[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 7968-7976]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            VETERANS AFFAIRS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida). Under the 
Speaker's announced policy of January 7, 2003, the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Waters) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of 
the minority leader.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address an issue that some 
of us started to talk about last week. Mr. Speaker, last week 11 
Members came to the floor to speak about the deep cuts in the 
President's budget. After we made our presentations on the floor, we 
were inundated with calls by veterans from all over America. They 
called us, they wrote us, and they are asking Members to join us. They 
want us to make a special appeal to our Republican friends, to the 
President, not to cut veterans services.
  We are back here tonight. I have more Democratic Members who have 
joined me. They have come to the floor this evening to appeal to our 
Republican colleagues and to the President not to cut the veterans 
budget.
  The budget is supposed to outline the Federal Government's priorities 
for the next year. Apparently, some of our colleagues have decided that 
their priorities are massive deficits, huge tax cuts that benefit only 
the most privileged, and drastic cuts to government programs that 
millions of people depend on. While the Republican budget did not 
include a dime in funding for the war in Iraq, it did cut the 
Department of Veterans Affairs by $25 billion.
  Mr. Speaker, on the same day that the President of the United States 
sent our soldiers into war, the Republicans in Congress pushed through 
a budget that slashed the very programs that our soldiers will count on 
when they return from their mission. This is unacceptable. I believe 
that we must live up to our duty and support the men and women who 
fought throughout our Nation's history to protect our freedom.
  However, it seems that many of our colleagues have forgotten the 
promises we made to our veterans when we sent them to war. This budget, 
the President's budget, has slashed government spending so that 
veterans are being impacted in the most unusual and negative way.
  The cuts that the veterans are being forced to take are simply unkind 
and

[[Page 7969]]

unfair. For example, in January of 2003, Mr. Bush cut off access to the 
VA health care system for approximately 174,000 veterans. Specifically, 
the President announced that new VA care would no longer be available 
to so-called ``Priority 8'' veterans who are not already enrolled in 
the VA system; that simply means veterans who earn about $24,000.
  It is ironic that the President announced this cut on the same day he 
did a photo op at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, touting veterans 
care for vets of the Afghanistan conflict.
  It is also ironic that the President was touting care for the 
veterans of the Afghanistan conflict when we are still, in our 
districts on a daily basis, responding to the cries of veterans who 
served in the Vietnam-era War and who served in the Persian Gulf War, 
veterans who still are not able to access their benefits. We are still 
dealing with veterans who have been inflicted with all of the diseases 
that come from the exposure to Agent Orange and other kinds of 
exposures.
  In July of 2002, the President had the Veterans Affairs Department 
direct all VA regional directors to stop, stop, all marketing 
activities to enroll new vets in the VA system. This was an effort to 
curb VA expenditures by not letting the public know about available 
services. According to several major veterans groups, the President's 
budget last year fell $1.5 billion short of the inadequate funding that 
was exhibited in that budget.


                           this year's budget

  So it should not come as a surprise when our President or his party 
short-changes our veterans, yet again. History has shown that they 
will.
  But Republicans decided that what they have done over the past couple 
of years was not enough. So when they drew up the Fiscal Year 2004 
budget they called for even greater cuts to the Department of Veterans' 
Affairs. The budget will cut $844 million from health programs next 
year.
  In addition, the budget called for increased co-payments for 
pharmaceutical drugs and primary care that veterans need--something 
that used to be provided for free.
  And mandatory spending would be cut by 463 million--this year alone. 
This means that the Montgomery GI Bill education benefits, vocational 
rehabilitation, and subsidies for VA home loans will be cut.
  The Republicans even cut funding for headstones, markers and flag for 
deceased veterans.
  Nor does the Republican's budget provide additional funding for the 
Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act which is a comprehensive 
effort to eliminate chronic homelessness among veterans within a 
decade.
  I would like to share with you two quotes that I think highlight the 
anger that many veterans felt after they saw the Republican Veterans' 
budget.
  The first is from John Keaveney of New Directions, Inc, a veterans 
group located in Los Angeles. He says: ``To propose cuts in VA nurses, 
doctors, hospitals and other important services to veterans at a time 
of war feels to many veterans like an act of treason. . . . It seems 
inexcusable at a time like this to virtually tear up the agreement 
America has had with veterans for more than 100 years which is to care 
for those who have borne the brunt of battle.''
  And the other is from Dwight Radcliff of US Vets also located in Los 
Angeles. He said: ``. . . the men and women who fought for this country 
are still struggling to obtain the benefits and services to which they 
are entitled. In being pro-active, it is imperative that during this 
time of war, we begin to prepare to address the needs of those who are 
currently in service as well as the forgotten heroes who still sleep in 
the streets. It is extremely unfair to tell those who have waited so 
long and also those who will return shortly that their effort for this 
country was unappreciated.''
  Mr. Speaker, I call on the President and the Republican leadership to 
restore the funding to the Department of Veterans' Affairs and to 
restore our veterans' confidence in their government which they so 
bravely defended.
  Mr. Speaker, I am going to call on some of my colleagues who are here 
to make their presentations this evening. I yield to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Clay).
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me, 
and commend her for taking this time in a special order on such a 
timely matter, while our troops are in the deserts of Afghanistan and 
Iraq fighting for their lives and while this administration is 
attempting to cut the budget of the VA.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to voice my opposition to cuts in benefits due 
our Nation's veterans. I urge my Republican colleagues to reconsider 
the drastic cuts made to the Department of Veterans Affairs. I oppose 
these cuts, this mistreatment, and believe our Nation's heroes deserve 
better. I sincerely urge my colleagues and all Americans to consider 
just what a vote to reduce the budget to our veterans, both on and off 
the battlefield, really means.
  Today, I submit, there is politics and then there is the presumption 
of politics; there is patriotism, and then there is the presumption of 
patriotism; there is support for our troops, and there is the 
presumption of support for our troops, all the contradictions involving 
the politics of war and peace.
  The notion of who is a true patriot and who is not and the welfare of 
our troops in combat all have been played out recently in this very 
Chamber. For my part, I have opposed the war, supported our troops in 
combat, and now stand to support our troops upon their return.
  For those who follow my votes, they may be confused. Do not be, 
because certainly I am not. Recently, on March 20, 2003, I placed into 
the Congressional Record a statement that noted my long-standing 
opposition to the war in Iraq. Yet, with the fighting having begun, I 
offer my support and prayers for the men and women who, out of duty to 
their Nation, find themselves in harm's way.
  On top of this budget, the current administration has also submitted 
a budget to pay for the war we are currently engaged in. That 
supplemental budget request is for $75 billion to fight the war in Iraq 
for 6 months. With the prospect of a long and arduous campaign and 
occupation of Iraq, the costs will likely soar even higher.
  We have 2.3 million disabled veterans who demand our patriotism, just 
as we demanded theirs in time of war. I echo the appeal of honor and 
dignity made on March 17, 2003, by some of the veterans groups in 
response to the GOP budget.
  I quote: ``Is there no honor left in the hallowed halls of our 
government that you choose to dishonor the sacrifices of our Nation's 
heroes and rob our programs, health care, and disability compensation 
to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy? You will be reducing benefits and 
services for disabled vets at a time when thousands of our service 
members are in harm's way, fighting terrorists around the world, and 
thousands more of our sons and daughters are preparing for war against 
Iraq.''
  Needless to say, the shooting war started in earnest 2 days later.
  I submit to Members, there is politics and then there is the 
presumption of politics; there is patriotism, and then there is the 
presumption of patriotism; and there is support for our troops, both on 
and off the battlefield, and there is the presumption of support for 
our troops.
  In a world where the cost of everything, even our Federal budget, is 
increasing at breakneck speed, does it make sense to cut benefits to 
the very people who we promised to take care of if they stood at a post 
and took care of us in some foreign land, often under an obscure 
objective that only our highest leaders know about and understand?
  In today's world, with the threat of international terrorism in our 
own backyard, war has come to us all. However, for those men and women 
who stand up, swear an oath of allegiance to defend our Nation at all 
costs, and do the bidding of Congress and our President, we are now 
being asked to turn our backs on them.

