[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 16003-16052]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND VETERANS AFFAIRS APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of today 
and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the 
bill, H.R. 2642.

                              {time}  1155


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2642) making appropriations for military construction, the 
Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, with Mr. Lynch 
in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the bill 
is considered read the first time.
  The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) and the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we now have before us the fiscal year 2008 Military 
Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations bill which will ensure 
the largest increase in VA health care spending in the 77-year history 
of the Veterans Affairs. There is $6 billion over the 2007 level of 
funding, and $3.8 billion over the President's request for 2008.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill sends a clear message to America's servicemen 
and -women, their families and our veterans that a grateful Nation 
deeply respects their service and sacrifice.
  The national commander of the Disabled American Veterans, Bradley 
Barton, went to the heart of what this bill is all about when he 
described it as ``keeping faith with America's veterans.''
  The bill means our servicemen and -women will have more effective 
training facilities which will save lives and help them carry out their 
military missions. It means our military families, who sacrifice so 
much for our Nation, will have better housing, health care and day-care 
facilities.
  This bill means we will honor our veterans in a meaningful way by 
providing them the health care and benefits we promised them when they 
put on our Nation's uniform.
  It means we will have more qualified doctors and nurses to improve 
medical services to our veterans and to reduce waiting times for 
doctors' appointments. For veterans with traumatic brain injury, PTSD, 
mental health care issues and lost limbs, it means renewed hope to 
rebuild their lives.
  For homeless veterans, it means the dignity of not having to live on 
the streets, and it means hope for the future. For veterans in rural 
areas and those who serve in the Guard and Reserves, this bill means 
needed care will be closer to home. For the 400,000 veterans, including 
combat wounded vets, who are having to wait far too long to have their 
benefits cases reviewed, it means over 11,000 new VA case workers to 
reduce the unacceptable delays in receiving earned benefits.
  Mr. Chairman, before I mention some of the details of this bill, I 
want to express some much-deserved thanks. I want to begin with 
Chairman Dave Obey, the gentleman from Wisconsin, for his unwavering 
commitment and strong leadership in seeing that America's veterans will 
receive a much-deserved historic increase in VA health care funding.

                              {time}  1200

  Our subcommittee's work simply would not have been possible had it 
not been for Chairman Obey's personal and strong leadership.
  Second, Speaker Pelosi made it clear from day one this year that 
keeping our promises to veterans would be the highest of priorities in 
this Congress. By working with Chairman Obey, along with Budget 
Committee chairman John Spratt and VA chairman, Mr. Filner, the Speaker 
made good on her word and millions of veterans will be the 
beneficiaries.
  I want to extend a very personal, special salute and expression of 
thanks and gratitude to our subcommittee's ranking member, Mr. Wicker 
of Mississippi. He, a veteran, has had valuable input into this bill 
and has been a vital part of making this historic day for our veterans 
a reality. His leadership has been instrumental in crafting this 
legislation.
  His ideas and strong support for our veterans our troops and their 
families have made this a much better bill, and at every step he and I 
have worked hard to continue a long, bipartisan tradition of working in 
behalf of our troops and our veterans, a tradition for which we have 
great respect.
  Last, but certainly not least, is the professional, dedicated staff I 
want to thank, a staff that has worked together on a bipartisan basis 
to do what is right for our veterans and troops. I believe they deserve 
our thanks by name: Carol Murphy, Tim Peterson, Walter Hearne, Donna 
Shabaz, Mary Arnold, Liz Dawson, Dena Baron, Jamie Swafford, as well as 
John Conger from my staff and Susan Sweat from Mr. Wicker's office. 
They're a first-class team, and it's a privilege to work with them.
  Let me mention a few specifics about the bill. Overall, the bill 
totals $64.7 billion in discretionary spending. As I said, but it bears 
reemphasizing, it provides the largest increase in VA health care 
funding in the 77-year history of the Veterans Administration, $6 
billion more than fiscal year 2007.
  For the first time in the 21-year history of the veterans independent 
budget, which is developed by AMVETS, the Disabled American Veterans, 
the Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and 
supported by 52 other veterans and military organizations, this bill 
meets and actually even exceeds that independent budget request.
  The Veterans Health Administration, which includes medical services, 
medical administration, medical facilities and medical research is 
funded at $37.1 billion, $2.5 billion more than the President's request 
and $294 million above the veterans independent budget.
  Compared to the administration's request, this bill provides a number 
of increases: $604 million more for new initiatives in the area of 
mental health, including PTSD and for traumatic brain injury; $71 
million more for veterans substance abuse programs; $23 million more to 
provide shelter for an additional 2,300 homeless veterans; $12.5 
million more to expand outpatient rehabilitation services for the 
blind; $508 million more for medical facilities maintenance. That might 
not sound important to some. Its goal is to see that we never have a 
Walter Reed Annex 18 tragedy, like occurred in the Department of 
Defense health care system, happen in the VA health care system.
  We also provide a minimum of $15 million for joint programs with DOD 
to improve access to care, to ensure a more seamless transition for 
veterans going from the Department of Defense into the Veterans 
Administration system.
  Mr. Chairman, the subcommittee heard from many sources about the need 
for more VA medical research, particularly in the areas of greatest 
impact for our Afghan and Iraq War veterans, research such as traumatic 
brain injury and mental health. That is why we significantly increased 
the VA research budget for the first time in the last 10 years.

[[Page 16004]]

  The subcommittee also heard from many who talked about the need to 
increase funding for extended care facilities for elderly and severely 
disabled veterans. So we took action on a bipartisan basis, more than 
doubled the programs to allow four new facilities to be built, as well 
as to address all currently identified life/safety needs at those 
facilities.
  Let me be clear, Mr. Chairman, along with this historic level of 
increased funding, we intend to increase the subcommittee's bipartisan 
oversight of these taxpayer funded programs. Oversight is absolutely 
essential to ensure that the VA spends the money wisely and for the 
highest priority needs of our vets.
  That's why this bill includes funding for the Office of Inspector 
General to hire 50 additional people. And it includes $5 million to 
establish a toll-free telephone number and Web-page-based link that 
makes it easier for veterans to provide feedback on the quality of 
their health care. We want veterans receiving health care to be part of 
the system of checks and balances to improve the already first-class 
medical care veterans across America are receiving.
  On the military construction side of this bill, the bill also 
strongly supports our active duty, Guard and Reserve servicemen and 
women and their families. The bill provides $21.4 billion in military 
construction, family housing, and the Base Realignment and Closing 
program funding. This is $207 million above the President's request and 
$5.1 billion above fiscal year 2007.
  This total funding level is unprecedented, largely due to three 
factors: BRAC, the proposal to increase the size of the Army and the 
Marine Corps, and the rebasing of troops from Germany and South Korea 
back to the United States.
  We fully fund the President's request for BRAC at $8.2 billion. We've 
also increased the subcommittee's oversight of the MILCON funding with 
new reprogramming and notification requirements, especially in the area 
of BRAC funding. We want to work together on a bipartisan basis to see 
that our military construction dollars go to the highest priority 
needs.
  The bottom line in this bill is it honors the promises made to our 
troops, our veterans and their families with the health care and 
benefits they earned when they put on our Nation's uniform.

[[Page 16005]]

TH15JN07.016



[[Page 16006]]

TH15JN07.017



[[Page 16007]]

TH15JN07.018



[[Page 16008]]

TH15JN07.019



[[Page 16009]]

TH15JN07.020



[[Page 16010]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin the debate by thanking Chairman 
Edwards for all the hard work he's put into preparing this legislation. 
I congratulate him on his first bill as chairman of Military 
Construction-VA, and I appreciate his kind words made just a few 
moments ago. Mr. Edwards has continued the excellent bipartisan 
relationship that this subcommittee has enjoyed for years. The chairman 
held many, many hearings this spring, perhaps more hearings on the VA 
accounts than any previous subcommittee with jurisdiction over this 
issue.
  Mr. Edwards has previously thanked our staff for their diligent work 
to prepare this bill and has mentioned them by name. I will thank them 
once again by name. They include Liz Dawson, Dena Baron, Jamie Swafford 
and Susan Sweat on the minority staff, and Carol Murphy, Walter Hearne, 
Tim Peterson, Donna Shabaz, Mary Arnold and John Conger on the majority 
staff. They have worked very hard on this measure, but their work is 
just beginning.
  As most of us know by now, there's much left to do in conference on 
this bill. For the first time in the history of the subcommittee, for 
the first time since 1958, the military construction portion contains 
no specific recommendation for projects. While I remain disappointed 
that no projects were included in this appropriation, I am pleased that 
last night we reached an agreement that will restore the transparency 
and openness begun by the Republican majority in the last Congress with 
regard to earmarks in the remaining appropriations bills.
  I want to make sure my colleagues understand that there is very 
little to the military construction portion of this bill. Unlike some 
appropriations bills, such as the Homeland bill we passed earlier today 
which include funding for specific agencies, offices and programs in 
addition to projects, the MILCON appropriation consists almost entirely 
of projects.
  Pursuant to yesterday's agreement, specific detailed funding amounts 
for the following programs will have to wait until conference: Base 
Realignment and Closure needs; initiatives to restation 70,000 troops 
and their families from Europe and Korea to the United States; projects 
necessary for increasing the active duty Army by 65,000 and the Marine 
Corps by 27,000; relocating Marines from Okinawa to Japan; 
consolidating U.S. forces south of Seoul, South Korea; establishing 
enduring bases in Afghanistan and Djibouti; new runways, control 
towers, National Guard readiness centers, and projects in the Middle 
East or Afghanistan where we have soldiers in harm's way. All of these 
specific details will have to wait until conference, Mr. Chairman.
  In addition, we know that quality-of-life issues are a priority for 
our military; yet, no specific initiatives such as modernization of 
unaccompanied housing, construction of new medical facilities or much-
needed child development centers, which we continuously heard in our 
hearings was the primary quality-of-life issue for our soldiers and 
their families, none of these are included in this bill.
  Specific projects and earmarks will no doubt be included in the 
Senate version of this bill, and I hope Chairman Edwards and Chairman 
Obey will work with Mr. Lewis and me to make sure that House Members' 
initiatives will receive equal consideration at the conference level 
and are not disadvantaged by our airdropping of these projects into the 
conference. I would point out that the bill is different from other 
appropriations bills in that military construction projects have an 
added layer of examination, having already undergone scrutiny by the 
Department of Defense.
  It is my hope that our colleagues will not offer amendments today 
that may decrease the military construction accounts. Though this bill 
today does not detail how these accounts will be used, the accounts 
will provide for many important military projects that our troops need.
  Now, with regard to the VA portions of the bill, the VA is receiving 
the largest increase in the Department's history, an increase of $6.7 
billion over the last fiscal year level. All of us in this body are 
deeply grateful for the sacrifices and service our veterans have 
provided this Nation, and this generous increase is appreciated by 
Members on both sides of the aisle. We do have concerns about the VA's 
ability to absorb so large a funding increase in one fiscal year. We 
are determined to work with VA officials in this effort as part of our 
oversight responsibilities.
  The bulk of the increase is going to boost medical services, medical 
facilities and construction for the VA. The bill increases the VA's 
discretionary funding by more than 18 percent over the fiscal year 2007 
level. It is important to remember that the increase in this bill is in 
addition to the $1.8 billion this Congress just provided to the VA in 
the supplemental. When considered together, the supplemental funding 
and the funding in this bill amount to a 23 percent increase for the 
Department of Veterans Affairs' discretionary accounts.
  Chairman Edwards has indicated that we will be conducting oversight 
hearings later in the year, and I'm glad to know that. Hearings will be 
needed to ensure that the funding we have provided actually gets to the 
veterans and does not languish in an administrative account. Mr. 
Chairman, we all want to make sure our veterans receive the care they 
deserve, but we will have to be diligent in our oversight in order to 
get this funding where it is intended, to our veterans.
  The President has indicated he will sign this bill even though it 
exceeds his budget request by some $4 billion. However, he has stated 
that offsets for these increases should be found in other 
appropriations bills. I agree with him, and I call upon my colleagues 
across the aisle to work with us and find these savings elsewhere.
  I think it is important to point out that, though we have some 
concerns on our side of the aisle about the feasibility for this large 
1-year increase, it has been in large part Republicans that have a 
track record of meeting veterans' needs. During the period of 
Republican majority from 1995 to 2007, VA funding increased by 96 
percent from $38.2 billion to $74.5 billion. I would point out that in 
the final decade of the last Democratic majority, veterans funding 
increased by less than half as much, about 42 percent, Mr. Chairman.
  Similarly, Republicans led the way to increase spending per veteran 
by over $1,800 when we held the majority, while the Democrats managed 
to increase per-veteran spending by $411 during a similar period of 
their majority. It was also a Republican Congress that passed the 
Veterans Health Care Eligibility Reform Act of 1996, which expanded 
eligibility for millions more veterans to access VA health care.
  I point out these things to make sure my colleagues understand the 
historical record on veterans' issues. And in truth, Mr. Chairman, 
funding for our veterans has always been a bipartisan issue.
  I support the bill on the floor today. It continues in the bipartisan 
tradition. It's not a perfect bill in my opinion, but our subcommittee 
has a good work product, and I'm proud of the combined efforts of 
Republicans and Democrats to continue the longstanding tradition of 
support and commitment for the men and women who have served our great 
country.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, 
absolutely the vital leader to see that we have this historic increase 
for veterans health care in this budget today.

                              {time}  1215

  Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, as we all know, we have been mired in a god-awful war 
in Iraq for almost 5 years. What bothers me most about it, except for 
the deaths that occur on a daily basis, what bothers me most about it 
is that there is virtually no sense of shared sacrifice in this country 
in dealing with that war.

[[Page 16011]]

  The only people who are being asked to sacrifice are military 
families, and they are being asked to sacrifice again and again and 
again. They are being sent back to Iraq and to Afghanistan again, 
again, and again. Not much sacrifice is being asked of anybody else.
  We hear politicians prattle about the need to stand behind the 
troops. You betcha, we certainly should.
  But we need to stand behind the troops not just when the bands are 
playing. We need to stand by those troops when they come home, and they 
are injured, and they are sick, or they may have lost their job, or 
they may have lost their spouse; and that's what this bill tries to do.
  I think we need to put in context how we got here. It has been a 
struggle to see to it that we have adequate funding in veterans medical 
care programs.
  Two years ago, on this side of the aisle, we were given information 
from people within the Veterans Administration that their veterans 
health care budget was going to fall $2 billion short. We tried to put 
that money in the budget. We were then in the minority. We were blocked 
by the majority then, except for one fellow. The Republican chairman of 
the Veterans' Committee sided with us, he agreed with us that we needed 
that $2 billion in additional money.
  What happened to him? Not only did the then-majority party leadership 
fire him as chairman, they took him completely off the committee 
because he told the truth. We finally got that money, but we had to get 
a double hernia to finally pry that money out of the administration.
  Then we had, as you know, the budget process collapse last year, and 
no domestic appropriation bills were passed by the then-majority party. 
In fact, this very bill, the Military Construction bill, was held up in 
the Senate by two Members of the Republican Party who put a hold on it 
because they didn't like certain earmarks that were on the bill.
  So the bill never passed. When we took the majority, the very first 
thing we did was to make veterans health care a number one priority, 
and we added over $4 billion to that account, made it the number one 
priority. Then we added additional funding of over $3 billion in the 
Iraqi supplemental, and now we have added this money today to make this 
the largest increase for veterans health care in the history of the 
country.
  When we did that, the White House announced it was going to veto the 
bill. Now, finally, they have had a St. Paul conversion on the road to 
Damascus. I welcome the White House on board the bandwagon.
  But as Golda Meir said to Anwar Sadat when he finally came to 
Jerusalem a long time ago: ``What took you so long?'' I am glad the 
President has finally changed his view.
  But the President continues to say, ``Well, now, I may not veto the 
bill, but you have got to have offsets. You have to find compensating 
savings.''
  Why do we single veterans out for that requirement? There were no 
offsets that the President required when he decided that this year we 
were going to spend $57 billion to provide tax cuts to people who make 
over $1 million a year and pay for it all with borrowed money. No 
offsets around then. Do you see them? I don't see any offsets in sight 
for that.
  So what do we get? Finally, we get grudging acceptance from the White 
House that after they stuck us in this miserable war, and after they 
sit there with no clue about how to get out, at least they are now 
grudgingly going to recognize that we need the funds in this bill to 
deal with veterans medical care.
  This bill ought to pass unanimously. It is far past the time that we 
put our votes where our mouths are in terms of long-term funding for 
veterans health care. I am proud of the fact that I provided the 
allocation to the subcommittee so that they could do that.
  We are taking funding from $49.7 billion last year to $64 billion 
this year. Now, green eyeshade people may say, ``Oh, that's too much.'' 
You know what? In my view, nothing is too much for people who have 
risked everything on behalf of this country. Finally, over the last 2 
years, we have been able to get funding up to begin to meet our 
obligations in this area.
  I want to congratulate the gentleman from Texas for helping to lead 
the way, and I want to express my appreciation to people on both sides 
of the aisle who stood up for veterans when it was tough, including Mr. 
Smith of New Jersey, the former Republican chairman of the Veterans' 
Affairs Committee, who paid a high price for his dedication to the 
needs of veterans, who paid a high price for putting truth ahead of the 
partisan wishes of the Bush administration.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, I yield to my friend from Indiana, the 
former chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Mr. Buyer, for as 
much time as he may consume.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I was sitting here, and I enjoyed the 
comments of the Chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Edwards, and the 
comments of Mr. Wicker, and then I was disturbed by the comments of Mr. 
Obey.
  Mr. Chairman, what I would say is he didn't go back far enough. I 
came here in 1992, and I heard the horror stories of what was occurring 
in the Appropriations Committee of how individuals would cut veterans 
programs to fund WIC and other programs. I was deeply disturbed by 
that.
  Then I would watch as the Clinton years would flatten VA spending. I 
guess the gentleman forgot about that too.
  I want to associate myself with Mr. Edwards' comments and Mr. 
Wicker's comments because this is a bipartisan issue, and I am deeply 
disturbed about Mr. Obey's comments to try to rewrite history here. 
Some of the language, inflammatory language, that he used is deeply 
disturbing to me.
  Now, if the gentleman wants to talk about his issues and how he feels 
about the war, that's one thing; but don't allow those emotions to 
bleed into how we care for America's veterans. That bothers me.
  We talk about how we got here. I recall the movie ``Born on the 4th 
of July.'' What did they depict in the movie ``Born on the 4th of 
July''? They depicted a VA system which bothered many people here in 
Congress. It was then Ken Keyser who worked for the Clinton 
administration who then thought that the best way we could improve our 
VA system is to move more people into the system. They set forth the 
priorities, but then they opened the system to the nondisabled systems.
  When we opened that, we didn't really prepare the system for the 
number of veterans that came into the system. When I looked back here 
over the last 6 years, my gosh, we have almost doubled the veterans 
budget.
  We also, as we are coping with dealing with the influx of veterans 
based on eligibility reform, I almost feel like, on the Veterans' 
Affairs Committee on a bipartisan basis, we are mechanics looking at 
different subsets of systems within the VA that need a tremendous 
amount of work.
  It's easy for us to always talk about the health side, but there is 
such a strong disability backlog too. If it were just money, if we 
could just throw money on it, and that's what would solve it, Mr. 
Edwards, if that's what you could put in the budget, it would be 
solved. The reality is that's not what's going to solve it. What's 
going to solve it will be management practices and accountability. If 
we don't have that, it's not going to be solved.
  The chairman of the committee is now on the floor. When he held a 
roundtable discussion, he learned that they were giving exams to those 
who are the case workers out there. When you get only 23 and 27 percent 
pass rate by the individuals who are actually working on these 
disability claims, I would say we've got a problem and we have to work 
cooperatively on those problems.
  I want to thank the new majority. I want thank the new majority 
because you are different from the old majority.
  The old majority, when I came here a freshman, and I was in the 
minority, because that old majority did things a little differently, 
and those weren't good budgets on behalf of veterans. But when you came 
now in the new majority, Mr. Edwards, I congratulate you,

[[Page 16012]]

because you have done what you said you were going to do. I want to 
personally thank you for that.
  But I just want you to know this, Mr. Edwards, there is much work for 
all of us, because it's not going to be just money alone.
  When Mr. Obey brought up the issue about the funding shortfall, what 
I did is I went in and I began to examine the finance modeling and 
found the errors in the inputs in the stale data in the model, and 
that's how we made the corrections. So even though we put in the $1.5 
billion, we only spent a third of that, and the other went for 
carryover.
  So there's going to be a lot of management issues, and there's going 
to be a lot of oversight that we going to have to continue to do. But 
as a baseline, let me congratulate you, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Wicker, on 
a very good bill.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Let me just take 30 seconds of that and say I thank Mr. Buyer, former 
chairman of the VA Committee, for emphasizing our work for veterans 
isn't done when this bill passes. There is a lot of oversight that 
needs to be done, and we will be working on that on a bipartisan basis.
  But let me say I am proud of the new congressional leadership in 
providing $6 billion increase over 2007 for VA health care, because you 
can't repair VA hospitals without funding. You can't hire 1,100 new 
case workers to reduce the intolerable delay of combat-wounded veterans 
to get their benefits without money.
  Money is a necessary, perhaps not sufficient, solution but absolutely 
necessary to provide the veterans health care and benefits that they 
have earned by sacrificing for our country.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to Mr. Obey.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman who just spoke has expressed a 
certain degree of unhappiness with the remarks that I made previously 
on the floor. I treasure his unhappiness.
  The fact is that when Harry Truman was President, he was out giving a 
speech one day, and someone in the crowd hollered, ``Give 'em hell, 
Harry!'' And Truman responded, ``I don't give them hell. I just tell 
the truth and they think it's hell.''
  The fact is, I am very comfortable with the fact that the previous 
speaker did not like my comments, because I think maybe that means they 
hit home. The fact is the previous speaker was the person who was 
selected by the then Republican Party leadership to replace Mr. Smith 
after Mr. Smith was, in essence, fired from his job by the majority 
because he told the truth about the VA health care needs.
  So I will be happy to endure the unhappiness of the gentleman with my 
comments anytime if we can use that unhappiness to get more money for 
people who sacrificed everything for this country.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend from Florida 
(Mr. Young).
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding to me, and I want to say that I am very, very proud to be 
working with Chairman Edwards and Ranking Member Wicker as a member of 
this very important subcommittee.
  The Department of Veterans Affairs is going to have much more 
responsibility as the months go by, probably more than they realize. 
One of the reasons is that military medicine has gotten so much better. 
Medicines are better, medical techniques are better, the ability to 
evacuate a wounded soldier from the battlefield is much better, and we 
have intensive care units on our aircraft today so better medical care 
can be provided to the wounded soldier, marine, and the wounded heroes.

                              {time}  1230

  Because of that many of our heroes are living today who would have 
died in previous wars and previous battles. But also because of that 
some of them are hurt worse than normal, and the Veterans' 
Administration is going to eventually have the responsibility once 
these heroes leave their military medical facilities at Walter Reed or 
at Bethesda or some of the other military hospitals.
  One of the things that this bill does, and it does a lot of good 
stuff, and I'm strongly in support of this bill, it increases funding 
for the Inspector General for the Department of Veterans Affairs. And I 
know that oftentimes we think that the Inspector General just looks at 
dollars and figures and decides if the money is being spent or 
accounted for.
  The Inspector General from the Department of Veterans Affairs does a 
really great job, not only in doing that, checking the dollars, but 
also in checking for fraud. And it is amazing how much fraud the IG has 
uncovered in the last couple of years, costing upwards of hundred of 
millions of dollars to the taxpayer, and taking it away from the 
veteran who needs it and the hospitals and the medical professionals 
who need this money to care for the veterans.
  But also, another part of their responsibility is the care that the 
veteran receives in the VA hospitals. They look at this very closely, 
and if and when the medical care in the hospital is not appropriate and 
not proper, they report this to the proper authorities.
  The investment that Chairman Edwards has made in the Inspector 
General's Office in this bill will pay us back many, many times over in 
what they recover than we have invested. So this is a good bill.
  If you wanted me to pick out something that I didn't like about it, 
I'm sure that I could. But the part that relates to the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, this is a good bill, and it deserves our support.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, let me just first say that there's no 
Member of Congress who's spent more time visiting our wounded troops in 
the hospitals or at our veterans hospitals than Mr. Young and his wife, 
Beverly; and he and his wife are an inspiration to all Members of 
Congress as we try to work together in support of our troops and our 
veterans. And I thank you, sir, for your heartfelt and deep commitment 
to our troops and our veterans and their health.
  Mr. Chairman, I'd like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Filner). Mr. Filner is not only the Chairman of the 
Veterans' Affairs Committee in the House, he has been a tremendous 
champion this year in fighting to see that we received $11.9 billion 
increase in funding for veterans since January.
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the committee for doing so much for 
veterans in this bill. And I want to add my thanks to Congressman Young 
from Florida. He and his wife, Beverly, have been an incredible 
inspiration. So we want to say on the record from our side of the aisle 
how much we appreciate you and your wife's efforts on behalf of our 
veterans. Thank you.
  Mr. Chairman, what this bill does and what our previous bills that we 
have passed here, the continuing resolution that we've had for this 
year, the supplemental for the war, added more than 30 percent to the 
health care budget from last year for the health care of our veterans. 
That's an unprecedented increase, and it comes at a time when we have 
unprecedented needs. So your work, Mr. Chairman, has been incredible 
for all of the veterans and their families in this Nation.
  No matter where we stand on the war, and there's a lot of 
divisiveness in this House about the war, we are united in saying, 
through this bill, that when every young man and woman comes back from 
Iraq or Afghanistan, they are going to get all the love, the care, the 
attention, the dignity, the honor that a Nation can bestow; and we are 
committed to that.
  And we are committed, not only to those veterans who are just coming 
back, but to those who are with us from World War II, from Korea, from 
Vietnam, from the first Persian Gulf war. We're going to take care of 
them all.
  We do not think that the problem with the Veterans' Administration is 
that there are too many veterans. We think we have to get the resources 
into the VA, and then have the accountability that it's spent wisely.
  We have an administration that says, support the troops, support the 
troops, support the troops; but when they

[[Page 16013]]

come home, as we have seen in Walter Reed and other places, too many 
times they're on their own. They slip through the cracks.
  Virtually everyone who comes back from this war has evidence of 
either brain injury or PTSD, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and we 
simply don't have the resources to treat them. There are waiting lists. 
There are people told to call back, go home.
  We had a young Marine in Minnesota who went to his hospital because 
he thought he had PTSD because he was thinking of suicide. What 
happened? He was told he was 28th on the waiting list, to go home. And 
he went home and committed suicide. That is a crime and we are not 
going to commit those crimes on our returning heroes. We are going to 
look at not only the brain injuries, not only the PTSD, but to make 
sure the backlog of pension disability claims is taken down to zero, 
where it's now at 600,000.
  We've got a lot of work to do. We've got a lot of work to handle all 
these heroes from World War II to the present, and with your budget, 
Mr. Chairman, we're going to be able to do this. We thank you. And 
we're going to work to get the accountability and the work done that 
lets these heroes know that their Nation is worthy of their sacrifice.
  Mr. WICKER. Before I yield to my friend from Indiana, I too want to 
join my colleagues in commending my friend from Florida, Bill Young, 
and his wife, Beverly, for constantly, consistently visiting our 
veterans, our wounded veterans at Walter Reed and Bethesda and at 
veterans facilities, and for day in and day out and week in and week 
out and year in and year out, being as supportive of our Nation's 
veterans as any couple probably in the entire United States.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to my friend from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) an 
additional minute.
  Mr. BUYER. Picking up off the comment that Mr. Edwards had made in 
his opening statement about management, I think you're right on point. 
Good management of the resources and accountability is what's 
essential.
  So when the chairman just spoke in the well and said, well, we don't 
have the money, that's not entirely correct because the GAO came back 
in 2005 and 2006 and said, we gave them sufficient resources allocated 
toward mental health, but they didn't even spend around $60 million 
that you had already given them in those cycles.
  Mr. Edwards, you worked on those budgets. So it's not just giving 
them the money; that was my point made earlier.
  So when Mr. Filner made the comment, they don't have the money; we 
had given them the money, then they didn't utilize it. And so I agree 
with Mr. Filner when he gets his angst about how it is that you don't 
spend money we gave you, yet you've got waiting lines.
  It goes back then to the management question about the resources in 
which we get them, and that's where I'd like to work with you and work 
with the chairman of the committee.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, let me just take 1 minute, if I could, to 
respond.
  Again, I would reemphasize, we must work closely together in Congress 
to see that the VA spends the money we appropriate for them and for our 
veterans, that they spend it wisely, effectively and efficiently. And 
we will work very hard on that.
  But I don't want it to go unsaid that the VA needs and our veterans 
deserve the additional funding, the $6 billion more for VA health care 
spending, $6.7 billion more than last year for all veterans programs. 
The VA and our veterans need and deserve that money. The increased 
funding in this budget, that I'm proud to say the new Congress has made 
its top priority, is something that is needed, not only to provide 
better benefits, reduce waiting times for benefit consideration, reduce 
waiting time for doctors appointments, improve mental health care 
services and PTSD services for our veterans, this money is needed to 
improve the, frankly, unsafe conditions at some VA hospitals. And 
construction projects are needed there, so the money is needed. We'll 
work together on the management and oversight.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Kansas (Mrs. 
Boyda). Mrs. Boyda has been a leading and tireless voice in this 
Congress, supporting full BRAC funding in this bill, as well as the 
veterans funding in this bill.
  Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to share a couple 
of freshman stories here. I am one of the new kids. And when I 
campaigned, I actually campaigned for 3 years. And you can image what I 
heard about veterans issues. It was about access mainly.
  Our veterans hospitals in Kansas are good, but they only had a 
certain amount of money, and getting access, waiting times, waiting 
lines was just a tremendous problem.
  So when I got here, I went to Chairman Filner's office with a little 
bit of a chip on my shoulder, and I said, listen, I need to know what 
we're going to do for veterans, what's going to happen. And listen, I 
want to know the truth. Don't tell me something. Don't let me go home 
to Kansas and then come back and not be truthful.
  He said, Mrs. Boyda, we are going to take care of our veterans.
  And then when we did our first continuing resolution and put $3.5 
billion immediately into that pipeline, I heard something that I just 
absolutely couldn't believe, and that was someone who said, that's just 
a down payment. So I actually began to have faith that people in 
Congress do what they promise to do.
  Let me tell you another quick story, too, and that was when I spoke 
with Chairman Edwards and he was telling me about what was going on, 
because I have been a tireless advocate for this. He said, Nancy, we're 
going to get this done, and we are going to do an historic funding for 
this, and we're going to get that done by June.
  And then the next thing we're going to do is spend the next 6 months 
on oversight because we have to make sure that those funds are used in 
a way that makes a difference to our veterans, and we have to make sure 
that every cent of that that we have appropriated we can do the best we 
can to make sure that those funds are used appropriately.
  So I am thrilled to be here with the new Democratic majority that is 
keeping its word to veterans, and saying that we're not only funding, 
but I believe that we will go and do the oversight that's needed to 
make sure those funds are used for the best benefit of our veterans.
  Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. And I will yield 
to Speaker Pelosi for the remainder of the time that I don't use of 
this 2 minutes.
  For the record, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to read into that record what 
a number of America's most respected veterans and military 
organizations have said about this bill.
  The American Legion called it ``an impressive commitment to this 
Nation's servicemembers, veterans and their families.''
  The Independent Budget, made up of numerous veterans organizations 
across the country, said, ``This is a much-needed investment in health 
care and the benefits delivery system for our Nation's sick and 
disabled veterans.''
  The Military Officers Association of America referred to the funding 
in this bill as ``an extraordinary level of funding.''
  AMVETS, ``The level of funding will ensure that returning veterans 
from Iraq and Afghanistan will continue to receive priority health care 
and other VA services.''
  The Disabled American Veterans called it ``keeping faith with 
America's veterans.''
  Mr. Chairman, several years ago, then Minority Leader Pelosi made a 
commitment to America's veterans, she said, if she became Speaker, that 
supporting those who have sacrificed for our country in uniform would 
be the highest priority of hers and of this Congress. Speaker Pelosi 
has kept that commitment. And the beneficiaries of that promise kept 
will be

[[Page 16014]]

millions of veterans who will receive better health care, who will 
receive better job training, better homeless care for those 200,000 
veterans that tonight, in America, will go to bed without a roof over 
their heads.
  We would not be here today, about to pass the largest increase in VA 
health care spending in the 77-year history of the Veterans 
Administration, had it not been for Speaker Pelosi's personal 
commitment at the Budget Committee level, at the 302(b) allocation 
level for our subcommittee and specifically pushing this legislation. I 
salute her, along with the veterans organizations of America, for her 
leadership on behalf of our veterans, our servicemen and -women, and 
their families.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to Speaker Pelosi.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his kind words 
and for his more than extraordinary leadership on behalf of America's 
veterans while they are in the service, in terms of the quality of 
their life which is addressed in this legislation, and when they become 
veterans, and how he has had the well-being of America's veterans as a 
priority for so long in his political year.
  Mr. Chairman, today is probably one of the top three happiest days of 
my official life, because today is a day where, under the leadership of 
Mr. Edwards, Mr. Spratt, Mr. Obey, Mr. Skelton, Mr. Murtha, this 
Congress of the United States is able to keep its promises to America's 
veterans. It's a day of respect for them.
  In the military, soldiers say, we will not leave any soldier on the 
battlefield. We say, when they come home, we will not leave any veteran 
behind. That is why, under the leadership of Mr. Edwards in his 
capacity as a leader on this issue, and I will add Mr. Filner's name to 
those I'm commending, but a person of the focus and values of Mr. 
Edwards kept this issue front and center.
  For the past 4\1/2\, 5 years, we have met on a regular basis with the 
veterans organizations and representatives of veterans from across the 
country. We asked them what their priorities were, because their needs 
were so great; and frankly, their concerns were so neglected for the 
last few years that we said, we cannot try to do everything. What are 
your priorities? This was when we were in the minority.
  Their first priority, the first couple of years there was the 
concurrent receipt issue, this veterans disability tax, which we made 
some progress on. And the next term, which was the last term, we were 
still in the minority. We still took a piece of what their agenda was, 
and that was survivors' benefits. All of these were important to the 
veterans, but there were many more concerns that we had.
  So it wasn't until the Democrats assumed the majority that we could 
keep the promise of America to America's veterans. That's why it was so 
thrilling to be with the representatives of the veterans groups, some 
of them I will name, the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, 
the Disabled Veterans of America, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, 
AMVETS, that's the American Veterans, then the Iraq and Afghan Veterans 
of America, to be with them and other representatives of veterans a 
couple of days ago when we stood in front of the Capitol and announced 
that today, with this vote, under Chairman Chet Edwards' leadership, we 
would be giving the largest increase in the history of our country and 
in the 77-year history of the Veterans Administration.
  Why is that necessary? Because there is a backlog of several hundred 
thousand cases at the VA. That's an injustice. That's an immorality. 
And there were needed more case workers to address a 2-year backlog, if 
you had an issue, you went there and you had to wait 2 years if you 
were a veteran.
  Well, the veterans were there when they were needed. They heeded the 
call. They came to our defense, and now we're saying, wait 2 years for 
us to consider your case. Just not right. Just not right.
  So in preparation for a possible Democratic majority where we could 
work in a bipartisan way, the veterans put together a budget, again 
emphasizing their priorities.

