[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6413-6415]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   VETERANS BENEFITS ENHANCEMENT ACT

  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I would like to ask the majority leader 
before he leaves the floor--I know he has a very busy schedule--the 
majority leader alluded to a bill on which we will take up a cloture 
motion tomorrow. I want the majority leader to know before he leaves 
the floor that the only thing that is contentious in the veterans bill 
that he has referred to is a new special pension that has been created 
in this bill of $300 to Filipino veterans who live in the Philippines, 
who have no service-connected injuries. If that were stripped from the 
bill, then this bill is one that I believe we could pass by unanimous 
consent on the Senate floor.
  In the absence of that----
  Mr. REID. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. BURR. I am happy to yield for a question.
  Mr. REID. I say to my friend, the distinguished Senator from North 
Carolina, I understand. I mentioned that in my prepared remarks, that 
people have a problem with that. But I say to my friend, we should go 
on the bill. If people don't like that, offer an amendment, and we will 
debate that, vote on it, and go about our way. I think that would be 
such a good way to do this.
  Some of us feel very strongly about these Filipino veterans, as you 
know. I have mentioned this before. They fought valiantly. All you need 
to do to prove that is to see what happened in the Tom Hanks movie.
  I would also say to my friend that we need to do something about 
this. The average age of one of these Filipinos is about 84 years now. 
It is not as if we are breaking the bank to help these people who 
fought side by side with us. I understand the concern of my friend, but 
I suggest, let's move to the bill, offer an amendment, it can be the 
first amendment. We will have you offer the first amendment, or whoever 
wants to.
  Mr. BURR. Let me assure the majority leader, as ranking member of the 
committee, I do not intend to vote against cloture. I intend to proceed 
to the bill. I intend to offer an amendment that strips out the 
provision of $300 of a special pension that I think prioritizes that 
group above our veterans who are coming back. My amendment would hold 
everything else in Senator Akaka's bill in place, but we would also 
make additions by using that $21 million for additional funding for our 
troops who are coming out of Afghanistan and Iraq.
  I hope the majority leader would at least consider voting for my 
amendment when it comes up. We have a rich history on this issue. It 
starts with the conclusion of the Second World War, when the United 
States made some very important gifts to the Philippines--the total of 
two hospitals, equipment, grants to rebuild the Philippines--to make 
sure those who served were in fact taken care of.
  I might also add for the majority leader, incorporated into Senator 
Akaka's bill, which is a very good bill on balance, there is only one 
area that we have any problems with. We hold intact those Filipino 
veterans who are in the United States receiving full VA benefits. Those 
who are outside the United States, living in the Philippines but with 
service-connected injuries, they receive compensation. It is those who 
live outside the United States, in the Philippines, with no service-
connected injury whatsoever, that creating a special pension is not the 
right thing to do, as we have troops who are coming back at this time.
  I pledge to the majority leader my willingness to move forward to 
consideration of the bill--to have a spirited debate, I am sure, but 
clearly to try to address what I think are the priorities, or should be 
the priorities, of this Senate, and that is to focus on our troops.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, if I could just say to my friend, I do not 
in any way question the seriousness of my friend's concern. The Senator 
asked me would I consider it? Sure, I will be happy to consider it. But 
let me just say this: Part of mine is basic frustration; that is, why 
in the world would

[[Page 6414]]