                              {time}  1830

  How can Congress, in the span of a few days, vote support for the 
troops fighting in Iraq and then seriously consider revoking by nearly 
a billion dollars the benefits we promised our warriors past, present, 
and future for the sacrifices they have sworn and continue to swear to 
make for the good of our Nation. This is an insult. This is an

[[Page 7970]]

abomination. We know it. America knows it, and our veterans know it.
  It is more patriotic to send our troops into battle with our 
congressional blessing but upon their return tell them their sacrifices 
are not deserving of benefits this Nation has traditionally offered 
those who risk injury, emotional stability and even their lives to keep 
this Nation secure.
  I urge Congress to reject any reduction in benefits to our fighting 
men and women and support the Democratic alternative. At a time of war 
and sacrifice by the men and women of our Armed Forces, Congress cannot 
and must not let these cuts stand. The alternative offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), the ranking member of the 
House Committee on the Budget, provides for $1.1 billion in additional 
discretionary spending in FY 2004 and $17 billion more over the course 
of 10 years to the Veterans department budget.
  If we want their full measure on the battle fields, they deserve a 
full measure of benefits upon their return. I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding to me.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Baca).
  Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Waters) for taking the leadership on behalf of veterans.
  As a veteran who has served in the 101st and 82nd Airborne Division 
in 1966 to 1968, I am outraged, I am outraged regarding the 2004 budget 
adopted by this House committee, $28.8 billion cuts in veterans 
programs over 10 years; $14.6 million in veterans benefits cut in 
mandatory veterans programs; $14.2 billion cuts in discretionary 
veterans health care. I speak on behalf of the 2.3 million disabled 
veterans including more than 1.2 million members of Disabled Veterans 
of America.
  Is there no honor left in the halls of government? Is there no honor 
left in the halls of government that you would choose to dishonor the 
sacrifice of our Nation's heroes and rob them of their programs, health 
care and disability compensation? During this time of war it is crucial 
to let our soldiers know that they will be taken care of once they 
return home. I state once they return home that they will be taken care 
of. Unfortunately, I am ashamed by what the Republican Congress and 
President Bush have done to our veterans lately.
  Since the troops have been deployed to the Persian Gulf, veterans 
benefits have been shipped away. Shame on you. Shame on you. They are 
fighting and dying for us. They are fighting and dying for us. And what 
are we doing? We are pulling the rug out from underneath them. The 
Republican budget resolution that passed last week cuts $449 million 
from veterans health care programs. What kind of message does it send 
to the hundreds and thousands of American men and women in uniform 
currently risking their lives overseas? Is this the kind of message 
that we want to send to our young soldiers fighting for freedom and 
democracy?
  Remember that we enjoy today the freedoms because of the sacrifices 
that many of our veterans made who have served this country, our 
country before. Is this the best way that we can do for the families of 
those who have died for this country?
  Just recently, Corporal Jorge Gonzalez, a U.S. Marine from my 
district in Rialto that I happened to visit the parents this week was 
killed in Iraq. His heroism is found in the battle field and at home. 
This occurs daily through this land and the homes of families of 
American men and women who are serving us, like those of my legislative 
field representative's husband who is now serving in Iraq. Our men and 
women in uniform should not have to come back and learn that the 
government they fought for refused to take care of them, and I state, 
refused to take care of them.
  During the time of war, we all say to our troops, we support you, our 
thoughts and prayers are with you. And we do, and we do. We display the 
American flag on our cars, in our homes, and clothing with pride. While 
this display of patriotism is important, I say we have to do more than 
that.
  We have a moral obligation to provide veterans with benefits and 
services that they have earned, and I state that they have earned 
through their honorable service to this country. We have a moral 
obligation to provide them with prescription drugs and access to care. 
Is that too much to ask? I ask, is that too much to ask?
  I am here to tell the administration and my fellow Members of 
Congress not to forget those men and women who have served this 
country. Remember, the freedoms we have today are because the men and 
women were willing to step up and fight for those freedoms, the 
freedoms we enjoy every day. Let us not forget them. Let us not forget 
them. Let us restore the benefits to our veterans. Let them know we 
will take care of them today and tomorrow, and I state today and 
tomorrow. I say God bless America. Let us restore our veterans. God 
bless our veterans.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Andrews).
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California for 
yielding and for organizing this chance for us to come to the floor and 
speak tonight.
  Once a year in my district a group of people gather in the middle of 
a dusty field and they line up trucks and tents on either side of the 
field, and over the course of a weekend veterans from all over our area 
come to this field to receive counseling, health care services, clean 
clothes, a shower, a meal. This is called a Veterans Stand Down. Most 
of the veterans who come to the stand down are homeless or living on 
the street, battered by a mental illness.
  Once a month in my district and in districts across the country, 
veterans look at the calendar as it heads toward the end of the month, 
and they look at their checkbook and they see nothing left in their 
checking account because the meager pensions and benefits that we pay 
veterans have run out before the end of the month.
  Once a day in my district and in districts around this country, 
veterans call health clinics and health care facilities and hear that 
the waiting list for an appointment is a month, 3 months, 6 months, 7 
months to see a doctor that they were promised they would be able to 
see when they agreed to serve their country.
  A few months ago, this Congress debated the use of force in Iraq. I 
am one who as a matter of deep personal conviction feels that the use 
of force in Iraq was justified and I voted ``yes.'' I feel equal 
conviction tonight of a sense of shame that my country is disregarding 
the needs of men and women who served our country in the past and who 
serve it today.
  Governing is choosing. And this body has already made a choice, which 
it is not too late to reverse, about honoring the men and women who 
have worn the uniform of this country. Veterans benefits and services 
are already insufficient to meet the needs of the veterans of this 
country. They are not good enough today to do what needs to be done. 
But just to restore this level of services for the next 10 years, we 
would need $28 billion more than the majority has provided in the 
budget that it rammed through this Chamber just a few days ago. So we 
are going to do $28 billion less in health care, in education, in 
disability benefits, in counseling, in housing, in burial benefits; $28 
billion dollars less than we are doing right now over the course of the 
next 10 years.
  Now, there are only four ways that we can deal with this problem. The 
first way we can say is, that is just too bad. That is the way it is 
going to be. And despite all of the ceremonies they will attend at 
home, despite all of the speeches they will make this Memorial Day, 
that is the position that a majority of this House took when it voted 
to cut veterans benefits by $28 billion.
  The second choice we could take is to find the $28 billion somewhere 
else, cut waste, fraud and abuse and come up with the money. Well, it 
was the majority's budget resolution that could have found that $28 
billion in waste, fraud and abuse. I remember the Committee on the 
Budget chairman came to the floor and stacked up reports from the 
General Accounting Office