                              {time}  1245

  And when they did, we took that budget. Congress worked its will on 
it through the appropriations process to bring us to the floor today. 
Every one of us in the committee, it was a bipartisan unanimous vote, 
56-0, in the Appropriations Committee.
  I hope we will have a similar vote today because, as Mr. Edwards 
said, starting with the budget process under Mr. Spratt to the larger 
Appropriations Committee under Chairman Obey and now to this moment on 
the floor under Chairman Edwards' leadership, we were able to give the 
biggest possible bipartisan vote to this increase. And it is paid for.
  When Democrats took control of the House, we instituted pay-as-you-
go, no new deficit spending, no increase to the deficit. So that is why 
this is especially, especially, important because this says that even 
within the constraints, those budgetary constraints, veterans aren't 
the priority. In our budget the two leading priorities were America's 
children and America's veterans. In the appropriations process, we are 
able to honor that blueprint set forth in the budget again without 
adding to the deficit, without increasing the deficit. That makes it 
harder, but that signaled in a very important way that when we talk 
about our priorities and we say that veterans are in the forefront of 
them, they are in the lead in terms of the values that we have, a 
reflection of America's values that, even though there are difficult 
budgetary constraints, veterans come first.
  This is an issue in urban America. It is a big issue in rural 
America. In rural America, 75 percent of the people know somebody 
closely who is serving or has served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and 
everybody in our country knows many people who have served in the 
military. Four of my brothers served in the military.
  We all have a dedication to our veterans. It is more than, though, 
just talking about it. We had to act upon those words, act upon those 
values. And I thank Chairman Chet Edwards for giving us that 
opportunity today to reward our heroes with something that we are 
giving to them. It is something that they deserve, have been deprived 
of, but that has come to an end.
  So I hope we have a unanimous vote on this to show the bipartisan 
support for veterans that I know exists in our Congress. I am just 
very, very proud that we were able to deliver on the promise once we 
took the majority of the House.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much times remains.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Mississippi has 11\1/2\ minutes 
remaining, and the time of the gentleman from Texas has expired.
  Mr. WICKER. Clearly we are nearing the end of this general debate, 
and I would at this point yield 1 minute to my friend from Indiana (Mr. 
Buyer).
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, the only thing I would note, as I listened 
to the Speaker speak in the well, is that when the Republicans 
presented their budget proposal as an alternative, we spent $8 billion 
more than the majority in the 10-year scope, actually in the 5-year 
budget plan, $8 billion more. And we did it without increasing taxes.
  So what everybody needs to understand here is, yes, we are increasing 
money here to veterans, but these are also the very same veterans which 
are about to be taxed.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Just in closing, the Speaker of the House just said what a happy day 
this is for her. It is a happy day for me and for Members on this side 
of the aisle also, Mr. Chairman.
  Why on a bipartisan issue do we have to sound so partisan sometimes 
in supporting the bill?
  The Speaker mentioned that veterans funding had been so neglected for 
the past few years. I will again point out to Members of the House, Mr. 
Chairman, that during the period of Republican majority, in working 
with our friends across the aisle and funding VA, we increased funding 
by 96 percent during that period, from $38.2 billion annually to $74.5 
billion. And during

[[Page 16015]]

the final decades of the Democratic majority, the increase was only 
half that much.
  The Speaker mentioned the concurrent receipt issue. Of course it was 
during the speakership of Speaker Hastert that the House of 
Representatives enacted concurrent receipt legislation. And as a matter 
of fact, the previous speaker, Mr. Buyer, was the author and prime 
mover behind that legislation, and he deserves credit.
  The point is this is a bipartisan issue. There is bipartisan support. 
I expect after discussion of a few amendments, Mr. Chairman, that we 
will have a near unanimous vote in favor of this bill. I will certainly 
be voting for it, as will the leadership of the Appropriations 
Committee.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2642, the 
Fiscal Year 2008 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 
Appropriations Act. This bill includes many provisions critical to 
improving the quality of life for our fighting men and women as well as 
providing long-awaited and substantial increases in funding for 
veterans services. We continue our important commitment to veterans and 
servicemembers in this bill.
  I would like to take this opportunity to thank Chairman Edwards and 
Ranking Member Wicker for the work that they and their staff members 
have done to include within this bill provisions important to the 
people of Guam; to servicemembers who serve on Guam, and veterans 
living on Guam. The work of committee leadership ensures that this 
Congress will make a meaningful positive impact on our Armed Forces.
  The appropriations bill continues Congress's strong support of the 
military build-up on Guam. The strategic importance of Guam cannot be 
understated. Guam allows the United States Armed Forces to maintain a 
strong presence in the Pacific region. The bill goes a long way to 
improving critical infrastructure on Guam that is necessary for the 
build-up to be successful.
  To that end, the bill fully funds $345 million in military 
construction projects. The bill provides for full funding of several 
key infrastructure projects for the Navy from improving electrical 
system security to repairing and upgrading a wastewater treatment 
plant. The bill also fully funds the critical Kilo Wharf upgrade 
project. The $101 million project is strategically critical to United 
States Naval forces as it is the only dedicated ammunition wharf in the 
Western Pacific Region.
  Important quality of life issues for servicemembers on Guam are also 
included. The bill fully funds $45 million for upgrades to the Naval 
Base Fitness Center. Funds for this project meet Chief of Naval Forces 
Admiral Mike Mullen's commitment to improving the quality of life for 
all Naval forces. It also fully funds $57 million in upgrades to 
degraded housing on Naval Base Guam. The need for adequate housing 
facilities is more prescient, as more and more Naval vessels use the 
base as maintenance and supply center.
  I also applaud the Committee's efforts in including report language 
that directs the Department of Veterans Affairs to report on its plans 
for activation of 29 previously funded Community-Based Outpatient 
Clinics. Guam is one of the 29 clinics that is awaiting activation. I 
am deeply concerned that the Department of Veterans Affairs is not 
providing the veterans on Guam with the quality care that they deserve 
for their sacrifices to our great nation. The report language answers 
the concerns that I have expressed to the Department on multiple 
occasions. I look forward to hearing the Department's plan for 
activation of the clinic on Guam.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am so proud of what we are doing on 
behalf of our veterans today and so I rise in strong support of the 
Military Construction & Veterans Affairs Appropriations bill.
  In addition to the increase in funding--the largest increase in the 
entire 77-year history of the Veterans Administration--there are many 
provisions here that will help the over 6,000 veterans of the U.S. 
Virgin Islands.
  Just last week as I was traveling back to Washington, one veteran 
complained that he was getting no response on his disability claim. I 
have many other open cases in my office. This bill will reduce the 
backlog and make good on the promise to take care of any injury related 
to their military service.
  There is a major increase in health care funding, and I will work to 
ensure that some of it is sued to make health care more accessible to 
Virgin Islands veterans. I also hope we can address the increased 
reimbursement for travel to and from care. Our veterans have to travel 
over water and by airplane to get VA provided care. The costs to them 
and the family member who may have to accompany them is a great burden 
they should not have to bear.
  This bill has many other important provisions, but I only want to 
highlight one other which is of great concern to me as a physician, and 
that is the funding for programs to address Post Traumatic Stress 
Disorder and the other mental health needs of returning men and women 
of our Armed forces. This is a vital need.
  We in the Virgin Islands were able to help our first responders after 
9/11 and we want to do more to help our soldiers transition safely and 
fully from the din and stress of war back to peacetime. This bill will 
help us do that.
  I want to commend our Speaker for her determination to lead this 
House and to keep our promise to the men and women who have kept theirs 
to us--our veterans. I also applaud Chairman Chet Edwards on 
shepherding this landmark bill to final passage, and Chairmen David 
Obey and John Spratt for setting the stage to make this victory for all 
Americans possible.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of 
H.R. 2642, the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2008, the annual spending bill for 
military construction and veterans' programs.
  Today, the House is considering a bill that would appropriate $109.2 
billion, with $64.7 billion in discretionary spending for military 
construction and veterans' programs, which is $4 billion more than the 
President's fiscal year 2008 budget request. The bill would provide 
$43.2 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which is 
$6.7 billion above 2007 and $3.8 billion over the President's request 
for veterans' medical care, claims processing personnel, and facility 
improvements. This includes $28.9 billion in funding to improve access 
to medical services for all veterans, which is $1.7 billion above the 
President's request. This legislation also defeats the President's ill-
advised proposals to nearly double co-pays for prescription drugs for 
veterans and to increase TRICARE premiums by over $1,000 a year for 
military retirees.
  The military health care system is understaffed and drowning in a 
backlog of cases and unable to provide our veterans with the benefits 
and resources they sacrificed a great deal to earn. In an effort to 
reduce the 400,000 claim backlog, the bill also includes $1.6 billion 
in funding to enable the VA to hire over 1100 more claims processors. 
This legislation is the largest single increase in the 77-year history 
of the VA and for the first time in 21 years that the House has 
exceeded the request of the veterans' Independent Budget.
  There are over 251,000 veterans living in Connecticut and I am 
pleased the 110th Congress has made funding our Nation's military 
health care system a top priority. Since the previous Congress 
adjourned without passing a budget, the new Congress passed a 
Continuing Appropriations Resolution (P.L. 110-5) that provided $3.4 
billion over the fiscal year 2006 funding level to fund the VA in 
fiscal year 2007. In addition, the Supplemental Appropriations Act 
(P.L. 110-28) added $1.8 billion directly targeted at the needs of 
veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Part of the cost of war 
is to care for our servicemen and women when they return home and 
Congress has an obligation to ensure they receive appropriate care.
  I applaud the leadership of Mr. Edwards, chairman of the House 
Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans 
Affairs, and Mr. Obey, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, 
and the members of the committee for their efforts and continued 
commitment to our Nation's veterans. Today's legislation takes us one 
step further in providing our veterans with the best health care and 
resources our country can provide and I encourage my colleagues to join 
me in voting for it and the President in signing it into law.
  Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill--engineered 
by my colleague from Texas Mr. Edwards--which funds vital military 
accounts and provides the largest increase in veterans funding in the 
history of the VA.
  While the central concern for South Texas is a veterans hospital--I 
understand we must authorize that funding before we can appropriate it. 
I have talked about this issue with appropriators and authorizers alike 
. . . and those conversations will continue until we find a resolution 
to help these veterans get the in patient care they deserve.
  The Congress is committed to working in a bipartisan way to ensure 
that our budget honors the service of our veterans and builds a future 
worthy of their sacrifice. With passage of this bill, the 110th 
Congress will have voted for historic increases in veterans' health 
care and benefits programs, totaling nearly $12 billion--including the 
joint resolution and the supplemental--to meet the needs of returning

[[Page 16016]]

veterans from Iraq and Afghanistanm . . . and make up for the Bush 
Administration's past shortcomings in its treatment of veterans.
  This bill will provide veterans with the health care and benefits we 
promised them, resulting in the hiring of more qualified doctors and 
nurses to improve medical services to our veterans and to reduce 
waiting times for doctor appointments, and provide more to help 
veterans suffering from traumatic brain injury (TBI), post traumatic 
stress disorder (PTSD), mental health care issues, and lost limbs so 
that they can rebuild their lives.
  For the first time, the budget for VA medical care exceeds the budget 
of the veterans' service organizations by $294 million. This will 
ensure quality health care for 5.8 million patients, including about 
263,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, which the VA will treat in FY 
2008. This significantly reduces the 400,000 claims backlog for 
veterans waiting for disability and other benefits by adding more than 
1,100 new claims processors.
  The bill also provides much needed maintenance of VA health care 
facilities (funding level is $500 million above the President's 
request) to prevent another Walter Reed-type scandal from occurring. A 
recent VA report outlined 1,000 specific problems at VA health 
facilities around the country, with a backlog of $5 billion in 
maintenance.
  The enormous number of troops returning home with mental health 
disorders, including PTSD and traumatic brain injury, resulted in the 
bill including five polytrauma centers and three Centers of Excellence 
for Mental Health and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). These 
centers will be fully operational this year to care for those returning 
from Iraq and Afghanistan, including those with TBI. A February GAG 
report noted about one-third of veterans returning from Iraq and 
Afghanistan are facing mental health challenges, and up to 300,000 
troops are expected to return from Iraq suffering from TBI.
  The bill also protects taxpayers and veterans by including solid 
steps to ensure accountability and stop wasteful spending by increasing 
funding for the Inspector General for VA to improve services for 
veterans and their families and to prevent and deter potential waste, 
fraud and inefficiencies.
  To strengthen our military, this bill provides better barracks, 
housing and training facilities when troops return from combat with an 
unprecedented $21.4 billion investment in military construction, family 
housing, and BRAC-- with $207 million more than the President's 
request.
  To address end strength, the bill provides funding recommended by my 
subcommittee to begin the process of adding 65,000 Army, 27,000 Marine, 
and 9,000 National Guard and Reserve troops.
  For BRAC, the bill fully funds the 2005 base realignment and closure 
process at $8.2 billion, and supports the relocation of 70,000 troops 
from bases in Korea and Europe.
  All this represents the start we need to pay for a healthy and vital 
military force to protect our nation today, tomorrow and for the coming 
decades.
  Mr. HARE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2642, the 
Fiscal Year 2008 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 
Appropriations Act.
  I am honored to stand here today as a freshman member of this 
Democratic Congress as we approve ``the largest'' funding increase in 
the 77-year history of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
  It is my hope that providing $6.7 billion above last year's funding 
will only be the beginning of our commitment to the promises made to 
our service men and women.
  All of us were outraged by the reports of what happened at Walter 
Reed. Part of the problem is for years the VA has been shortchanged on 
funding, due to understating its budgeting needs instead of proactively 
planning for the needs of our veterans.
  This underfunding has resulted in budget shortfalls, understaffing of 
vets centers, a huge claims backlog, and inexcusable delays at VA 
facilities.
  This bill represents a change in priorities.
  It funds an additional 1,100 claims' processors to address the 
600,000 backlog.
  It provides $4.4 billion above 2007 levels for the Veterans Health 
Administration. This will help the VA treat the more than 5.8 million 
patients they expect in 2008.
  Additionally, the bill increases funding for the VA's repair and 
maintenance accounts to prevent a VA medical facility from falling into 
unacceptable levels of disrepair.
  I commend my colleagues on the VA Military Construction 
Appropriations Subcommittee for bringing to the floor a bill that 
exceeds the recommendations of the veterans' service organizations of 
the Independent Budget.
  We've seen a change in priorities and I am going to continue to 
support this momentum until all veterans who want access to healthcare 
in the VA system, have it. I urge all my colleagues to pass this bill 
that funds critical benefits for our veterans.
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Chairman, I am proud today to stand with this 
Congress as it affirms its commitment to the brave men and women who 
are part of our active and retired military services. Their collective 
sacrifice and service has been phenomenal, and we must do all we can to 
ensure that they receive the medical care that they have earned as a 
result of the sacrifices they have made in service to America. The bill 
before us provides an historic, substantial boost to the Veterans' 
Administration, allocating $43.2 billion--$3.8 billion more than the 
President's request and $6.7 more than the FY 07 allocation--to 
properly fulfill America's obligation to our servicemen and women and 
their families.
  As a representative of the State with the second highest population 
of military retirees and veterans--nearly 2 million people--I know many 
Florida families stand to benefit greatly. The extra funding for the VA 
to double its benefits personnel in order to reduce the backlog of more 
than 400,000 benefit claims will do much to improve health care and 
efficiency for benefits that are due to many Florida families. The top 
two busiest VA Health Care centers, Bay Pines in St. Petersburg and 
Haley VA in Tampa, serve residents in my district. I have walked the 
halls of both facilities, and encountered active and retired military 
personnel looking for the best care possible for them and their 
families. This bill provides resources adequate to the enormously 
important task of supporting our veterans and their families as they 
transition back into civilian life. It also expands access to vital 
services in the areas of greatest concern for veterans of Iraq and 
Afghanistan: traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, 
treatment for burns, and amputation. Haley VA has the distinction of 
being one of a handful of poly-trauma centers, with special designation 
to handle traumatic brain injuries, and with its partner, the 
University Of South Florida College Of Public Health, has been on the 
forefront of discovering the best roads to effective treatment for 
those suffering with TBI.
  Also, this bill represents the recognition that we must confront, not 
shy away from, the serious issues in veterans care brought to light by 
the Walter Reed scandal. $4.1 billion dollars, $508 million above and 
beyond the President's request, is set aside for the ongoing 
maintenance and renovation of existing facilities to make certain they 
remain capable of delivering our veterans the treatment they deserve 
and need. It also heavily invests in information technology to better 
track health records, so that no American is allowed to fall through 
the cracks.
  I urge this Congress to back up the talk about supporting our troops 
with concrete actions. We have an unwavering obligation as a country to 
do right by our servicemen and women, whether it be in the solemn 
purpose with which we must always send them off to war, or in providing 
the necessary care for them and their families upon their return. Their 
sacrifice must be respected not just with our words, but with our 
actions.
  Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an 
amendment on the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 
Appropriations Bill for FY 08. My amendment would devote $2 million 
dollars from the Department Administration General Operations Expenses 
Account, of the nearly $1.6 billion appropriated in this bill, to the 
Advisory Committee on Women Veterans. The intent of my amendment is 
that the Advisory Committee on Women Veterans would establish a 
commission to evaluate and make recommendations for improvements to the 
VA system so that it can better meet health care needs of women 
veterans.
  In 1978, I purchased a one-way ticket to Colorado Springs, Colorado 
to enroll at the Air Force Academy. I was in the third class that 
accepted women into our service academies. I am the only woman veteran 
serving in the Congress. Women face different obstacles than men when 
trying to receive care from the VA. To start with, many women who have 
served in the military don't call themselves ``veterans'' and many 
women don't think of the VA as ``their'' system.
  A larger number of women are serving in military and in the future we 
will see a higher number of women veterans. One in seven Americans 
deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan is a woman.
  My goal in proposing this amendment is to bring together a group of 
people who can truly devote the time and effort to study the needs and 
examine the challenges our women veterans face. They then can report to 
Congress their finding and recommendations so that we, as a body, can 
evaluate these findings and

[[Page 16017]]

implement improvements and initiatives to ensure women receive the care 
they have earned.
  I introduced legislation similar to my amendment, H.R. 2394, the 
Bipartisan Commission on Wounded Women Veterans. This amendment would 
fund the commission envisioned in H.R. 2394.
  I am grateful to all who serve their nation and we as a Congress have 
a responsibility to ensure they receive the best possible care. In this 
war on terrorism, the greatest burdens have fallen on the shoulders of 
a relatively small number of Americans who have volunteered to take 
great risks on our behalf. Events over the last few years have made a 
new generation of Americans realize just how precious our freedoms 
really are. We owe our freedom fighters--past, present, and future--a 
debt of gratitude for their selflessness and sacrifice. I will continue 
to fight to ensure that our veterans get the benefits they were 
promised, the health care they deserve, and the recognition that our 
Nation owes them.
  Thank you for the time and I ask for a yes vote on my amendment.
  Mr. REYES. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my support for this 
important measure which reflects--in dollars and cents--just a small 
measure of our appreciation for all that men and women in uniform do in 
defense of our Nation.
  We have an obligation to provide the housing and other facilities in 
which our military members and their families live and work. This 
measure includes the funds required to fully fund the President's 
budget request for military construction projects. The bill provides 
$8.2 billion dollars to implement the 2005 BRAC recommendations and 
$2.9 billion to replace, rehabilitate, and build housing for troops and 
their families.
  As the representative of Fort Bliss, Texas I have seen the fruits of 
military construction spending, and I can assure my colleagues that 
these funds are being wisely used by the Army and the other military 
services to greatly improve the quality of life for our military 
members and their families. From a motorpool that allows a young 
technician to repair vehicles out of the heat and rain to a childcare 
center where the children of deployed service members can learn and 
grow, these facilities are more than bricks and mortar. They are an 
integral part of every soldier's daily life.
  This bill provides an unprecedented level of funding for veterans 
health care which will allow us to begin to address the needs of 
current veterans who have for years been woefully under-served by the 
Veterans Administration, VA system. H.R. 2642 will also provide needed 
funding for men and women returning from combat in Iraq and 
Afghanistan.
  This measure continues our efforts to improve benefits for our 
Nation's veterans and provides $43.2 billion for veterans programs-- 
$6.7 billion more than was allocated last year and $3.8 billion more 
than the White House requested for VA programs. This additional funding 
will meet shortfalls in the Veterans Health Administration budget and 
provide needed funds to better address Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, 
mental health and substance abuse, homeless veterans, and prosthetic 
research.
  These programs and other initiatives funded in the Military 
Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act are critical to 
our troops and their families and to our veterans who sacrificed so 
much in defense of our Nation and our American values. I urge my 
colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mrs. DRAKE. Mr. Chairman, as has been widely reported, the Department 
of Veterans Affairs continues to face challenges in improving service 
delivery to veterans and reducing the existing backlog of benefit 
claims.
  While the VA made progress in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 reducing the 
size and age of its pending claims inventory, it has regrettably fallen 
behind in recent years. The VA's inventory of pending claims and their 
average time pending has increased significantly in the last 3 years 
and the Department is currently facing over 630,000 open benefit 
claims.
  The VA reduced the average age of its pending claims from 182 days at 
the end of fiscal year 2001 to 111 days at the end of fiscal year 2003. 
However, by the end of fiscal year 2006, average days pending had 
increased to 127 days and is currently reported to be 177 days.
  It should be noted that continued increases in the number and 
complexity of claims being filed have played a contributing role in the 
current backlog. In its fiscal year 2008 budget justification, the VA 
identified an increase in claims processing staff as essential to 
reducing the pending claims inventory and improving timeliness. 
However, the VA states that the budget request only provides resources 
to reduce the processing time to 145 days. Furthermore, even as 
increased funding is appropriated and staffing levels increase, the VA 
acknowledges that it still must take other actions to improve 
productivity.
  Representatives from the VA have stated that there is a newly 
implemented strategy to manage the pending inventory and improve 
response time by getting more out of current resources, increasing 
staffing, and improving information technology. Given the current 
claims crisis, I believe that we need to know more about this strategy.
  My amendment will require the VA to provide a report to Congress on 
the status of the number of pending disability benefit claims and the 
actions taken to reduce processing time for veterans' disability 
claims. As the House considers FY 2008 funding for the VA, I believe 
the Congress, the American people, and more importantly, our Nation's 
veterans are entitled to know how current and future resources will be 
implemented to address these concerns. This is the least we can do.
  I understand that this amendment will be subject to a point of order 
and I will therefore not offer it. However, the current claims backlog 
is an issue of importance for our Nation's veterans. It is my hope that 
this Congress will address this issue in the near future.
  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support 
of funding for our soldiers, veterans, and military families. Military 
service is part of the proud history of the Second Congressional 
District of Kentucky. The provisions included in this bill will 
significantly benefit many of those I am honored to represent.
  The Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act of 
2008 contains the largest ever increase in Veterans Health funding: 
including $29 billion for new and modified medical services.
  If passed, these funds will initiate the opening of two new Community 
Based Outpatient Clinics in my District, as designated by Secretary 
Nicholson. These facilities, and dozens of others across the country, 
will help to ensure that veterans have the highest quality local care 
possible.
  The Second Congressional District is also home to Fort Knox. As a 
result of the 2005 BRAC proceedings, Fort Knox is transforming over the 
next few years from an institutional training installation to a multi-
functional installation that will include an active force infantry 
brigade and the site for the Human Resources Command for the Army.
  This bill includes $8.2 billion to support necessary infrastructure 
preparations at Fort Knox and other BRAC-affected installations working 
to accommodate new military operations.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support timely funding for our 
nation's veterans and military installations by voting to approve this 
bill.
  Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support the fiscal year 2008 military construction and veterans affairs 
appropriations bill which includes $27.8 million dollars to construct a 
veterans' cemetery in my District.
  The funding was part of the President's budget and will allow us to 
honor our commitment to provide nearly 400,000 veterans living within 
75 miles of Sarasota, Florida with a final resting place that honors 
their military service.
  The VA has purchased 245 acres of land in Sarasota County and 
construction is planned for May 2008. The first burials are anticipated 
in October of 2008.
  With more than 1,800 veterans dying every day in this country, the 
timely completion of this project is a primary concern for area 
veterans and is one of my highest priorities.
  This funding will help ensure that our goals are met and the veterans 
who proudly served this Nation and eligible family members can be 
placed to rest close to home and with the honor and dignity they 
deserve.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2642, the 
Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act for 
Fiscal Year 2008. This measure shows what a high priority our Nation 
places on providing for our servicemembers, their families and our 
veterans.
  The new Democratic leadership in Congress has faced many challenges 
in recent months regarding the treatment of servicemembers and 
veterans. Earlier this year, we learned about horrific conditions at 
the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, including overused outpatient 
housing in disrepair, patients confused about where to go after serious 
operations, and the tangled bureaucracy confronting servicemembers and 
their families. It was clear that administrative policies needed to be 
revised, not only at Walter Reed, but across the system at locations 
both here and abroad.
  It was also clear that increasing the funding level for military 
health care was a priority. As a result, Congress passed a supplemental 
spending bill that contained an additional $1.8 billion for veterans' 
health care, and today we

