[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 18852-18857]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          ASSURED FUNDING FOR VETERANS HEALTH CARE ACT OF 2003

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.


                             General Leave

  Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
on the subject of my special order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, it is no secret to anyone in this body, nor 
to the Nation's 25 million American veterans and their families, that 
the health care system is critically underfunded.
  The result is that tens of thousands of veterans are being forced to 
work and one group of veterans is being denied access to VA care 
altogether. The

[[Page 18853]]

current funding process for veterans' health care is broken. It simply 
does not work and, frankly, it never has.
  The problem starts out at OMB where they consistently pare down the 
Department of Veterans Affair's budget requests to accommodate the 
other priorities of the White House. It moves on to this Capitol where 
Congress must squeeze the veterans' programs into funding for a myriad 
of other priorities of ill-advised tax cuts to the Space Station. It 
ends with veterans waiting in lines, sick and disabled and living with 
the year-to-year anxiety that comes from wondering if the VA will be 
there when they ask for help.
  In short, Madam Speaker, veterans, the individuals who defended this 
country in time of war and kept us a free Nation, are forced by a cruel 
funding process to continue fighting for what is rightfully theirs.
  I and 117 of my colleagues so far, some of whom join me today, 
believe enough is enough. There is no feasible alternative to 
permanently fix this problem. Only one. And that is mandatory funding 
of the VA spending, just like Medicare, just like the Department of 
Defense, TRICARE and just like the Federal Employees Health Benefits 
Program, the veterans deserve some consideration as the beneficiaries 
of their plans.
  The Nation's veterans organizations strongly agree. The American 
Legion, AMVETS, Blinded Veterans Association, Disabled American 
Veterans, Military Order of the Purple Heart, Paralyzed Veterans of 
America, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vietnam Veterans of America and 
others, including organizations that represent nearly 6 million 
members, are speaking up across the Nation. They too are saying enough 
is enough.
  That is why I have introduced H.R. 2318, the Assured Funding for the 
Veterans Health Care Act of 2003. The bill would require the Secretary 
of Treasury annually to come before Congress to provide funding for the 
VA's care, based on the number of enrollees in the system and medical 
inflation.
  What could be more appropriate than providing funding for veterans' 
health care, based on the number who will need it, the demand and the 
projected cost. Let us be absolutely clear. These projections and the 
subsequent funding of them should be based on care for all eligible 
veterans.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland).
  Mr. STRICKLAND. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my friend and the 
ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans). I want to thank the gentleman for 
being such an advocate for veterans, but I also want to thank him for 
introducing this legislation, the Assured Funding for the Veterans 
Health Care Act of 2003.
  What we are talking about here is simply having mandatory funding for 
veterans programs so that the vets do not have to come to the Congress 
year after year after year with hat in hands and ask for what they 
need. But if this bill that the gentleman has introduced passes, and by 
the way, I think it has 117 cosponsors at the present time, if it were 
to pass, there would be a mandatory stream of funding. Veterans would 
be able to have assurance that what they needed in terms of benefits 
and health care would be there for them.
  I would like to take a minute, if I can, just to put this debate 
about mandatory funding in context and talk about what is at stake 
here. We need to put mandatory funding in this budget because right now 
funding for veterans' benefits is inadequate.
  This is what we have seen happen in recent months: There are hundreds 
of thousands of veterans who are waiting 6 months or more just to get 
an appointment to see a doctor. Think about that. Would any Member of 
this House of Representatives tolerate having to be put on a waiting 
list and to wait 6 months or longer to see a doctor? I think we would 
not. And I think it is a fair question to ask. Why should those of us 
who serve in this body have access to health care in a more timely 
manner than that which is made available to our veterans?
  Another problem, veterans about a year and a half ago, had to pay $2 
for each prescription they received. The VA increased that copayment 
from $2 to $7 a prescription. And now the President has requested that 
that copayment be increased from $7 a prescription up to $15 a 
prescription.
  And one of the most outrageous things that has happened, the VA 
actually placed a gag order on their health care providers. The VA sent 
out a memo to all of their network health providers saying, you can no 
longer market VA services to veterans. In other words, you cannot 
proactively tell veterans what they are entitled to receive. Think 
about that. I mean, it is almost unbelievable that the Department that 
is supposed to be looking out for veterans, protecting veterans, 
servicing veterans, would actually put out a memo telling their doctors 
and nurses and social workers that they could not participate in health 
fairs, that they have could not send out newsletters telling veterans 
what they are entitled to receive under the laws that have been passed 
right here in this Chamber, that they could not make public service 
announcements urging veterans to come in for services. And that gag 
order is in effect tonight, and it is shameful. And it is in effect 
because we do not have sufficient funding to pay all the costs of 
veterans' benefits and veterans' health care.
  Then something else that more and more veterans across this country 
are just becoming aware of, the VA created a new classification for 
veterans. They have call it Priority 8. And they say those who are in 
Priority 8 are of higher income. Now, quite frankly, one can make as 
little in my district as about $24,000 a year and be considered higher 
income. And so these are called Priority 8 veterans, and they are being 
told that they can not enroll in the VA health care system at all. 
Think about that.
  These are men and women who have served our country admirably. They 
have been honorably discharged. Many of them are in great economic and 
financial need. And because they make about $24-, $25,000 a year, the 
VA is saying you are high income and so you do not qualify to 
participate in the VA system.