[[Page 7971]]

that purported to show waste, fraud and abuse and expressed his 
frustration that we were not cutting that. With all due respect, he was 
expressing frustration with himself because they wrote the resolution 
and they wrote the budget that could have cut $28 billion from 
somewhere else in the budget other than in veterans benefits, and they 
chose not to do.
  The third way to restore these cuts is to borrow the money from our 
children, which is what the majority chooses to do when it has a higher 
priority. That is the way they propose to pay for the war in Iraq. I 
support the effort in Iraq. I voted for it. I certainly support paying 
for it, but I do not think we should borrow the money from our children 
to pay for it. I do not think that is a very justifiable response; but 
when it comes to higher priorities for the majority, that is what they 
do.
  And the fourth way to pay for restoring these benefits is to choose 
veterans benefits over tax cuts. We are here tonight to say no vets 
cuts for tax cuts. No cuts in veterans services that are used to 
finance yet another drain on the Federal Treasury so the favored 
supporters of the majority can enjoy yet another tax break at the 
expense of the rest of the budget.
  President Kennedy said, governing is choosing. Every Member of this 
House has a choice to make when it comes to veterans services. You can 
choose to let this $28 billion in cuts stay in the budget and explain 
to your constituents why the American Legion, why the Disabled American 
Veterans, why veterans groups around this country oppose that budget. 
My colleagues can make that choice. Or my colleagues can choose to 
identify some other area in the budget that could be cut to pay for 
this. But it is a little late for that because the budget has already 
been passed. The third choice is to advocate borrowing more money to 
cover these benefits, which I think is an irresponsible fiscal 
position. Or just a few more on the majority side could join the 215 of 
us who voted to choose veterans benefits over tax cuts, who resolved to 
say we do not want veterans cuts to pay for tax cuts; and we believe 
that is the right choice.
  So when we all go home, Mr. Speaker, to the American Legion and the 
VFW for the Memorial Day services this year and tell the veterans how 
much we appreciate what they have done, I would say to you that with 
all due respect talk is cheap. And the $28 billion in cuts that are in 
the majority's budget are an affront and an insult to the people who 
have worn the uniform of this country. It is not too late to reverse 
this mistake.
  The right thing to do is to repeal a part of the President's tax cut, 
to choose veterans benefits over this endless stream of worship at the 
idolatrous alter of tax cuts the majority seems to be engaged in.
  So the next time there is a Veterans Stand Down in my district, I 
want to see doctors and nurses and counselors and therapists there to 
help the vets. And I want to see the pensions increased and broadened 
and enriched so veterans can make it to the end of the month and pay 
their bills. And I want to see the 90-day waiting list cut back to 9 
days or 9 hours by hiring more nurses and clinicians and doctors at VA 
health care facilities across this country.
  Governing is choosing. We choose not simply to honor the veterans of 
this country with our hollow words, a false honor indeed. We choose to 
honor the veterans of this country with our actions and our votes and 
to fulfill the promises we have made to them.

                              {time}  1845

  I would urge the majority, redress this wrong that you have committed 
in your budget. Fix this budget. Restore these veterans cuts and take 
it out of the tax cut you so unwisely passed.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois 
(Ms. Schakowsky).
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, not only for 
yielding to me, but for organizing this opportunity for us to come to 
the floor.
  Last Friday, I spoke to a group of veterans in my district. They were 
mostly World War II and Korean War veterans, and of course, I thanked 
them profusely for their service to our country. And they appreciated 
it, but what they wanted to know and where most of the questions were 
was, what is happening to our benefits? I told them about the 
President's budget proposal, and they did not appreciate that.
  We have all been making a lot of speeches lately and offering 
resolutions, and they are eloquent and they are flowery, and yes, they 
are heartfelt speeches and resolutions, expressing support for our 
troops; and I am not denying the sincerity or even the importance of 
making those supportive gestures. Speeches and resolutions do not 
provide health care, and they do not provide education, and they do not 
provide pensions, and they do not provide burial benefits.
  Budgets are a statement of values and priorities, and what the 
veterans are finding out is that they are not a priority in the 
President's budget and they are not a priority of the Republican 
leadership. And not only that, despite all the sacrifices that they 
have made and, as we speak, the sacrifices that are being made, they 
are being asked to sacrifice yet again in the form of a $28 billion cut 
in benefits and in health care.
  What we know when it comes to dollars and cents is that veterans 
across Illinois are going to suffer from President Bush's proposed 
budget. A report that was released by the Democratic staff of the 
Committee on Government Reform concluded that the changes, that is, the 
$28 billion in cuts, would cause over 65,000 Illinois veterans, 
including an estimated 36,000 veterans enrolled at VA facilities in the 
Chicago area, to be denied VA health care or to drop out of the VA 
system while increasing costs for thousands more.
  First, President Bush would halt enrollment to Priority 8 veterans, 
denying them access to VA care. The report found that as a result of 
this proposed suspension, 173,000 veterans nationwide would be denied 
care, including 7,160 in Illinois, of which 4,000 are in the Chicago 
area.
  Second, President Bush would require the VA to charge all Priority 7 
and Priority 8 veterans currently in the system a $250 annual 
enrollment fee in order to receive service. As a result of the fee, the 
VA estimates that 55 percent of enrolled Priority 7 and 8 veterans 
would be forced to drop out of the VA system nationwide, including 
32,000 veterans in the Chicago area.
  Finally, a third set of provisions would increase copayments for 
Priority 7 and 8 veterans who do stay enrolled in the VA program. The 
copayments for primary care payments would increase by 33 percent from 
$15 per visit to $20 per visit. The copayments for prescription drugs 
would more than double, increasing from $7 to $15 for 30-day 
prescriptions. On average, the report concluded, veterans would have to 
pay a $97 a year increase in copayments, plus the new enrollment fee of 
$250. However, many veterans can see an increase of almost $600 a year.
  I did not support the Republican budget resolution and instead 
supported the Democratic substitute which would have restored funding 
for mandatory veterans benefits, including compensation for service-
connected disabilities, burial benefits, pensions for permanently 
disabled, low-income veterans, education benefits, rehabilitation 
benefits and housing loan programs. Unfortunately, for our veterans and 
our soldiers currently in the U.S. Armed Forces, the Democratic 
substitute was voted down.
  While our veterans suffer, the administration continues to cut taxes 
that only favor the rich. While our veterans endure hardship, the 
administration continues to send our men and women into battle with no 
guarantees of a safe and healthy life for them and their families when 
they return home.
  Speeches and resolutions are fine, but they are woefully 
insufficient. Our veterans, those who have served in the past and the 
veterans of the future, who are risking their lives right now, as we 
speak, deserve better. It is time for the Republican leadership to put 
its money where its mouth is.