[[Page 16018]]

will pass a bill that is $6.7 billion above fiscal year 2007 funds and 
$3.8 billion over President Bush's request. The total amount in this 
bill is even more than what is requested in the Independent Budget, a 
needs estimate published by four veterans' service groups. If passed, 
H.R. 2642 will mark the largest annual increase to VA health care 
funding in over 75 years.
  Mr. Chairman, we must ensure that servicemembers wounded in Iraq and 
Afghanistan have the services they require and as well anticipate the 
increasing number of returning veterans who have earned their promised 
benefits. To that end, H.R. 2642 provides $43.2 billion for veterans 
medical care to alleviate the backlogged claims processing system and 
fund improvements for VA facilities. I am also pleased that this 
measure allots $600 million for new initiatives for improving mental 
health and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) centers, $1.9 billion 
to improve the electronic health records system, and $130 million to 
assist homeless veterans.
  After a recent visit to the Providence VA Medical Center, I was 
impressed with the treatment of veterans, as well as the ongoing 
innovative research at the facility. I am also optimistic that upcoming 
construction projects will improve the facility, especially knowing 
that the VA will play a larger role in the coming years as more 
servicemembers return from ongoing conflicts. Today's bill provides 
$4.1 billion for ongoing maintenance and renovations of existing 
facilities, which will help Providence attain its goals. I am also 
pleased that $15 million is allocated for the Health Care Sharing 
Incentive Fund, which allows the Department of Defense and VA to 
increase research, improve access to care, and ensure a seamless 
transition for our veterans.
  H.R. 2642 also includes $21.4 billion for military construction. This 
amount is $5.1 billion above the amount for fiscal year 2007, and will 
fully fund Base Realignment and Closure. This funding will also help 
improve training and quality of life facilities for active duty troops 
and members of the National Guard and Reserves, all of whom are playing 
critical roles in ongoing conflicts and need our support now more than 
ever. Finally, this measure includes $2.8 billion to help increase the 
size of the Army, Marine Corps, the National Guard and Reserves over 
the next five years.
  Mr. Chairman, we must maintain strong support for our men and women 
in uniform and all those who have bravely served our nation, and H.R. 
2642 will do just that. May we all keep those currently serving abroad 
in our thoughts and wish them a safe return home.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to 
commend the chairman of the Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs 
Appropriations Subcommittee--Congressman Edwards, Chairman Obey, and my 
colleagues for passing the Military Construction and Veterans 
Appropriations for FY 2008.
  This bill is the largest increase in veterans funding in the 77-year 
history of the Veterans Administration.
  As a result, this measure supports high priority programs such as 
Homeless Veterans Care, Mental Health Care, and Long-Term Care.
  As a former psychiatric nurse at the Dallas Veterans Administration 
Hospital, I know firsthand the disparities contributed by lack of 
funding.
  I am particularly pleased to see the bill provides increased funding 
for homeless veterans programs, 3 centers for Centers of Excellence for 
Mental Health and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder to become fully 
operational this year. It also matches the VA's request to fund 
programs for minority contractor procurement and streamlines the VA 
billing system.
  The Dallas VA has been a leader in outreach to homeless veterans, who 
comprise almost a fourth of the homeless adults in the Nation.
  The North Texas VA Health Care System in Dallas was the first to 
establish a comprehensive homeless program, which helps homeless 
veterans with mental and physical illnesses. Dallas is 1 of 8 cities in 
the country with a veteran's homelessness program targeted towards 
women.
  I am also pleased with the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 
FY 08 funding because it includes funds for mental health centers. I 
have continually advocated for increased access to mental health care 
by returning veterans through the science committee.
  This bill also grants the Veterans Administration request for 
administrative functions, including operation of Veterans 
Administration Medical Centers, quality of care oversight, 
informational technology--hardware and software, legal services, 
billing, coding activities, and procurement.
  Funding for administrative functions is especially important to 
decreasing claims backlog for veterans waiting for disability and other 
benefits by adding more than 1,100 new claims processors. The funding 
also makes five polytrauma centers and three Centers of Excellence for 
Mental Health and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) fully 
operational this year. These centers will afford care for those 
returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
  Subsequently, sufficient funding for procurement and billing 
activities is in particular important to Dallas, since the Dallas 
Veterans Administration actively encourages large businesses to partner 
with small businesses through subcontracting plans.
  This bill makes available resources to support military construction 
projects and ensures America's servicemen and women have more effective 
training facilities, and better housing, health care and day care 
facilities. I would like to take this opportunity to once again commend 
my colleagues, Congressman Edwards and Chairman Obey for providing a 
comprehensive Military Construction and Veterans Appropriations for FY 
2008 possible.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2638, the 
Fiscal Year 2008 Homeland Security Appropriations Act.
  The tragic terrorist attacks of 2001, and the destruction resulting 
from Hurricane Katrina in 2005, made clear that we must improve our 
nation's ability to prepare for and respond to disasters. In the days 
and weeks following these events, the United States Congress acted 
quickly to provide our Nation's first-responders with the resources and 
equipment they need to ensure our security.
  The bill before us today provides critical resources for vital 
national security requirements, including increased border patrol 
agents, port security improvements, and grants for America's 
firefighters. Still, although continued funding for such important 
programs is essential, it is obvious that increased spending alone 
cannot solve every problem.
  Since its creation in 2002, the Department of Homeland Security has 
at times suffered from wasteful spending decisions and business 
management shortcomings. Unfortunately, this legislation fails to 
correct many of these deficiencies--and instead would boost funding 
levels well above what experts at the Department have requested.
  In 2004, the 9/11 Commission also characterized the federal focus on 
aviation security following the 2001 terrorist attacks as ``fighting 
the last war,'' and noted that ``opportunities to do harm are as great, 
or greater, in maritime or surface transportation.'' In the wake of 
attacks on subway trains in London and on passenger rail lines in 
Madrid and Mumbai, it is clear that terrorist organizations are intent 
on disrupting surface transportation systems and mass transit around 
the world. Despite the 
9/11 Commission's warning, the legislation before us today continues to 
provide billions for aviation security, while failing to prioritize 
rail and transit spending.
  Mr. Chairman, it is our duty to make certain that we have an 
effective national security system, capable of ensuring the safety of 
all Americans. I am concerned that H.R. 2638 fails to adequately 
achieve this goal and I look forward to working with my colleagues to 
improve this bill as we move forward with the legislative process.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, we have a solemn responsibility to honor 
the promises we've made to our veterans. Boldly heeding the call to 
duty, brave men and women from across America have served with 
distinction in defense of our Nation. They have dedicated their lives 
to safeguarding the promise and potential of our country, and we have 
an obligation to repay their commitment.
  The veterans of California's 6th District understand that our 
obligation to our service men and women does not end when they return 
home. The importance of providing our veterans with the benefits they 
need and deserve does not abate just because our troops are no longer 
serving in the field. Our support for troops is a lifelong commitment.
  The substandard care, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and deplorable 
conditions exposed at Walter Reed Military Hospital underscore broken 
promises to our Nation's veterans. We cannot allow the Bush 
administration's failure to become the hallmark of our country's 
commitment to our veterans. Our veterans deserve much better.
  The Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs Appropriations bill 
for Fiscal Year 2008 is a resolute step toward fulfilling the promises 
to our veterans that the Republican-controlled Congress neglected 
during the past 12 years. This bill increases the VA's budget by $6.7 
billion above fiscal year 2007 funding levels, providing the greatest 
single increase in funding for veterans health care in the 77-year 
history of the VA and, for the first time, exceeding the

[[Page 16019]]

budget requests of independent veterans service groups. Additionally, 
this legislation confronts the 400,000 claims backlog from veterans 
awaiting decisions on the status of their disability benefits by adding 
more than 1,100 new claims processors. By allocating critical funding 
to help repair veteran's health care facilities, establish eight new 
centers to care for veterans suffering from Traumatic Brain Injuries, 
and facilitate the transition from the Defense Department to the VA, 
this appropriations bill will go a long way toward fixing the problems 
that the Bush administration has allowed to fester.
  The veterans' community needs our reinvestment in their health care 
and benefits system. Our service members have proved courage and 
patriotism, and it's our turn to prove that we can keep our promise to 
them. This Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs Appropriations 
bill shows that we can provide our veterans with medical care, benefits 
and social support in a timely manner. By passing this bill, we can 
start to repay them for the bravery they have shown.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the bill shall be 
considered for amendment under the 5-minute rule.
  No amendment to the bill may be offered except those specified in the 
previous order of the House of today, which is at the desk.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 2642

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for military 
     construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related 
     agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and 
     for other purposes, namely:

                                TITLE I

                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

                      Military Construction, Army

       For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment 
     of temporary or permanent public works, military 
     installations, facilities, and real property for the Army as 
     currently authorized by law, including personnel in the Army 
     Corps of Engineers and other personal services necessary for 
     the purposes of this appropriation, and for construction and 
     operation of facilities in support of the functions of the 
     Commander in Chief, $4,070,959,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2012: Provided, That of this amount, not to 
     exceed $481,468,000 shall be available for study, planning, 
     design, architect and engineer services, and host nation 
     support, as authorized by law, unless the Secretary of 
     Defense determines that additional obligations are necessary 
     for such purposes and notifies the Committees on 
     Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of the 
     determination and the reasons therefor.

              Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps


                    (including rescission of funds)

       For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment 
     of temporary or permanent public works, naval installations, 
     facilities, and real property for the Navy and Marine Corps 
     as currently authorized by law, including personnel in the 
     Naval Facilities Engineering Command and other personal 
     services necessary for the purposes of this appropriation, 
     $2,125,138,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012: 
     Provided, That of this amount, not to exceed $110,167,000 
     shall be available for study, planning, design, and architect 
     and engineer services, as authorized by law, unless the 
     Secretary of Defense determines that additional obligations 
     are necessary for such purposes and notifies the Committees 
     on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of the 
     determination and the reasons therefor: Provided further, 
     That of the funds appropriated for ``Military Construction, 
     Navy and Marine Corps'' under Public Law 108-132, $5,862,000 
     are hereby rescinded.

                    Military Construction, Air Force


                    (including rescission of funds)

         For acquisition, construction, installation, and 
     equipment of temporary or permanent public works, military 
     installations, facilities, and real property for the Air 
     Force as currently authorized by law, $927,428,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2012: Provided, That of this 
     amount, not to exceed $51,587,000 shall be available for 
     study, planning, design, and architect and engineer services, 
     as authorized by law, unless the Secretary of Defense 
     determines that additional obligations are necessary for such 
     purposes and notifies the Committees on Appropriations of 
     both Houses of Congress of the determination and the reasons 
     therefor: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated 
     for ``Military Construction, Air Force'' under Public Law 
     108-324, $5,319,000 are hereby rescinded.

  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I will not use all 5 minutes.
  And I think, as my colleagues have noticed, my comments have been 
very bipartisan today. I am proud that the bill that we put together 
was supported on a unanimous bipartisan basis in the committee. I am 
also proud as a Democrat that the new Democratic leadership, led by 
Speaker Pelosi, has made funding for veterans health care and benefits 
a top priority in this Congress.
  I would just point out, in response to some of the comments made, 
that the first comments made referencing Republicans or Democrats were 
made by the minority in today's debate when the comment was made that 
Republicans have primarily supported veterans. And in comparisons of 
past increases between Republican and Democratic Congresses, I am not 
going to get into all that.
  I would like to point out for the record that under the previous 
leadership of the Congress, the concurrent receipt problem wasn't even 
brought to the floor of the House until, led by Democrats, we almost 
had 218 signatures on a discharge position to override the previous 
Speaker of the House, who had not let the concurrent receipt bill get 
to the floor of the House.
  But having said that fact, I am here to say we are proud to work with 
Mr. Wicker and work with our colleagues to see that we do have a 
historic increase in veterans health care spending in this bill, 
unprecedented in the history of the VA and in the history of our 
Nation. I am glad to see that the administration has reversed its 
threat to veto this bill because they were concerned it might spend too 
much on veterans and our military families. I am glad they recognize 
the error of their ways, and I commend them for pulling off of that 
veto threat.
  So I just would reiterate what I again today have been saying, and 
that is I am proud to have worked on a bipartisan basis with my 
colleague Mr. Wicker and members of our subcommittee and others in this 
House to see that we got this historic bill on the floor.

                              {time}  1300

  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                  Military Construction, Defense-Wide


              (including transfer and rescission of funds)

       For acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment 
     of temporary or permanent public works, installations, 
     facilities, and real property for activities and agencies of 
     the Department of Defense (other than the military 
     departments), as currently authorized by law, $1,806,928,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2012: Provided, That 
     such amounts of this appropriation as may be determined by 
     the Secretary of Defense may be transferred to such 
     appropriations of the Department of Defense available for 
     military construction or family housing as the Secretary may 
     designate, to be merged with and to be available for the same 
     purposes, and for the same time period, as the appropriation 
     or fund to which transferred: Provided further, That of the 
     amount appropriated, not to exceed $154,728,000 shall be 
     available for study, planning, design, and architect and 
     engineer services, as authorized by law, unless the Secretary 
     of Defense determines that additional obligations are 
     necessary for such purposes and notifies the Committees on 
     Appropriations of both Houses of Congress of the 
     determination and the reasons therefor: Provided further, 
     That of the funds appropriated for ``Military Construction, 
     Defense-Wide'' under Public Law 110-5, $7,592,000 are hereby 
     rescinded.

               Military Construction, Army National Guard

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the Army National Guard, and contributions 
     therefor, as authorized by chapter 1803 of title 10, United 
     States Code, and Military Construction Authorization Acts, 
     $439,291,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.

               Military Construction, Air National Guard

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the Air National Guard, and contributions 
     therefor, as authorized by chapter 1803 of title 10, United 
     States Code, and Military Construction Authorization Acts, 
     $95,517,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.

[[Page 16020]]



                  Military Construction, Army Reserve

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the Army Reserve as authorized by chapter 
     1803 of title 10, United States Code, and Military 
     Construction Authorization Acts, $154,684,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2012.

                  Military Construction, Navy Reserve

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the reserve components of the Navy and 
     Marine Corps as authorized by chapter 1803 of title 10, 
     United States Code, and Military Construction Authorization 
     Acts, $69,150,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012.

                Military Construction, Air Force Reserve


                    (including rescission of funds)

       For construction, acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, 
     and conversion of facilities for the training and 
     administration of the Air Force Reserve as authorized by 
     chapter 1803 of title 10, United States Code, and Military 
     Construction Authorization Acts, $39,628,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2012: Provided, That of the 
     funds appropriated for ``Military Construction, Air Force 
     Reserve'' under Public Law 109-114, $3,069,000 are hereby 
     rescinded.

                   North Atlantic Treaty Organization

                      Security Investment Program

       For the United States share of the cost of the North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program for 
     the acquisition and construction of military facilities and 
     installations (including international military headquarters) 
     and for related expenses for the collective defense of the 
     North Atlantic Treaty Area as authorized by section 2806 of 
     title 10, United States Code, and Military Construction 
     Authorization Acts, $201,400,000, to remain available until 
     expended.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Hayes

  Mr. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Hayes:
       Page 7, line 12, insert after the dollar amount the 
     following: ``(reduced by $30,000,000)''.
       Page 10, line 24, insert after the dollar amount the 
     following: ``(increased by $30,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. HAYES. I want to thank Chairman Edwards and the ranking member, 
my friend, Mr. Wicker, for allowing me the time.
  Mr. Chairman, I bring an amendment to the floor today because I feel 
the Base Realignment and Closure, BRAC, implementation process needs 
more funding than is being provided.
  Mr. Chairman, the fiscal year 2007 continuing resolution did not 
adequately meet the needs of BRAC implementation. Though we came back 
and put a $3.1 billion allocation for BRAC in the supplemental and we 
funded the President's fiscal year 2008 request in the bill, I do not 
believe we are doing all we should do in terms of funding this 
priority.
  I realize the President's budget and supplemental request were based 
on the best estimates at the time, but there is no doubt that these 
figures were low. The Department of Defense currently estimates it will 
take $30.8 billion from 2006 to 2011 to complete the 2005 Base 
Realignment and Closure round.
  As the chairman and the ranking member pointed out in this bill, the 
current BRAC estimate is $8 billion higher than that given by DOD only 
a year ago. I share the concern of the committee that even with this 
large increase, the projected funding estimate does not fully take into 
account construction and inflation costs and is lower than what will be 
actually required.
  My home district, Fort Bragg, the epicenter of the universe, is 
facing these miscalculations today. As part of the BRAC 2005 plan for 
Fort Bragg, it was named the Joint Mobilization Center; however, no 
funding to house servicemembers going through the process of 
mobilization was involved.
  The garrison is currently housing these mainly National Guard and 
Reserve members in the 82nd Airborne barracks, while the 82nd is 
deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. When the 82nd returns, Fort Bragg 
will be forced to house those going through the Joint Mobilization 
Center in World War II-era barracks which are completely inadequate.
  As part of the BRAC 2005 recommendations, Pope Air Force Base will be 
realigned to become part of Fort Bragg. This means that Bragg will take 
over the airfield at Pope, but there is no money currently programmed 
for the new control tower or the fire and rescue station that will be 
necessary to support carrying out this realignment. Fort Bragg and Pope 
are but one example of this trend. No doubt these kinds of BRAC-
related, unplanned expenses for military construction needs are 
prevalent at installations across the country.
  The BRAC process was designed to increase the efficiency and increase 
the effectiveness of combat capability of our forces. Underfunding, 
even slightly, will affect our Nation's combat capability first. In the 
midst of this global war on terror, we need to be very careful not to 
underfund our combat capability, either indirectly or inadvertently.
  Although I greatly respect and appreciate the chairman and ranking 
member's funding of the Base Realignment and Closure program, I 
strongly believe that this crucial national security area needs more 
focus. We need to search for ways to implement it.
  To this end, my amendment reprograms $30 million from NATO Security 
Investment to the Department of Defense. As you know, the NSIP is 
designed to be our contribution to construction of support facilities 
at NATO bases. While this is important, NATO is forward deployed, and 
it does not always provide us with a swift return on our investments in 
terms of combat capability.
  In the past, NATO fought primarily from fixed bases in forward areas, 
but now it will operate from deployed locations. Infrastructure 
provided in NSIP, while important in previous NATO strategy, is 
somewhat less now. Conversely, BRAC and global rebasing moves direct 
American forces from Europe to home stations here in the U.S. Security 
requirements in Europe are decreasing while security requirements in 
the U.S., as well as readiness requirements at home stations, are going 
up as new units are reformed here at home.
  The money could be better spent in the BRAC program with a focus on 
improving our quick reaction and Special Operations Forces. It will 
increase our Nation's combat power, fighting the continued war against 
terrorists, and it will improve the combat power of NATO.
  I urge you to vote in favor of my amendment and join me in support of 
Base Realignment and Closure implementation.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Let me just say that I have great respect for Mr. 
Hayes's support of the military. He and I have worked together over the 
years in support of our veterans and our troops; his record is clear on 
that. I sympathize with his interest and support his interest in seeing 
that we fully fund BRAC. I have been one of those, along with Mrs. 
Boyda and others on your side of the aisle, that have worked hard to 
try to fully fund BRAC.
  The opposition I have to this amendment, Mr. Chairman, is not in the 
good-faith effort to increase funding for BRAC, even though we fully 
fund it by $8.2 billion. My opposition to this amendment comes from the 
fact that the gentleman would cut by 15 percent President Bush's 
request for the NATO Security Investment program. Now, maybe a lot of 
Americans aren't familiar with that program, but that program has 
provided infrastructure investment in Iraq to support U.S. forces in 
our fight in Iraq. The NATO Investment program has provided funding for

[[Page 16021]]

our troops in Afghanistan. We are working with NATO forces to defend 
our national security interests in Afghanistan.
  The cut of $30 million proposed by the gentleman, I think, would 
unintentionally do great harm to the interests of our troops in Iraq 
and Afghanistan and throughout the world where we are working with NATO 
forces.
  Let me give you some specifics of how this money is used. In the 
past, we have used $9 million for the restoration of water distribution 
system at the Royal Air Forces base in Lakenheath in the United 
Kingdom. We have three Air Force F-15 squadrons there. We have used 
this fund to provide $25 million for a medical treatment facility at 
Aviano Air Base in Italy. At Aviano, we have two U.S. Air Force F-16 
squadron stations. And again, as I mentioned, we've used this money to 
support needed NATO infrastructure that helps U.S. forces in Iraq and 
Afghanistan.
  So I would like to offer to the gentleman a good-faith effort, as we 
move to conference committee, to work with Mr. Wicker and work on a 
bipartisan basis to see if we can find additional funding for BRAC. I 
want additional funding for BRAC, but let's not undermine President 
Bush's commitments to NATO, our Nation's commitments to NATO, and 
unintentionally undermine important infrastructure programs that do 
support our troops that are risking their lives in Afghanistan and 
Iraq, even as we speak today.
  Mr. WICKER. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. EDWARDS. I would be glad to yield.
  Mr. WICKER. I thank my friend, the chairman of the subcommittee, for 
yielding.
  I would simply join my chairman in his offer to continue working with 
Mr. Hayes with regard to this effort. Certainly, no one has been a 
stronger advocate for the men and women at Fort Bragg, and also Pope 
Air Force Base and the families in that surrounding area, than has 
Robin Hayes of North Carolina.
  I appreciate the sense of the amendment. I suspect that it will not 
pass today, Mr. Chairman, but I do want to work with Chairman Edwards 
to see if we can accommodate the gentleman from North Carolina's needs 
as we move forward in the process.
  Mr. EDWARDS. I would absolutely look forward to working and looking 
through every nook and cranny in the budget to see if we can squeeze 
out additional funding for BRAC. I agree with the gentleman from North 
Carolina that the Department of Defense has underestimated the full 
cost of BRAC, and we need to watch that very carefully as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time is 
remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. Each side has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. HAYES. I thank very much the chairman. People who know Chet 
Edwards and Robin Hayes clearly understand our love for the military. 
And I appreciate Ranking Member Wicker's comments. When all is said and 
done, they have tough decisions to make, but there is no place like 
home. Home is Fort Bragg, and I hope that the Members will support my 
amendment.
  Again, I thank Chairman Edwards and Ranking Member Wicker, and I look 
forward to working with them however this comes out, because this 
process is not going to end this morning or tomorrow. And again, I 
thank you for the time and look forward to working with you. I hope the 
membership will support my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I do look forward to working with Mr. 
Hayes to see if we can find additional funding for BRAC.
  I will just finish by saying that right now home for many American 
forces is Iraq, it's Afghanistan, it's with NATO forces throughout the 
world defending our families and our homes. That is why I simply must 
oppose this, reluctantly, but strongly oppose this amendment because of 
the source of the funding. If we can find a better source of the 
funding, I would be glad to support the gentleman.
  But I must oppose the amendment because it would undermine our 
commitment to NATO and vital infrastructure programs and investments 
that are so very important to our servicemen and -women serving in 
Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the world today.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from North Carolina will be 
postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                   Family Housing Construction, Army

       For expenses of family housing for the Army for 
     construction, including acquisition, replacement, addition, 
     expansion, extension, and alteration, as authorized by law, 
     $419,400,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.

             Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Army

       For expenses of family housing for the Army for operation 
     and maintenance, including debt payment, leasing, minor 
     construction, principal and interest charges, and insurance 
     premiums, as authorized by law, $742,920,000.

           Family Housing Construction, Navy and Marine Corps

       For expenses of family housing for the Navy and Marine 
     Corps for construction, including acquisition, replacement, 
     addition, expansion, extension, and alteration, as authorized 
     by law, $298,329,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012.

    Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps

       For expenses of family housing for the Navy and Marine 
     Corps for operation and maintenance, including debt payment, 
     leasing, minor construction, principal and interest charges, 
     and insurance premiums, as authorized by law, $371,404,000.

                 Family Housing Construction, Air Force

       For expenses of family housing for the Air Force for 
     construction, including acquisition, replacement, addition, 
     expansion, extension, and alteration, as authorized by law, 
     $362,747,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012.

          Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

       For expenses of family housing for the Air Force for 
     operation and maintenance, including debt payment, leasing, 
     minor construction, principal and interest charges, and 
     insurance premiums, as authorized by law, $688,335,000.

         Family Housing Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

       For expenses of family housing for the activities and 
     agencies of the Department of Defense (other than the 
     military departments) for operation and maintenance, leasing, 
     and minor construction, as authorized by law, $48,848,000.

         Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund

       For the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement 
     Fund, $500,000, to remain available until expended, for 
     family housing initiatives undertaken pursuant to section 
     2883 of title 10, United States Code, providing alternative 
     means of acquiring and improving military family housing and 
     supporting facilities.

          Chemical Demilitarization Construction, Defense-Wide


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses of construction, not otherwise provided for, 
     necessary for the destruction of the United States stockpile 
     of lethal chemical agents and munitions in accordance with 
     the provisions of section 1412 of the Department of Defense 
     Authorization Act, 1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521), and for the 
     destruction of other chemical warfare materials that are not 
     in the chemical weapon stockpile, as currently authorized by 
     law, $86,176,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2012: Provided, That such amounts of this appropriation as 
     may be determined by the Secretary of Defense may be 
     transferred to such appropriations of the Department of 
     Defense available for military construction as the Secretary 
     may designate, to be merged with and to be available for the 
     same purposes, and for the same time period, as the 
     appropriation to which transferred.

[[Page 16022]]



            Department of Defense Base Closure Account 1990

       For deposit into the Department of Defense Base Closure 
     Account 1990, established by section 2906(a)(1) of the 
     Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (10 U.S.C. 
     2687 note), $270,689,000, to remain available until expended.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Blumenauer:
       Page 10, line 17, insert after the dollar amount the 
     following: ``(increased by $50,000,000)''.
       Page 10, line 24, insert after the dollar amount the 
     following: ``(reduced by $201,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, first, let me begin by expressing my deep appreciation 
to the subcommittee for their work in providing an increase over the 
President's request for funding base cleanup. And particularly what 
we're talking about here are the legacy locations, places that have 
been closed in previous BRAC cycles, 1995, 1993, 1991, 1988. However, 
as we consider this appropriations act, I am concerned that we continue 
to dramatically underfund our commitment to communities impacted by 
these past BRAC rounds.

                              {time}  1315

  These communities are ones that have been penalized twice. They are 
penalized when the base is closed, and second, they are penalized 
because they are unable to make use of the land left behind because of 
hazardous contamination caused by unexploded ordnance.
  According to the most recent Defense Environmental Programs' annual 
report, there is an estimated $3.5 billion backlog for environmental 
cleanup of these bases. This represents over 140,000 acres of land that 
remain unusable by local communities for economic development across 
this country.
  At the current levels, Mr. Chairman, we are facing people who went 
through the trauma of base closure in 1988, for instance, in 
Sacramento; they are going to wait over 60 years to be cleaned up.
  I appreciate the words of the subcommittee Chair and ranking member 
in terms of what they are trying to do with the difficult issues 
regarding BRAC, and I appreciate there is a very generous number that 
have been established, maybe not completely adequate, to try and deal 
with the people who were just whacked in the last round of closure. 
But, for heaven's sake, we need to keep our commitments to the 
communities that have worked in good faith, that had their bases closed 
5 years, 10 years, 15 years ago, and still are awaiting our meeting, 
our commitment to them.
  I strongly urge support of the amendment that I have introduced with 
Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, while I cannot support this amendment, I 
want to thank Mr. Blumenauer and Mr. Farr for having led the fight in 
Congress to bring to every Member's attention the terribly important 
need to better fund the cleanup of past military sites that have been 
closed as a result of base realignment and closing process.
  There is a $3.5 billion backlog for the BRAC 1990 round 17 years ago. 
For those communities that have been a partner in defending our Nation, 
we owe it to them morally to see that we provide the adequate funds to 
allow those sites to be cleaned up so they can be utilized in a 
productive manner on behalf of their communities.
  The reason I can't support the amendment and will oppose it is 
because of the outlay technicalities, the gentleman actually has to cut 
$200 million from the BRAC 2005 account in order to fund additional $50 
million for the BRAC 1990 account. So that outlay problem could create 
great problems by cutting funding for BRAC 2005 in order to help the 
cleanup of BRAC 1990. We could inadvertently make it more difficult to 
have barracks ready for troops coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan to 
their homes here in the United States. It might be more difficult to 
have military training facilities, necessary at new Army bases, built. 
So, I oppose this.
  But even as I oppose this amendment, I want to thank the gentleman. 
He has done every community in this country a service, along with Mr. 
Farr. Every community that has continued waiting 17 years after the 
1990 BRAC round has suffered from the fact that the Congress and the 
administrations have not adequately funded this. It is time we work 
with the administration and ask them to increase that funding.
  Because of the Members' strong support, Mr. Blumenauer and Mr. Farr, 
we have provided $271 million for the 1990 BRAC round, and that is an 
increase of $50 million, or a 23 percent increase over the 
administration's budget request, recognizing that budget request, in my 
personal opinion, was inadequate.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Farr).
  Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to 
first of all compliment the chairman for adding an additional $50 
million.
  What every Member of Congress ought to worry about is that we have so 
many bases that have been closed in the United States that have not 
been able to finish their cleanup. That means that they can't do 
economic development. They just sit there with fences around them 
because they have unexploded ordnances. It is what they call ``warm 
basing'' a property. Mayor and city councils and local government folks 
are furious about this.
  There is a $3.5 billion cleanup necessary. What Mr. Blumenauer is 
saying is, let's just put $50 million more towards that. That will go a 
long way toward getting those high-priority communities cleaned up.
  Frankly, there is no movement that can be taken until this is done, 
because the only government that can clean up unexploded ordnances is 
the Federal Government. You can't delegate it out. It can't be a State 
or local issue.
  If you want to do economic development in your States and home 
communities which have been affected by these numerous base closings 
over the years, for those of you that have base closures, just the 
recent base closure, there is a separate account. But the reason we 
have to put more money into this is, there are only two ways of getting 
money into there, either from sales of property or from direct 
appropriations. The sales of property haven't filled up this account. 
So the only way, if we are going to address the unexploded ordnance 
cleanup, to amend the bill is to add an additional $50 million. It is 
urgent for economic development at the local level. It is good 
government.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask for an ``aye'' vote.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. May I inquire as to how much time remains.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Oregon has an additional 1\1/2\ 
minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Crenshaw), a leader on our Appropriations Subcommittee on Military 
Construction and Veterans Affairs.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to rise very briefly in opposition. I share the 
same concern that we all share about these unexploded ordnance sites. 
The safety of our citizens is important, and I think our subcommittee 
has recognized that by stating very clearly in very

[[Page 16023]]

strong language that the Department of Defense should make this a 
priority, that we should get rid of this unacceptable backlog.
  But I don't think we can take money out of the 2005 round of BRAC to 
solve the problem. That would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul. The 
2005 round of BRAC has been put together. There is already some concern 
that it may not be fully funded, so if we take one penny out of that 
pot of money and spend it somewhere else, we could upset a very 
delicate balance.
  We have to remember we have made a commitment to our men and women in 
uniform. For instance, I know in my community, they are building a $129 
million hangar to house all the P-3s that will come down from Maine. If 
there is not enough money to do that, what happens to those planes? 
They are stranded. What happens to the sailors that are coming? They 
are stranded.
  So while I share everyone's concern in dealing with this backlog, I 
think it is inappropriate and I think it is wrong to take money which 
would upset that kind of balance. We have to remember not only do we 
care about our communities, but we care about our commitment to our men 
and women in uniform.
  Therefore, I would rise in opposition and urge my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on this amendment.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate what my friend from 
Florida said, and I have no interest in robbing Peter to pay Paul. But 
let's take it down to a very specific example that you are familiar 
with in Jacksonville. You had a base closed, Cecil Naval Air Station, 
in a prior round. Under the current schedule, this facility is not 
scheduled to be cleaned up until 2026, another 19 years.
  Now, you are right, we have put a significant amount of money into 
the 2005 round of BRAC closures. We put $5 billion in the supplemental. 
And you have put in this bill which I appreciate, almost $8.2 billion. 
But where I take modest exception with the gentleman is that you can't 
spend it. The payout rate is about 10 percent. I am seeking to transfer 
2 percent away from areas that you can't spend this year or next year 
or the year after that.
  But I will distribute a list of people who have been waiting in some 
cases since 1988. They have plans ready to go. They are ready to clean 
up. If you talk to the companies that are the ordnance contractors, 
they are ready to go. They will clean this up. But we have got to stop 
the fits and the starts, where we don't follow through on our 
commitments.
  With all due respect, if I had a facility in the 2005 BRAC cycle, I 
would like this Congress to start meeting its commitments from 1988 and 
1990 and 1992 and 1995, because if we don't, subsequent Congresses are 
going to play the same game. Because you can't spend this $13 billion, 
it will be dragged on and dragged out, and it will ultimately be 
diverted. Then we will be here, or some of you will be here, 10 years 
from now, and people will be wondering why the 2005 round of BRAC is 
waiting, like Mather Air Force Base, for 60 years, or why people in El 
Toro are waiting for 30 years.
  With all due respect, I would hope that the subcommittee would build 
on its good work, but look at the payout rate for the $13 billion you 
have for 2005, which we estimate maybe will be spent, 10 percent.
  Join with me in shifting a modest 2 percent of that money, so that we 
can keep our commitments to people who have been waiting since 1988, 
since 1990, 1993 and 1995.
  I deeply appreciate the work that the subcommittee has done, and I 
appreciate Mr. Edwards, you have been encouraging and helping the work 
that I have done in the past on this with Mr. Farr. And it is important 
that you put $50 million in above the administrations request but I 
hope we can work to keep the commitment to the people.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
  At this point, the gentleman from Texas has 2\1/2\ minutes. The 
gentleman from Oregon has 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Farr).
  Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I want to just reiterate on what Mr. 
Blumenauer indicated. This isn't a ``rob Peter to pay Paul'' case. But 
if you are from the Jefferson Proving Ground, you have been waiting a 
long time. If you are from Fort Ord, California, where I am from and 
why I am really interested in this, we closed in the 1992 round, and we 
are doing massive economic development, and it is foreclosed if you 
can't get into cleaning up the unexploded ordnance. Fort Meade, Fort 
McClellan, Savannah Army Depot, the list goes on and on. These are the 
kinds of projects that are out there, ready to go. Just take the 
projects off the shelf, fund them and get it done.
  I am on this committee and I am very sympathetic. I am very 
appreciative of what the chairman has done, increasing the account by 
$50 million. We are going to have an amendment in a minute to cut it, 
which would be the worst thing we could ever do for all these reasons. 
Mr. Blumenauer is trying to increase it by $50 million so we could 
actually have enough money to get some of these projects started. I 
think it is good government. It is promises made, promises kept, and 
that is what we ought to do.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I think I have 1\1/2\ minutes left?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, my Republican cosponsor is stuck in 
traffic, and I wanted Ginny to have a chance to speak on this. 
Evidently, she is not going to make it.
  Mr. Chairman, I do think this is very important in terms of our 
keeping our commitments. I appreciate the work that the subcommittee is 
doing in this broad range of areas, but I would hope that you would 
work with us, because you cannot spend the $13.5 billion. The adoption 
of this amendment will have no effect on BRAC cleanup for the 2005 
round for years to come, if at all.
  But failure, failure for Congress to keep our commitments to these 
legacy BRAC programs, not only does it penalize these people who have 
been waiting in line for, in some cases, 19 years, but it makes it more 
likely, frankly, that people who are in the 2005 cycle are going to end 
up having Congress do to them what pass Congresses have done to the 
legacy BRAC.