                              {time}  2115

  Does my colleague not think it is fair that the people in this 
country know that he and I earn about $150,000 a year? I think that is 
high income. I do not think $24,000 is high income. I think this is 
really shameful what the VA has done here.
  Right now, the House Committee on Appropriations has been considering 
the fiscal year 2004 appropriations for the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, and it does not look good. Despite assurances from the 
leadership here in the House, in fact, they have held press conferences 
saying, oh, we are going to treat the veterans in the right way, 
despite those assurances, Republicans have abandoned their promises; 
and they are going to increase the cost of prescription drugs for a 
veteran.
  The President asked for this in his budget. At a time when we were 
getting ready to send our young men and women into harm's way, the 
President sent a budget to this House, and he asked that veterans be 
required to pay more money for a prescription drug. In fact, he wanted 
that copayment to be doubled, more than doubled, from $7 to $15 a 
prescription; and he also asked that this Congress impose an annual 
enrollment fee on priority 7 and 8 veterans, an enrollment fee of $250 
a year. Then the President asked that the cost of going to see a doctor 
at a clinic be increased from $15 a visit to $20 a visit, and this 
House is going along with that request.
  Oh, but we were told, do not worry, because we have actually 
increased funding for veterans health care next year; and we were told 
it was going to be $3.4 billion, but it looks as if the Congress is 
reneging on that promise as well, and the increase has been cut about 
in half, down to $1.4 billion.
  These are shameful acts in my judgment, and I want to tell my 
colleagues that all of the veterans organizations in this country, and 
I am talking about the American Legion, the VFW, the AMVETS, the 
Disabled American Veterans, Vietnam Vets, they are pretty

[[Page 18854]]