[[Page 7972]]


  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Watson).
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from 
California for organizing this time.
  Mr. Speaker, our Armed Forces have now been at war for almost 2 
weeks. Over 40 members of the coalition have paid the ultimate 
sacrifice. Scores of others have been injured. Sadly, there is no doubt 
in our minds that U.S. casualties of war will rise, even as we all pray 
for their swift and safe return.
  Later this week, each of us will be asked to support a $75 billion 
supplemental appropriation. In part, it will pay for the war effort. A 
few weeks ago, we were asked to support a budget, minus money for the 
war effort, that drastically reduced funding for the veterans health 
care and other benefit programs, a cut of $28.8 billion over 10 years; 
and today, we have been asked to support a motion to send to conference 
the same flawed Republican budget that slashes veterans benefits in 
order to preserve President Bush's tax cuts for wealthy Americans.
  In effect, we have been asked by President Bush and the Republican 
leadership to support funding for the war, support tax cuts for the 
wealthy and, at the same time, to drastically cut back our soldiers' 
benefits once they return from the battlefield in Iraq. And even more 
cruel, we have been asked by the President and Republican leadership to 
reduce survivor benefits, those that go to the spouses and the children 
of our service people who have made the ultimate sacrifice.
  Mr. Speaker, as others have said, there is no honor in this approach. 
It is shameful at a time when our dedicated men and women of the Armed 
Forces are in the field fighting, perhaps to be subjected to attack 
with chemical or biological weapons, that the President and the 
Republican leadership have made the choice to underfund our veterans 
programs.
  How can this Congress even consider cutting benefits to our veterans 
during a time of war? What kind of message are we sending to American 
men and women in uniform overseas? When they come home, what do we tell 
them, Thanks for your service to our Nation, but now you are on your 
own, no thanks?
  Mr. Speaker, our veterans deserve better than this. They deserve 
better than to come home and find that their health care coverage has 
been reduced, but their enrollment fees and copayments have been 
increased. They deserve better than to come home to discover that the 
President and the Republican leadership have decreased spending for 
Montgomery GI educational benefits and subsidies for VA home loans.
  Mr. Speaker, the Republican budget simply disregards the needs of our 
veterans. It is so shameful in its disregard of their needs that the 
Disabled American Veterans asked the following question, and we have 
heard it quoted this evening: ``Is there no honor left in the hallowed 
halls of our government that you choose to dishonor the sacrifices of 
our Nation's heroes and rob our programs, health care and disability 
compensation, to pay,'' to pay for what, to pay for tax cuts for the 
wealthy, those who lie back and say send them while I enjoy my luxury 
here at home?
  That is reprehensible, Mr. Speaker, and I ask that we preserve the 
honor of this hallowed institution by restoring cuts to the veterans 
programs and do it now.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California for 
her comments, and I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), 
who has been spending every waking moment trying to get these cuts 
restored to veterans of his district. And the State of Ohio can be very 
proud of him; he helped to organize this time on the floor last week 
and tonight.
  Mr. STRICKLAND. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from 
California for yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, we are here tonight talking about something that is 
close to all of our hearts. I happen to be the youngest son in a family 
of nine children. My oldest brother was a World War II veteran. My 
brother-in-law, who is now deceased, lost his leg by stepping on a land 
mine in Germany during World War II, worked his final years in a Wal-
Mart, walking around on an artificial limb; much of the time it was 
sore. And I just stand here tonight, and I think that we are able to 
enjoy the kind of freedoms that we all enjoy because of the sacrifices 
of those who have gone before us, who have suffered immensely.
  I think of the mothers who grieved. I think of my own mother. Some of 
my earliest memories as a child were of my mother weeping as she 
worried about whether or not my brother was safe as he participated in 
that great war. We ought to honor those who went before us, who have 
fought for us, who have sacrificed their time and have lost their 
health, and that is not what we are doing.
  It is almost beyond belief to me that we, at this time when we have 
young Americans engaged in a battle, even now risking their lives, that 
we would be so callous, so callous in our decision-making here in this 
Chamber that we would pass a budget, and I used the word ``we.'' It 
certainly did not include most of my Democratic colleagues, but a 
budget was passed in this House by the majority party, supported by the 
administration, that cuts benefits, health care benefits and other 
benefits, to our Nation's veterans by $28 billion. Think of that, $28 
billion at the same time that the President and majority party is 
pushing to pass a $726 billion tax cut, and most of that money is going 
to go to the richest people in this country.