                              {time}  1330

  I appreciate the work of the subcommittee, and I look forward to 
working with you, and echo my friend from California that it would be 
the worst of all possible worlds if somehow the next amendment, taking 
money away from these critical bases, was somehow diverted for another 
use. But I hope that we spare ourselves that problem by adopting the 
amendment before us.
  Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Chairman, as a Co-Chair of the 
Unexploded Ordnances Caucus, I strongly support this amendment. Anyone 
who lives on or near a site containing disposed munitions can attest 
how unsettling this can be.
  In Florida, thousands of my constituents have moved to an area on or 
adjacent to an old military gunnery. Unfortunately, inspections have 
found rockets, mortars, and grenades, putting people at substantial 
risk. In fact, one piece of live ordnance was found less than six 
inches beneath a child's backyard trampoline.
  This is not a problem confined to a few areas--this is a nationwide 
issue. Across the country, from Representative Earl Blumenauer's 
district in Oregon, to Brooksville, Florida, many sites face a similar 
dilemma. Some people are literally sitting on ticking time bombs.
  Congress has an opportunity to prevent the worst from happening. 
Jurisdiction over cleanup at these older sites falls under two major 
accounts--the Formerly Used Defense Sites account within the Defense 
Appropriations bill, and the BRAC 1990 account within this legislation. 
Our amendment would redirect funds from the BRAC 2005 account, which is 
set to see a large increase over its previous year funding, to cleanup 
efforts at these older sites, where people are increasingly taking up 
residence.
  Listen up America! The Federal Government has an obligation to clean 
up its mess. I urge

[[Page 16024]]

my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this commonsense 
amendment and put public safety first.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will be 
postponed.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Price of Georgia

  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Price of Georgia:
       Page 10, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $50,000,000)''.
       Page 27, line 6, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $22,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Edwards) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I thank the Chair, and I thank the leadership for the opportunity to 
present this amendment.
  This amendment is very simple. It transfers $50 million from the 1990 
BRAC account and puts $22 million into the Veterans Health 
Administration and Medical Services account. The proposal for the 1990 
BRAC account is $50 million above the Department of Defense request. As 
has been talked about with the previous amendment, it is nigh 
impossible to be spending more than the request.
  The money that is in the request is used for environmental cleanup 
associated with previous BRAC-based closings, and my amendment would 
make the 1990 BRAC account reflect the Defense Department request and 
place $22 million of these funds in health care for our veterans. The 
amendment as scored by CBO is outlay neutral which is the reason for 
the difference in the figures.
  While cleaning up after base closings is indeed important, the 
unrequested money, as has been mentioned, would be very difficult to 
spend and would be better spent, I believe, by providing better health 
care for our returning service men and women.
  The conflict we are in has left many soldiers with lifelong injuries, 
and veterans are acquiring lasting health care. As a physician, I am 
well aware of the fact that traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic 
stress disorder are the signature conditions from our current conflict. 
As we are learning more about traumatic brain injury and PTSD, we find 
that more and more of our soldiers are suffering from these injuries.
  I believe it is imperative that we ensure that as much funding as 
possible is available to go for important veterans health care. I 
believe this amendment to be a fiscally responsible amendment that 
ensures that our veterans are taken care of in the finest possible 
manner. I urge adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am proud of the fact that under the new leadership in 
the Congress, in a period of 6 months, we will have increased veterans 
health care spending by over $10 billion compared to the funding level 
that existed in December of 2006.
  Virtually every major veterans organization in America has applauded 
this bill for its $6 billion increase in veterans health care spending.
  I salute any Member of this House who has worked or is working or 
will work to improve funding for veterans health care, but I must say 
to the gentleman, and perhaps in fairness to him he spoke to other 
Members of the House, but when I was working as chairman on the 
Subcommittee on Veterans Funding for a $3.4 billion increase in VA 
health care spending for the 2007 continuing resolution, I didn't hear 
from the gentleman.
  When as chairman I worked to add $1.8 billion in the Iraq war 
supplemental for VA health care programs, I didn't hear from the 
gentleman.
  When Mr. Wicker and I worked together on a bipartisan basis to put 
together the largest increase in VA health care spending in the 77-year 
history of the VA, I didn't hear from the gentleman any requests for an 
additional $22 million for VA medical services.
  Here at the relatively last moment we get this amendment. While it is 
well intentioned and I salute and respect the gentleman for trying to 
increase funding for VA health care, we have been working for 6 months 
to provide more health care funding for the VA than any previous 
Congress in the history of the country. And with Mr. Wicker's 
bipartisan leadership, we have accomplished that so far.
  The problem I have with this amendment is that it takes $50 million 
out of the BRAC 1990 account. Now, in this bill we provide $3.8 billion 
above the President's request for VA health care and benefits programs 
and only $207 million above the President's request for BRAC and 
military construction together.
  I think it is very modest to ask for, given there is a $3.5 billion 
backlog to clean up former military sites all across America, in States 
such as California, Texas. And in a number of other States, Alabama, 
Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, 
Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode 
Island, this BRAC 1990 money is needed to help these communities get 
back on their feet and take this former military land and use it for 
the benefit of their communities and for economic growth in their 
communities.
  So given we have had a $3.8 billion increase in veterans health care 
spending above the President's request in this bill, I think it is more 
than fair that we add an additional $50 million to a BRAC 1990 program 
that needs $3.5 billion.
  So I am going to oppose the gentleman's amendment and encourage him 
to work with our committee on a bipartisan basis in the months ahead, 
just as the Members of the committee worked on a bipartisan basis to 
provide historic increases in veterans health care funding.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to Mr. Blumenauer.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy, 
and I am really bitterly disappointed that we would have somebody come 
before us to break the commitment that we have to the previous BRAC-
round cleanups, communities across the country who are going to wait up 
to 60 years to have their bases cleaned up, to take that funding and 
further reduce it. I think this is a very cruel cut.
  If you wanted to do something, you've got $13 billion in the 2005 
BRAC account that is only going to be spent a maximum of 10 percent. 
Why in heaven's name would we reach back and penalize people who have 
been waiting in some cases since 1988 to have the Federal Government 
keep its commitment to base closure and cleanup. I think this is cruel. 
I think it is unjustified. I think that it is unfair to make these 
communities that have dealt with unexploded ordnances and military 
toxins and have land that is not available for reuse and penalize them 
for a small amount of veterans health.
  I respectfully request that we reject this amendment.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the chairman's 
comments, and I applaud the work he has done to increase funding for 
veterans health care, sincerely. I don't recall, specifically, requests 
to the committee; but I am certainly on record in multiple areas across 
this Congress in urging increased funding for health care. As a 
physician, I appreciate the need for increased funding for health care 
across all areas of our budget.

[[Page 16025]]

  My understanding regarding this provision in the bill is that the $50 
million increase over the DOD request is, as I understood it, money 
that would not be able to be spent in fiscal year 2008. Consequently, 
that was the reason we requested or proposed in this amendment that the 
money come from that. So removing $50 million from there, based on 
outlays by CBO, would stipulate that $22 million was available; and it 
is my respected request to my colleagues that we place that money for 
veterans health care for the obvious benefits to all.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Farr).
  Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to respond to the gentleman 
from Georgia about his amendment.
  First of all, I think it is an ill-conceived amendment, and here's 
why.
  In order to build veterans facilities on former military property, 
you have to have that property cleaned and cleared and transferred. I 
happen to represent a base where we have that problem. We have to clear 
the area. So if you want to provide health care for your communities, 
you have to do this clearance.
  Your statement that this money couldn't be spent is totally false. 
These are projects ready to go. It is the newest BRAC round that can't 
be spent until 2008 because they have to have all their plans in place.
  You are cutting $50 million out of something that is very critical 
for a lot of communities and can do a lot of good, and you are adding 
it to a program where we just put in $3.4 billion. $3.4 billion. So $50 
million more in that account is not going to help.
  Frankly, we have already raised that account in committee with strong 
bipartisan support by $1.7 billion over what the President asked for. 
So you are going to steal from essentially accounts that are critical 
and put it into an account that has been plussed-up and is fat. The 
consequences are going to be that people who are wanting to provide 
health care services for veterans in their community won't be able to 
build that facility or get that facility refurbished because the 
environmental cleanup hasn't been done because we didn't have enough 
money in the old account. And the only way we can get that money in the 
account, as I said previously, is to appropriate it.
  I think this is a very reckless amendment. I would prefer that we 
even add more, but that was opposed. But this one, I would hope that 
you might withdraw your amendment because you are going to do more harm 
than good.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. EDWARDS. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate the chairman yielding.
  I would hope that we wouldn't impugn an individual's motives for 
bringing amendments forward. My motive is sincere. I believe it is 
appropriate to increase funding for veterans health care as much as 
possible, and it was my understanding, and we can disagree about 
whether or not the funds would be available to be spent in fiscal year 
2008, and we may have a legitimate disagreement about that, but I would 
hope that we wouldn't impugn an individual's motives.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Reclaiming my time, I certainly don't question the 
gentleman's motives. Could I ask the gentleman where did the $22 
million figure come from.
  We increased VA health care spending in this bill by $3.8 billion 
above what President Bush asked for. That is a $6 billion increase in 
VA health care spending over last year. That level of funding has been 
saluted by every national veterans organization, including the American 
Legion, Military Officers Association of America, AMVETS, National 
Association for Uniformed Service, Disabled American Veterans, and 
dozens of others. Where did the gentleman at the last minute come up 
with the $22 million figure?
  We haven't had this conversation at any time during the first 6 
months of this year when we were working on adding $10 billion, and it 
was done on a bipartisan basis, to VA health care funding.
  Where did the $22 million figure come from, if I can ask the 
gentleman?
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. EDWARDS. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate the gentleman yielding, and I 
commend you for the increase in health care spending.
  The $22 million comes from removing the $50 million that the Defense 
Department didn't request in the account, and then it works out to be 
$22 million based on outlays.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Right. You take $50 million in order to add $22 million, 
but did the gentleman meet with Veterans Administration leaders, 
perhaps the Secretary of Health for the VA, and did they request this 
additional $22 million?
  Was there a specific project that wasn't being funded or a particular 
need that wasn't being met by the $6 billion increase in VA health care 
spending this year that caused the gentleman to ask specifically for a 
$22 million increase?
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. EDWARDS. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I think I mentioned in my comments that the 
increase in traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress syndrome 
that we are seeing with the conflict that we are currently in obviously 
warrants as much funding as we can make available to our veterans who 
are serving us so proudly.
  Mr. EDWARDS. And I agree with the gentleman. That is why we provided 
over $600 million more than the administration request to improve 
mental health care, traumatic brain injury and PTSD services.
  Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I respect the gentleman's 
intentions in this effort. I would simply say that we have provided a 
historic increase in VA health care spending in this bill. That level 
of funding has been supported by virtually every major veterans 
organization in America, and we ought not to have to gut another 
important program for the gentleman's last-minute amendment.

                              {time}  1345

  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will be 
postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

            Department of Defense Base Closure Account 2005

       For deposit into the Department of Defense Base Closure 
     Account 2005, established by section 2906A(a)(1) of the 
     Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (10 U.S.C. 
     2687 note), $8,174,315,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

                       Administrative Provisions

       Sec. 101. None of the funds made available in this title 
     shall be expended for payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee 
     contract for construction, where cost estimates exceed 
     $25,000, to be performed within the United States, except 
     Alaska, without the specific approval in writing of the 
     Secretary of Defense setting forth the reasons therefor.
       Sec. 102. Funds made available in this title for 
     construction shall be available for hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles.
       Sec. 103. Funds made available in this title for 
     construction may be used for advances to the Federal Highway 
     Administration, Department of Transportation, for the 
     construction of access roads as authorized by section 210 of 
     title 23, United States Code, when projects authorized 
     therein are certified as important to the national defense by 
     the Secretary of Defense.
       Sec. 104. None of the funds made available in this title 
     may be used to begin construction of new bases in the United 
     States for which specific appropriations have not been made.


[[Page 16026]]

  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I 
yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for 
yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, the prevalence of HIV/AIDS among veterans who access 
the VA health care system is markedly higher than that of the general 
population. Furthermore, barriers within this system contribute to 
already late diagnoses of HIV among veterans. Early diagnosis is 
crucial because the sooner an HIV-infected person begins treatment, the 
more manageable and the more cost effective their treatment will be.
  I speak today as a member of the subcommittee with concern about the 
impact of HIV/AIDS on veterans, not only in Georgia, but throughout the 
Southeast and every major city around the Nation.
  The need for action on this issue, Mr. Chairman, is exemplified by 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's recent Heightened 
Response to HIV/AIDS in African American Communities initiative. These 
actions follow the September 2006 release of the CDC's revised HIV 
testing guidelines, which advise HIV testing become a routine part of 
medical care.
  The VA is the largest integrated health care system in the United 
States and, therefore, the largest provider of HIV care in the country. 
However, VA's current HIV testing policy is based on an outdated 
testing model which is inconsistent with the CDC guidelines.
  Compared to the general population, the prevalence of HIV infections 
is higher among those accessing the VA health care system. A recent 
study that was conducted by a VA researcher found that at the time of 
diagnosis 55 percent of HIV-positive veterans had already developed 
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, or AIDS, which takes roughly 10 
years to develop after it's initially contracted.
  Even more disturbing is the fact that most of these veterans had 
accessed the VA health care system on an average of six times before 
they were ever diagnosed with this disease. This outdated VA HIV 
testing policy denies veterans sensible and what is now recommended as 
standard access to HIV screening in other health care systems.
  I applaud the chairman for his leadership in making health care for 
veterans a priority in the VA appropriations bill. Mr. Chairman, I'm 
hoping that we can work together to further explore this important 
issue and address it in an appropriate way as we move forward on the VA 
Appropriations measure for fiscal 2008.
  At this point, I'd like to ask the chairman of the subcommittee if he 
would be so kind as to yield to Mr. Jackson from Illinois to speak to 
the issue of HIV prevalence among veterans.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Let me say that I thank both the gentleman from Illinois 
and the gentleman from Georgia for their leadership on this important 
issue. I look forward to working with them and the Veterans' Affairs 
Committee and our subcommittee to address the needs and pursue the 
solutions that you have proposed.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, let me first thank my friend from Georgia (Mr. Bishop) 
for his remarks and for his leadership in bringing this topic to the 
attention of our colleagues. I would also like to recognize the 
timeliness of his comments, as National HIV Testing Day is on June 27.
  The gravity of this issue cannot be understated, and I hope to work 
with Mr. Bishop and lend my support to address the veterans who suffer 
from this interminable disease.
  Chicago is the epicenter of HIV/AIDS in Illinois. Roughly 70 percent 
of reported AIDS cases in the State are in Chicago. Minorities account 
for approximately 69 percent of the city's total population, but 
represent 81 percent recently diagnosed AIDS cases. Minorities 
constitute 20 percent of veterans in Illinois; yet the trend of HIV/
AIDS among the State population and the higher prevalence of HIV/AIDS 
among veterans in general demonstrates minority veterans are 
disproportionately affected by this disease.
  HIV/AIDS has had a significant impact on veterans across the country. 
Combating the spread of this disease through testing and education is 
not only important to our communities, but vital for the health of all 
Americans.
  I want to thank the chairman for yielding me the time and thank Mr. 
Bishop for his leadership.
  Mr. EDWARDS. I want to thank Mr. Jackson and Mr. Bishop for your 
leadership on this. By exercising early intervention, we can save the 
lives of thousands of America's veterans and prevent them from having 
HIV or AIDS. It will be a tremendous service to those who have served 
our country in uniform, and I look forward to working with both 
gentlemen as we go to conference committee and as we work with the 
Veterans' Affairs Committee to address this serious national problem.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 105. None of the funds made available in this title 
     shall be used for purchase of land or land easements in 
     excess of 100 percent of the value as determined by the Army 
     Corps of Engineers or the Naval Facilities Engineering 
     Command, except: (1) where there is a determination of value 
     by a Federal court; (2) purchases negotiated by the Attorney 
     General or the designee of the Attorney General; (3) where 
     the estimated value is less than $25,000; or (4) as otherwise 
     determined by the Secretary of Defense to be in the public 
     interest.
       Sec. 106. None of the funds made available in this title 
     shall be used to: (1) acquire land; (2) provide for site 
     preparation; or (3) install utilities for any family housing, 
     except housing for which funds have been made available in 
     annual Acts making appropriations for military construction.
       Sec. 107. None of the funds made available in this title 
     for minor construction may be used to transfer or relocate 
     any activity from one base or installation to another, 
     without prior notification to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.
       Sec. 108. None of the funds made available in this title 
     may be used for the procurement of steel for any construction 
     project or activity for which American steel producers, 
     fabricators, and manufacturers have been denied the 
     opportunity to compete for such steel procurement.
       Sec. 109. None of the funds available to the Department of 
     Defense for military construction or family housing during 
     the current fiscal year may be used to pay real property 
     taxes in any foreign nation.
       Sec. 110. None of the funds made available in this title 
     may be used to initiate a new installation overseas without 
     prior notification to the Committees on Appropriations of 
     both Houses of Congress.
       Sec. 111. None of the funds made available in this title 
     may be obligated for architect and engineer contracts 
     estimated by the Government to exceed $500,000 for projects 
     to be accomplished in Japan, in any North Atlantic Treaty 
     Organization member country, or in countries bordering the 
     Arabian Sea, unless such contracts are awarded to United 
     States firms or United States firms in joint venture with 
     host nation firms.
       Sec. 112. None of the funds made available in this title 
     for military construction in the United States territories 
     and possessions in the Pacific and on Kwajalein Atoll, or in 
     countries bordering the Arabian Sea, may be used to award any 
     contract estimated by the Government to exceed $1,000,000 to 
     a foreign contractor: Provided, That this section shall not 
     be applicable to contract awards for which the lowest 
     responsive and responsible bid of a United States contractor 
     exceeds the lowest responsive and responsible bid of a 
     foreign contractor by greater than 20 percent: Provided 
     further, That this section shall not apply to contract awards 
     for military construction on Kwajalein Atoll for which the 
     lowest responsive and responsible bid is submitted by a 
     Marshallese contractor.
       Sec. 113. The Secretary of Defense is to inform the 
     appropriate committees of both Houses of Congress, including 
     the Committees on Appropriations, of the plans and scope of 
     any proposed military exercise involving United States 
     personnel 30 days prior to its occurring, if amounts expended 
     for construction, either temporary or permanent, are 
     anticipated to exceed $100,000.
       Sec. 114. Not more than 20 percent of the funds made 
     available in this title which are limited for obligation 
     during the current fiscal year shall be obligated during the 
     last two months of the fiscal year.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 115. Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense 
     for construction in prior

[[Page 16027]]

     years shall be available for construction authorized for each 
     such military department by the authorizations enacted into 
     law during the current session of Congress.
       Sec. 116. For military construction or family housing 
     projects that are being completed with funds otherwise 
     expired or lapsed for obligation, expired or lapsed funds may 
     be used to pay the cost of associated supervision, 
     inspection, overhead, engineering and design on those 
     projects and on subsequent claims, if any.
       Sec. 117. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 
     funds made available to a military department or defense 
     agency for the construction of military projects may be 
     obligated for a military construction project or contract, or 
     for any portion of such a project or contract, at any time 
     before the end of the fourth fiscal year after the fiscal 
     year for which funds for such project were made available, if 
     the funds obligated for such project: (1) are obligated from 
     funds available for military construction projects; and (2) 
     do not exceed the amount appropriated for such project, plus 
     any amount by which the cost of such project is increased 
     pursuant to law.
       Sec. 118. The Secretary of Defense is to provide the 
     Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress with 
     an annual report by February 15, containing details of the 
     specific actions proposed to be taken by the Department of 
     Defense during the current fiscal year to encourage other 
     member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 
     Japan, Korea, and United States allies bordering the Arabian 
     Sea to assume a greater share of the common defense burden of 
     such nations and the United States.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 119. In addition to any other transfer authority 
     available to the Department of Defense, proceeds deposited to 
     the Department of Defense Base Closure Account established by 
     section 207(a)(1) of the Defense Authorization Amendments and 
     Base Closure and Realignment Act (10 U.S.C. 2687 note) 
     pursuant to section 207(a)(2)(C) of such Act, may be 
     transferred to the account established by section 2906(a)(1) 
     of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (10 
     U.S.C. 2687 note), to be merged with, and to be available for 
     the same purposes and the same time period as that account.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 120. Subject to 30 days prior notification to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, such 
     additional amounts as may be determined by the Secretary of 
     Defense may be transferred to: (1) the Department of Defense 
     Family Housing Improvement Fund from amounts appropriated for 
     construction in ``Family Housing'' accounts, to be merged 
     with and to be available for the same purposes and for the 
     same period of time as amounts appropriated directly to the 
     Fund; or (2) the Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied 
     Housing Improvement Fund from amounts appropriated for 
     construction of military unaccompanied housing in ``Military 
     Construction'' accounts, to be merged with and to be 
     available for the same purposes and for the same period of 
     time as amounts appropriated directly to the Fund: Provided, 
     That appropriations made available to the Funds shall be 
     available to cover the costs, as defined in section 502(5) of 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of direct loans or loan 
     guarantees issued by the Department of Defense pursuant to 
     the provisions of subchapter IV of chapter 169 of title 10, 
     United States Code, pertaining to alternative means of 
     acquiring and improving military family housing, military 
     unaccompanied housing, and supporting facilities.
       Sec. 121. None of the funds made available in this title 
     may be obligated for Partnership for Peace Programs in the 
     New Independent States of the former Soviet Union.
       Sec. 122. (a) Not later than 60 days before issuing any 
     solicitation for a contract with the private sector for 
     military family housing the Secretary of the military 
     department concerned shall submit to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of both Houses of Congress the notice 
     described in subsection (b).
       (b)(1) A notice referred to in subsection (a) is a notice 
     of any guarantee (including the making of mortgage or rental 
     payments) proposed to be made by the Secretary to the private 
     party under the contract involved in the event of--
       (A) the closure or realignment of the installation for 
     which housing is provided under the contract;
       (B) a reduction in force of units stationed at such 
     installation; or
       (C) the extended deployment overseas of units stationed at 
     such installation.
       (2) Each notice under this subsection shall specify the 
     nature of the guarantee involved and assess the extent and 
     likelihood, if any, of the liability of the Federal 
     Government with respect to the guarantee.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 123. In addition to any other transfer authority 
     available to the Department of Defense, amounts may be 
     transferred from the accounts established by sections 
     2906(a)(1) and 2906A(a)(1) of the Defense Base Closure and 
     Realignment Act of 1990 (10 U.S.C. 2687 note), to the fund 
     established by section 1013(d) of the Demonstration Cities 
     and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 3374) to 
     pay for expenses associated with the Homeowners Assistance 
     Program. Any amounts transferred shall be merged with and be 
     available for the same purposes and for the same time period 
     as the fund to which transferred.
       Sec. 124. Notwithstanding this or any other provision of 
     law, funds made available in this title for operation and 
     maintenance of family housing shall be the exclusive source 
     of funds for repair and maintenance of all family housing 
     units, including general or flag officer quarters: Provided, 
     That not more than $35,000 per unit may be spent annually for 
     the maintenance and repair of any general or flag officer 
     quarters without 30 days prior notification to the Committees 
     on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, except that an 
     after-the-fact notification shall be submitted if the 
     limitation is exceeded solely due to costs associated with 
     environmental remediation that could not be reasonably 
     anticipated at the time of the budget submission: Provided 
     further, That the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is 
     to report annually to the Committees on Appropriations of 
     both Houses of Congress all operation and maintenance 
     expenditures for each individual general or flag officer 
     quarters for the prior fiscal year.
       Sec. 125. None of the funds made available in this title 
     under the heading ``North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     Security Investment Program'', and no funds appropriated for 
     any fiscal year before fiscal year 2008 for that program that 
     remain available for obligation, may be obligated or expended 
     for the conduct of studies of missile defense.


            Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Franks of Arizona

  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 8 offered by Mr. Franks of Arizona:
       Page 19, beginning on line 15, strike section 125.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, in an age of sophisticated 
missile development and rampant nuclear proliferation, the United 
States must continue to invest its attention and resources in 
developing and fielding defenses to stay ahead of the ominous threat of 
ballistic missiles.
  It is critical that the United States continue to work with our 
friends and allies who wish to cooperate in our mission to develop a 
robust ballistic missile defense against our common enemies.
  The United States is currently working with NATO and negotiating with 
European countries about the possibility of placing a ballistic missile 
interceptor site in Europe. This is an example of a missile defense 
opportunity that could offer protection for the U.S. homeland and our 
European friends from a perilous threat that we share, ballistic 
missiles potentially carrying nuclear warheads, being launched from 
rogue nations such as Iran.
  Mr. Chairman, incidentally, Iran is projected to have missiles 
capable of reaching the United States homeland within 7 years.
  As it currently stands, this bill prohibits funds made available 
under the NATO Security Investment Program from being obligated or 
expended to conduct studies on missile defense. My amendment would 
strike this section. Mr. Chairman, in the midst of the current debate 
regarding the need for greater international support of missile 
defense, we must not arbitrarily prevent our allies from joining with 
us to pursue these vital and common goals.
  For the sake of defending our cities and our freedom, I encourage our 
colleagues to support our Nation's policy to build a robust, layered 
ballistic missile defense; to support our allies against common 
threats; and to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a few points about this amendment, 
and I will be glad to accept the amendment when I'm completed. Let me 
just make a few points that are clear, though.