 upset about this. I have a letter which they sent out last Friday, and 
it is from the National AMVETS, the Disabled American Veterans, the 
Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Veterans of Foreign Wars; and 
they say here: ``The VA-HUD Independent Agencies appropriations bill, 
which calls for a $1.4 billion increase over last year and 
approximately the President's request,'' basically this House is doing 
what the President has requested. These groups say that is wholly 
inadequate. It is inadequate to provide health care to sick and 
disabled veterans, and it represents a flagrant disregard of promises 
made to veterans by this Congress.
  ``So much for promises,'' they say in their letter. So much for 
promises. Providing a wholly inadequate $1.4 billion increase calls 
into question all the press conferences and the news releases touting 
this Congress' commitment to the men and women who have served this 
Nation.
  So what we are asking for in the gentleman from Illinois' (Mr. Evans) 
bill is that we make this funding mandatory. Just as other parts of our 
Federal Government call for mandatory spending, we want veterans to 
have the assurance that comes with mandatory funding.
  These veterans service organizations that I mentioned tell me that 
this is their number one legislative priority. There are lots of things 
that veterans need; but nothing is more important to them than having 
mandatory funding, so that year after year we can know how much money 
our hospitals are going to get, our outpatient clinics, how much money 
is going to be there to take care of our aging population of veterans.
  I would just close my remarks by reminding my colleagues and others 
once again that what this Congress is doing represents a following of 
the directions that came to us from President Bush. He sent his budget 
over here in January. As my colleague will recall, January was a time 
when we were preparing for war. Talk is cheap. The gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Evans) knows that.
  But health care costs a lot of money, and it does cost a lot of money 
to provide needed health care to our veterans; but these are men and 
women who have paid the price. They have served our country. They have 
taken the oath. They have served honorably and admirably; and as they 
chose to do that, to provide the service to their country, promises 
were made to them, and our country has an obligation to keep those 
promises; and the best way to keep those promises, I think, is to pass 
my colleague's legislation, the legislation that he has entitled 
appropriately Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2003.
  Every Member of this House should sign on as cosponsors. We have, I 
think, 117 cosponsors now, thanks to the gentleman's leadership. We 
ought to have every Member, Democrat and Republican alike, in this 
House sign on to this act. It is H.R. 2318, and I repeat that just in 
case there may be some veterans who are listening and who would like to 
communicate with their Senator and their House Member, H.R. 2318. It is 
called the Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2003.
  Madam Speaker, I would hope that veterans across this country would 
recognize the importance of this legislation and would let their 
representatives know how important it is to them, and perhaps they will 
just decide to urge them to sign on as cosponsors.
  I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for his leadership. I 
admire him greatly. I was elected to this body for the first time, took 
office in January of 1993. He and I were both younger men then; but I 
admired him then for the dedication he had to serve our veterans, and 
across the years my admiration for him has only grown, and I thank him 
for introducing this vital legislation. I pledge to him that I will do 
everything in my power to see that we get as many cosponsors as 
possible, that we urge the leadership of this House to allow this 
legislation to move forward; and I thank him for allowing me to 
participate with him tonight.
  Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the remarks, and at this time 
I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished 
gentleman for his yielding, and I thank him for his leadership. It is 
an honor to work with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) as he has 
worked for the issues of veterans not only because he is a passionate 
legislator and a member of this body, an honored and esteemed member of 
this body, but because he also is a Vietnam-era veteran and clearly 
knows the sensitivity of these issues and the great need in these 
issues.
  Madam Speaker, I represent a veterans hospital and many veterans in 
the State of Texas in the 18th Congressional District. We are honored 
to have as one of our very fine medical institutions the veterans 
hospital, and it is particularly of great importance to my constituents 
and my community because during Tropical Storm Allison in 2001, when 
the medical center found itself flooded in and many of its patients 
were in need of transfer and need of additional assistance or many of 
its equipment was not working, who rose to the occasion? It was the 
veterans hospital, and of course, those who were committed to serving 
veterans, who had the mindset, the charitable mindset, they had the 
great knowledge and as well the caring attitude to open their doors and 
as well to take many of the staff, they were also veterans themselves, 
to be able to assist by providing beds for the patients who needed it. 
They rose to the occasion.
  Tonight I think it is important that we are on this floor to rise to 
the occasion on their behalf. I support totally H.R. 2318 concerning 
mandatory funding for veterans health care and am proud to be a proud 
sponsor of this legislation, would encourage the Members of the House 
and the other body, who have not yet found their way to this 
legislation. I expect that it will be dropped by one of or our very 
fine Senators in the other body, of course, and hope that we will be 
able to move this legislation quickly through the Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs and as well bring it to the floor.
  We know that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) and the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) work well together. I would hope 
that this would be the kind of legislation that has no problems, should 
have no obstacles. It should move. I think I would be optimistic, I 
would want it to be in the committee tomorrow or at the end of the week 
so that as soon as we get back here in September we could quickly move 
this legislation forward.
  Let me tell my colleagues why, because there are many things that are 
happening to our veterans, and we are getting more veterans as we speak 
because, as my colleague well knows, we had a quarter of a million 
troops stationed in Iraq. Now we have 140,000. Clearly there is 
discussion as to whether or not we need more; but many of those troops 
are going to be veterans soon, and right now as we speak, even though 
they may not be retirees, we have several problems that are occurring.
  We have problems with respect to veterans not being able to enroll in 
hospitals right now. We have problems about the concurrent receipt 
issue where veterans have to choose between disability pay and 
retirement pay, dollar for dollar. What an insult to our veterans, and 
there is H.R. 303 in which we are trying to correct that problem.
  The work that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) is doing is 
crucial as relates to health care. So I rise today in support of H.R. 
2318, the Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2003. This 
legislation is key to addressing shortfalls in the fiscal year 2003 
budget appropriations for veterans health that could prove injurious to 
our veterans. We have a duty to protect our veterans from 
misunderstanding as to the new veterans administration medical care 
budget proposed by the Bush administration.
  About 25 million veterans, living veterans, nearly 19 million have 
served during times of war. There are 19 million stories to tell and 19 
million histories to preserve. However, time is of the essence. There 
are only a few thousand World War I veterans left and