                              {time}  1900

  The President has a choice to make. He can either fully fund veterans 
health care and veterans benefits, or he can ask for his complete $726 
billion tax cut. It is a fairly clear choice. We have a unified budget. 
There is only so much money. If we use the resources we have for this 
big tax cut, there is going to be an insufficient amount of resources 
to take care of our other needs, including the needs of our veterans.
  I have talked on this House floor before about the outrageous things 
that are being done: increasing the cost of prescription drugs. It went 
from $2 to $7 a prescription. Now the President is saying we want to 
charge veterans, many of them, $15 a prescription. Many veterans in my 
district get 10 or more prescriptions a month. If we take 10 times 15, 
that is $150 a month. A lot of these veterans are living on fixed 
incomes. This is simply outrageous.
  And then they created an entirely new priority group of veterans. 
They call them priority group 8. These are high-income veterans. Of 
course, you can be one of those priority group 8 veterans and make as 
little as $24,000 a year. Now, maybe a lot of my colleagues do not want 
people watching to know that those of us in this Chamber make about 
$150,000 or so a year. So maybe a $15 copay would not hurt us. It would 
not hurt me. I could pay $15 if I was going to have to take medication. 
I can do that. I make $150,000 a year. But what about the veteran who 
makes $24,000 a year? And we have the gall to suggest that they are 
high income and so they just can no longer enroll in the VA health care 
system. They are priority group 8.
  And then others who may make a little more than that are priority 
group 7. Those veterans, those men and women who have honorably served 
our country, are being told, well, you are in priority group 7 so you 
can enroll in the VA health care system and continue to participate, 
but in order to do so you have to pay an annual enrollment fee of $250. 
And then if you go for a doctor visit, we will increase the cost of 
that.
  It is as if we are singling out our veterans for a disproportionate 
share of the burden for caring for this country. I just find it 
amazing, amazing that at a time when nearly all of us in here find that 
we want to associate with the military, we want to show our support for 
our fighting men and women, that we would take these actions that would 
be so harmful to our veterans.
  I have talked before about the gag order. I mean, it is unbelievable 
that the VA decides that too many veterans

[[Page 7973]]

are coming in for health care. We just do not have the resources to 
provide that health care, with having long waiting lists and many 
veterans waiting 6 months or more just to see a doctor. In order to 
correct that, we should just say we need more money. We need more 
resources. But the VA has a different approach. They say, well, in 
order to correct that problem, we will just limit information that is 
being given to veterans so that fewer veterans will understand what 
they are entitled to and fewer will come in for services. That is how 
we are going to solve this problem.
  It is almost unbelievable. When is it going to stop? When are we 
going to have our actions match our words? A couple of Fridays ago, 
about 3 a.m. in the morning, 3 a.m. in the morning, when most of the 
country was asleep, we were here in this Chamber and we voted a 
resolution of thankfulness and support for our fighting men and women 
who are currently risking their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan and 
elsewhere around the world. Within minutes of casting that vote, we 
cast another vote for the budget. And in that budget we voted to cut 
veterans benefits and health care by $28 billion.
  With one hand we saluted the veterans and said thanks, thanks to our 
servicemen and women. And with the other hand we took our voting card, 
and we put it in this little gizmo on the back of our chairs here and 
cast a vote to cut veterans benefits by $28 billion. In my judgment 
that is sheer hypocrisy. How can we justify those two actions? How can 
we say on the one hand we honor and appreciate the service of our 
military men and women and on the other hand cast a vote that cuts 
benefits to those who have already served?
  I think the veterans in this country are coming to understand what is 
going on. I think they are coming to realize that they have to listen 
not only to the words but they have to watch the actions of those of us 
who serve in this Chamber.
  Mr. Speaker, I will finish by telling my colleagues this. Talk is 
cheap. And we do a lot of talking in this Chamber. Talk is cheap, but 
health care for veterans costs money. And unless we are willing to 
spend the money, our words are empty.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from 
Ohio for all of the work he is doing on this issue, and I now yield to 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me, 
and I speak this evening from the Republican side of the aisle in the 
hope that my words, and the words of all my colleagues here tonight, 
will nestle in the empty seats that are here this evening and, by 
osmosis, maybe change the hearts and the minds of those who, as the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) just said, just last week in one 
minute voted to support the troops in Iraq, and in the very next vote 
voting to cut veterans benefits by the $28 billion he mentioned. What 
sheer hypocrisy, my colleague said; and I think the American people 
must understand this.
  We say they have cut this $28 billion over 10 years. That means $2 
billion or $3 billion every year from the budget from what it should 
have been. Now, $2 billion or $3 billion around here sounds like a 
little bit of money, but $2 billion or $3 billion out in the 
countryside sounds like some unimaginable figure. And it really is.
  What could we do with that $2 billion or $3 billion every year for 
our veterans? What should we do with that which is going to be cut by 
the Republican budget? Here is what we could do with that. Right now 
there are a quarter million veterans waiting for their first 
appointment, their first appointment with the VA. They have been 
waiting for over 6 months. Some of these veterans will die before they 
have their first appointment the way our system works right now.
  There are almost a half million veterans who have made claims for 
disability to the Veterans Administration that are pending. They may be 
pending for 2, 3, 4, some even 5 years; 125,000 appeals are pending for 
years. Why is that the case? Because the VA does not have enough 
resources to solve those cases within the 30, 60, or 90 days, the way 
they should be solved. Why is a veteran kept waiting for years? There 
are veterans in my district who have died while waiting for their 
appeals to be adjudicated, as we said. That is what the $2 billion will 
buy. It will get the veterans the service they need, get them the 
disability justice that they deserve. That is what the $2 billion will 
buy.
  It will buy full funding of the Montgomery GI bill. For many young 
people that bill is the only entrance into the economy of today, to get 
an education. We have the Montgomery GI bill to do it, except we do not 
fund it. We fund it at a few hundred bucks a month. We need to have the 
full funding of that so our veterans can get funding.
  I could go on with what this $2 billion will buy, and we will be 
doing that for the next few weeks. We will have colloquies on this. But 
I will just end by saying that our veterans are being mistreated by 
this Nation. The folks in Iraq will come home as veterans. What do my 
colleagues think their morale will be when they know they have to wait 
years before they can ever get their claim adjudicated? It is time for 
veterans around the Nation to watch what we do, not what we say. I 
believe they should be here when the appropriations process occurs. I 
have suggested they should surround the Capitol while we do that bill 
until we do the right thing. They should set up tents, bivouacs. Be 
here so their representatives do the right thing. Let us support our 
veterans the way we should.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much. I now yield 
to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me first of all thank the 
gentlewoman from California. I know that many of my colleagues are 
aware of her long years of work on the issue of veterans, and I am 
delighted to be able to join my colleagues. With the sound of my voice, 
I will be hopefully as potent and as brief as I possibly can be, but 
one cannot look into the midst of this storm of water and not come to 
the floor to speak about those who are actually putting their lives on 
the line and sacrificing so that I might be here today to acknowledge 
the truth of their predicament.
  Mr. Speaker, I come from a State that is noted as one of the States 
with the largest number of veterans in the Nation. I happen to come 
from Harris County, which has the largest number of veterans in the 
State of Texas. In the State of Texas we have almost 2 million 
veterans. Those that are 65 and older number about 65,000. We have 
about 100,000 women veterans. In Harris County, where I live, we have 
about 250,000 veterans. As I speak today, the hospital which is in my 
district, the Veterans Hospital, is de-enrolling, or closing the door 
to veterans who are seeking health care.
  One of the most disturbing aspects of this is that there are reports 
that severely disabled veterans have to wait months, and in some cases 
more than a year, for basic health care and specialized services. A few 
weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, we passed a budget resolution of shame. And the 
reason why it was a budget resolution of shame is because it required 
the Department of Veterans Affairs to cut $14 million from the lives of 
our veterans. We did that, Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that young 
men and women are now on the front lines of Iraq.
  It is very clear, Mr. Speaker, that many of us did not vote for the 
war resolution in October, and we have persisted to press the case of 
peace; but at the same time we have acknowledged those who fight for 
us, fight for us because they believe in freedom. And so, Mr. Speaker, 
I have joined my colleagues today to say that the motion to instruct 
was not enough. Even though today we have added back the $14 million, 
what we must do as colleagues is to insist that we never come to this 
floor to commit an act of shame again.
  I know it will happen again, because my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle keep asking over and over again