[[Page 16028]]

  Section 125 prohibits the use of funds appropriated to the NATO 
Security Investment Program for studies of missile defense. The history 
of this is that in the fiscal year 2004 Military Construction bill, it 
was a Republican majority that put this language into the bill which 
has been repeated year after year without any controversy or serious 
discussion. It grew out of concerns that large sums of these NATO funds 
were being spent on expensive studies.
  I do want to emphasize and clarify that this provision relates to the 
studies for a NATO missile defense system that is not related to the 
proposal by the administration to pursue and place a missile defense 
site in Poland and in the Czech Republic. That is a U.S. initiative, 
not a NATO initiative, and I want Members to understand that 
distinction.
  I also want to make it clear that I believe NATO Security Investment 
Program funds should focus primarily on building current NATO 
infrastructure, including critical facilities in the NATO mission in 
Afghanistan. Because these funds are limited, I think they should be 
wisely and directed to where they have the greatest impact in support 
of our military troops around the world.
  With that being said, I will accept the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
  I would only add that it is vitally important from our perspective 
that NATO countries be encouraged to cooperate with the things that 
we're doing there and some of the countries that we're working with for 
the European missile site. We understand that everything you said is 
correct. We also believe that it doesn't make sense to single out 
missile defense as the only study that would be prohibited under this 
section.
  And there may come a day when we will have to apologize to the 
American public for putting so much emphasis on building expensive 
missile defense capabilities, and if that happens, I will be willing to 
stand here and do that, but it would be far harder for me to apologize 
to the American people for failing to do everything that we could on 
every front to protect the homeland and our European allies and our 
soldiers and warfighters abroad from the most dangerous offensive 
weapons that have ever come upon humanity.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1400

  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman of South Carolina 
(Mr. Brown) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I would like to discuss a 
very serious battle our veterans are waging here at home, a battle 
against ALS, better known as Lou Gehrig's disease.
  Several independent and government studies have found that military 
veterans are at a greater risk of dying from Lou Gehrig's disease than 
those who have never served in the military. In fact, veterans are at a 
60 percent greater risk to develop ALS. Lou Gehrig's disease is a 
horrific disease that robs a person of the ability to control their 
muscles.
  Unfortunately, I have met firsthand and have knowledge of the true 
nature of ALS and its impact on veterans. I have watched the disease 
attack a good friend of mine, Tom Mikolajcik, a retired Air Force 
brigadier general. He was diagnosed with ALS in 2003. Since then I have 
seen the disease take a once-powerful man and rob him of nearly all of 
his physical abilities.
  Mr. Chairman, only certain veterans with ALS who served in theatre 
during the 1991 Persian Gulf War are currently presumed to be eligible 
for service-connected benefits, and there are significant research 
needs related to the causes and treatment of ALS. As such, we must 
begin to take the steps necessary to not only discover why our veterans 
are at greater risk of ALS and to find treatments for the disease but 
also to help ensure that they have timely access to needed VA benefits.
  I hope that you and the committee will work in conference and ensure 
the resources of the VA are directed towards meeting the research and 
benefit needs of all veterans who are diagnosed with ALS.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, let me thank the 
gentleman for bringing this important problem and issue before the 
House. It is something we have a responsibility to deal with. I am 
proud to say that Mr. Wicker and I worked with the Members of our 
subcommittee to ensure that we had $69 million increase in this bill to 
increase VA health care research funding above the President's request.
  I think we have had the VA research budget at a stable number for a 
number of years. I think, given our war in Iraq and Afghanistan and the 
challenges we face trying to support our veterans from past combat, as 
you have pointed out, this additional research money is much needed and 
very well deserved.
  While it hasn't been the tradition of the Congress to try to earmark 
funds, we have made this a peer review process to let the VA in its 
peer review process determine what are the highest priority needs for 
research. I, for one, would certainly hope that it would take a serious 
look at the challenge of Lou Gehrig's disease and its impact on 
veterans who have been exposed to various chemical agents in their 
service.
  I would point out, as the gentleman well knows, that right now the 
Bronx VA Medical Center has worked on research to improve the 
identification of this disease. With the gentleman's leadership, we 
will do even more.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 126. Whenever the Secretary of Defense or any other 
     official of the Department of Defense is requested by the 
     subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and 
     Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives or the subcommittee on Military 
     Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies of the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the Senate to respond to a 
     question or inquiry submitted by the chairman or another 
     member of that subcommittee pursuant to a subcommittee 
     hearing or other activity, the Secretary (or other official) 
     shall respond to the request, in writing, within 21 days of 
     the date on which the request is transmitted to the Secretary 
     (or other official).
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to yield to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), a senior member of the Military 
Construction and Veterans' Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee, someone 
who has fought long and hard in this House on behalf of our servicemen 
and -women and their families and our veterans. I offer him an 
opportunity to talk about provisions of the bill.
  Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I thank the gentleman, our subcommittee 
chairman, for his tremendous work and bringing our bill to the floor.
  Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to rise in full support of our FY 
2008 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies 
appropriations bill.
  As a member of the subcommittee, I am extremely proud of the work 
that the subcommittee and members on both sides of the aisle have done 
in crafting a bill which truly supports America's servicemen and -women 
and their families by boosting military construction funding so that 
they can have more effective training facilities, better housing, 
health care and day-care facilities, providing an unprecedented $21.4 
billion investment in military construction, family housing and BRAC, 
or nearly $207 million more than the President's request.
  Just as important, I am extremely proud to join my subcommittee 
colleagues in recommending a historic expansion in support and 
resources for our Nation's veterans. This bill includes the largest 
single increase in the 77-year history of the Veterans Administration, 
increasing the VA budget by $6.7 billion above the 2007 level and $3.8 
billion above the President's request.

[[Page 16029]]

  For the first time in history, funding for VA medical care exceeds 
the budget of the veterans service organization's independent budget 
that has been going on now for decades. This will ensure quality health 
care for 5.8 million patients, including about 263,000 Iraq and 
Afghanistan veterans, who the VA will treat, expectantly, in FY 2008.
  This bill will provide veterans with health care and benefits that we 
have promised them, resulting in the hiring of more qualified doctors 
and nurses to improve medical services to our veterans and to reduce 
the waiting times for doctor appointments and to provide more help to 
veterans suffering from traumatic brain injury, PTSD, mental health 
care issues and lost limbs to rebuild their lives. This is truly an 
accomplishment that all of us, as Members of this august body, should 
be very proud of.
  Of note, our bill also provides funding that gives much-needed 
nonrecurring maintenance of the VA health care facilities, $500 million 
above the President's request to prevent a Walter Reed-type situation 
from occurring in the VA medical system. It will significantly reduce 
the 400,000 claims backlog of veterans that are waiting for disability 
and other benefit determinations.
  It will provide for better barracks, housing, training facilities for 
our troops when they return from combat through an unprecedented $24.4 
billion investment in military construction, family housing and BRAC, 
$207 million more than the President's request.
  It provides funds to grow our military forces to begin the process of 
supporting an additional 65,000 Army, 27,000 Marine and 9,000 National 
Guard troops that will increase our ultimate end strength.
  I have the privilege and the honor of representing Fort Benning and 
Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, and the men and women who work, 
live and train at this great military facility, who are defending and 
serving our great Nation with dignity, honor and distinction.
  As such, I was very pleased that our subcommittee saw fit to include 
full funding for the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure Account, which 
is also known as BRAC, at the level of $8.2 billion. This level of 
funding will be critically important to military facilities, such as 
Fort Benning, which are expected to see and experience significant new 
personnel as a result of BRAC and the global repositioning of our 
forces around the world.
  While we in the Columbus area continue to have some concerns with 
respect to what impact the BRAC process may have on our local school 
systems in terms of potential dramatic increases in school enrollment, 
we continue to be encouraged by the interest and support shown by our 
colleagues on the subcommittee, particularly Mr. Edwards, our chairman.
  Finally, I would like to recognize and thank the staff of the 
subcommittee, Carol Murphy, Mary Arnold, Walter Hearne, Tim Bishop and 
Donna Shabaz, majority staff; Liz Dawson, Deana Baron and Jamie 
Swafford, minority staff; and, of course, Michael Reed on my staff for 
their hard work.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of title I and all of title II be considered as read, printed in the 
Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  I believe this has been cleared with the minority leadership.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:

       Sec. 127. Amounts contained in the Ford Island Improvement 
     Account established by subsection (h) of section 2814 of 
     title 10, United States Code, are appropriated and shall be 
     available until expended for the purposes specified in 
     subsection (i)(1) of such section or until transferred 
     pursuant to subsection (i)(3) of such section.
       Sec. 128. None of the funds made available in this title, 
     or in any Act making appropriations for military construction 
     which remain available for obligation, may be obligated or 
     expended to carry out a military construction, land 
     acquisition, or family housing project at or for a military 
     installation approved for closure, or at a military 
     installation for the purposes of supporting a function that 
     has been approved for realignment to another installation, in 
     2005 under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 
     1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 
     2687 note), unless such a project at a military installation 
     approved for realignment will support a continuing mission or 
     function at that installation or a new mission or function 
     that is planned for that installation, or unless the 
     Secretary of Defense certifies that the cost to the United 
     States of carrying out such project would be less than the 
     cost to the United States of cancelling such project, or if 
     the project is at an active component base that shall be 
     established as an enclave or in the case of projects having 
     multi-agency use, that another Government agency has 
     indicated it will assume ownership of the completed project. 
     The Secretary of Defense may not transfer funds made 
     available as a result of this limitation from any military 
     construction project, land acquisition, or family housing 
     project to another account or use such funds for another 
     purpose or project without the prior approval of the 
     Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. This 
     section shall not apply to military construction projects, 
     land acquisition, or family housing projects for which the 
     project is vital to the national security or the protection 
     of health, safety, or environmental quality: Provided, That 
     the Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional 
     defense committees within seven days of a decision to carry 
     out such a military construction project.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 129. During the 5-year period after appropriations 
     available in this Act to the Department of Defense for 
     military construction and family housing operation and 
     maintenance and construction have expired for obligation, 
     upon a determination that such appropriations will not be 
     necessary for the liquidation of obligations or for making 
     authorized adjustments to such appropriations for obligations 
     incurred during the period of availability of such 
     appropriations, unobligated balances of such appropriations 
     may be transferred into the appropriation ``Foreign Currency 
     Fluctuations, Construction, Defense'', to be merged with and 
     to be available for the same time period and for the same 
     purposes as the appropriation to which transferred.
       Sec. 130. None of the funds in this title shall be used for 
     any activity related to the construction of an Outlying 
     Landing Field in Washington County, North Carolina.

                                TITLE II

                     DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

                    Veterans Benefits Administration


                       compensation and pensions

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the payment of compensation benefits to or on behalf of 
     veterans and a pilot program for disability examinations as 
     authorized by section 107 and chapters 11, 13, 18, 51, 53, 
     55, and 61 of title 38, United States Code; pension benefits 
     to or on behalf of veterans as authorized by chapters 15, 51, 
     53, 55, and 61 of title 38, United States Code; and burial 
     benefits, the Reinstated Entitlement Program for Survivors, 
     emergency and other officers' retirement pay, adjusted-
     service credits and certificates, payment of premiums due on 
     commercial life insurance policies guaranteed under the 
     provisions of title IV of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act 
     (50 U.S.C. App. 541 et seq.) and for other benefits as 
     authorized by sections 107, 1312, 1977, and 2106, and 
     chapters 23, 51, 53, 55, and 61 of title 38, United States 
     Code, $41,236,322,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $25,033,000 of the amount 
     appropriated under this heading shall be reimbursed to 
     ``General operating expenses'' and ``Medical administration'' 
     for necessary expenses in implementing the provisions of 
     chapters 51, 53, and 55 of title 38, United States Code, the 
     funding source for which is specifically provided as the 
     ``Compensation and pensions'' appropriation: Provided 
     further, That such sums as may be earned on an actual 
     qualifying patient basis, shall be reimbursed to ``Medical 
     care collections fund'' to augment the funding of individual 
     medical facilities for nursing home care provided to 
     pensioners as authorized.


                         readjustment benefits

       For the payment of readjustment and rehabilitation benefits 
     to or on behalf of veterans as authorized by chapters 21, 30, 
     31, 34, 35, 36, 39, 51, 53, 55, and 61 of title 38, United 
     States Code, $3,300,289,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That expenses for rehabilitation program 
     services and assistance which the Secretary is authorized to 
     provide under subsection (a) of section 3104 of title 38, 
     United States Code, other than under paragraphs (1), (2), 
     (5), and (11) of that subsection, shall be charged to this 
     account.


                   veterans insurance and indemnities

       For military and naval insurance, national service life 
     insurance, servicemen's indemnities, service-disabled 
     veterans insurance, and veterans mortgage life insurance as 
     authorized by title 38, United States Code, chapters 19 and 
     21, $41,250,000, to remain available until expended.

[[Page 16030]]




         veterans housing benefit program fund program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, such sums as 
     may be necessary to carry out the program, as authorized by 
     subchapters I through III of chapter 37 of title 38, United 
     States Code: Provided, That such costs, including the cost of 
     modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That 
     during fiscal year 2008, within the resources available, not 
     to exceed $500,000 in gross obligations for direct loans are 
     authorized for specially adapted housing loans.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     direct and guaranteed loan programs, $154,562,000, which may 
     be transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.


            vocational rehabilitation loans program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, $71,000, as authorized by 
     chapter 31 of title 38, United States Code: Provided, That 
     such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall 
     be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act 
     of 1974: Provided further, That funds made available under 
     this heading are available to subsidize gross obligations for 
     the principal amount of direct loans not to exceed 
     $3,287,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the direct loan program, $311,000, which may be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     ``General operating expenses''.


          native american veteran housing loan program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan 
     program authorized by subchapter V of chapter 37 of title 38, 
     United States Code, $628,000, which may be transferred to and 
     merged with the appropriation for ``General operating 
     expenses'': Provided, That no new loans in excess of 
     $30,000,000 may be made in fiscal year 2008.


  guaranteed transitional housing loans for homeless veterans program 
                                account

       For the administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed 
     transitional housing loan program authorized by subchapter VI 
     of chapter 37 of title 38, United States Code, not to exceed 
     $750,000 of the amounts appropriated by this Act for 
     ``General operating expenses'' and ``Medical administration'' 
     may be expended.

                     Veterans Health Administration


                            medical services

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses for furnishing, as authorized by 
     law, inpatient and outpatient care and treatment to 
     beneficiaries of the Department of Veterans Affairs and 
     veterans described in section 1705(a) of title 38, United 
     States Code, including care and treatment in facilities not 
     under the jurisdiction of the Department, and including 
     medical supplies and equipment, food services, and salaries 
     and expenses of health-care employees hired under title 38, 
     United States Code, and aid to State homes as authorized by 
     section 1741 of title 38, United States Code; 
     $28,906,400,000, plus reimbursements, of which not less than 
     $2,900,000,000 shall be expended for specialty mental health 
     care; not less than $130,000,000 shall be expended for the 
     homeless grants and per diem program; not less than 
     $428,873,754 shall be expended for the substance abuse 
     program; and not less than $100,275,000 shall be expended for 
     blind rehabilitation services: Provided, That of the funds 
     made available under this heading, not to exceed 
     $1,100,000,000 shall be available until September 30, 2009: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall establish a 
     priority for the provision of medical treatment for veterans 
     who have service-connected disabilities, lower income, or 
     have special needs: Provided further, That, notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     shall give priority funding for the provision of basic 
     medical benefits to veterans in enrollment priority groups 1 
     through 6: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs may 
     authorize the dispensing of prescription drugs from Veterans 
     Health Administration facilities to enrolled veterans with 
     privately written prescriptions based on requirements 
     established by the Secretary: Provided further, That the 
     implementation of the program described in the previous 
     proviso shall incur no additional cost to the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs: Provided further, That for the DOD-VA 
     Health Care Sharing Incentive Fund, as authorized by section 
     8111(d) of title 38, United States Code, a minimum of 
     $15,000,000, to remain available until expended, for any 
     purpose authorized by section 8111 of title 38, United States 
     Code.


                         medical administration

       For necessary expenses in the administration of the 
     medical, hospital, nursing home, domiciliary, construction, 
     supply, and research activities, as authorized by law; 
     administrative expenses in support of capital policy 
     activities; and administrative and legal expenses of the 
     Department for collecting and recovering amounts owed the 
     Department as authorized under chapter 17 of title 38, United 
     States Code, and the Federal Medical Care Recovery Act (42 
     U.S.C. 2651 et seq.); $3,635,600,000, plus reimbursements, of 
     which $250,000,000 shall be available until September 30, 
     2009.


                           medical facilities

       For necessary expenses for the maintenance and operation of 
     hospitals, nursing homes, and domiciliary facilities, and 
     other necessary facilities of the Veterans Health 
     Administration; for administrative expenses in support of 
     planning, design, project management, real property 
     acquisition and disposition, construction, and renovation of 
     any facility under the jurisdiction or for the use of the 
     Department; for oversight, engineering, and architectural 
     activities not charged to project costs; for repairing, 
     altering, improving, or providing facilities in the several 
     hospitals and homes under the jurisdiction of the Department, 
     not otherwise provided for, either by contract or by the hire 
     of temporary employees and purchase of materials; for leases 
     of facilities; and for laundry services, $4,100,000,000, plus 
     reimbursements, of which $250,000,000 shall be available 
     until September 30, 2009: Provided, That $300,000,000 for 
     non-recurring maintenance provided under this heading shall 
     be allocated in a manner not subject to the Veterans 
     Equitable Resource Allocation.


                    medical and prosthetic research

       For necessary expenses in carrying out programs of medical 
     and prosthetic research and development as authorized by 
     chapter 73 of title 38, United States Code, $480,000,000, 
     plus reimbursements, to remain available until September 30, 
     2009.

                      Departmental Administration


                       general operating expenses

       For necessary operating expenses of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, not otherwise provided for, including 
     administrative expenses in support of Department-Wide capital 
     planning, management and policy activities, uniforms, or 
     allowances therefor; not to exceed $25,000 for official 
     reception and representation expenses; hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles; and reimbursement of the General Services 
     Administration for security guard services and the Department 
     of Defense for the cost of overseas employee mail, 
     $1,598,500,000: Provided, That expenses for services and 
     assistance authorized under paragraphs (1), (2), (5), and 
     (11) of section 3104(a) of title 38, United States Code, that 
     the Secretary of Veterans Affairs determines are necessary to 
     enable entitled veterans: (1) to the maximum extent feasible, 
     to become employable and to obtain and maintain suitable 
     employment; or (2) to achieve maximum independence in daily 
     living, shall be charged to this account: Provided further, 
     That the Veterans Benefits Administration shall be funded at 
     not less than $1,324,957,000: Provided further, That of the 
     funds made available under this heading, not to exceed 
     $75,000,000 shall be available for obligation until September 
     30, 2009: Provided further, That from the funds made 
     available under this heading, the Veterans Benefits 
     Administration may purchase (on a one-for-one replacement 
     basis only) up to two passenger motor vehicles for use in 
     operations of that Administration in Manila, Philippines.


                     information technology systems

       For necessary expenses for information technology systems 
     and telecommunications support, including developmental 
     information systems and operational information systems and 
     pay and associated cost for operations and maintenance 
     associated staff; for the capital asset acquisition of 
     information technology systems, including management and 
     related contractual costs of said acquisitions, including 
     contractual costs associated with operations authorized by 
     chapter 3109 of title 5, United States Code, $1,859,217,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2009: Provided, That 
     none of these funds may be obligated until the Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs submits to the Committees on Appropriations 
     of both Houses of Congress, and such Committees approve, a 
     plan for expenditure that: (1) meets the capital planning and 
     investment control review requirements established by the 
     Office of Management and Budget; (2) complies with the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs enterprise architecture; (3) 
     conforms with an established enterprise life cycle 
     methodology; and (4) complies with the acquisition rules, 
     requirements, guidelines, and systems acquisition management 
     practices of the Federal Government: Provided further, That 
     within 30 days of the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall submit to the Committees 
     on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a reprogramming 
     base letter which provides, by project, the costs included in 
     this appropriation.


                    national cemetery administration

       For necessary expenses of the National Cemetery 
     Administration for operations and maintenance, not otherwise 
     provided for, including uniforms or allowances therefor; 
     cemeterial expenses as authorized by law; purchase of one 
     passenger motor vehicle for use in cemeterial operations; and 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles, $170,000,000, of which not 
     to exceed $7,800,000 shall be available until September 30, 
     2009.

[[Page 16031]]




                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), $76,500,000, of which $3,630,000 
     shall remain available until September 30, 2009.


                      construction, major projects

       For constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of 
     the facilities, including parking projects, under the 
     jurisdiction or for the use of the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, or for any of the purposes set forth in sections 
     316, 2404, 2406, 8102, 8103, 8106, 8108, 8109, 8110, and 8122 
     of title 38, United States Code, including planning, 
     architectural and engineering services, construction 
     management services, maintenance or guarantee period services 
     costs associated with equipment guarantees provided under the 
     project, services of claims analysts, offsite utility and 
     storm drainage system construction costs, and site 
     acquisition, where the estimated cost of a project is more 
     than the amount set forth in section 8104(a)(3)(A) of title 
     38, United States Code, or where funds for a project were 
     made available in a previous major project appropriation, 
     $1,410,800,000, to remain available until expended, of which 
     $2,000,000 shall be to make reimbursements as provided in 
     section 13 of the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 U.S.C. 
     612) for claims paid for contract disputes: Provided, That 
     except for advance planning activities, including needs 
     assessments which may or may not lead to capital investments, 
     and other capital asset management related activities, 
     including portfolio development and management activities, 
     and investment strategy studies funded through the advance 
     planning fund and the planning and design activities funded 
     through the design fund, including needs assessments which 
     may or may not lead to capital investments, none of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading shall be used for any project 
     which has not been approved by the Congress in the budgetary 
     process: Provided further, That funds provided in this 
     appropriation for fiscal year 2008, for each approved project 
     shall be obligated: (1) by the awarding of a construction 
     documents contract by September 30, 2008; and (2) by the 
     awarding of a construction contract by September 30, 2009: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     shall promptly submit to the Committees on Appropriations of 
     both Houses of Congress a written report on any approved 
     major construction project for which obligations are not 
     incurred within the time limitations established above: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated in this 
     or any other Act may be used to reduce the mission, services, 
     or infrastructure, including land, of the 18 facilities on 
     the Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) 
     list requiring further study, as specified by the Secretary 
     of Veterans Affairs, without prior approval of the Committees 
     on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.


                      construction, minor projects

       For constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of 
     the facilities, including parking projects, under the 
     jurisdiction or for the use of the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, including planning and assessments of needs which 
     may lead to capital investments, architectural and 
     engineering services, maintenance or guarantee period 
     services costs associated with equipment guarantees provided 
     under the project, services of claims analysts, offsite 
     utility and storm drainage system construction costs, and 
     site acquisition, or for any of the purposes set forth in 
     sections 316, 2404, 2406, 8102, 8103, 8106, 8108, 8109, 8110, 
     8122, and 8162 of title 38, United States Code, where the 
     estimated cost of a project is equal to or less than the 
     amount set forth in section 8104(a)(3)(A) of title 38, United 
     States Code, $615,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended, along with unobligated balances of previous 
     ``Construction, minor projects'' appropriations which are 
     hereby made available for any project where the estimated 
     cost is equal to or less than the amount set forth in such 
     section: Provided, That funds in this account shall be 
     available for: (1) repairs to any of the nonmedical 
     facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of the 
     Department which are necessary because of loss or damage 
     caused by any natural disaster or catastrophe; and (2) 
     temporary measures necessary to prevent or to minimize 
     further loss by such causes: Provided further, That within 30 
     days of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of 
     both Houses of Congress a reprogramming base letter which 
     provides, by project, the costs included in this 
     appropriation.


       grants for construction of state extended care facilities

       For grants to assist States to acquire or construct State 
     nursing home and domiciliary facilities and to remodel, 
     modify, or alter existing hospital, nursing home, and 
     domiciliary facilities in State homes, for furnishing care to 
     veterans as authorized by sections 8131 through 8137 of title 
     38, United States Code, $165,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended.


        grants for the construction of state veterans cemeteries

       For grants to assist States in establishing, expanding, or 
     improving State veterans cemeteries as authorized by section 
     2408 of title 38, United States Code, $37,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                       Administrative Provisions


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 201. Any appropriation for fiscal year 2008 for 
     ``Compensation and pensions'', ``Readjustment benefits'', and 
     ``Veterans insurance and indemnities'' may be transferred as 
     necessary to any other of the mentioned appropriations: 
     Provided, That before a transfer may take place, the 
     Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall request from the 
     Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress the 
     authority to make the transfer and such Committees issue an 
     approval, or absent a response, a period of 30 days has 
     elapsed.
       Sec. 202. Appropriations available in this title for 
     salaries and expenses shall be available for services 
     authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; lease of a facility or land 
     or both; and uniforms or allowances therefore, as authorized 
     by sections 5901 through 5902 of title 5, United States Code.
       Sec. 203. No appropriations in this title (except the 
     appropriations for ``Construction, major projects'', and 
     ``Construction, minor projects'') shall be available for the 
     purchase of any site for or toward the construction of any 
     new hospital or home.
       Sec. 204. No appropriations in this title shall be 
     available for hospitalization or examination of any persons 
     (except beneficiaries entitled to such hospitalization or 
     examination under the laws providing such benefits to 
     veterans, and persons receiving such treatment under sections 
     7901 through 7904 of title 5, United States Code, or the 
     Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.)), unless reimbursement of the 
     cost of such hospitalization or examination is made to the 
     ``Medical services'' account at such rates as may be fixed by 
     the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
       Sec. 205. Appropriations available in this title for 
     ``Compensation and pensions'', ``Readjustment benefits'', and 
     ``Veterans insurance and indemnities'' shall be available for 
     payment of prior year accrued obligations required to be 
     recorded by law against the corresponding prior year accounts 
     within the last quarter of fiscal year 2007.
       Sec. 206. Appropriations available in this title shall be 
     available to pay prior year obligations of corresponding 
     prior year appropriations accounts resulting from sections 
     3328(a), 3334, and 3712(a) of title 31, United States Code, 
     except that if such obligations are from trust fund accounts 
     they shall be payable only from ``Compensation and 
     pensions''.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 207. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     during fiscal year 2008, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     shall, from the National Service Life Insurance Fund (38 
     U.S.C. 1920), the Veterans' Special Life Insurance Fund (38 
     U.S.C. 1923), and the United States Government Life Insurance 
     Fund (38 U.S.C. 1955), reimburse the ``General operating 
     expenses'' account for the cost of administration of the 
     insurance programs financed through those accounts: Provided, 
     That reimbursement shall be made only from the surplus 
     earnings accumulated in such an insurance program during 
     fiscal year 2008 that are available for dividends in that 
     program after claims have been paid and actuarially 
     determined reserves have been set aside: Provided further, 
     That if the cost of administration of such an insurance 
     program exceeds the amount of surplus earnings accumulated in 
     that program, reimbursement shall be made only to the extent 
     of such surplus earnings: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall determine the cost of administration for 
     fiscal year 2008 which is properly allocable to the provision 
     of each such insurance program and to the provision of any 
     total disability income insurance included in that insurance 
     program.
       Sec. 208. Amounts deducted from enhanced-use lease proceeds 
     to reimburse an account for expenses incurred by that account 
     during a prior fiscal year for providing enhanced-use lease 
     services, may be obligated during the fiscal year in which 
     the proceeds are received.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 209. Funds available in this title or funds for 
     salaries and other administrative expenses shall also be 
     available to reimburse the Office of Resolution Management of 
     the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Office of 
     Employment Discrimination Complaint Adjudication under 
     section 319 of title 38, United States Code, for all services 
     provided at rates which will recover actual costs but not 
     exceed $32,067,000 for the Office of Resolution Management 
     and $3,148,000 for the Office of Employment and 
     Discrimination Complaint Adjudication: Provided, That 
     payments may be made in advance for services to be furnished 
     based on estimated costs: Provided further, That amounts 
     received shall be credited to ``General operating expenses'' 
     for use by the office that provided the service.
       Sec. 210. No appropriations in this title shall be 
     available to enter into any new lease

[[Page 16032]]

     of real property if the estimated annual rental is more than 
     $300,000 unless the Secretary submits a report which the 
     Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress 
     approve within 30 days following the date on which the report 
     is received.
       Sec. 211. No funds of the Department of Veterans Affairs 
     shall be available for hospital care, nursing home care, or 
     medical services provided to any person under chapter 17 of 
     title 38, United States Code, for a non-service-connected 
     disability described in section 1729(a)(2) of such title, 
     unless that person has disclosed to the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs, in such form as the Secretary may require, current, 
     accurate third-party reimbursement information for purposes 
     of section 1729 of such title: Provided, That the Secretary 
     may recover, in the same manner as any other debt due the 
     United States, the reasonable charges for such care or 
     services from any person who does not make such disclosure as 
     required: Provided further, That any amounts so recovered for 
     care or services provided in a prior fiscal year may be 
     obligated by the Secretary during the fiscal year in which 
     amounts are received.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 212. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, at 
     the discretion of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, proceeds 
     or revenues derived from enhanced-use leasing activities 
     (including disposal) may be deposited into the 
     ``Construction, major projects'' and ``Construction, minor 
     projects'' accounts and be used for construction (including 
     site acquisition and disposition), alterations, and 
     improvements of any medical facility under the jurisdiction 
     or for the use of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Such 
     sums as realized are in addition to the amount provided for 
     in ``Construction, major projects'' and ``Construction, minor 
     projects''.
       Sec. 213. Amounts made available under ``Medical services'' 
     are available--
       (1) for furnishing recreational facilities, supplies, and 
     equipment; and
       (2) for funeral expenses, burial expenses, and other 
     expenses incidental to funerals and burials for beneficiaries 
     receiving care in the Department.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 214. Such sums as may be deposited to the Medical Care 
     Collections Fund pursuant to section 1729A of title 38, 
     United States Code, may be transferred to ``Medical 
     services'', to remain available until expended for the 
     purposes of that account.
       Sec. 215. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall allow veterans who are 
     eligible under existing Department of Veterans Affairs 
     medical care requirements and who reside in Alaska to obtain 
     medical care services from medical facilities supported by 
     the Indian Health Service or tribal organizations. The 
     Secretary shall: (1) limit the application of this provision 
     to rural Alaskan veterans in areas where an existing 
     Department of Veterans Affairs facility or Veterans Affairs-
     contracted service is unavailable; (2) require participating 
     veterans and facilities to comply with all appropriate rules 
     and regulations, as established by the Secretary; (3) require 
     this provision to be consistent with Capital Asset 
     Realignment for Enhanced Services activities; and (4) result 
     in no additional cost to the Department of Veterans Affairs 
     or the Indian Health Service.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 216. Such sums as may be deposited to the Department 
     of Veterans Affairs Capital Asset Fund pursuant to section 
     8118 of title 38, United States Code, may be transferred to 
     the ``Construction, major projects'' and ``Construction, 
     minor projects'' accounts, to remain available until expended 
     for the purposes of these accounts.
       Sec. 217. None of the funds available to the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs, in this or any other Act, may be used to 
     replace the current system by which the Veterans Integrated 
     Service Networks select and contract for diabetes monitoring 
     supplies and equipment.
       Sec. 218. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to implement any policy prohibiting the Directors of 
     the Veterans Integrated Service Networks from conducting 
     outreach or marketing to enroll new veterans within their 
     respective Networks.
       Sec. 219. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall submit to 
     the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a 
     quarterly report on the financial status of the Veterans 
     Health Administration.
       Sec. 220. Amounts made available for the ``Information 
     technology systems'' account may be reprogrammed between 
     projects: Provided, That no project may be increased or 
     decreased by more than $1,000,000 of cost before the 
     Secretary submits to the Committees on Appropriations of both 
     Houses of Congress a reprogramming request and the Committees 
     issue an approval, or absent a response, a period of 30 days 
     has elapsed.


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 221. Any balances in prior year accounts established 
     for the payment of benefits under the Reinstated Entitlement 
     Program for Survivors shall be transferred to and merged with 
     amounts available under the ``Compensation and pensions'' 
     account, and receipts that would otherwise be credited to the 
     accounts established for the payment of benefits under the 
     Reinstated Entitlement Program for Survivors program shall be 
     credited to amounts available under the ``Compensation and 
     pensions'' acount.
       Sec. 222. Amounts made available for the ``Construction, 
     minor projects'' account may be reprogrammed between 
     projects: Provided, That no project may be increased or 
     decreased by more than $1,000,000 of cost before the 
     Secretary submits to the Committees on Appropriations of both 
     Houses of Congress a reprogramming request and the Committees 
     issue an approval, or absent a response, a period of 30 days 
     has elapsed.