[[Page 18855]]

World War II veterans left. These World War I veterans are all more 
than 100 years old. The average age of our World War II veterans is 
more than 77, and we are losing 1,500 of them a day. We need to 
preserve not only their tribute to us by fighting in World War II and 
World War I, but certainly if they are in need of health care, 
obviously we know that they would be, that we certainly would not want 
to say no to those few remaining veterans of that era and then the 
veterans that are now coming from the Korean War and all of the 
conflicts that we have had through not only the Vietnam War but the 
Persian Gulf and now Iraq.
  Republican tax cuts and the shortfalls to the veterans health plan 
will have a negative impact on the veteran community and the veterans 
health care service facility of Texas and of the Nation. In the State 
of Texas, there are approximately 1.721 million veterans. I believe my 
State has one of the highest numbers or the highest numbers. Certainly 
in my congressional district there are a large number of veterans with 
whom I work on a regular basis.
  Currently, 3,400 veterans are on the waiting list; and due to the war 
in Iraq, we will have new veterans in need of services as relates to 
health care. The Veterans Administration Medical Center in the 18th 
Congressional District has seen an 18 percent increase in its need for 
its services this year already. There must be additional funding to 
meet that need.
  I am adamantly opposed to any effort that would reduce accessibility 
or the extent of health care to our veterans. The Republican budget 
cuts also include cutting health care and education needs for our 
veterans.
  It is really, I believe, a questionable practice to suggest that a 
veteran making $30,000 a year should have to be questioned regarding 
accessing the veterans hospital services. It just does not make sense, 
and the budget that we put forward would slash services to veterans who 
make $30,000 a year or more. Can my colleagues imagine, $30,000 a 
veteran, may have a family, needy in health care, people making $30,000 
a year, may not have health insurance because of the cost and the 
amount it takes to raise their families.

                              {time}  2130

  If this present structure is in place now without this legislation, 
without the full funding that our ranking member, the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Evans), has put forward in this very, very important 
bill, then what we have are hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of 
veterans, maybe even millions, who are not able to access health care 
at the veterans hospitals, and this is what we promised them when they 
went into the United States military, in a volunteer military.
  As it speaks right now, it says we will provide the kind of resources 
that are necessary for them. And yet here we are in 2003 denying them 
the right to have the resources that would allow the veterans hospitals 
to provide care if they make over 30,000 a year.
  I am astonished and I am also appalled at the taking away of promises 
that we made to individuals who are willing to offer the ultimate 
sacrifice, and that is their life.
  Someone said to me that we do not have conscription, we do not have a 
draft anymore. That occurred in the Vietnam War. Now we have a 
volunteer military. That means that most of those who are in today got 
up out of their hometown and went to the office where the military was, 
whether Army, Navy, Coast Guard, or any of the others, and signed up to 
be able to defend their country and to follow the orders of the 
Commander in Chief or if this Congress would declare war.
  They are in a war now that there was no declaration of, but they are 
there fighting. They are there loyal to the United States. They have 
taken an oath and they are sacrificing both their life and limbs on 
behalf of the people of the United States of America. Those very young 
men and women will ultimately become veterans. God hope they will come 
home to their loved ones.
  How dare we cut a budget and suggest that if they make $30,000 a 
year, they cannot get health care?
  But, really, in my district, I see individuals that are not in that 
category, who cannot access health care because they are making moneys 
of $31,000, $32,000 and $33,000 a year. Some of these individuals are 
in desperate need. And I might add, even though we are talking about 
full funding, some of the very people that are penalized overall with 
the budget structure and the veteran structure in the hospital are my 
homeless veterans, homeless veterans who because of the trials and 
tribulations of war, yes, they came back to us, but even though they 
came back to us they came back broken in mind and spirit. So, today, we 
find thousands upon thousands of homeless veterans who also cannot get 
resources because of the cuts in the veterans budget that impacts on 
the veterans hospitals and thereby impacts on veterans' health care.
  So this bill by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for full 
funding makes a lot of common sense. In fact, it upholds the tradition 
of this Nation that we care and love and nurture those veterans who 
care about us; we care and love those individuals who are willing to 
sign up on the bottom line, take the oath, and say I, swear loyalty to 
the United States of America and so I am going into the United States 
military; and if I am called to a place that would jeopardize my life, 
I am willing to give the ultimate sacrifice.
  Yet we here in the United States are failing to provide the kind of 
regulations that would ensure that they could enroll, here we are de-
enrolling and not allowing veterans to get the kind of health care that 
they need to take care of themselves.
  This legislation being put forward, with 117 sponsors, assures 
funding for veterans' health care. It ensures that there are no signs 
at veterans hospitals that say ``No room at the inn.'' Can we do less 
than to provide the opportunity for veterans to have full funding?
  Let me close by simply acknowledging that my good friends will say 
that they have given an increase in funding for health care, and yet I 
think it should be acknowledged that that funding is $400 million short 
of meeting veterans' needs. It is $400 million short of meeting 
veterans' needs. That is why we have in place a policy that requires 
veterans to be denied coverage or denied coverage of health care at 
these hospitals if they make over $30,000 a year. I understand there is 
also a proposal to impose a new $1,500 annual copayment on higher 
income nonservice connected veterans who receive medical care from the 
VA.
  But let me just reinforce the fact these veterans have served their 
Nation and their country. These veterans may have health problems now, 
like diabetes and stroke and heart condition, they may have 
Alzheimer's, and there is always this fine line of whether or not this 
was service connected. We do not know if it is service connected. We 
took 20 years to find out about Agent Orange from Vietnam. We are still 
trying to find out about the Persian Gulf illness, and there have been 
denials upon denials about whether it was related or connected. All of 
that occurred.
  If we are still trying to find out about Agent Orange, if we are 
still trying to find out about the Persian Gulf, how do we know whether 
diabetes, stroke and heart disease may not have been service connected. 
So, therefore, we are denying these veterans the kinds of services they 
need.
  Let me also cite, Madam Speaker, that in a January, 2003, letter the 
Disabled American Veterans, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S., 
Paralyzed Veterans of America, and AMVETS called on President Bush to 
propose a veterans medical care appropriation of $25.4 billion. 
However, the administration has not heeded this budget advice from 
these veterans organizations.
  We have paralyzed veterans who are paralyzed from the neck down. 
These are individuals who need a high degree of health care. Many of 
them are my constituents. And let me give a special tribute to the 
Disabled Veterans of America and, as well, the U.S. Paralyzed Veterans 
of America who come into my office every single year. And every single 
year I make a commitment to them that we have got to do better by them.