[[Page 7974]]

for these cuts, in light of or in support of a $726 billion tax cut. 
But as I close, Mr. Speaker, let me make a personal commitment. As I 
join my colleagues today, with this voice that is broken but a spirit 
that is strong, we will not allow a vote of shame to continue 
unexposed. We will continue to reinforce the values of this Nation; we 
will continue to support those young men and women, as we have through 
the years, my relatives and uncles in World War II, those in the Korean 
War, and Vietnam War and others. We will continue to stand on their 
side. There will be not one veteran who will have the dishonor to be 
dishonored if any of us are able to stand. We stand with the veterans 
and stand with the reinforcement of their resources, and we stand with 
those who fight for us in Iraq.
  Mr. Speaker, as we debate the emergency supplemental request from the 
President to fund the war, the fiscal year 2004 budget resolution, and 
the appropriations' bills, and as Iraq war escalates and casualties 
mount, it is only fitting that we honor our nation's veterans. Their 
sacrifices on behalf of our civil liberties have too often been 
overlooked and forgotten.
  It is astonishing that as we ask for even more sacrifices from our 
men and women in the Armed Forces, that this Congress would seek to cut 
veterans' benefits. America owes our nation's veterans so much.
  There are more than 25.3 million veterans in our nation; family 
members and survivors of veterans total about 41 million. One-third of 
veterans live in 1 of 5 states: California, Florida, Texas, New York, 
and Pennsylvania.
  The increasing average age of veterans means additional demands for 
medical services. As we know, the Department of Veterans Affairs 
operates the nation's largest health care system, with 172 hospitals, 
137 nursing homes, 43 domiciliaries, 206 readjustment counseling 
centers, home health-care programs, and nearly 900 outpatient clinics.
  So, as the need for services for our veterans increases it is 
disturbing that this Congress would consider cutting veterans benefits.
  We must be committed to investing resources to improve the 
efficiency, quality and breadth of the VA medical care system, and to 
ensure that care is accessible to more veterans. I am particularly 
concerned about our nation's African-American veterans--African-
Americans comprise a substantial percentage of our enlisted men and 
women. African-Americans comprise 20% of the enlisted in the Armed 
Forces.
  They should be provided with the highest standard of care. African-
Americans have served in the Civil War, World War I, World War II, the 
Korean War, the Vietnam Conflict, the Persian Gulf War, and now many 
African-Americans are on the frontlines in Iraq.
  I have met with many veterans from Texas and what they want is so 
reasonable: They want our nation to honor the promises we made to our 
veterans to provide them with decent livelihoods for their sacrifices 
to our nation. We should not cut benefits to veterans, in order to 
provide tax cuts to the wealthy.
  Many veterans who served in the Gulf War suffer from post-traumatic 
stress disorder and substance abuse. Our nation owes an obligation to 
veterans who incur injury, disease, or aggravating existing conditions 
while in service to the country. Not only must we provide health care 
to our nation's veterans but we must ensure that veterans have adequate 
access to education, housing, and other benefits.
  Access to priority health care for our nation's service-connected 
disabled veterans have been seriously eroded over the years due to 
insufficient health care funding. The veterans health care system is in 
crisis.
  Continued budget shortfalls, combined with rising costs for medical 
care and increased demand for VA health care, have resulted in 
unprecedented waiting times for routine and specialty care nationwide.
  According to the VA, in December 2002, nearly 236,000 veterans are 
either waiting for their first appointment or waiting at least six 
months for care. Additionally, the VA reports that many of its 
facilities have reached capacity with closed enrollment at some 
hospitals and clinics.
  But most disturbing are reports of severely disabled veterans having 
to wait months, and, in some cases, more than a year, for basic health 
care and specialized services.
  I was honored to be joined by many veterans' groups, who supported 
legislation that I introduced, H. Con. Res. 2, to re-examine the issue 
of sending our troops to Iraq in a pre-emptive strike. Veterans who 
have served in foreign wars know the risks, the hazards, and the 
dangers of combat.
  African-Americans have a rich history of serving in the Armed Forces. 
Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the University of 
Michigan affirmative action case. I have to note that the Armed Forces 
are a model of integration--the Armed Forces were one of the first 
areas of our society to be integrated.
  In Houston, Texas, Dr. Michael Ellis DeBakey is an internationally 
recognized pioneer of modern medicine. He is an ingenious medical 
inventor and innovator, a gifted and dedicated teacher, a premier 
surgeon, and an international medical statesman. I have introduced 
legislation supported by veterans to re- name the Department of 
Veterans' Affairs, the Michael E. DeBakey Department of Veterans 
Medical Center.
  Last week, I received disturbing news. Corporal Brian Kennedy, a 
Houston native, lost his life on the battlefields. I want to pay a 
special tribute to this young man and his family. He bravely put his 
life on the line for the liberties we enjoy in this country. I salute 
Brian for the service and the sacrifice he made to our country. Our 
prayers go out to Brian, his family, and the troops stationed in Iraq.
  The Origins of Veterans' Day:
  In 1921, an unknown World War I American soldier was buried in 
Arlington National Cemetery. This site, on a hillside overlooking the 
Potomac River and the city of Washington, became the focal point of 
reverence for America's veterans.
  Our troops embody the ideals of our country: Courage, valor and a 
sense of pride in country.
  Dr. Martin Luther King once said, ``The ultimate measure of a man is 
not where he stands in moments of comfort, but where he stands at times 
of challenge and controversy.'' Our men and women on the frontlines in 
Iraq truly deserve our support.
  Our veterans and our active duty troops deserve our highest respect 
and our commitment as a nation to providing them the best in care and 
services--they have given us so much as a nation, that it is our moral 
obligation to return to them the benefits they have given to us. We 
call on our armed forces to protect us both here and abroad.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas, and I 
now yield to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. 
Norton).