                Amendment Offered by Mr. Moran of Kansas

  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Moran of Kansas:
        Page 27, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $125,000,000)''.
       Page 28, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $125,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas reserves a point of order.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kansas.
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I commend the committee's work in 
regard to the funding levels that are here before us in this Veterans 
Administration and Military Quality of Life appropriation bill.
  I am pleased to be here in support of this legislation, but I do have 
an amendment. My amendment would transfer $125 million from veterans 
health administration accounts to the medical services account, and the 
purpose of doing so is to increase the amount of mileage reimbursement 
that disabled veterans receive for travel for medical services.
  Currently, and, in fact, since 1978, our veterans have received 11 
cents per mile. One would think that to be a misstatement on our part. 
I think it's very hard to believe that since 1978 we have not increased 
that reimbursement rate.
  Because of funding constraints and priorities, I'm not asking that it 
be increased to what most of us would think is appropriate. Amendments 
have been offered in support on this House floor that have been 
demonstrated for the 48\1/2\ cents allowed by IRS regulations.
  On the floor today is the gentleman from Georgia who offered an 
amendment that passed unanimously by voice vote earlier this session 
that would increase the rate, authorize the increased rate to 48\1/2\ 
cents. My amendment today appropriates the money, provides the money 
necessary to double the mileage reimbursement rate for disabled 
veterans from 11 cents per mile to 22 cents per mile.
  A reasonable reimbursement rate is awfully important. This bill, in 
my opinion, goes a long way toward increasing the likelihood that 
veterans will have access to medical care and services that they so 
desperately need and so sincerely desire and deserve.
  Those of us, however, who come from places in which it's a long 
distance to receive that service, to receive those benefits, are very 
concerned that there are people who are slipping through the cracks, as 
we have heard in other instances, within the VA system, because they 
cannot afford to make the trip to see the physician, to be seen at the 
hospital, to receive the services that they are entitled to.
  I represent a district approximately the size of the State of 
Illinois. There is no VA hospital within the district. So my veterans 
must travel significant distances in order to receive care and 
treatment, and we know what has occurred in regard to the cost of 
travel with gas prices where they are today, as compared to where they 
were in 1978 when 11 cents per mile was established.
  This concept is supported by our veterans service organization. I am 
a member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee. I have chaired the 
health care subcommittee. This has been an issue we have dealt with for 
a long

[[Page 16033]]

time, and I have seen amendments offered in previously years often 
stuck on a point of order or for me to withdraw them.
  Today, I think it's important that we move forward, particularly at a 
time when we were increasing the amount of money available within the 
VA funding stream. If we don't do it now, when will we do it? I offered 
this amendment, a similar amendment, in 2003, and most years since. 
It's always going to be next year.
  With the levels of funding that are provided for in the underlying 
appropriation bill, it seems important for us, to me, for us not to 
sidestep this issue for another year.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation, and I rise in 
opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The reservation is withdrawn.
  The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, in all due respect, I had not seen this 
amendment until 2 minutes ago.
  I wish we had an opportunity to sit down, as our subcommittee has 
been doing for the last 6 months on a bipartisan basis, to see if the 
legitimate needs that the gentleman from Kansas has raised could have 
been dealt with through our subcommittee process.
  The problem with what the gentleman has proposed in this amendment, 
while it might sound like we are cutting medical administration 
overhead at the central office in Washington, DC, the gentleman may or 
may not know that the VA Medical Administration account funds employees 
with their feet on the ground, in the hospitals all across America, 
including in the gentleman's home State.
  So, perhaps, unintentionally, I assume unintentionally, this 
amendment would cut funding needed to fund security at our VA 
hospitals, it would cut funds needed to provide patient medical 
information, transcription of patient records, financial management 
services at our VA hospitals and third-party collection activities.

                              {time}  1415

  So, unintentionally, by cutting this funding, it could make it more 
difficult to even bring third-party funding into the VA system and into 
the Treasury. So for those reasons, I must rise in opposition to this 
amendment.
  I would be happy to sit down and work on a bipartisan basis to try to 
find a way to increase the miles reimbursement rate for veterans. I 
completely agree with the gentleman that the miles reimbursement rates 
are inadequate.
  And I would like to think, given that we increased the medical 
services account for 2008 by $3.4 billion over the 2007 level, and 
given that we increased it by $1.7 billion over the President's request 
for medical services, my hope would be that the VA could seriously look 
at using those significant increases in funding to address the 
shortfall that the gentleman has mentioned.
  I'm not sure what the authorizing process is. Since this amendment 
was one I'd never seen prior to, now 4 or 5 minutes ago, I'm not sure 
if there's a need to authorize funding for this if that authorization 
has passed both the House and the Senate. I think it might have been in 
the Wounded Warrior legislation. But there might be an authorization 
question. Perhaps not.
  But I would like to request the gentleman draw down the amendment. He 
doesn't have to, but I'd be happy to work in good faith, as we've been 
working all year long, to address legitimate needs. And the gentleman 
has pointed out a legitimate need.
  But I want to be clear. I strongly oppose this amendment because it 
could hurt medical services provided to veterans by cutting out funding 
needed to staff our VA hospitals. The source of this money wouldn't be 
cutting out the Washington, DC, office staff; it would be cutting out 
employees that are serving vital roles in our veterans hospitals in the 
gentleman's home State as well as mine.
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments offered 
by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards). I will have to admit to him 
that my amendment is not unintentional, and so his assumption that the 
offset that I'm providing is an unintentional offering on my part is 
not true. I'm aware of where the money comes from and still believe 
that this is a high priority. And, in fact, this bill, the medical 
administration account, receives a 14\1/2\ percent, $458 million, 
increase over last year's funding levels, and $193 million more than 
the President requested in fiscal year 2008. And, in fact, our 
authorizing committee, both the minority and majority views, accepted 
those, the President's recommendation, as our suggested funding levels.
  So again, in searching year after year for a place from which this 
money can come, it is not without concern that we have chosen these 
accounts. But this is the year in which there is a 14.5 percent 
increase in those funds. And even if my amendment would be adopted, it 
would still allow for a 10.6 percent increase in those administrative 
accounts.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, if I could use my remaining time, I'd like 
to just say to the gentleman, I appreciate his bringing this serious 
problem before the House. I wish, in hindsight, he'd brought it to us 
earlier than 5 or 10 minutes ago. I hope we could work together to try 
to find a way to address the needs he's mentioned.
  But, my colleagues, let me reemphasize two points. He may know the 
source of the funding, but I'm not sure he intended to actually cut out 
funding, which this amendment would do, that is needed to hire VA 
employees to man our VA hospitals to see our veterans get the service 
that they desperately need and deserve.
  In addition, we've had lengthy discussion, including from the 
Republican leadership, about the importance of oversight of this 
additional funding, this historic level of funding we're putting into 
the VA this year. If we cut out the accounts that the gentleman's 
trying to cut out in this amendment, that undermines the entire effort 
that was discussed so eloquently by my Republican colleagues, that 
we've got to have enough money to have oversight to see that these new 
dollars are spent wisely and for the highest priority.
  So, if the gentleman persists in offering the amendment and having a 
vote on it, I would ask my colleagues, on a bipartisan basis, in all 
due respect, to reject it and allow us to then work together in the 
months ahead to find an appropriate way to more adequately fund 
reimbursement rates for America's veterans.
  I believe, personally and strongly, that this amendment would do harm 
to medical care to veterans, not intentionally, because the gentleman 
is a strong supporter of veterans. But nevertheless, it would do harm 
to service to veterans and undermine our ability to have strong 
oversight on the historic increases in VA funding that we provide in 
this bill.
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas will be 
postponed.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow) for 
the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. BARROW. Mr. Chairman, this is an important bill that addresses 
the needs of our veterans who've been neglected for too long now. 
Taking care of our veterans is important at any time, but it's 
particularly important in a time of war. So I want to thank you, Mr. 
Chairman, and your staff for your hard work on this bill.
  I recently conducted a tour of veterans service organizations all 
across

[[Page 16034]]

my district, and one of the things I heard over and over again was the 
growth in demand for veterans services in the future, and that's what 
I'd like to discuss with you, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, community-based outpatient clinics play a vital role in 
meeting the health care needs of our veterans, especially in the rural 
parts of our country. My district, a 17-county area centered on 
Statesboro, Georgia, contains some 34,000 veterans. And I ask for your 
commitment, Mr. Chairman, to work in conference with the other body to 
look at this area and evaluate the need and determine the feasibility 
of a community-based outpatient clinic in Statesboro, Georgia.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, let me thank the 
gentleman for his focus on the importance of VA outpatient clinics.
  In my 16 years in Congress, I think one of the most important 
improvements made in VA care to veterans, particularly in rural areas, 
is the creation and development and expansion of VA outpatient clinics, 
particularly for those veterans that live a long way from VA hospitals.
  I'll be happy to work with the gentleman as we go to conference, and 
to work with the Veterans Administration as well, to put the facts 
together to see if we can provide funding for a Statesboro clinic. And 
I know the gentleman will be a strong advocate on its behalf.
  For the record, I will say we have not, as a procedure in the past, 
earmarked specific funding for specific outpatient clinics. But the 
gentleman has spoken very strongly and eloquently about the need for 
his clinic, and we will work with him and the VA to see if we can 
provide the funding.
  And I will say that the bill that the gentleman has strongly 
supported provides, as we previously said, an enormous increase in VA 
medical services funding, far above, $1.7 billion above the President's 
request, $6 billion in total VA medical care funding over fiscal year 
2007. So I hope the VA will make a high priority out of expanding these 
clinics where they are needed.


                    Amendment Offered by Mrs. Capito

  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mrs. Capito:
       Page 28, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)(decreased by $5,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from West Virginia.
  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a bipartisan 
amendment highlighting the importance and need for an Office of Rural 
Health within the Department of Veterans Affairs.
  I'd like to commend the chairman and the ranking member for their 
good, solid, hard work on this bill and the tribute it pays to 
America's veterans. I would also like to thank Mr. Salazar of Colorado 
and Mr. Smith of Nebraska for their work on this bipartisan amendment.
  I was pleased that language was included in the legislation that was 
signed into law by the President last year calling on the Department of 
Veterans Affairs to create an Office of Rural Health within the Office 
of the Under Secretary for Health. However, the Department has yet to 
make any progress towards establishing this very important office.
  This is a simple amendment that should encourage the Department to 
make the Office of Rural Health fully operational as expeditiously as 
possible, and provide them with the resources needed to do so by 
rerouting $5 million in the Medical Services Account to help fund the 
Office of Rural Health, thus making it revenue neutral.
  Rural Americans face different and unique challenges than our fellow 
citizens who reside in urban and suburban areas, and this is no 
different for our veterans and their ability to seek the services and 
the treatments that they need. For some rural veterans, a simple trip 
to the doctor can often involve hours of travel to reach the 
appropriate facility within the veterans health facilities health 
system.
  It is my hope that the Office of Rural Health will shed light on many 
of these challenges, and will be a resource with many new and creative 
ideas for methods to help our rural veterans receive their much-
deserved benefits in a manner that is efficient, and allowing them to 
stay as close to home as possible.
  One of the great challenges we are beginning to face is the number of 
servicemen and -women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan who have 
sustained a traumatic brain injury. The Department of Veterans Affairs 
has four large polytrauma centers, in Richmond, Tampa, Minneapolis and 
Palo Alto, California. These facilities provide first-class treatment 
for veterans suffering polytrauma, and also provide inpatient 
rehabilitation services.
  Despite the services provided at these facilities, many veterans will 
eventually return to their homes in the rural areas of America, but 
they will still need care and treatment. The Office of Rural Health 
will be the basis for new ways to provide rural veterans with 
polytrauma with the care that they need.
  Another development within the Department of Veterans Affairs that 
has been going on for a while are the Community-Based Outpatient 
Clinics, or CBOCs. Often serving rural areas, CBOCs are a tremendous 
asset to the delivery of care for veterans, allowing them to seek 
treatment closer to their home. Unfortunately, underserved areas still 
remain in the rural areas. Again, the Office of Rural Health will be an 
excellent resource for new ways to provide primary outpatient care.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of this commonsense amendment so that 
the rural veterans concerns can be appropriately addressed.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlelady for 
bringing to the attention of the House, once again, the importance of 
providing quality veterans care to the men and women who served our 
Nation and happen to live in small, rural communities, areas perhaps in 
many cases far away from veterans hospitals. I think the community 
clinics have been one great, great addition to the VA health care 
system over the last 2 decades.
  And let me point out, for the Record, before I will express that I 
will support this amendment, that Mr. Udall of New Mexico and Mr. 
Latham, in our full Appropriations Committee, added language on this 
issue which I know the gentlelady and I will both support; and it says 
this: ``The committee notes that the Public Law 109-461 directed the 
establishment of an Office of Rural Health within the Office of Under 
Secretary for Health. To date, after more than 6 months, there has been 
no action taken to implement the provision regarding the Office of 
Rural Health. The Committee urges the Department to move forward in an 
expeditious manner.''

                              {time}  1430

  With that, I would like to express my support for the amendment.
  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my 
colleague from Colorado (Mr. Salazar).
  Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. And 
I would also like to thank the chairman of the committee for expressing 
his support for this amendment.
  At the end of the 109th Congress, the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, 
and Information Technology Act of 2006 was signed into law. This 
legislation created the Office of Rural Health within the VA and tasked 
the office with conducting research into issues affecting rural 
veterans, as well as developing and refining policies and programs to 
improve care and services for rural veterans.
  Unfortunately, as the chairman has clearly stated, since this 
legislation has been signed into law establishing the Office of Rural 
Health, no action

[[Page 16035]]

has been taken. Just yesterday in the Veterans' Affairs Health 
Subcommittee, I asked the VA Under Secretary to give me an update, and 
he confirmed that as of this date a director has not even been hired 
yet.
  This amendment would simply allocate $5 million from the same account 
within Medical Services to establish this office.
  The care our Nation provides rural veterans in return for protecting 
our country should not suffer because some have chosen to live in rural 
America. We owe them no less for their sacrifice.
  For the 25 percent of all veterans who live in rural areas, and the 
nearly 45 percent of all recruits coming from rural America, I urge you 
to strongly support this amendment, and I commend the chairman for 
supporting this amendment.
  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Chairman, I, too, would like to thank the Chair for 
his support of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Smith), one of the cosponsors of this amendment.
  Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, I thank Congresswoman Capito.
  I appreciate your support for this amendment, the Capito-Smith-
Salazar amendment. And I don't want to be repetitive because many good 
points were offered by the chairman of the committee as well as others. 
So I just want to add my support and certainly state that it is 
unfortunate that nearly 6 months since the legislation was signed into 
law for the Office of Rural Health, little action has been taken. So I 
believe this is a good step forward for those in rural America because 
they should not have to suffer simply because they live in rural 
America.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito).
  The amendment was agreed to.


           Amendment Offered by Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida

  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida:
       Page 30, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $40,000,000)''.
       Page 33, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $40,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to 
thank Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Obey, and Chairman Edwards for bringing 
this bill to the floor. The motto of the former Veterans Secretary, my 
friend Jessie Brown, was ``putting veterans first.''
  Well, the leadership they have shown, bringing the largest increase 
in the history of veterans funding to the floor, over $7 billion, I 
have got to thank you, sir. I have served on this committee for 15 
years, and for 15 years we have struggled to put the veterans first. 
And I am so pleased that the House of Representatives under your 
leadership has finally put the veterans first.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise on my amendment to bring attention to a travesty 
occurring in my district. A travesty not just affecting my district, 
but this regional hospital affects Florida and Georgia.
  The Gainesville VA Medical Center is 40 years old and looks every day 
of it. There are five beds to a room, no shower, and no place for 
families.
  This facility received one of the highest rates of returning 
Afghanistan and Iraq veterans and is being shortchanged by a lack of 
proper facilities. The bed tower project includes 228 single-patient 
bedrooms for surgical, medical, and psychiatric patients. This includes 
extra space for support of the psychiatric care inpatient program. 
Finally, the building itself was required to be structurally 
strengthened to protect it from potential terrorist attack since we are 
part of the national emergency response system. The current design will 
be completed in June 2007 and will be ready to be released for bid in 
September 2007.
  Since the approval by the National CARES Commission and initial 
funding allocation, much has changed in the construction world. The 
dual impacts of Hurricane Katrina and the construction boom in China 
have caused the costs of all construction in the U.S. to rise.
  The total estimated construction cost is over $103 million. The 
original projection was $64 million for construction. That leaves a 
shortfall of about $40 million.
  Every month of delay costs about $1.1 million. An additional $40 
million is needed in order to complete the project.
  The men and women returning to Florida and southern Georgia will be 
greatly impacted, and I would like to work with the committee to 
resolve this matter.
  Mr. Chairman, do I have the word of the chairman to look into this 
matter?
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. I yield to Chairman Edwards.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, let me first thank the gentlewoman for her 
kind words about our work on this bill and, more importantly, for her 
15 years of leadership on the Veterans' Affairs Committee on behalf of 
our veterans not only in Florida but on behalf of veterans all across 
the country.
  Because of the concerns raised by the gentlewoman, we increased the 
major construction project account in this bill by $683 million above 
the President's request because the reality is it is not just the VA 
system. It is the DOD health care system. It is construction all across 
America that is facing huge increases in costs, and obviously the 
Gainesville Florida hospital is a terribly important health care 
facility in our national VA health care system. And I look forward to 
working with the gentlewoman to see that we have enough funding to see 
that that additional funding is possible. And we will work with the VA 
as we go to conference and beyond on that issue.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And once again 
thank you for your leadership.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from Florida?
  There was no objection.


          Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey

  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey:
       Page 30, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 36, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) and the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Edwards) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I wish to rise 
to say that I appreciate the work of both the Chair and ranking member 
with regard to their work on behalf of veterans of this country.
  The amendment that is before us is an amendment to seek increase in 
funds for the State veterans homes. It does so in the amount of $10 
million. There are 126 facilities, veterans homes, across the 50 States 
and Puerto Rico. These are State veterans homes and they care for 
nearly 30,000 of our Nation's heroes. The number of veterans that are 
going to be requiring care is large and is going to continue to grow 
through the year 2020. And the conflict today is leading to more 
veterans that will need special care throughout the rest of their 
lives.
  As many of our veterans move into these extended care facilities, we 
must continue here in this House to ensure

[[Page 16036]]

that the facilities are both safe and comfortable for the residents. As 
you may know, there is an extensive list of backlogged projects just 
waiting for the funds, many of them in the area of critical health and 
safety needs. Of the $500 million of projects waiting for Federal 
funds, nearly half are classified as priority one.
  We must also see that these facilities are able to provide for high 
quality of life as well for those individuals who have made great 
sacrifices in the past years for our Nation. These are homes, as I said 
before, for our heroes. They are not simply institutions that we are 
funding. If we are not able to fund the priority one projects that I am 
worried about, these homes will be inadequate and we will not be 
honoring our veterans.
  The staff at these homes work hard to honor our veterans and work 
with them to provide that they have, for the remaining years of their 
lives, a comfortable environment. I have had the opportunity to spend 
some time in these veterans home, particularly the Paramus Veterans 
Home in my district in Bergen County, and I particularly had the chance 
to visit with the people who live there and the staff and their friends 
and relatives who come along. In addition to that, there are local 
veterans service organizations that have worked hard to secure State 
matching funds for these essential projects as well at this facility, 
just as their counterparts are doing the same sort of thing all across 
this country in their homes as well.
  Finally, I would like to point this out, that our colleagues in the 
Senate Appropriations Committee just this week approved $250 million 
for this account. So including my amendment here would still mean that 
we are falling short of where the Senate is by around $75 million; so I 
therefore believe that this $10 million is well called for.
  While this backlog is much greater than what this amendment can 
provide, I wanted to call attention to this difficulty these homes 
currently are facing and have been facing for some period of time, and 
I hope that we can work together now to find a way to honor these vets 
and make sure that they receive the best care and the best quality of 
life in their remaining days.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I do want to thank the gentleman from New 
Jersey for his support for state-extended care facilities, and I agree 
with him that the President's budget for this account was, in my words, 
woefully underfunded, and it is because of the importance of these 
extended care facilities that in our subcommittee we provided a 95-
percent increase over the President's request for that. The President 
has requested $85 million; we fund it at $165 million.
  The reason I oppose this amendment and would ask my colleagues to do 
the same is that the gentleman, in order to provide additional funding, 
cuts $10 million out of the funding account that is necessary to meet 
one of the veterans service organizations' highest priorities this 
year, and that is reduce the terrible backlog of 400,000 veterans 
waiting to get their claims reviewed by VA caseworkers. And with the 
funding we provided in that account in this bill, if we don't reduce it 
in this or other amendments, we are going to be able to hire 1,100 new 
VA caseworkers in order to reduce that backlog. Right now that backlog 
is averaging 177 days, and many veterans are having to wait longer than 
that, including combat veterans, to get their earned benefits approved 
and started.
  The gentleman in no way would want to or intend to cut the funding to 
try to help our veterans get their benefits more quickly. But the 
reality is that taking $10 million out of that very account, the very 
account that the VAV, the VFW, the American Legion, and others 
emphasized to us all year long, we have to reduce the terrible backlog 
in veterans benefits claims processing. All the groups supported that 
additional funding. And that is why I would ask, with all due respect, 
that our colleagues on a bipartisan basis respect that 95 percent 
increase we provided in this bill for state-extended care facilities 
and let's not cut one of the top two priorities of veterans service 
organizations this year all across the Nation, and that is, reduce the 
400,000 claims backlog of veterans benefits.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. EDWARDS. I will be glad to yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. As you know, this is not an issue that is 
new. I actually brought this up and talked about this back early in the 
year in the Budget Committee, and we had a discussion on it at that 
time.
  Just a question to you: That account you are referencing where we are 
drawing the money from has grown as well, has it not?
  Two questions. And the second question is there are other aspects of 
that account other than just that provision that you are referencing; 
so does it necessarily mean, in your opinion, that if we do withdraw 
some funds from the fairly large account that it will have a 
detrimental effect on the area that you are specifying, one which I 
agree with?
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, we can't say on the 
floor at this moment exactly what the VA would do, but what I could say 
for a fact is this $10 million comes out of the account. It is used and 
intended to fund an additional 1,100 VA claims caseworkers, and I am 
afraid if you start cutting that account, the VA will obviously have to 
cut funding out of our intended plans to increase those numbers.
  We still have a long way to go in this process. Who knows, as we look 
carefully at various projects in military construction and the VA side, 
where we might find additional money. And I think the committee has 
shown its good intention by increasing President Bush's request for 
this program by 95 percent. We understand it is an important need, and 
the gentleman has spoken out on it earlier this year and in the past.
  I would just say to our colleagues, not this year, not now, not 
today. Let's not cut $10 million out of an account that the veterans 
service groups say we desperately need funded in order to reduce the 
backlog for 400,000 veterans to get their benefits started. Many of 
these veterans need their benefits started as soon as possible. Many of 
them are living day to day, week to week; and the earlier we can get 
them their benefits, the quicker they go on with rebuilding their 
lives. And for that reason, I must oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's 
comments. And we are on the same page as far as both aspects that we 
wish the Department to deal with.
  On this amendment, I think your comment was ``just not this year.'' 
And obviously as a Member who has been here 4 years now fighting, as 
you have also, probably before me, but myself here on this floor 
fighting for these veterans homes, fighting literally for the ones back 
in my districts as well for the veterans there and seeing just the 
smallest improvements in just a certain number of the safety areas. And 
there are other area safety areas that would seem to me to need 
improvements in and health areas as well, and we just can't get the 
funds.

                              {time}  1445

  And the quality of life even goes beyond those issues as far as what 
these gentlemen need in these homes.
  So I bring this amendment to the floor today for that reason, 
firstly. And secondly, also from a pragmatic point of view that this 
will go to the Senate and, as I did make the reference, that the Senate 
has already marked it up even significantly higher than what the 
gentleman has already done.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.

[[Page 16037]]


  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey will be 
postponed.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield time to the 
gentleman from Rhode Island, a valued and important member of our 
subcommittee who, I must say, giving credit where credit is due, has 
been an eloquent and powerful speaker on behalf of the need to increase 
funding for mental health care services for our vets, drug and alcohol 
treatment programs for our vets, as well as increasing funding for 
homeless veterans. The product of his hard work and dedication is very 
obvious in this bill.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island 
(Mr. Kennedy).
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I don't want anyone to mistake, after 
hearing the previous debate or any one of these amendments, what the 
big picture is here today. The success story today, the take-away 
message today is that this bill is the biggest increase in veterans 
health care in the history of the veterans health care system, the 
biggest increase in the 77-year history of the veterans health care 
system; and it has happened under the chairmanship of Chet Edwards.
  Every amendment here is talking about nickels and dimes compared to 
the overwhelming increase in billions of dollars, billions of dollars 
that are going into this veterans health care system that has never 
seen such an infusion of dollars. We're not talking about a little bit 
of money here, a little bit of money there, and that's often what ends 
up happening. We're talking about money for this program or that 
program. We are talking about billions of dollars that have never been 
even seen in this kind of fashion in any kind of veterans health care 
program before.
  And so what we are doing here is raising the bar for generations to 
come because what we're doing now is layering the bar up. So from now 
on, the floor is 20 stories higher than it was the day before. And from 
now on, whenever another veterans budget comes up, it is going to start 
from the top floor and move even higher.
  I want everyone to know that this is a monumental day. This budget 
exceeds even the proposed budget of all the veteran service 
organizations, even the VFW, the American Legion, the Paralyzed 
Veterans of America; this is even more than they have asked for.
  And I want to say on behalf of the mental health needs of our 
veterans, we are doing all that we need to do and more to try to make 
sure that their needs are met. And we should do so, because the 
suffering that these veterans have had to undergo as a result of this 
war has been unbearable. And we, as a Nation, owe it to make sure that 
not only do their outward physical wounds get met and treated, but 
their inward psychological wounds get tended to as well. And this bill 
does that.
  I want to thank the chairman for his work to make sure that not only 
their outward wounds, but their inward wounds get addressed as well. 
And I commend him for his leadership. He ought to feel very proud to be 
chairman on such an historic bill such as this, and I thank him for his 
leadership.
  Mr. EDWARDS. I want to thank the gentleman not only for his kind 
words and for his eloquent and powerful words on behalf of our 
veterans, but even more importantly, for his deeds, not just this year, 
but for every year you've been in Congress. Millions of veterans are 
living a better life today because of that leadership. I thank you for 
that.
  Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield back the balance of my time.


             Amendment Offered by Mrs. Wilson of New Mexico

  Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mrs. Wilson of New Mexico:
       Page 31, line 6, after ``Philippines'', insert ``: Provided 
     further, That of the funds made available under this heading, 
     $2,000,000 is for the Advisory Committee on Women Veterans 
     under section 542 of title 38, United States Code''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Mexico.
  Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an 
amendment to the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 
Appropriations bill this year.
  My amendment would designate and devote $2 million from the 
Department of Administration general operations expenses account. This 
is a very large account. The President requested $1.4 billion for that 
account. This body is appropriating $1.6 billion for that account, and 
what it does is fence that money and say that $2 million of this must 
be devoted and appropriated to the Advisory Committee on Women 
Veterans.
  The intent of this amendment is that the Advisory Committee on Women 
Veterans would undertake a special effort, through a task force or 
special commission, to study and make recommendations on the health 
care needs of women veterans. All of us are concerned about whether the 
veterans health care system is meeting the needs of this newest 
generation of veterans. But there is a special category of veterans 
that I think sometimes gets overlooked.
  In 1978, I got a one-way ticket to Colorado Springs, Colorado, in the 
third class with women at the United States Air Force Academy. And I 
walked up a ramp, and over that ramp was a big sign in aluminum letters 
that said, ``Bring Me Men.'' That sign stayed there for 20 years after 
women were admitted to the Air Force Academy. It's gone now, but some 
of us as women veterans feel that maybe the VA hospitals have a similar 
sign over their doors, if not literally, then certainly figuratively.
  I am the only woman veteran serving in the Congress. And women 
veterans face different obstacles than men and have different health 
care needs than men when they start to get care from the VA. To start 
with, many women don't even consider themselves or call themselves 
veterans, and they don't think of the VA as their system.
  A larger number of women are serving in the military, and in the 
future we are going to see higher numbers of women veterans, and they 
will face different problems and challenges as they age. One in seven 
veterans of the current war on terrorism, one in seven Americans who 
are deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan is a woman, and yet the VA health 
care system is very oriented towards the health care needs of men.
  Just let me give you one example. If you are a veteran and you go to 
the VA for a clinic on PTSD, if everyone else in that group is a guy, 
are you really getting the care that is appropriate to you? A lot of 
women veterans don't feel comfortable in those settings. They are not 
sure that the OB/GYN care is what they need. If they face osteoporosis, 
they're not sure that the VA is where they should be. Or if they face 
problems with cancers particular to women, is the VA going to meet 
their needs?
  My goal in proposing this amendment is to get the VA to bring 
together a group of people who can truly devote the time and effort 
needed to study the needs of women veterans and examine the care that 
is available to our women veterans and the challenges that we face so 
that they can report their findings to Congress and to the VA so that 
we as a body can evaluate and adjust the system so that all of our 
veterans get the care that they have earned.
  I am very grateful, and I think all Americans are, to those who serve 
our Nation, and we have a responsibility to make sure that they receive 
the best possible care. The burdens of this war on terrorism has fallen 
on the shoulders of a relatively small number of

[[Page 16038]]

Americans who have volunteered to take great risks on our behalf. We 
owe them, our veterans past, present and future, a debt of gratitude 
for their selflessness and for their service. We need to make sure that 
our veterans get the benefits they were promised, the health care they 
deserve, and the recognition that our Nation owes them.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  I want to thank the gentlelady for her strong voice on behalf of 
women veterans. I had the honor of working in the Texas State Senate 
under then Lieutenant Governor Bill Hobby, whose mother, Oveta Culp 
Hobby, played a leading role in heading the WACs in World War II.
  When I was first elected to the House in 1990, the famous, some would 
say infamous, but the wonderful and always famous Sarah McClendon, the 
White House reporter, who I think at one point was second in line in 
seniority at the White House and was an outspoken advocate on behalf of 
women veterans. And I thank the gentlelady for continuing in the 
tradition of Ms. Hobby and Ms. McClendon.
  There is no doubt that the VA has come a long way in its history in 
trying to improve care to women veterans, but we have yet a long way to 
go. And for that reason, I will support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. I thank my colleague for his support of 
this effort. I look forward to working with him to make sure that the 
VA undertakes this effort and takes it seriously, and we get some good, 
solid recommendations that all of us can work on.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word and would 
be glad to yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. McHENRY. I want to thank my colleague from Texas for putting 
together a great bill. I know he has been a long-time advocate of the 
best care possible for our veterans in this country. And as a military 
general, I want to commend him for the great work he has done on a 
bipartisan basis. And I thank you for that, Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to bring attention to the shortcomings of 
the Department of Veterans Affairs in addressing the infrastructure 
needs of community-based outpatient clinics. These clinics provide 
convenient care to our veterans on an outpatient basis.
  There are currently 64 pending clinics that have received approval 
from the VA either in fiscal year 2007 or fiscal year 2008. One of 
those clinics is set to be established in my district in Hickory, North 
Carolina. When opened, this clinic will serve approximately 10,000 
veterans on an outpatient basis annually. However, since the VA Mid-
Atlantic Health Care Network announced last June that the clinic in 
Hickory would open in January of this year, there has been nothing but 
delay after delay after delay. Now, veterans in western North Carolina 
are frustrated with these delays, as many of us are, and there seems to 
be this common issue throughout the system.
  This particular clinic has been in the works in some way or another 
for roughly 12 years, Mr. Chairman. The time is up for delays, and 
veterans of these 64 regions are entitled to answers.
  Last month, my two North Carolina colleagues in the Senate and I 
formally requested an update about the status of the outpatient clinic 
in Hickory. Unfortunately, we have yet to receive a response to our 
inquiry. Our veterans, I believe, deserve better.
  I would ask that as this bill moves forward to the Senate and to 
conference, the chairman and the ranking member work to get answers 
from the Department of Veterans Affairs, answers to why we have these 
continued delays for pending outpatient clinics. Veterans in Hickory, 
North Carolina, and across the country have sacrificed too much for our 
country and deserve to have, at the very least, convenient health care. 
They deserve a proper explanation and progress report as well.
  I also want to finish by commending the chairman for his, again, hard 
work on increasing funding for our veterans. I know that on both sides 
of the aisle we are very pleased with the work you've done, both the 
chairman and the ranking member, and we are looking forward to passage.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, let me thank the 
gentleman for his kind comments and say that while I don't know 
specifically where the Hickory Outpatient Clinic stands in the list of 
priorities for the VA, for the very reasons the gentleman mentioned 
about the importance of these clinics we have report language in this 
bill to require the VA to report back to us the status of these 
clinics.
  I think it is pretty clear the reason the VA hasn't funded many of 
these clinics, and there are 717 that have been funded, is simply that 
they didn't have enough money to fund the clinics. That is one reason 
we worked so hard this year in this Congress to provide an increase in 
VA care funding that is unprecedented in our Nation's history. If you 
count the 2007 continuing resolution plus the Iraq war supplemental 
plus this bill, if it passes today and becomes law, we will have 
provided in this Congress this year in the last 6 months an $11.9 
billion increase in VA discretionary spending, 90 percent of which goes 
to VA medical care.
  I hope that with passage of this bill, and now the administration has 
agreed not to veto it, we will perhaps have enough money to fund some 
of the clinics that have not been funded.
  We will look forward to working with the gentleman. He deserves an 
answer from the VA. I don't know why the gentleman hasn't gotten an 
answer back from the VA. I encourage you to keep calling them or 
talking to them until they do answer you.
  Again, I can't answer specifically on where Hickory does stand or 
should stand in the process. That should be a process based on the 
reality of the veterans' needs, comparing one community to another. But 
I sure look forward to working with our colleagues to see that we have 
enough funding in this bill to increase the number of VA clinics that 
we can build around the country.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               TITLE III

                            RELATED AGENCIES

                  American Battle Monuments Commission


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the 
     American Battle Monuments Commission, including the 
     acquisition of land or interest in land in foreign countries; 
     purchases and repair of uniforms for caretakers of national 
     cemeteries and monuments outside of the United States and its 
     territories and possessions; rent of office and garage space 
     in foreign countries; purchase (one-for-one replacement basis 
     only) and hire of passenger motor vehicles; not to exceed 
     $7,500 for official reception and representation expenses; 
     and insurance of official motor vehicles in foreign 
     countries, when required by law of such countries, 
     $43,470,000, to remain available until expended.


                 foreign currency fluctuations account

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the 
     American Battle Monuments Commission, $11,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, for purposes authorized by section 
     2109 of title 36, United States Code.