[[Page 18856]]

  This legislation, I believe, is the kind of legislation that clearly 
speaks to the needs of veterans. It is sensitive and sympathetic. And I 
do want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for his wisdom 
in helping to provide for those veterans who cannot provide or speak 
for themselves.
  And may I remind my colleagues that as we discuss these veterans, the 
toll of those dying in Iraq is going up, one by one by one. And those 
who will come back will have been subjected to the trauma of war for a 
long period of time. Some will reenlist but some will become veterans. 
I would be appalled if they went to one of our veterans hospitals and 
they said, ``There is no room at the inn.''
  How can we be a Nation who believes in the equality of all, how can 
we be a Nation that adheres to the Constitution that says we have 
organized this Nation to create a more perfect union, and not support 
in totality H.R. 2318? I rise to support this effort, and would hope 
that someone is listening and that the leadership of this House will 
come to the gentleman from Illinois immediately and ask that this bill 
be brought to the floor of the House, and that we will provide for the 
veterans who have provided for us.
  I thank the gentleman for his service and thank him for giving me the 
opportunity to share with my colleagues the importance of passage of 
H.R. 2318.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2318, the Assured 
Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2003. This legislation is 
before us to address shortfalls in the FY 2003 budget appropriations 
for veterans health care that could prove quite injurious. We have a 
duty to protect our veterans from misunderstanding as to the new 
Veterans Administration (VA) medical care budget proposed by the Bush 
administration. Of our 25 million living veterans, nearly 19 million 
have served during times of war. There are 19 million stories to tell 
and 19 million histories to preserve. However, time is of the essence. 
There are only a few thousand World War I veterans left and they are 
all more than 100 years old. The average age of our World War II 
veterans is more than 77 and we are losing 1,500 of them a day. We need 
to preserve their great legacy now.
  Republican tax cuts and the shortfalls to the veterans' health plan 
will have a negative impact on the veteran community and the veteran-
service healthcare facilities of Texas. In the State of Texas, there 
are approximately 1.721 million veterans. Currently, 3,400 veterans are 
on the waiting list and due to the war in Iraq we will have new 
veterans in need of services. The Veterans' Administration Medical 
Center in the 18th Congressional District of Texas has seen an 18 
percent increase in its need for its services this year already. There 
must be additional funding to meet that need. I am adamantly opposed to 
any efforts that would reduce the accessibility or the extent of health 
care to our veterans. The House Republican budget cuts veterans' 
benefits, including health care and education, by $14.6 billion. The 
Republican budget cuts veterans programs in order to finance additional 
tax cuts that we cannot afford. To pay for those tax cuts, we will be 
leaving thousands of veterans who were disabled during their brave 
service to this country without the medical services they require--
which is an atrocity and a national embarrassment. At a time when our 
economy is suffering, the Republican Party wants to take from the poor 
and disabled to give to the rich. The Republican budget would slash 
services to veterans who make $30,000 a year or more. If there budget 
stands without prophylactic measures like H.R. 2318, a large economic 
burden would befall thousands of veterans who will then be forced to 
bear their medical expenses on their limited incomes. We must renew our 
commitment to our Nation's veterans who have already given to us.
  The Bush administration claimed that the proposed veterans budget 
requests a record-setting ``$25.5 billion for medical programs.'' 
Unfortunately, in reality, the administration really asks Congress to 
appropriate $22.75 billion for veterans' medical care, which is $2.75 
billion less than the reported record-setting reported total. Of the 
$25.5 billion the Bush administration claims the budget will provide 
for veterans' medical care, $794 million will only shift administrative 
costs to the VA from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). In 
Congressional District 18, Harris County alone in 1998, total Veterans 
Administration patient care costs rose to $240,868,665 and 
$1,071,793,244 for of all of Texas. An extrapolation of this figure 
with inflationary factors gives but a glimpse of the national shortfall 
for our veterans. Another $1.28 billion of the administration's request 
is intended to offset unavoidable cost increases like inflation, higher 