                              {time}  1915

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Waters) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) for their 
leadership in bringing this important matter to the floor.
  The last thing I thought there would be a bipartisan split on would 
be veterans benefits. We talk about unity around the troops. What about 
unity around the veterans? Members want to wave the flag. Let us begin 
with those who have already served.
  Instead, we are talking about the great differences between the 
Democratic budget and the Republican budget. The Democratic budget was 
more than $30 billion over a 10-year period than the Republican budget. 
That tells Members something about the different priorities of the two 
parties in this Chamber, particularly today when what we are talking 
about is a volunteer Army. We should be going out of our way to make 
sure that every ``t'' is crossed and every ``i'' is dotted.
  We have used all kinds of inducements to attract these men and women 
into the Army, and we have a class- and race-based Army. A lot of folks 
are going in there because there are not a lot of opportunities in 
society, and they are depending on those education and health benefits.
  What have we done? We have spared no cost when it comes to the 
equipment that they have to go to war, but we are pinching pennies on 
the health consequences of their going to war. Shame on us. We enticed 
them into service. We make no sacrifice ourselves, and we ask them to 
sacrifice when they come home.
  Who has made a sacrifice during this war? The only folks I can think 
about who has made a sacrifice since 9/11 are the people who died in 
the Twin Towers and at the Pentagon. None of us has been asked to make 
a sacrifice. Instead, we have been offered a big, fat tax cut.
  In this way, we separate ourselves from our ancestors and our 
forefathers. When they went to war, they said, we are going to pay for 
war and our veterans, and they raised taxes. These were not folks that 
liked to raise taxes.

[[Page 7975]]

Indeed, we had our first Federal income tax during World War I, and 
nobody had even heard of taxes; but they said, if we are going to war, 
we are in for a dime, we are in for a dollar. We have raised taxes; and 
during every war, including the Persian Gulf War, we have never cut 
taxes in time of war.
  We have not asked the other side of the aisle to raise taxes, but we 
have asked them not to sacrifice veterans benefits in order to offer 
tax cuts to the wealthy. The veterans who are most offended are 
veterans who live in the District of Columbia, who have gone to war 
since our first war, without having full representation in this House.
  In their name, I ask that these cuts be restored.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Owens) to close.
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of statistics which show 
how grave the problem is. Last fall, I had a town meeting of veterans 
in my district, and those were some of the angriest people I have ever 
seen. These are members of our society who have been betrayed, and who 
are continuously betrayed. Those who are fortunate enough to come back, 
there are 58,000 who died in Vietnam, 300,000 were wounded, and some of 
the wounded were in that audience, and on and on it goes with the 
insults they have to endure, like the long waiting lists.
  It is important for us to note that those of us who are against war 
are not against soldiers or veterans. Anybody who places his life at 
risk, whether as a volunteer or drafted, deserves to have the medal of 
greatness placed upon them. Out of the nearly 300 million people in our 
population, those few people become great people. There is no such 
thing as a greatest generation just because they fought World War II. 
All veterans, Vietnam, Korea, whoever was able to come back, deserves 
the maximum that we can do in terms of housing, education and certainly 
medical benefits.
  It is a commentary, which I think has been pointed to several times 
here, on the heartlessness of this administration that at a time like 
this they would dare have a $28 billion cut in the benefits for 
veterans over a 10-year period. Veterans deserve all we can give them. 
They are all part of a great generation no matter which war they have 
fought in.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a communication 
from New Directions, signed by Mr. John Keaveney, who is head of this 
New Directions organization, a fine organization rehabilitating 
veterans in the greater Los Angeles area; a communication from Mr. 
Dwight Radcliff from United States Veterans Initiative, another 
organization providing drug rehabilitation services, providing job 
training services for our veterans from the Vietnam era and from the 
Persian Gulf; and a communication from the National Veterans Foundation 
that is signed by Shad Meshad.
                                                     United States


                                    Veterans Initiative, Inc.,

                                    Inglewood, CA, March 27, 2003.
     Maxine Waters,
     Member of Congress, 35th Congressional District, California.
       Dear Congresswoman Waters: I have reviewed the findings of 
     Congressman Lane Evans, ranking Democratic member of the 
     House Veterans' Affairs committee regarding the budget 
     adopted by the house budget committee which results in 
     drastic reductions in funding for veterans benefits and 
     services. As the director of the largest veterans-specific 
     program in the country, I am appalled that this 
     administration would consider decreasing the amount of 
     funding available to the Department of Veterans Affairs and 
     the special programs and services provided by community based 
     organizations such as ours.
       United States Veterans Initiative provides outreach, 
     housing, employment assistance, case management, counseling, 
     legal assistance, and food services to over 2500 homeless 
     veterans per year at our Inglewood site. At our other sites 
     across the country, we provide services to an additional 3000 
     veterans annually. The majority of the veterans that we serve 
     are Vietnam Veterans. Today, over thirty years after the war 
     in Vietnam, the men and women who fought for this country are 
     still struggling to obtain the benefits and services to which 
     they are entitled. In being proactive, it is imperative that 
     during this time of war, we begin to prepare to address the 
     needs of those who are currently in service as well as the 
     forgotten heroes who still sleep in the streets of this 
     country each night. It is extremely unfair to tell those who 
     have waited so long and also those who will return shortly 
     that their effort for this country was unappreciated. This is 
     our time to fight for them.
       As our congressional representative I am requesting that 
     you strongly oppose any effort to cut funding for the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs. Without this crucial funding, 
     those veterans that are in desperate need of benefits and 
     assistance will not be able to access the needed resources 
     such as medical, psychiatric, housing, and employment.
           Sincerely,

                                              Dwight Radcliff,

                                    Los Angeles Services Director,
     United States Veterans Initiative.
                                  ____



                                         New Directions, Inc.,

                                  Los Angeles, CA, March 26, 2003.
     To: Representative Maxine Waters.
     From: John Keaveney.
     Subject: Department of Veterans Affairs Funding Cuts.
       Dear Congresswoman Waters: I am writing for your help 
     Congresswoman Waters because you have always been a strong 
     advocate for veterans, protecting veterans' benefits and 
     defending veterans from special interests in Congress and 
     here locally. I am pleading with you once again to help our 
     Nation's veterans. It has come to our attention that the 
     House Budget Committee chaired by Congressman Jim Nussle (R-
     IA) pushed through a bill to cut $25 billion from the 
     Veterans' Administration over the next 10 years. I know you 
     agree that if the government can consider funding tax breaks 
     for the rich and businesses, then they certainly can make it 
     a priority to help our Nation's veterans and homeless by not 
     allowing a major cut in benefits to veterans.
       The shame of this is that this was done on March 13, as 
     America was asking hundreds of thousands of servicemen and 
     women to lay their lives on the line as our country was 
     making final preparations to go to war with Iraq. I find it 
     difficult to describe my feelings about this development 
     especially considering that this Nation is now engaged in a 
     war and simultaneously enacting legislation making huge cuts 
     in funding for veterans' services. To propose cuts in V.A. 
     nurses, doctors, hospitals and other important services to 
     veterans at a time of war feels to many veterans like an act 
     of treason. I do not believe that the American public is 
     informed properly about this issue. Just imagine, how would 
     our troops in the Middle East feel about this? It seems 
     inexcusable at a time like this to virtually tear up the 
     agreement America has had with veterans for more than 100 
     years which is to care for those who have borne the brunt of 
     battle.
       Veterans expect the promises made to them to be honored as 
     this should be considered a sacred agreement. Thank you for 
     your time and devotion to serving our country in honor of our 
     nation's servicemen and women.
           God bless you.
     John Keaveney.
                                  ____



