[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 21]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 30821]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



  CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2116, VETERANS MILLENNIUM HEALTH CARE AND 
                              BENEFITS ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. MICHAEL F. DOYLE

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, November 16, 1999

  Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about the final version 
of legislation that deals with a comprehensive and complex set of 
veterans' healthcare and benefits issues. Without question, this 
conference report on H.R. 2116, the Veterans Millennium Health Care and 
Benefits Act, deals constructively with a significant portion of the 
substantive matters considered at length by the Veterans Affairs 
Committees in both the House and the Senate.
  I want to recognize the efforts of Senator Specter, Senator 
Rockefeller, Senator Stump, and Ranking Member Evans for their 
demonstrated leadership in crafting collaborative compromises in the 
most productive manner as the conference allowed.
  This agreement makes significant steps forward in defining the VA's 
mission in a number of critical health care areas: Extended care, 
emergency services, mental health services, and chiropractic treatment 
to name a few. This agreement also moves in the right direction in 
terms of addressing the lingering need for additional national veterans 
cemeteries and long-term care facilities, as well as needed renovations 
at various VA medical centers.
  This agreement also provides constructive direction in the areas of 
veterans' education and housing, in meeting the needs of homeless 
veterans, and improving the administrative structure of the court of 
appeals for veterans claims.
  I am disappointed however, that many of the provisions that were 
originally included in the House version of the bill pertaining to 
employee and veterans organizations participation in various VA 
decision-making and planning practices were not made part of this final 
package. I also think that the conference could have produced a better 
work product in terms of providing strong language that speaks to the 
need for cost-benefit analysis, employee protections, stringent 
hospital closure guidelines, and heightened oversight measures 
throughout the entire VA network. Inclusion of such provisions would 
have greatly improved the agreement's overall intentions and would have 
made them less susceptible to inconsistent treatment system wide.
  So in summary, while the conference agreement is not a perfect piece 
of legislation, it is nonetheless worthy of members' support. And as 
Representative Evans pointed out earlier, the conference agreement in 
many ways represents the need to demonstrate our concerted interest in 
reaffirming our commitment to our nation's veterans. But as I have 
repeatedly stated, the most well intentioned efforts in terms of 
authorizing language are only as good as the amount of adequate funding 
that is appropriated. I have very serious concerns that next year we 
will find ourselves in the same vicious circle of logical debate. And 
the circle begins and ends with the need to have adequate resources to 
sufficiently support our responsibilities in meeting the needs of our 
veterans.
  It is my hope that all members who cast their vote in support of the 
conference agreement will maintain their focus on veterans issues so 
that in the next fiscal year we can reverse the course we have been on 
for far too long and begin our work on matters concerning veterans with 
enhanced resources, not severe budgetary cuts.

                          ____________________