pharmaceutical prices, and federal pay raises. In sum, the supposed $2 
billion ``increase'' won't give our veterans any health care relief as 
promised.
  The proposed increase in the medical care appropriation for fiscal 
year 2003 is approximately $100 million more than the $1.3 billion 
Congress appropriated for fiscal year 2002 which the administration 
acknowledges is $400 million short of meeting veterans' needs. This 
paints a dismal picture in light of the fact that five of the VA's 22 
networks have already projected shortfalls in funding for veterans' 
medical care by the year's end. The administration already plans to 
request a $142 million supplement for funding to continue to treat non-
service connected, higher income veterans. It plans to find another 
$300 million in ``management efficiencies.'' As also proposed by the 
administration, the FY 2003 VA medical care budget will require the VA 
to find an additional $316 million in management savings in order to 
meet veterans' demand for health care. This prospect promises to cause 
funds to be taken away from another weakly budgeted project to cover 
the gaping holes created by this scheme.
  The administration budget also assumes Congress will pass a Bush 
proposal to impose a new $1,500 annual co-payment on higher income, 
non-service connected veterans who receive medical care from the VA. If 
Congress were to reject this proposal, the VA would require an 
additional $1.15 billion in appropriations to cover the cost of 
providing this care. More than $400 million of the reported budget 
increase for veterans' medical care is projected to come from increased 
collections by the VA, particularly veterans' co-payments. With the 
recent increase from $2 to $7 in the amount veterans are charged by the 
VA for a prescription, much of this ``increase'' in funding for medical 
care is being paid by veterans themselves. This is outrageous. The Bush 
administration veterans' medical care appropriation falls short of the 
request made to President Bush by veterans' organizations by nearly $2 
billion. In a January 2003 letter, the Disabled American Veterans, the 
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S., Paralyzed Veterans of America and 
AMVETS, called on President Bush to propose a veterans' medical care 
appropriation of $24.5 billion. However, the administration has not 
heeded this budget advice from our veterans' organizations.
  The administration's budget emphasizes the need to reduce the huge 
backlog in claims for benefits submitted by veterans. During the first 
4 months of fiscal year 2002, the number of rating cases awaiting a 
decision for over 180 days increased from 172,294 to 204,006. Our 
veterans are waiting for the VA to reduce claims processing time 
without sacrificing decision-making quality or the shirking of the VA's 
statutory duty to assist veterans in developing their claims.
  The current administration's budget needs re-examination of its 
misguided priorities that will cause us to provide inadequate funding 
for health care for the men and women who have served our Nation in 
uniform in order to allow tax cuts that will primarily benefit 
wealthier Americans.
  Unfortunately, too often the President is simply unwilling to work 
with Congress to develop a fair budget. This means veterans' programs 
consistently fall prey to political considerations that have little to 
do with veterans. This year, funding lost to the tax cut will have a 
direct effect upon the amount of funds that remain available for 
discretionary priorities, like veterans' health care. H.R. 2318 will 
provide a veritable bandage for the scar that the administration's 
budget will create on the brow of our Nation's heroes.
  Absent protective legislation to provide mandatory funding and the 
concurrent passage of the Republican's budget would mean there would be 
no additional funds available to implement the Homeless Veterans 
Comprehensive Assistance Act to work toward the goal of eliminating 
chronic homelessness in a decade. Furthermore, the Capital Assets 
Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) program, a comprehensive 
planning and evaluation process undertaken by the VA to assess the best 
use of its physical infrastructure would become a ``de facto'' closure 
commission with no ability to respond to veterans' needs for primary 
care, long-term care, and mental health projected by its own models. 
There would be little money leftover for any of the system's 
desperately needed construction and improvement projects.
  Even more horrifying than the simple health care system problems, the 
scheduled cuts for veterans' benefits would carry far-reaching negative 
implications. The administration's budget for 2004 makes no provision 
for additional service-connected disability benefits resulting from the 
present war with Iraq. As we

