) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, S. 1198.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. BOST. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________