[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 19397-19398]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                 KEEPING OUR PROMISE TO SERVICEMEMBERS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago when we sat down to turkey 
dinner with our families, we certainly had plenty to be thankful for. 
Our thoughts, however, were thinking about the men and women of the 
Armed Forces, both active duty and retired, who have risked life and 
limb for all of us, and these folks, these troops, were in our prayers 
of thanks and in our hopes.
  But, Mr. Speaker, it is critical that our gratitude to these 
courageous Americans be expressed not just with kind thoughts around 
the Thanksgiving table or speeches on Veterans Day. We need to show our 
thanks with deeds, not words, which is why it was important last week 
that the House passed the Physician Payment and Therapy Relief Act, 
ensuring that seniors and military families continue to see their 
doctors.
  But even as we were taking that important step, military health 
benefits continue to be endangered, because Defense Secretary Gates is 
considering a proposal to increase the amount that military retirees 
pay for their health insurance under the TRICARE program.
  Let me be clear: I couldn't agree more with Mr. Gates's belief that 
the Pentagon is overextended. I share his concern about the ``gusher of 
defense spending,'' as he himself refers to it. If we are having a 
serious conversation about the bloated DOD budget, then I am all in. In 
fact, the Congressional

[[Page 19398]]

Progressive Caucus has proposed $600 billion in cuts, much of it from 
obsolete, overpriced and untested weapons systems that are doing 
absolutely nothing to protect America or advance our national security 
interests.
  But with so much waste, fraud and abuse, why in the world would we 
cut the Pentagon budget by taking it out of the hide of the military 
families who have already sacrificed so very much? Why should they take 
the hit, while DOD has historically shown little spending discipline or 
fiscal responsibility, throwing billions upon billions of dollars at 
inefficient programs? Instead of targeting affordable health care for 
the people who have worn the uniform, how about we start by pulling the 
plug on the V-22 Osprey, notoriously over budget and also responsible 
for 30 accidental deaths over the years?
  Norbert Ryan, Jr., of the Military Officers Association of America, 
put it well to The New York Times. He wrote: ``Don't ask the folks who 
have done so much for this country, who have been called to act since 
9/11, to be first in line to give some more.''
  It is indeed true, Mr. Speaker, that military retirees and their 
families get a good benefits package. To those who say they should pay 
more, I say they have already worked for a higher premium in the form 
of their service and sacrifice than any of us can even imagine. The 
bottom line is that military retirees have earned the benefits they 
receive. They deserve them. We owe it to them. It is a promise we must 
keep to them.
  But let me take this argument one step further, Mr. Speaker. I have 
got a broader solution that attacks the problem two different ways. 
First, ending the war in Afghanistan will cut military spending 
dramatically, and it will also mean fewer military retirees requiring 
fewer health care services, yet another urgent, compelling reason to 
bring our troops home.

                          ____________________