                                 National Veterans Foundation,

                                  Los Angeles, CA, March 27, 2003.
     Congresswoman Maxine Waters,
     Rayburn House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congresswoman Waters: As author and founder of the 
     National Vet Center program (Public Law 96-22), and founder 
     and president of the National Veterans Foundation which has 
     been operating since 1987, I want to express my extreme shock 
     and dismay over the recent announcement concerning the House 
     Veterans Affairs Committee decision to drastically cut 
     Veterans' health-care benefits.
       We have seen many disturbing things with past 
     administrations concerning veterans support, but this present 
     attempt to slash budgets supporting our nation's veterans is 
     the most shameful. A $25 billion cut from the Veterans 
     Administration over the next 10 years is a staggering amount 
     to an already severely reduced and diminished program. 
     Veterans comprise 30% of the nation's homeless, many of them 
     are in desperate need of services . . . many more are at the 
     brink of homelessness and what is probably worse, a crisis of 
     hopelessness.
       Where is the logic of cutting these programs precisely when 
     we are sending our young men and women into the field to 
     secure the peace and safety not just of our nation, but of 
     the world?
       Cuts in VA hospitals, in doctors and nurses, in 
     rehabilitation and retraining, and in counseling to heal 
     wounded psyches, seems cruel and treasonous. What kind of 
     country asks its citizens to be prepared to make the ultimate 
     sacrifice, and then penalizes those who rise to the 
     challenge?
       Lincoln's Address at Gettysburg dictates our responsibility 
     to these brave men and women: to care for him who shall have 
     borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan.
       We are barely doing that now. How is it possible for our 
     existing system to undergo these savings cuts and still offer 
     services to the hundreds of thousands of troops now engaged 
     in Iraq? Then there's Afghanistan, not to mention the 
     countless thousands of military personnel in support 
     positions all over

[[Page 7976]]

     the world. We are looking at a vast increase in the number of 
     those we must serve. To cut funding for veterans services in 
     a time of war while simultaneously offering a tax break that 
     would have its greatest impact on the affluent and on 
     business seems indefensible.
       You have always been a strong advocate for veterans. You 
     have protected veterans' benefits from special interests 
     locally and in our Congress. Please help us now. We need your 
     strong, clear voice.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Shad Meshad,
                                            President and Founder.

  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to express my deep concern and 
stringent opposition to the proposed cuts in veterans health care 
contained in the President's 2004 Budget. While a tax cut may require 
us to discuss reductions in many vital programs, there are few cuts 
that are as unkind as the cuts the President wishes to visit upon those 
brave men and women who were willing to serve and if necessary die for 
this country.
  Mr. Speaker, this House recently voted on a 2004 budget from the 
President which will cut funding for veterans health care and benefit 
programs by nearly $25 billion over the next ten years. These cuts 
would require the Veterans' Administration for the first time in its 
history to require monetary payment from those who have already paid 
with their service to this nation. According to the Veterans' 
Administration, approximately one out of every two veterans could lose 
their only source of medical care under the President's budget plan. 
What should the VA say to a veteran who needs treatment but cannot 
afford to pay? I cannot believe that we would honor their service by 
turning them away. And yet, under the President's plan, rejection may 
be the only response that a fiscally-strapped health care system can 
give.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe that the veterans who served this country 
responded affirmatively to this nation's call to service. We cannot now 
respond negatively to their call for help.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, as we stand here today in Washington, DC, 
thousands of our men and women in uniform are in harm's way, fighting 
for the freedom and the values that we hold dear.
  They are in our thoughts and our prayers. They do not know what fate 
awaits them, but they know they are fulfilling their duty and serving 
their country.
  When these brave Americans return home, they will join the ranks of 
over 26 million American veterans.
  In my state of North Carolina, we are home to more than 150,000 
veterans.
  I served in the United States Army for two years. I never fought in 
combat or served overseas. And I'm certainly no hero, but I understand 
the sacrifices that our veterans have made.
  Our troops fighting overseas today should know that when they come 
home the country that they have served will not turn its back on them.
  Once the fighting is over, veterans should know that the government 
will fulfill its promises to take care of those injured in battle and 
to provide for health care and education assistance.
  It is absolutely outrageous that the majority in the U.S. House of 
Representatives wants to push through a budget that severely cuts 
funding for our nation's veterans.
  They passed this budget under the cover of darkness because they knew 
it could not stand the light of day.
  That budget breaks the solemn promise made to the very men and women 
who fight for our freedom.
  You've heard my colleagues tell you how the budget cuts would affect 
veterans' programs nationwide, but I want to tell you about one 
specific proposal that would significantly impact North Carolina's 
veterans.
  The budget cuts mean that many North Carolina veterans won't be able 
to continue receiving VA health care because of new $250 enrollment 
fees.
  The VA estimates that 1.25 million veterans who are already a part of 
the health care system will be forced out because of these steep new 
fees.
  In North Carolina this could translate into over 27,000 veterans cut 
out of health care.
  For those who can afford to stay in the VA health care system, many 
will be forced to pay significant new costs.
  An estimated 22,000 North Carolina veterans, referred to as Priority 
7 and Priority 8 veterans, will pay a new $250 enrollment fee, 
increased copays for physician benefits and prescription drug fees.
  All in all, this will mean a total average increase of $347 each 
year. Others could be forced to pay even more, as much as $600 
annually.
  The budget passed by the House means that 4,100 veterans in North 
Carolina will not even have the opportunity to enroll in the VA health 
system.
  These so-called Priority 8 veterans, who were not injured in service 
and who make above a level between $24,450 and $38,100 depending on 
location and situation, will be denied care.
  Our country made a promise to the men and women in our armed forces. 
Our troops and our veterans have fulfilled their duty to their country. 
Now it is our turn to make good on our promises.
  Congress should reject the Republican budget and honor our 
commitments to our veterans.

                          ____________________