[[Page 18857]]

know from the last war in the Persian Gulf, war results in adverse 
health effects and justifiable claims for service-connected disability 
compensation. It does acknowledge the expected increase in veteran's 
claims and an expected worsening of the disabilities of some service-
connected veterans. Under these circumstances, cuts in mandatory 
spending can only be made by cutting benefits to veterans with service-
connected disabilities. With a death toll of 152 U.S. troops since the 
start of the Iraqi War that is rising on a daily basis, it is incumbent 
upon our government to plan ahead for expenses that will stem from 
these deaths--as a courtesy to our fallen heroes at the very least.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2318 and the 
mandatory funding called for to bandage the wound to be caused by the 
administration's misguided budget proposal.
  Mr. FILNER. Madam Speaker and colleagues, I rise today in support of 
guaranteed funding for veterans' health care as found in H.R. 2318.
  This bill replaces the current ``discretionary'' funding process with 
a reliable, predictable, and rational way to assure that the funding 
that is needed for our veterans will be there! Guaranteed funding takes 
into account inflation and increased enrollment for VA health care and 
provides the money to meet these needs.
  Currently, the Members of the Veterans' Affairs Committee and many of 
our other colleagues must join together with organizations like the 
Disabled American Veterans, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the 
Veterans of Foreign Wars, AMVETS, the American Legion and others to 
fight for a budget to provide health care for veterans--a budget that 
is worthy of our veterans. And we must do this every year!
  And unfortunately, every year we fall far short of our goal. 
Veterans' health care needs are pitted against many other priorities of 
Congress and the administration, and we end up with less money than we 
need. The result, as many of you know, is disastrous. Right now, an 
entire group of veterans is being denied access to the VA health care 
system. And over 200,000 other veterans are waiting for a first 
appointment or an initial follow-up for health care, many waiting for 
more than 6 months.
  This year, the House passed a budget resolution that cut $25 billion 
from veterans' benefits. Twenty-five billion dollars! Although the 
final budget resolution is better, it is unclear how veteran's health 
care will fare when pitted against all the other programs in the VA-
HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriations bill--programs like low-income 
housing, the space program, environmental protections, urban 
development, and inner-city projects. These are worthy, but we should 
not have to limit services to veterans in order to fund them. That is 
why this legislation is so vital.
  Other federal health care programs like Medicare, the Defense 
Department's Tricare for Life, and the Federal Employees Health 
Benefits Program are being provided with guaranteed funding. Why not 
our Nation's veterans?
  Not only is the current ``discretionary'' funding unfair to veterans 
of past wars, but the lack of guaranteed funding sends an alarming 
message to current and future members of the Armed Forces. Recruitment 
and retention of service members is vital to the security of our 
country.
  This bill responds to the recommendations of the President's Task 
Force to Improve Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans. This 
task force recently testified before the House Veterans' Affairs 
Committee to the ``growing mismatch between funding and demand in VA 
health care''.
  H.R. 2318 will address this mismatch, and will help the VA to keep 
pace with increasing medical costs and an increasing patient 
population.

                          ____________________