           United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the operation of the United 
     States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims as authorized by 
     sections 7251 through 7298 of title 38, United States Code, 
     $21,397,000, of which $1,300,000 shall be available for the 
     purpose of providing financial assistance as described, and 
     in accordance with the process and reporting procedures set 
     forth, under this heading in Public Law 102-229.

[[Page 16039]]



                      Department of Defense--Civil

                       Cemeterial Expenses, Army


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, as authorized by law, for 
     maintenance, operation, and improvement of Arlington National 
     Cemetery and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery, 
     including the purchase of two passenger motor vehicles for 
     replacement only, and not to exceed $1,000 for official 
     reception and representation expenses, $30,592,000, to remain 
     available until expended. In addition, such sums as may be 
     necessary for parking maintenance, repairs and replacement, 
     to be derived from the Lease of Department of Defense Real 
     Property for Defense Agencies account.

                      Armed Forces Retirement Home


                               trust fund

       For expenses necessary for the Armed Forces Retirement Home 
     to operate and maintain the Armed Forces Retirement Home--
     Washington, District of Columbia and the Armed Forces 
     Retirement Home--Gulfport, Mississippi, to be paid from funds 
     available in the Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund, 
     $55,724,000.

                      Armed Forces Retirement Home

                          Federal Fund Payment

       For payment to the ``Armed Forces Retirement Home'', 
     $800,000, to remain available until expended.

                                TITLE IV

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 401. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 402. Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 
     2008 pay raises for programs funded by this Act shall be 
     absorbed within the levels appropriated in this Act.
       Sec. 403. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used for any program, project, or activity, when it is 
     made known to the Federal entity or official to which the 
     funds are made available that the program, project, or 
     activity is not in compliance with any Federal law relating 
     to risk assessment, the protection of private property 
     rights, or unfunded mandates.
       Sec. 404. No part of any funds appropriated in this Act 
     shall be used by an agency of the executive branch, other 
     than for normal and recognized executive-legislative 
     relationships, for publicity or propaganda purposes, and for 
     the preparation, distribution or use of any kit, pamphlet, 
     booklet, publication, radio, television, or film presentation 
     designed to support or defeat legislation pending before 
     Congress, except in presentation to Congress itself.
       Sec. 405. All departments and agencies funded under this 
     Act are encouraged, within the limits of the existing 
     statutory authorities and funding, to expand their use of 
     ``E-Commerce'' technologies and procedures in the conduct of 
     their business practices and public service activities.


               Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mrs. Blackburn

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 13 offered by Mrs. Blackburn:
       In section 405 (page 48, beginning on line 11), strike 
     ``encouraged'' and insert ``directed''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House today, the 
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, American businesses in the private sector continue to 
advance the use of information and e-commerce technology to strengthen 
their bottom line and increase customer service. However, too many 
government agencies continue to use antiquated operating systems that 
do not use taxpayer dollars efficiently or create optimal conditions 
for customer service.
  Right here in the House of Representatives, we offer Americans e-
commerce services in the form of ``Write Your Rep.'' I am sure most of 
my colleagues and their staff use this program, and they use it with 
efficiency. It helps us to stay in touch.
  I have a military post in my district, Fort Campbell. It is located 
in Montgomery County, Tennessee. I also have 60,000 veterans that are 
there. One of the things we find is that many times our agencies, 
working with these constituents, continue to do business on antiquated 
systems that don't optimize efficiently.
  That is why I am offering this amendment today. Increasing the use of 
e-commerce technology and procedures in the bureaucracy will allow 
critical agencies funded under this act to operate more efficiently. 
But, more importantly, it will allow our members of the military and 
our veterans to gain access to records, especially health records, that 
they need in a timely manner.
  I want to thank the chairman for recognizing this important business 
objective. The underlying legislation takes a step forward to the goal 
by encouraging the agencies to expand the use of e-commerce.
  My amendment, however, is an important step further. It would direct 
the agencies funded under H.R. 2642 to expand the use of e-commerce 
technologies in the conducting of their business practices within the 
limits, within the limits, of the existing statute and funding.
  It is a straightforward, simple amendment. As we know, the 
bureaucracy is not going to do this on their own. They need the 
oversight from Congress.
  If successful, we have got three points we hope it would achieve: 
number one, lead to greater transparency in agency asset and records 
management; number two, enhance governmental reform and efficiency; 
and, number three, spur agencies to build best practices and conduct 
themselves in a more businesslike manner.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman will yield, I think 
this is a good amendment, and I will support it. I think there will be 
broad bipartisan support for your amendment, because it is well thought 
out and it is a positive thing to do. We will support it.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the 
chairman for thinking about the records process with our veterans and 
our military.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 406. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality 
     of the United States Government except pursuant to a transfer 
     made by, or transfer authority provided in, this or any other 
     appropriations Act.
       Sec. 407. Unless stated otherwise, all reports and 
     notifications required by this Act shall be submitted to the 
     Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and 
     Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Subcommittee on Military 
     Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies of the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.
       Sec. 408. The Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
     shall, not later than February 1, 2008, submit to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate a report projecting annual appropriations 
     necessary for the Department of Veterans Affairs to continue 
     providing necessary health care to veterans for fiscal years 
     2009 through 2012.


                   Amendment Offered by Mrs. Musgrave

  Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mrs. Musgrave:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available in this Act may be used for any action that is 
     related to or promotes the expansion of the boundaries or 
     size of the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site in southeastern 
     Colorado.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Musgrave) and the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Edwards) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
  Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend the chairman for his work on 
this bill, and I would like to commend the ranking member for the 
yeoman's job that you have done, for the work

[[Page 16040]]

you have had before you. I very much appreciate it.
  In Colorado, we have a very unique situation. We have a maneuver site 
that the United States Army uses, and it is 236,000 acres presently. 
The Army is wanting to expand this by 418,000 additional acres.
  If you drive in that area of our State, you will see this sign. This 
was created by a high school teacher from La Junta: ``Our land is our 
life. It is not for sale.''
  As a very strong supporter of the United States military, but also a 
very strong supporter of our private property rights, I am opposed to 
this expansion, and my amendment would say that no funds in this bill 
would be used for the expansion.
  A month ago in Colorado, our Democratic Governor, Bill Ritter, signed 
into law a bill to withdraw the State's consent to give up any land 
that the United States Army might acquire through condemnation. So 
there is a very strong message that comes from our State legislature, 
from our house and senate and from our Governor. But the most poignant 
opposition that I hear about is from the farmers and ranchers, many of 
them who have been there for five generations who will lose their land, 
who will lose their way of life.
  When you look at the opposition to the Pinon Canyon expansion, it 
goes on and on. But, interestingly enough, it is very diverse. The 
opposition comes from the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. It 
comes from property rights groups. But it also comes from groups such 
as the Sierra Club, Colorado Springs Chapter. This is all over the 
political spectrum that this expansion is opposed.
  As we think about what could happen in that area, it is interesting 
to look at the National Trust for Historic Preservation issues and 
their 2000 list of America's most endangered places: ``Pinon Canyon, 
Colorado. In Southeastern Colorado, under uninterrupted blue skies, 
Pinon Canyon is an area of scenic buttes, river valleys, family ranches 
and historic and archeological sites that span 11,500 years. The area 
is threatened by the United States Army's plan to expand its maneuver 
training ground by as much as 418,000 acres, a move that could lead to 
forced condemnation of private lands and damage or destroy historic 
Santa Fe Trail monuments, ranches and historic and prehistoric 
archeological sites.''
  That is what is at stake in southeastern Colorado. As we look at how 
much land the government already owns, in the red area you can see how 
much of our State is already government land in Colorado. The expansion 
of the Pinon Canyon maneuver site would be as large as the State of 
Rhode Island. It is striking.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Salazar).
  Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlelady from Colorado.
  Mr. Chairman, today I rise as a proud veteran, as a son of a veteran 
and the father of a veteran. I am honored to be the only veteran of the 
Colorado delegation.
  As an Army man, today I am saddened to rise in opposition to the 
Army's plan to condemn nearly half a million acres of privately owned 
ranches and farms in my district.
  Pinon Canyon currently has a 235,000-acre training facility which 
Fort Carson utilizes in southeastern Colorado. Now the Army is seeking 
to expand the Pinon Canyon site by an additional 418,000 acres, 
utilizing condemnation as a power to do so. The Army's plans include 
taking this land by condemnation. If the Army succeeds, Fort Carson and 
Pinon Canyon combined will be larger than the State of Rhode Island.
  Opposition to the expansion is unified, as the gentlewoman from 
Colorado stated. But when the Army acquired the original Pinon Canyon 
land in 1982, they promised local landowners that it would never be 
expanded. Now they are planning to take even more. The loss of 400,000 
acres of ranch land, Mr. Chairman, would devastate the economy of 
southeast Colorado.
  The BRAC decision of 2005 stated that the Army did not need 
additional space. In 1970, the Army first looked at condemning land in 
El Paso County, which is now in Mr. Lamborn's district for the original 
Pinon Canyon. Many residents from El Paso County fought against the 
possible land grab in their own backyard, and the site was eventually 
moved to southeast Colorado.
  I would ask my fellow Members, if you can't support this in your 
backyard, please don't support it in my district.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me say this is with mixed feelings: I want to make 
it clear that I think the Army has responsibility to these communities 
in Colorado to sit down with them, work with them and work with the 
landowners, because it is my understanding that at one point the Army 
made the statement that it would not exercise eminent domain.
  I also want to clarify that there is no money in this bill to allow 
for any acquisition of any land. The money in this bill could be used 
by the Army to pursue plans to later acquire land.
  I respect Mrs. Musgrave and Mr. Salazar for their opposition, and I 
say that with great respect to you, Mr. Salazar, knowing of your 
service and your family's service to our Nation's military. The reason 
I personally oppose this amendment is that the Army sees Fort Carson as 
an important part of growing the Army, of bringing troops back from 
Germany and South Korea, of implementing the BRAC process, and the Army 
has identified up to 5 million acres worldwide that they need for 
additional training operations.

                              {time}  1515

  Fort Carson is one of the tremendous beneficiaries of the BRAC 2005 
process, getting two additional brigades that are moving from Fort Hood 
as well as additional forces there. So I am going to oppose the 
amendment because I believe it would stop even the planning process for 
even a smaller amount, much smaller than 418,000 acres. I understand 
why the gentlewoman and the gentleman are opposing what the Army's 
intentions are, but at least let's clarify that there is no money in 
this bill for land acquisition.
  I yield to Mr. Salazar.
  Mr. SALAZAR. I agree there is no money for actual land acquisition, 
but there is money for the planning process. Do you agree with me that 
in the 2005 BRAC decision that the Army clearly stated they did not 
need any additional land in Colorado when they moved the troops from 
Fort Hood to Colorado to Fort Carson? Is that correct?
  Mr. EDWARDS. Reclaiming my time, actually, this is the first BRAC 
round, in 2005, that I actually voted against. One of the reasons was 
that I felt the Army was making some decisions that weren't in the best 
interests of the taxpayers and the Army. But the Army made their 
decisions. The BRAC recommendations were passed by the Congress, and 
now they are being implemented. I do have some concerns despite my 
opposition to BRAC 2005 that if we totally stop the planning for this 
expansion, we could seriously impact the training of forces during a 
critical time in the Army's history.
  I respect the gentleman's position, and I am going to encourage the 
Army to sit down and meet with both Members who are sponsoring this 
amendment, and perhaps the gentlelady and gentleman can win this vote.
  But if not, I am still going to encourage the Army to sit down and 
deal with the landowners and the people of Colorado, and the two of you 
in particular, to try to address this problem and the concerns, the 
legitimate concerns that you have raised.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, for a different perspective, I yield to the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding me 
this time.

[[Page 16041]]

  I rise today in opposition to this amendment which would cut off all 
funding to study an expansion of the Pinon Canyon maneuver site. This 
amendment would stop the Army from providing the soldiers with much-
needed additional training space, an action which could have serious 
negative consequences for the Army and for the brave men and women 
serving our Nation.
  By prohibiting these funds, the Army would not even be able to study 
the area and complete an environmental impact statement. The purpose of 
an EIS is to assess the environmental, economic and other impacts of a 
proposed action before a Federal action is even taken up.
  Private property rights are deeply important to me. Any option to 
increase the size of the PCMS should be thoroughly studied, and if 
plans for the expansion were to go forward, it should occur to the 
greatest extent possible, if not completely through willing sellers.
  The type of enemy we are now facing overseas is much different than 
during the Cold War. PCMS contains terrain much like areas such as Iraq 
and Afghanistan. We are fortunate as a country to have this training 
area, but the Army has outgrown it. It would be a shame to not even 
study the possibility of using an existing facility that could easily 
be transformed into a 22nd-century facility. During the Cold War, 
divisions consisting of approximately 20,000 soldiers fought in 
relatively small areas in Europe. Consequently, training could be 
conducted in areas of approximately 22,000 acres or 5 by 7 miles. 
Today, brigade-size formations of approximately 3,500 soldiers must now 
operate in and control areas of approximately 615,000 acres, or 31 by 
31 miles.
  While Army units have gotten smaller, the battlefield has gotten 
larger. We owe our soldiers proper training for the conditions they 
will experience in other combat theaters. Not allowing the soldiers to 
train adequately puts them in harm's way.
  The Army is simply asking for an opportunity to study an expansion. 
To deny them this opportunity would be to substitute political pressure 
for the considered judgment of our military commanders who are charged 
with training and protecting our troops.
  It is unrealistic and irresponsible to think other public lands in 
Colorado or the West, such as roadless wilderness areas or national 
parks, could be used as a substitute. No critic of PCMS has come 
forward with a responsible and specific alternative. The longer 
distances involved would also make that difficult.
  Over 200 soldiers from Fort Carson have died in Iraq and Afghanistan 
fighting terrorism. The soldiers and commanders at Fort Carson know 
what it takes to wage war in the 21st century, and they are serious 
about it. It would truly be a shame if they don't have the proper 
training facilities so that they can succeed. The Army should at least 
be given a chance to study the issue and present their findings.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Colorado 
(Mrs. Musgrave), but I would express to all of my colleagues, though, 
that we are receiving calls from people who have made airline plans and 
are hoping to get back to their districts and to their homes for 
Father's Day. Mindful of that, I am happy to yield to the gentlelady.
  Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to point out that my 
son-in-law served in Afghanistan, and I would like to commend Mr. 
Salazar, his father and his son for their service to this great Nation 
and point out that in the 1970s the land was thought about in the 
Colorado Springs area in El Paso County, and the landowners there 
fought it.
  And so when anyone would imply that Mr. Salazar and I, Mr. Chairman, 
are responding to political pressure, what we are doing is standing up 
for private property rights and balancing that with our concern that 
our soldiers have the proper training.
  It is like Mr. Salazar said, you oppose it in your own yard, but it 
is okay for someone else. I am standing up for those ranchers. You 
might as well cross southeastern Colorado off the map if this expansion 
goes forward. So I respectfully look at the opinion of my friend from 
Colorado and I do say, though, that in this country the government owns 
enough land. There are alternatives to this that would be satisfactory 
in balancing our support for private property rights and our support 
for our troops.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment.
  Passage of this amendment will not stop the proposed expansion of the 
Army's Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site in southeastern Colorado, but it will 
delay consideration of the Army's plans until two very important 
questions can be answered: (1) What are the Army's real training needs, 
and (2) will the Army assure Coloradans that it will not resort to 
condemnation to acquire land?
  Before giving the Army money to take the first steps toward expanding 
these training grounds, we should be convinced that there is a real 
military need for the Army to acquire an additional 418,000 acres. I 
have kept an open mind on this question and that that is why, along 
with the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Readiness Subcommittee of 
the House Armed Services Committee, I have asked the Government 
Accountability Office to report to Congress on whether this expansion 
is the right way to meet the Army's training requirements and what 
other alternatives the Army should consider.
  More important, it is abundantly clear to me that there is no 
support--even among proponents of an expansion--for the Army's use of 
eminent domain to acquire any land. But so far, the Army has been 
reluctant to give the State of Colorado and the landowners in the area 
a commitment that it will not resort to condemnation. For me, that 
commitment is essential, and unless and until the Army makes clear it 
will not use condemnation, I believe Congress should not allow the 
expansion process to go forward.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Musgrave).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado will be 
postponed.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Wicker and I would not want to cut off 
any Member from expressing his or her heartfelt views on important 
issues in this bill, but we would like to bring to the attention of the 
House and our colleagues that there are a number of colleagues trying 
to catch airplanes to get back home for Father's Day weekend. There are 
a number of amendments that are subject to a point of order. I would 
like to respectfully request Members on those amendments to keep your 
remarks to 2 minutes. I will reserve my right to exercise a point of 
order. If we take too much time, we might have to go ahead and exercise 
those points of order.
  If we could proceed ahead expeditiously, I would appreciate that.


            Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Hall of New York

  Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Hall of New York:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to provide to any officer of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs who is appointed by the President, by and 
     with the consent of the Senate, or to any Deputy Under 
     Secretary or Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs a performance award under section 5384 of 
     title 5, United States Code, or a performance-based cash 
     award under section 4505a of such title.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Hall) and

[[Page 16042]]

a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Chairman, my amendment makes a small change 
to funding at the Department of Veterans Affairs. It would prohibit any 
funding to be spent for performance bonuses to senior level staff at 
the Department for fiscal year 2008.
  This amendment would effectively mean no person in a Presidential-
appointed position or Secretary-level position would receive a 
performance bonus during the coming fiscal year.
  As I begin, let me state that the Department of Veterans Affairs has 
done a very good job in many areas for our Nation's veterans. In fact, 
its health care system is rated amongst the very best in the country, 
and the demand of veterans to get into the system speaks to the high 
level of care that it provides.
  However, there remains a significant need for improvement in many 
areas. In the last 3 years, the VA has underestimated its health care 
budget by nearly $1 billion. It has roughly 600,000 veterans claims 
backlogged and veterans currently waiting an average of 177 days before 
receiving a decision on their claim.
  Furthermore, according to a draft Inspector General's report, the VA 
is significantly overstating its success in getting patients timely 
appointments with VA doctors. The number of claims pending before the 
Department has steadily increased over the last 5 years. The current 
wait time is nearly 2 months longer than what Secretary Nicholson 
suggested in front of our Veterans Affairs Subcommittee would be 
acceptable to him, which was 125 days rather than the 177 currently 
being suffered by our veterans. That is nearly a 2-month difference.
  The Secretary himself called this ``unacceptable.'' However, the 
awards for bonuses last year ranged up to and included a number of 
members of high management at the VA of $33,000 in annual bonus. Their 
award bonuses were because of evaluations of outstanding and excellent. 
In fact, 87 percent of the senior staff were called ``outstanding'' or 
``excellent'' in performance. One of those who got the $33,000 bonus 
had only served in his position from February 2006 until September 
2006. So an outstanding performance for 6 months earned that individual 
a $33,000 bonus; this at a time when our veterans are waiting 177 days 
average to have their claims for disability heard. And if they go to an 
appeal, it is an average of 2 years to wait for that appeal to be 
heard. This simply makes no sense. It is either unacceptable or it is 
outstanding, but it can't be both.
  I am sure that most of the staff at the Department is dedicated and 
hardworking and the service they provided in often excellent, but in 
other areas it is unsatisfactory. Our veterans deserve accountability 
from the VA. Yet Secretary Nicholson himself has signed off on all of 
these bonuses, making only one change since 2004.
  Veterans in my district and across the country were outraged when The 
Washington Post and the Army Times broke this story a couple of months 
ago. The VA Committee and the Subcommittee on Oversight invited 
Secretary Nicholson to testify this week and explain the bonuses. 
However, he decline and decided instead to send a substitute who 
admitted to knowing very little about the issue.
  I understand that the chairman wants to study and best address this 
issue; and I would prefer that rather than eliminating bonuses 
altogether that we have them tied to performance, as bonuses should be. 
So if the chairman agrees, I would like to work with him and other 
Members on a separate piece of legislation to add accountability to the 
bonus process to the Department.
  As in private industry, bonuses at the VA should be tied to 
performance, and I believe all of us want to see that happen, want to 
see the backlog reduced, and want to see our veterans get their claims 
processed promptly.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the chairman.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Hall for his strong 
leadership; first, on trying to see that this Congress, which we are 
going to do in this bill, provides the funding to reduce the terrible 
backlog of veterans cases pending. As he mentioned, there are over 
400,000-plus veterans waiting for their cases to be considered.
  And, secondly, for bringing to the attention of the Congress the 
problems raised by the bonuses given to a number of VA employees at a 
time when so many veterans are waiting for their benefits.
  I thank the gentleman for agreeing to withdraw the amendment. We have 
every intention of working with him and the Veterans' Affairs Committee 
on which he serves as a subcommittee chairman to address the inequities 
of this situation.
  Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Chairman, with the chairman's agreement, I 
ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
New York?
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, this 
amendment is either ill-conceived or politically conceived in that the 
Deputy Secretary is the gentleman who came to the committee to testify, 
and that was by agreement at the committee.
  So to say that the administration sent someone who was uninformed is 
not a good way to address this to our colleagues.

                              {time}  1530

  That was by agreement of the committee, and it was the Deputy 
Secretary of the VA who came in and who testified, and as a matter of 
fact, his testimony, that I will share with all my colleagues, is that 
he testified just last week during the Oversight and Investigations 
Subcommittee hearing on the SEC bonuses, at which the author of this 
amendment was present and he said, by statute, senior executive 
presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed appointees are not 
eligible for performance bonuses.
  Did you hear that? They're not eligible for bonuses. So what we have 
here is, the gentleman's brought an amendment that is either redundant, 
multiplicitous or unnecessary.
  With that, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Hall).
  Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Chairman, thank you for agreeing to allow 
the amendment to be withdrawn.
  For the record, I would like to say that Under Secretary Mansfield, 
under oath this week at the Subcommittee on Oversight hearing, at least 
six times answered that he did not know the information and would have 
to go back and respond in writing. And one of those times specifically 
had do with an individual who was identified by the Congressional 
Research Service as being a presidential appointee who is among those 
receiving bonuses.
  So at least in one case that may need to be clarified.


             Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       Page 49, after line 11, insert the following new section:
       Sec. 409. (a) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall 
     increase the number of medical centers specializing in post-
     traumatic stress disorder in underserved urban areas, which 
     shall include using the services of existing health care 
     entities.
       (b) At least one of the existing health care institutions 
     used by the Secretary pursuant to subsection (a) shall be--
       (1) located in an area defined as a HUBzone (as that term 
     is defined in section 3(p) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 632(p)) on the basis of one or more qualified census 
     tracts;
       (2) located within a State that has sustained more than 
     five percent of the total

[[Page 16043]]

     causalities suffered by the United States Armed Forces in 
     Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, as 
     May 1, 2007; and
       (3) have at least 20 years experience and significant 
     expertise in providing treatment and counseling services with 
     respect to substance abuse, alcohol addiction, and 
     psychiatric or stress-related disorders to populations with 
     special needs, including veterans and members of the Armed 
     Forces serving on active duty.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me offer my appreciation 
to the full Committee on Appropriations, both the chairman and ranking 
member, and to this subcommittee. I've seen enormous commitment to 
bipartisanship between Mr. Edwards and, of course, Mr. Wicker. But my 
good colleague and friend from Texas has outdone himself, and this 
particular veterans appropriation, the Military Construction Veterans 
Affairs appropriation, signifies nothing but joy for Americans and 
veterans all across this country.
  Might I just cite the fact that this bill moves above the President's 
budget in medical services, making it $28.9 billion; moves above the 
President's request on homeless vets, $130 million; moves above the 
President's request on medical facilities, $4.1 billion; and moves 
above it on extended care facilities, $165 million.
  Many of us have risen to the floor today to talk about post-traumatic 
stress. I just wanted to remind my colleagues of the kind of horror and 
nightmare that many of our soldiers and returning soldiers and veterans 
live with, suffering from PTSD. It is simply to acknowledge the fact 
that over and over again you relive the tragedy of the experience, 
whether it's small arms fire, whether it's IEDs, whether it's seeing 
your comrade fall in battle in front of you, whether it's seeing his 
body implode, you know that you're reliving it, and the number one 
basis of PTSD is military and combat exposure.
  Just for the record, let me acknowledge that 94 percent of the 
soldiers in Iraq reported receiving small arms fire; 86 percent of 
soldiers in Iraq reported knowing someone who was seriously injured or 
killed. This is a major issue and it is a major part of the lives of 
our soldiers.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment simply was to do this: It was to provide 
more medical centers in places like rural areas or small cities to be 
able to be utilized for PTSD. I know Chairman Edwards knows this issue 
because it was his leadership that generated the change of the Waco 
veterans hospital into a mental health facility. I want that to 
continue to stand, and I want to thank him for the increased dollars 
he's put in for PTSD.
  But, Mr. Chairman, I have a veterans advisory committee that's 
indicated that we need centers around the Nation, smaller centers maybe 
in small hospitals, that would respond to veterans and returning 
soldiers, maybe even to the extent of reimbursing them by being in 
those particular centers.
  Let me close by simply saying that this bill is comprehensive. I look 
forward to working with the chairman on more permanent housing for the 
disabled, as we work toward more PTSD facilities, even though we have a 
great amount of resources here, more adjusted housing, if you will, for 
those who are coming back so they're not living alone.
  I want to take special privilege to acknowledge the DeGeorge in my 
community for my homeless vets, a facility for homeless vets, DeGeorge 
at Union Station and U.S. Vets. All of them confront veterans and 
returning soldiers with PTSD. If we expand these facilities so that 
rural and small cities and even inner city areas, which is what my 
amendment is focused on, everybody would have the opportunity to be 
able to access help with PTSD.
  I would ask my colleagues to consider as we move toward conference to 
be able to work on this issue in an expanded way.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in strong support of the bill and in 
favor of my amendment. I also rise to express my sincere appreciation 
to Mr. Edwards, the chairman of the Appropriations I subcommittee on 
Veterans Affairs and Military Construction, and the Chairman of the 
Veterans Affairs Committee, Mr. Filner, for all they have done and 
continue to do to make real President Lincoln's admonition that ``we 
care for him who has borne the battle, and for his widow and orphan.''
  In particular, I wish to commend Chairman Edwards, for the 
leadership, commitment, and foresight he has demonstrated on the issue 
of PTSD and the overall mental health of our nation's veterans. On 
February 28, 2007, he announced that $3 million has been made available 
for the Waco VA PTSD program in 2006 which is now available so that 
researchers at Fort Hood, Texas A&M, Baylor, the Temple VA, and the 
Waco VA hospital work towards realizing their goal of making the Waco 
VA, in conjunction with Ft. Hood and the Temple VA, a world-class PTSD 
and mental health care research center.
  Like Mr. Edwards and Mr. Filner, I am committed to improving the 
lives of thousands of veterans who have risked their lives for our 
nation, and I believe my amendment plays a crucial role in ensuring 
that veterans suffering from PTSD receive the medical treatment they 
desperately need.
  Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to explain my amendment 
to H.R. 2642, the Veterans Affairs and Military Construction 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year of 2008. As a Member of Congress 
from Texas, a state which has sustained more casualties in the ongoing 
conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq than all but one other, I am pleased 
to offer this amendment. This amendment is intended to address the 
urgent need for more post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment 
and counseling facilities servicing veterans living in some of the more 
distressed areas of our country.
  Mr. Chairman, according to Webster's, dignity is ``the quality or 
condition of being esteemed, honored or worthy.'' We can never do 
enough to honor our wounded veterans. Studies have shown that 30 
percent of troops deployed to Iraq suffer from depression, anxiety, or 
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, when wounded troops 
return home the treatment they receive is more befitting a second class 
citizen than a hero. This is a shame and a great stain on our nation.
  How these problems could be overlooked or neglected by this 
Administration is unfathomable. The very leaders that these brave young 
men and women rely on let them down. The message that incidents like 
Walter Reed Medical Center sends to our troops is that we do not care 
enough. But that is not the message we wish to send. The Veterans 
Administration and Military Construction Appropriations Act of 2008, 
H.R. 2642, will go long away toward correcting this misapprehension. 
All members of the House are indebted to our colleague, Mr. Edwards of 
Texas, for his masterful leadership in shepherding this landmark 
legislation to the House floor. For the 25,380, 2,401 from Texas, brave 
men and women who have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, help is on 
the way. And the 3,519, 298 from Texas, heroes who have given the last 
full measure of devotion will always be in our hearts and prayers.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
to increase the number of medical facilities specializing in post-
traumatic stress disorder located in underserved urban areas. Access to 
post-traumatic stress disorder treatment is especially important since 
veterans living in such areas are less likely to be diagnosed and 
treated for post-traumatic stress disorder.
  Mr. Chairman, PTSD is one of the most prevalent and devastating 
psychological wounds suffered by the brave men and women fighting in 
far off lands to defend the values and freedom we hold dear.
  For those of us whose daily existence is not lived in harm's way, it 
is difficult to imagine the horrific images that American servicemen 
and women deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other theaters of war see 
on a daily basis. In an instant a suicide bomber, an lED, or an 
insurgent can obliterate your best friend and right in front of your 
face. Yet, you are trained and expected to continue on with the 
mission, and you do, even though you may not even have reached your 
20th birthday.
  But there always comes a reckoning. And it usually comes after stress 
and trauma of battle is over and you are alone with your thoughts and 
memories. And the horror of those desperate and dangerous encounters 
with the enemy and your own mortality come flooding back.
  PTSD was first brought to public attention in relation to war 
veterans, but it can result from a variety of traumatic incidents, such 
as mugging, rape, torture, being kidnapped or held