we have to file cloture on a motion to proceed to this bill? It happens 
so many times. It is something that has not happened very much in the 
past, and now it happens on every piece of legislation.
  Again, it sounds like we agree on this legislation. Why could we not 
just move to it and save the 30 hours and all the wasted time on filing 
this motion?
  Understand, I am not at all upset at my friend for having a concern 
about this bill--not whatsoever. I just am frustrated with the need to 
have to file cloture to proceed to the bill.
  Mr. BURR. I share the leader's frustration and do not think, in that 
case, cloture was necessary. But with the restrictions that are placed 
on me as ranking member, that I can only agree to a bill if there are 
no amendments and there is a limit set of debate time and I have to 
speak for 48 others who might not share that limited debate time or a 
set amount of amendments, I think the leader knows that is something 
that is impossible for me to do and impossible for me to suggest to my 
leadership.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I would just go back and say what I said 
earlier. We have suggested over the 9 months there be limited 
amendments, there be relevant amendments. We are not there. We cannot 
go back where we want to be. We are where we are.
  I hope we would not even need to do the vote tomorrow at 12 noon. I 
hope maybe you can talk to your folks and we can start legislating this 
bill in the morning. That would be the best thing to do because we have 
a lot to do. I ask my friend to check that out and maybe that is 
something we can do.
  Anyway, I am glad you are here. I appreciate your concern for the 
bill--part of it. I know you are not the only person who is concerned 
about that. I know that. But I repeat, there is a thing we call 
offering an amendment. You have one ready to go, and I will look 
forward to debating that amendment.
  Mr. BURR. I have had the amendment ready to go for months. I think it 
is a shame the majority in the committee was not willing to talk about 
any changes to the bill. Now I think we are to a point where it is 
healthy for the Senate in total to debate the merits and priorities of 
our country.
  Were Filipino veterans promised a VA benefit? According to all the 
information I have researched and the information provided in 1998 at a 
congressional hearing with the Department of the Army--it examined its 
holdings of the Douglas MacArthur and President Franklin Roosevelt 
papers and found no references by either of those wartime leaders to 
postwar benefits for Filipino veterans.
  Let me be very specific. This bill, S. 1315, does two things: No. 1, 
it enhances some benefits for our veterans.
  I think that receives unanimous support in the Senate. But, two, it 
diverts $221 million over the next 10 years to create a special pension 
for a very specific slice of Filipino veterans, those who live in the 
Philippines, those who had no service-connected injury, those who have 
gone post the war with the understanding that the United States stepped 
in by gifting two hospitals, by gifting medical equipment, by gifting 
everything, and rebuilding the Philippines.
  At a time of war where we are fighting on two fronts, Afghanistan and 
Iraq, I believe the important thing and prudent thing is to take the 
$221 million, over 10 years, and devote it to our men and women who are 
coming out of combat. S. 1315 has the wrong priorities. So I put 
together a substitute proposal, S. 2640. I will offer that as an 
amendment at the appropriate point in the debate.
  In that bill, we do one specific thing: We increase what is in S. 
1315, minus the special pensions, and we propose increasing housing 
grants for profoundly disabled veterans who need their homes modified 
to accommodate their disabilities; we increase the auto grants for 
profoundly disabled veterans who need that freedom of the platform, the 
platform for mobility to live independently; it improves the education 
benefits for our Guard and Reserves; it increases the burial benefits 
to lessen the financial burden on families of deceased veterans.
  I did not come over today to debate the merits of S. 1350. I see the 
chairman, Chairman Akaka, is here. The chairman has known since last 
year that I had problems with that portion of the bill, and we have 
tried to work out the differences. But as I said earlier, for it to be 
communicated that we have reached this point because of stall and delay 
and because we are against things, it is flatly wrong. I am for 99 
percent of the bill. Drop the part that prioritizes someone else in 
front of our veterans, and I am ready to go forward, I am ready to pass 
it by unanimous consent.
  But by the same token, I believe when given the responsibility to 
make sure our veterans are taken care of, to make sure that those with 
severe disabilities are taken care of, to devote $221 million to a new 
special pension, I believe, is the wrong priority at this point in 
time.
  I believe we should look at the history and find out: Did we make a 
commitment? Well, I cannot find that. I cannot find where we promised 
somebody something we have not fulfilled. Tomorrow, I will take the 
opportunity to go through a very indepth bit of research, not just done 
by me but done over the years that goes back to 1946 in great detail; 
looks at what the promises were that were made by the United States; 
but, more importantly, again, the generosity already displayed by this 
country to the Philippines to reward them for their participation, and, 
by the way, our help to liberate their country from the siege of an 
enemy.
  I am convinced the right thing to do is to prioritize that $221 
million for our troops, for our kids from Afghanistan, for our kids 
from Iraq, to make sure that those who have paid a sacrifice, and in 
some cases the ultimate sacrifice, are the beneficiaries of this money.
  I am committed to come to the floor and debate, as I have made a 
promise to the chairman. I am not going to block the motion to proceed. 
By the same token, I am not going to vote for limiting the amount of 
time Members want to spend on this because I think it is too important. 
Our veterans deserve as much time as it takes for us to debate where 
our priorities on money are. If at the end of the day this body votes 
we send it in the form of a special pension to Filipinos in the 
Philippines who have no service-connected injury, I will live with 
that.
  But I will not live with it by agreeing to less than the amount of 
time that is needed to debate an issue about the future of our kids, 
our service personnel, the men and women who put on a uniform and risk 
their lives every day. I believe they should sit at the top of the 
list. And S. 1315 does not put them there. S. 1315 puts at the top of 
the list a new special pension program for people who have never had a 
service-connected injury.
  I am as sympathetic to those who fall into the category of having 
helped us. I might mention again, the Filipinos who live in the United 
States who fought in the Philippines for us, we take care of; we have 
integrated them fully into the Veterans' Administration. They receive 
every service our veterans do. To those Filipinos who live in the 
Philippines who have service-connected injuries, we have made sure 
compensation is in this bill to take care of them.
  But for those who do not have service-connected injuries, I cannot 
see where they fit at the top of the list of $221 million and our kids 
go below it, as it relates to what they need for the severely disabled 
injuries they have been faced with.
  I have a number of soldiers in North Carolina, at least they are 
stationed in North Carolina, that fall into this category. When we see 
Eric Edmundson's family spend $47,000 on a van, and $14,000 of that 
comes out-of-pocket, I have to ask: Where are our priorities? Where are 
the priorities of the Congress in defense of these kids? Well, they are 
in $221 million getting ready to go to the Philippines. That is where 
they are. That is the debate we are going to have over the next several 
days. If it takes a week or if it takes a month, then we will have that 
debate.

[[Page 6415]]

At some point, we will take a vote. I believe the American people will 
see the advantage, the need, to make sure the No. 1 priority is our 
kids in uniform, our veterans who come back who will be serviced by 
this very important piece of legislation.
  I am committed to Chairman Akaka that once we can dispose of the 
issue of this special pension, I am more than willing to vote for the 
rest of the bill because it is a good bill. It brings some needed 
benefits to our veterans.
  It never should have been locked up for the length of period this 
was. But make no mistake about it, no matter how good a bill is, if you 
want to structure it in a way that debate does not flourish in the 
Senate, then we have done an injustice to the American people. The most 
deliberative body in the world is supposed to be one that you are not 
corralled into agreeing to a certain amount of time to debate on an 
issue; it is where everybody's voice is heard, it is where every bit of 
information about an issue can be presented. It is where charts can 
display what words cannot explain.
  That is what the next several days will be about with S. 1315. I am 
convinced that at the end of this process, not only will Members in 
this body be enlightened by what we are able to talk about, but the 
American people will be enlightened, and hopefully this body will vote, 
hopefully in the majority way, that the priority, the No. 1 priority is 
our men and women in uniform when they come home.

                          ____________________