[[Page 16044]]

captive, child abuse, car accidents, train wrecks, plane crashes, 
bombings, or natural disasters such as floods or earthquakes.
  People with PTSD may startle easily, become emotionally numb, 
especially in relation to people with whom they used to be close, lose 
interest in things they used to enjoy, have trouble feeling 
affectionate, be irritable, become more aggressive, or even become 
violent. They avoid situations that remind them of the original 
incident, and anniversaries of the incident are often very difficult. 
PTSD symptoms seem to be worse if the event that triggered them was 
deliberately initiated by another person, as in a mugging or a 
kidnapping. Most people with PTSD repeatedly relive the trauma in their 
thoughts during the day and in nightmares when they sleep. These are 
called flashbacks. Flashbacks may consist of images, sounds, smells, or 
feelings, and are often triggered by ordinary occurrences, such as a 
door slamming or a car backfiring on the street. A person having q 
flashback may lose touch with reality and believe that the traumatic 
incident is happening all over again.
  Mr. Chairman, the matter is that most veterans with PTSD also have 
other psychiatric disorders, which are a consequence of PTSD. These 
veterans have co-occurring disorders, which include depression, alcohol 
and/or drug abuse problems, panic, and/or other anxiety disorders.
  The current conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq are the most continuous 
combat operations since Vietnam. Only one comprehensive study has 
examined the mental health impact of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, 
and that was performed by Charles W. Hoge, MD. This study looked at the 
experience of soldiers in the war zone and symptoms of psychological 
distress. Soldiers in Iraq are at risk for being killed or wounded 
themselves, are likely to have witnessed the suffering of others, and 
may have participated in killing or wounding others as part of combat 
operations. All of these activities have a demonstrated association 
with the development of PTSD. Hoge's study indicated that 94 percent of 
soldiers in Iraq reported receiving small-arms fire. In addition, 86 
percent of soldiers in Iraq reported knowing someone who was seriously 
injured or killed, 68 percent reported seeing dead or seriously injured 
Americans, and 51 percent reported handling or uncovering human 
remains. The majority, 77 percent, of soldiers deployed to Iraq 
reported shooting or directing fire at the enemy, 48 percent reported 
being responsible for the death of an enemy combatant, and 28 percent 
reported being responsible for the death of a noncombatant.
  My amendment recognizes that these soldiers are first and foremost, 
human. They carry their experiences with them. Ask a Vietnam Veteran 
about the frequency of nightmares they experience, and one will realize 
that serving in the Armed Forces leaves a lasting impression, whether 
good or bad. My amendment ensures that no soldier is left behind. By 
directing the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to increase the number of 
medical facilities specializing in PTSD that are located in underserved 
urban areas, and conducting a concurrent study on increasing access to 
PTSD treatment at these facilities those soldiers will never feel 
forgotten or taken for granted. These soldiers can be certain that 
Members of Congress will ensure that they receive the necessary 
treatment to guarantee that their adjustment back into society is a 
successful one.
  As the war in Iraq continues to drag on, and with our country 
continuing to send military personnel to Afghanistan, the military has 
been overwhelmed with returning soldiers suffering from mental health 
problems. Earlier this month, Col. Elspeth Ritchie, psychiatry 
consultant to the Army surgeon general, stated ``as the war has gone 
on, PTSD and other psychological effects of war have increased. The 
number of mental health workers that was adequate for a peacetime 
military is not adequate for a nation that's been at war.''
  Mr. Chairman, according to surveys conducted of troops in Iraq, 15-20 
percent of Army soldiers have demonstrated signs of post-traumatic 
stress. Symptoms of this serious disorder include nightmares, 
flashbacks, emotional detachment, dissociation, insomnia, loss of 
appetite, memory loss, clinical depression, and anxiety. One year after 
returning from combat, approximately 35 percent of soldiers are seeking 
some kind of mental health treatment. Among soldiers still stationed in 
Iraq and Afghanistan, many incidents of abuse, including killings and 
rapes by U.S. soldiers, have been attributed to ethics lapses caused by 
the strain of combat.
  Mr. Chairman, last Thursday, the Department of Defense released a 
report that stated ``current efforts fall significantly short'' in 
providing help for troops. Further, this report found that the 
psychological health needs of America's military service members, their 
families and their survivors pose a daunting and growing challenge to 
the Department of Defense.
  I urge adoption of my amendment. And I thank the Chairman for his 
fine work in bringing this exceptional legislation to the House floor 
where it should receive an overwhelmingly favorable vote.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman and particularly 
want to salute her for her strong support for veterans and, in 
particular, for PTSD and mental health care studies.
  As she knows, this bill has a significant increase in funding, 
historic increase in funding, for VA medical care, and we have directed 
in the report of the bill that a significant part of that money should 
go to PTSD and mental health care services.
  So I hope with the funding levels in this bill we will have 
opportunities to provide the kind of expanded service that the 
gentlewoman has spoken about so eloquently.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished 
gentleman, and I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Upton

  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Upton:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. 409. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to purchase light bulbs unless the light bulbs have 
     the ``ENERGY STAR'' designation.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I first want to thank Chairman Edwards and 
Ranking Member Wicker, Mr. Obey and others, particularly my coauthor, 
Ms. Harman, on this amendment.
  As Congress tackles climate change legislation and examines ways to 
promote energy efficiency, it is so important that the Federal 
Government set a proper example, taking the lead in commonsense 
conservation measures. Some would say this is an amendment that sets a 
shining example for the rest of the country.
  The Federal Government has to be the world's largest consumer of 
light bulbs, and with this amendment, we will likely save American 
taxpayers probably as much as $100 million.
  Why Energy Star light bulbs? Well, current incandescent bulbs on 
store shelves are obsolete, and they're highly inefficient. In fact, 
only 10 percent of the energy consumed by each bulb is for light, with 
90 percent wasted on unnecessary heat.
  Energy Star light bulbs use about 75 percent less energy than the 
standard incandescent bulbs, as they last as much as 10 times longer. 
In fact, if every house in the Nation switched to Energy Star bulbs, we 
would have the potential to annually reduce the emissions equivalent of 
80 coal-burning plants each year, saving 65 billion kilowatts.
  This amendment will make the Federal Government a shining example of 
how we can conserve energy, one light bulb at a time.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, if my colleagues will excuse the pun, I 
want to thank the gentleman for enlightening the VA and the DOD on this 
issue. I'm glad to support this amendment. It is an important issue, 
and we can set a good example for the country by passing it.

[[Page 16045]]

  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, it is now my pleasure to yield to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), a valued leader on armed services and 
veterans issues.
  Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of our south Texas veterans, we 
appreciate the committee's concern regarding access to inpatient and 
outpatient care for our far south Texas veterans.
  Let me say I compliment you, Mr. Chairman, for doing such a great job 
and for having way down in your heart the care of the veterans that 
served in many, many wars, not only in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  These veterans have to travel upwards of 6 hours each way to receive 
inpatient care, and many times they have their appointments cancelled. 
As you know, the VA's currently finalizing a study on options to 
provide inpatient and outpatient specialty care which will be out this 
July.
  And Mr. Chairman, as you know, this war has resulted in many 
casualties. We've had over 46 young men killed in this war. We have 
lost more, between Chairman Hinojosa and I, 46 soldiers. In addition, 
we've had many more soldiers maimed and injured; and what we would like 
to see, Mr. Chairman, would the committee work with us to move the 
issue of a veterans hospital in south Texas forward.
  Mr. EDWARDS. I thank the chairman for his strong leadership over the 
years on behalf of the veterans in south Texas.
  With that, I'd like to yield to my colleague and close friend, Mr. 
Hinojosa.
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
2642, and I also rise on behalf of myself, the Honorable Congressman 
Ortiz and the Honorable Congressman Cuellar and the more than 75 
veterans who in the fall of 2005 walked in the hot sun a long, long 250 
miles from Edinburg, Texas, to San Antonio to raise the level of 
awareness of a badly needed veterans hospital in south Texas.
  I want to sincerely thank Chairman Edwards for your outstanding 
leadership and for the past support for veterans affairs. I look 
forward to working with you to accomplish what naysayers have said, 
that it will never get done.
  And finally, I want to emphasize that our south Texas veterans and 
the south Texas congressional delegation have been fighting for a 
veterans hospital for more than 20 years. While the VA has a contract 
for a few hospital beds, those 10 beds are not enough to take care of 
the more than 75,000 veterans living in the eight county region. Once 
the VA releases their report next month, will the chairman work with us 
to address any shortfalls that are identified for inpatient care in 
south Texas?
  Mr. EDWARDS. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, let me say the answer 
to that is yes. As a native son of south Texas, as someone who grew up 
admiring Dr. Hector Garcia, the great World War II veteran who founded 
the American GI forum as you know, I have always stood in awe of the 
service of south Texans and Hispanic Americans as well in south Texas 
to our country in time of war and in time of our greatest need.
  While a veterans hospital in south Texas would have to be authorized 
by the VA authorization committee, if that were to be done, certainly 
again as a native son of south Texas, it'd be a dream come true for all 
of us who care about that part of the country to see a hospital built.
  The data will have to be there. The report should be a very important 
one coming in July, but until that report comes, let me just say in the 
meantime that veterans all across south Texas have benefited from the 
hard work of Mr. Hinojosa and our colleague Mr. Ortiz, and they're 
getting services today they wouldn't have gotten without your help, and 
I salute you both for that effort.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Pearce

  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Pearce:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to reimburse employees of the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs for official travel expenses until the Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs increases the mileage reimbursement rate 
     payable under section 111 of title 38, United States Code, to 
     individuals traveling to or from a Department facility so 
     that such rate is equal to the rate payable to Federal 
     Government employees traveling on official business in 
     privately-owned vehicles, as prescribed by the Administrator 
     of General Services under section 5707(b) of title 5, United 
     States Code.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. A point of order is reserved.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico.
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, we call our veterans from World War II 
America's greatest generation but our actions don't always hold water.
  I rise today to offer an amendment to the Military Construction-
Veterans Affairs appropriations bill which would ensure veterans are 
appropriately reimbursed for mileage travel to and from medical 
facilities in New Mexico or large rural States.
  Many times people in my county, 305 miles away from Albuquerque one 
way, are directed to drive to Albuquerque. These people, many are like 
my father in their 80s, they cannot travel 5\1/2\ hours one way. It's 
unthinkable that we do that. It's unconscionable that we only pay them 
11 cents a mile.
  From Hobbs to Albuquerque, 305 miles one way, the reimbursement is 
$34. I would like to ask anyone in this chamber how they would expect 
to drive 305 miles for $34, but even worse, the Veterans' 
Administration takes a fee when they get there. Approximately $7.50 of 
the $34 is then sacrificed to the VA.

                              {time}  1545

  No allowance is made to sleep overnight. No allowance is made for 
hotel. No allowance is made for any circumstance except turning around 
and driving another 5\1/2\ hours to get back home. We are reimbursing 
all that driving at 11 cents a mile.
  Meanwhile many of us in government jobs, all Federal officials are 
reimbursed at 48\1/2\ cents per mile because that's the going rate. 
That's the rate that we should be paying, and yet to America's Greatest 
Generation, we're paying 11 cents a mile.
  Now, the director of the service, the Secretary, could change this by 
regulation, and all people on this House floor agree that it should be 
changed. Back in March of 2007, March of this year, we passed the 
Wounded Warrior Act, H.R. 1538, by a vote of 426-0, where we mandated 
that the Secretary actually do this.
  But we also know in Washington that we play games with people, we 
play games with our veterans. So that bill now is trapped over in the 
Senate.
  What my amendment simply does is say we would like for the Secretary 
not to pay anyone mileage from this bill, from H.R. 2642, until he 
remedies the situation with our veterans. Pay them what the mileage 
costs them to drive. We are mandating that they go that far to the 
facilities. That's unthinkable, but it's unconscionable that we are 
paying only 11 cents a mile.
  So while we are claiming America's generation, America's World War II 
veterans, to be our Greatest Generation, let's begin to act with honor 
and reimburse them the way that we should. My amendment would ensure 
that.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to make a point of order.

[[Page 16046]]

  Mr. Chairman, let me just say we all know that 11 cents per mile is 
inadequate. We need to deal with it. I don't think this amendment is 
the right way and the right time to do that.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a point of order against the 
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes 
legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of 
rule XXI.
  The rule states in pertinent part: an amendment to a general 
appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing an existing law 
imposes additional duties.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of 
order?
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, I would say to the chairman that I 
understand and accept that, but I would point out to the chairman that 
we have legislated this way through appropriations before, and we'll do 
it again.
  I would simply make the point that the point of order today says we 
will not do what our seniors and what our veterans deserve for us to do 
one more time.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time and graciously 
accept the gentleman's comments in his point of order and thank him for 
his work on this bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. The amendment imposes a legislative condition on the 
availability of funds, namely, the increasing of a reimbursement rate 
not required under current law.
  As such, the amendment constitutes legislation under clause 2 of rule 
XXI.
  The point of order is sustained.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I 
yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Donnelly).
  Mr. DONNELLY. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend you on this bill and 
what a tremendous job your committee has done in producing this. I want 
to make sure that the Veterans Administration uses the added resources 
that you have provided to help reduce the disability claims that we 
have seen getting backlogged. We need to reduce that backlog in the 
most efficient manner possible.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this underlying bill. For the first 
time in years, Congress is going to provide the kind of resources the 
VA should have in order to provide the level of health care and 
customer service that America's veterans have earned through their 
service.
  I commend you and the committee for drafting a bill that we can all 
be proud of and that works for our veterans.
  Today, America's disabled veterans must wait an average of almost 6 
months for the VA to make a decision on their initial claim. Right now, 
as we speak, almost half a million veterans have pending claims that 
have already exceeded that 6-month time period, a period of time, I 
believe, that is far, far too long.
  With hundreds of thousands of returning veterans from Iraq and 
Afghanistan, we can only expect the demand for services to rise. This 
is an unacceptable situation, as you well know, Mr. Chairman, and it's 
a result from two occurrences, insufficient resources at the VA to 
process claims and a system that fundamentally needs to be improved. We 
commend you because this bill starts to address the funding issues that 
we face.
  H.R. 2642 provides invaluable new resources to address the VA's 
deficiencies, including funding for over 1,000 additional claim 
workers. I want to make sure the VA is doing everything possible in 
considering every opportunity to use the funds you are using in a wise 
fashion.
  The Government Accountability Office has made eight commonsense 
recommendations to how it can improve the disability claims process at 
the VA. This report, most recently reiterated on May 25, is a report 
that deals with our wounded warriors and how to take care of them 
better. It has eight strategic ways to fix the disability claims 
situation.
  However, according to the GAO, the VA is not moving on these eight 
recommendations. I think the Congress should know why the VA is not 
moving forward with these, and if they do move forward, they should let 
us know when and how they are going to implement these recommendations. 
We should require the VA to report back to Congress on what it is doing 
to implement the GAO recommendations and how they can improve this 
process.
  Mr. Chairman, we are grateful. The veterans of Indiana's Second 
District are grateful for the increase in funds, and we ask your help 
in making sure that the VA uses those funds in a wise way and reduces 
the disability claims backlog.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, let me thank Mr. 
Donnelly for his leadership and seeing that we did put additional 
funding in this bill to hire, as he mentioned, over 1,000 new VA case 
workers, actually over 1,100 VA case workers to reduce that absolutely 
unacceptable backlog of handling veterans cases.
  I also look forward to working with the gentleman in the months ahead 
to see how we can implement the GAO recommendations, to see we not only 
have additional money for the VA to reduce that management backlog, but 
to see that we are putting in place management practices to reduce it 
even further.
  This is not the first time the gentleman has spoken out on behalf of 
veterans on this problem. I thank him for his continued leadership on 
this effort.
  Mr. DONNELLY. I thank you for your leadership and your wisdom on this 
issue.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EDWARDS. At this time I would like to yield to my colleague and 
friend, a distinguished veteran who comes to this Congress as the 
highest ranking enlisted officer to have ever served in Congress, the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Walz).
  Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Thank you to the distinguished colleague and 
gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. Chairman, having been a member of our armed services for over 20 
years and a member of many of our veterans service organizations for a 
long time and now as a representative of tens of thousands of veterans, 
I can assure you that no one has been a bigger supporter and fought 
harder for veterans than the gentleman from Texas.
  It is an honor to stand here as we have crafted, I believe, under his 
leadership, one of the best pieces of legislation that has ever come 
through the House. I thank you for that, Mr. Chairman.
  Having represented the district of southern Minnesota that includes 
the Mayo Clinic, the efficiency and quality of care in health care 
services is of deep concern to me.
  One of the areas that I am concerned with, and one that I look 
forward to working with the chairman and his committee on, is how we 
figure out how to make sure that VA and the Department of Defense are 
fully cooperating in the efficient use of their health care resources.
  In the past, the VA and the DOD have been encouraged by Congress to 
do the best they can to make sure they share those resources 
effectively. Some great examples of successes come out of that. Joint 
purchasing of pharmaceuticals has been one of those where we have seen 
great savings for our Nation, great savings for our veterans.
  A year ago, the Government Accountability Office found that the VA 
and DOD are, indeed, making progress. But they also made some 
suggestions where they said standards must be developed to measure that 
performance in order to determine whether they are doing an adequate 
job of sharing their health care resources.
  A year later yet we haven't seen, even though DOD and VA have agreed, 
we haven't seen them implement some of those recommendations.
  Once, again, I applaud the chairman for a great piece of legislation, 
very thoughtful. I applaud my friends on other side of the aisle for 
great cooperation, thoughtful care, and an absolute commitment, a moral 
commitment to taking care of our veterans.
  I look forward to working with you on this issue in the future to 
make sure

[[Page 16047]]

that we are not only taking care of our veterans at the highest quality 
standard; we are also safeguarding those precious resources of the 
American taxpayers to make sure we are not duplicating services when we 
don't have to and to make sure that we are maximizing our effect.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time. I want to thank the 
gentleman for his distinguished military service to our country. 
Veterans of America ought to be grateful to having someone like you 
with your experience on the VA Committee.
  You have taken a leadership position this year. Particularly we look 
forward to working with you in getting the VA and DOD to work together. 
There needs to be a seamless transition as someone moves from active 
duty or is a member of the Guard and Reserves into the VA health care 
system or the VA benefits system. We know we will have a better system 
because of your leadership, and we will work with you.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to my colleague and very close friend from 
Texas (Mr. Gene Green) for a unanimous consent request.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this 
appropriations bill and thank Chairman Obey, Chairman Edwards, and our 
ranking members for their work in setting a new standard for funding 
our veterans program.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this appropriations bill, 
and to congratulate Chairman Edwards and Ranking Member and Chairman 
Obey for their work in crafting this bill that sets a new standard for 
funding veterans' programs.
  For the first time since the veterans' service organizations began 
producing their independent budget, Congress has met and even exceeded 
their request in this bill. The bill appropriates a total of $87.7 
billion for veterans' programs, which marks a $6.7 billion increase in 
funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs--the largest increase in 
veterans' health care funding in the 77-year history of the VA.
  This level of funding lets veterans, our troops, and their families 
know this Congress is going to make sure the promises we made to the 
men and women who fight for our country will be fulfilled, even after 
they are done with their service. The wait times at VA medical 
facilities have increased in recent years; the number of veterans has 
increased and will continue to grow in the coming years as service 
members return from Iraq and Afghanistan; and unspeakable conditions at 
Walter Reed uncovered earlier this year all require attention, and this 
bill ensures there is funding to address these problems.
  During a time of war, we need to demonstrate a strong commitment not 
only to our troops currently serving, but to those who have returned 
from service and those who fought to defend our country in previous 
conflicts. I would also like to offer my support for a project request 
to provide funding for a fire station at Ellington Field, and I hope 
the chairman will give it strong consideration as projects are funded.
  The existing fire station at Ellington field is in a rapidly 
deteriorating condition and does not meet OSHA or Air Force standards. 
Roof leaks and lack of insulation result in equipment being destroyed 
and extremely high operating costs. New firefighting apparatus must be 
parked outside the station because they will not fit into the truck 
bays.
  This fire station supports all flying operations at Ellington Field 
including Air National Guard, Army National Guard, U.S. Coast Guard, 
NASA, and civilian aircraft. Construction of a new fire station at 
Ellington is critical for the Texas Air National Guard and all units 
stationed at Ellington Field.
  Mr. Chairman, I again applaud the leadership from the chairmen who 
drafted this bill, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting 
this legislation.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  These will be my last remarks of the day. We have had a lot of debate 
here over the last 4 hours.
  I just want to say that we are facing a historic moment. Never before 
in the history of this Congress have we voted on the floor of this 
House to increase veterans health care spending by the level we will in 
just a few moments.
  I want to thank all those who have been part of it. I want to salute 
Speaker Pelosi for having said we must keep our promises to our 
veterans. I want to salute Chairman Obey; Congressman Spratt, the 
chairman of the Budget Committee; Mr. Filner, the chairman of the 
Veterans' Affairs Committee; as well as Mr. Wicker and the others who 
have worked on this in a bipartisan basis.
  As the son of a World War II veteran, son of a dad I love greatly for 
his service to our country, as my mentor was Congressman Olin B. 
``Tiger'' Teague, known as Mr. Veteran in Congress for over 32 years, 
his service here, what an honor and privilege, and humbling privilege 
it is to me to work with us here today to pass this historic bill for 
America's veterans.
  We know we can never repay our debt of gratitude, but this bill today 
will be a great down payment on that debt, and ultimately it will be a 
show of respect for those who have sacrificed so much for the American 
family.


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will 
now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were 
postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment by Mr. Hayes of North Carolina.
  Amendment by Mr. Blumenauer of Oregon.
  Amendment No. 17 by Mr. Price of Georgia.
  Amendment by Mr. Moran of Kansas.
  Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey.
  Amendment by Mrs. Musgrave of Colorado.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Hayes

  The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded 
vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Hayes) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been requested. Those in support of 
the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, point of order. I don't see a sufficient 
second, Mr. Chairman. I think we have been going automatically 
assuming. I see staff people on both sides. I do not see Members.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman wish to have a quorum call first?
  Mr. DICKS. I just want to make sure that everybody sat down and we 
had the Members stand up.
  The CHAIRMAN. A sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is 
ordered. Members will record their votes by electronic device.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 110, 
noes 304, not voting 23, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 492]

                               AYES--110

     Alexander
     Arcuri
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bilbray
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bordallo
     Boyda (KS)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carney
     Chabot
     Conaway
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Davis, David
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Donnelly
     Drake
     Duncan
     Etheridge
     Fallin
     Forbes
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gerlach
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Hall (TX)
     Hastert
     Hayes
     Heller
     Herger
     Hunter
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     LaTourette
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McIntyre
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Sali
     Shadegg
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Wamp
     Watt
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--304

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bono
     Boozman

[[Page 16048]]


     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Burgess
     Butterfield
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Hastings (FL)
     Hensarling
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Wexler
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--23

     Bonner
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Coble
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Eshoo
     Faleomavaega
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (WA)
     Higgins
     Jones (OH)
     LaHood
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McHenry
     Meehan
     Miller, George
     Paul
     Pickering
     Sessions
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Westmoreland

                              {time}  1622

  Messrs. HOBSON, RYAN of Wisconsin, ALTMIRE, ADERHOLT, AKIN, TIAHRT, 
BOOZMAN, Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS, and Mrs. BACHMANN changed their vote 
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. FOSSELLA, WATT and ROHRABACHER, and Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas 
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

  The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded 
vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Blumenauer) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 68, 
noes 347, not voting 22, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 493]

                                AYES--68

     Abercrombie
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Blumenauer
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Campbell (CA)
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Costa
     Crowley
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Doggett
     Duncan
     Ellison
     Farr
     Feeney
     Foxx
     Gilchrest
     Gordon
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hinchey
     Honda
     Hooley
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (IL)
     Kingston
     Lantos
     Lewis (GA)
     Manzullo
     Matsui
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Mitchell
     Moore (WI)
     Napolitano
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pitts
     Roybal-Allard
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Stark
     Thompson (CA)
     Tierney
     Velazquez
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wu

                               NOES--347

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fallin
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Israel
     Issa
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry

[[Page 16049]]


     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Watson
     Watt
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--22

     Bonner
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Coble
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Eshoo
     Faleomavaega
     Gonzalez
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (WA)
     LaHood
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McHenry
     Meehan
     Miller, George
     Paul
     Pickering
     Sessions
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Westmoreland


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there are 30 
seconds remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1627

  Mr. BILIRAKIS changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


            Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Price of Georgia

  The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded 
vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price) 
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 154, 
noes 260, not voting 23, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 494]

                               AYES--154

     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Bilirakis
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Chabot
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dingell
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Jindal
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Latham
     Lewis (KY)
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marchant
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Murphy, Tim
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Taylor
     Tiberi
     Upton
     Walberg
     Wamp
     Waters
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--260

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Boehner
     Bordallo
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Filner
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Roskam
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Wexler
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--23

     Bonner
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Coble
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Eshoo
     Faleomavaega
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (WA)
     LaHood
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McHenry
     Meehan
     Melancon
     Miller, George
     Paul
     Pickering
     Sessions
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Westmoreland


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members have 30 seconds remaining on 
this vote.

                              {time}  1632

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Amendment Offered by Mr. Moran of Kansas

  The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded 
vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran) 
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 264, 
noes 152, not voting 21, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 495]

                               AYES--264

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Arcuri
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyda (KS)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Capito
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Christensen
     Cleaver
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     Delahunt
     Dent
     Dicks
     Donnelly

[[Page 16050]]


     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Hastert
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holt
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kildee
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Moore (KS)
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--152

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bordallo
     Boyd (FL)
     Brady (PA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Cantor
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Castor
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Farr
     Fattah
     Frank (MA)
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hastings (FL)
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holden
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Knollenberg
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mollohan
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Radanovich
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Snyder
     Stark
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (MS)
     Towns
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wicker
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--21

     Bonner
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Coble
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Eshoo
     Faleomavaega
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (WA)
     LaHood
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McHenry
     Meehan
     Miller, George
     Paul
     Pickering
     Sessions
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Westmoreland


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members have 30 seconds on this vote.

                              {time}  1636

  Ms. GIFFORDS changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


          Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey

  The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded 
vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Garrett) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 206, 
noes 211, not voting 20, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 496]

                               AYES--206

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Bachmann
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hayes
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNulty
     Melancon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Rothman
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Space
     Sullivan
     Tanner
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Wamp
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--211

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bordallo
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Tom
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Flake
     Frank (MA)
     Gilchrest
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Heller
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Knollenberg
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin

[[Page 16051]]


     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Radanovich
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Sutton
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Wicker
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--20

     Bonner
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Coble
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Eshoo
     Faleomavaega
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (WA)
     LaHood
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McHenry
     Meehan
     Miller, George
     Paul
     Pickering
     Sessions
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Westmoreland


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). There are 30 seconds remaining.

                              {time}  1641

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                   Amendment Offered by Mrs. Musgrave

  The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded 
vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. 
Musgrave) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 383, 
noes 34, not voting 20, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 497]

                               AYES--383

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Bartlett (MD)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)

                                NOES--34

     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Blumenauer
     Capuano
     Crenshaw
     Dicks
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Frelinghuysen
     Hastert
     Higgins
     Johnson (IL)
     Lamborn
     Lewis (CA)
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Marshall
     Pascrell
     Putnam
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sestak
     Shimkus
     Skelton
     Smith (WA)
     Taylor
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Visclosky
     Wicker
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--20

     Bonner
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Coble
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Eshoo
     Faleomavaega
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (WA)
     LaHood
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McHenry
     Meehan
     Miller, George
     Paul
     Pickering
     Sessions
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Westmoreland


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). There are 30 seconds remaining.

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. MILLER of North Carolina changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       This Act may be cited as the ``Military Construction and 
     Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, 2008''.

  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise and 
report the bill back to the House with sundry amendments, with the 
recommendation that the amendments be agreed to and that the bill, as 
amended, do pass.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Weiner) having assumed the chair, Mr. Lynch, Chairman of the Committee 
of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that 
Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2642) making 
appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2008, and for other purposes, pursuant to the previous order of the 
House by unanimous consent, he reported the bill back to the House with

[[Page 16052]]

sundry amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole, with the 
recommendation that the amendments be agreed to and that the bill, as 
amended, do pass.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the 
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
  The amendments were agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 409, 
nays 2, not voting 21, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 498]

                               YEAS--409

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fallin
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--2

     Campbell (CA)
     Feeney
       

                             NOT VOTING--21

     Bonner
     Brady (TX)
     Buchanan
     Coble
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Eshoo
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (WA)
     Kilpatrick
     LaHood
     Lofgren, Zoe
     McHenry
     Meehan
     Miller, George
     Paul
     Pickering
     Sessions
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Westmoreland


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2 
minutes remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1653

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I was detained and not present on the House 
Floor when the final vote for passage of H.R. 2642--Military 
Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations was taken. Had I been 
present I would have voted ``yea.''

                          ____________________