[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7911-7914]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. RISCH:

[[Page 7912]]

  S. 2335. A bill to exempt certain 16- and 17-year-old children 
employed in logging or mechanized operations from child labor laws; to 
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, Senator Crapo and I would like to introduce 
the Youth Careers in Logging Act. Small family logging companies, much 
like family farms, rely on younger family members to help make their 
companies successful. The agriculture industry enjoys exemptions from 
child labor laws to allow for family members to learn the trade and 
carry on the family business. This bill will provide those same 
benefits for the logging industry.
  The logging industry is struggling to recruit young employees. This 
industry, like many others, has an aging work force that will soon 
retire. Modern mechanized machinery opens up opportunities for a new 
tech-savvy generation of loggers if we give them the chance.
  There are 400 independent logging contractor businesses in Idaho, 
most of which are family owned and operated. Current labor laws do not 
allow the children of these family owned businesses to work and learn 
in the same profession as their parents.
  Should the Youth Careers in Logging Act be enacted, starting at the 
age of 16 young adults will be allowed to operate safe and modern 
machinery. These young loggers will help Idaho and the country to 
create healthy, fire resilient forests and bring much needed natural 
resources into our marketplace to help make paper and build homes.
  By passing this legislation, Congress can help young adults earn good 
wages through hard work in the great outdoors that will create a 
generation of young Americans that understand the value of a great work 
ethic.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself, Mr. Franken, Ms. Klobuchar, Mrs. 
        Feinstein, Mr. Begich, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Levin, and Mr. 
        Pryor):
  S. 2337. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to inter in national cemeteries 
individuals who supported the United States in Laos during the Vietnam 
War era; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President I have come to the floor today to 
reintroduce a piece of legislation that I feel is long overdue. The 
Hmong Veterans' Service Recognition Act is a bill to authorize the 
interment in national cemeteries of Hmong veterans who served in 
support of U.S. forces during the Vietnam War. Thousands of members of 
the Hmong community fought for America during Vietnam yet they enjoy no 
rights as veterans. The Hmong veterans are requesting to be buried in 
national cemeteries and I, along with a bipartisan group of colleagues, 
Senators Franken, Klobuchar, Feinstein, Begich, Whitehouse, and Pryor, 
believe this is an appropriate honor.
  To preserve Laos's neutrality during the Vietnam War, the U.S., 
Soviet Union, North Vietnam, and ten other countries signed the 1962 
Geneva Declaration prohibiting all foreign military personnel from 
Laos. While the U.S. and other countries withdrew all military 
personnel, the North Vietnamese Army blatantly violated the Geneva 
Declaration by keeping thousands of troops in Laos. Using Laotian 
territory to circumvent borders, these NVA forces posed a direct threat 
to America's military position in South Vietnam. Unable to be present 
in Laos, but needing to counteract the NVA, America required a covert 
military force. The Hmong were ideal candidates for America's secret 
war--they were renowned as being brave fighters who knew the rocky 
mountain terrain of Northern Laos well.
  All told, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency conducted covert 
operations in Laos which employed some 60,000 Hmong volunteers in 
Special Guerilla Units. The Hmong Fighters interrupted operations on 
the Ho Chi Minh trail and assisted in downed aircraft recovery 
operations of American Airmen. In Laos, they valiantly fought the 
Vietnamese and Laotian Communists for over a decade and were critical 
to America's war efforts in Vietnam. In all, over 35,000 Hmong lost 
their lives by the end of our involvement in Vietnam.
  Since the end of the Vietnam War, thousands of Hmong and Lao families 
have resettled around the United States to become legal permanent 
residents or United States citizens and have greatly contributed to 
American society. There are currently over 260,000 Hmong people in 
America. According to the 2010 Census, the heaviest concentrations are 
in California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Michigan, 
Colorado, Georgia, Oklahoma, Oregon, and my home State of Alaska.
  Of the Hmong who became U.S. citizens, approximately 6,000 veterans 
are still with us today, and they deserve the choice to be buried in 
national cemeteries. This concept is not without precedent. Currently, 
burial benefits are available for Philippine Armed Forces veterans who 
answered the call to serve during World War II, just like the Hmong. 
This legislation would not grant the small group of Hmong veterans full 
veteran benefits, but would simply authorize their interment in 
national cemeteries across the Nation. A small, but deserved token of 
appreciation and an appropriate honor for their sacrifices towards a 
common goal of democracy and freedom in the world.
  This new legislation is improved from the previous version, S. 200, 
in that it connects with Public Law 106-207: The Hmong Veterans' 
Naturalization Act of 2000 which acknowledges Hmong Special Guerilla 
Unit's contributions during Vietnam and provides a path to validation 
of a Hmong veteran's service for the purpose of naturalization. Public 
Law already recognizes the service of Hmong Special Guerilla Unit 
veterans for the purpose of naturalization, so it is a natural 
connection to afford them burial rights as well.
  Hmong-Americans who fought and risked their lives in secret for 
America deserve the same public respect and honor we give the men and 
women they served with and rescued. I believe it's time to honor the 
service and sacrifice of Hmong Special Guerilla Unit Veterans by 
allowing them to be buried alongside their brothers in arms in our 
national cemeteries. Again, I appreciate the support of my colleagues 
from across the aisle for this legislation and look forward to working 
with them and others in the Senate to finally getting this approved 
into law this year.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2337

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Hmong Veterans' Service 
     Recognition Act''.

     SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY FOR INTERMENT IN NATIONAL CEMETERIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 2402(a) of title 38, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(10) Any individual--
       ``(A) who--
       ``(i) was naturalized pursuant to section 2(1) of the Hmong 
     Veterans' Naturalization Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-207; 8 
     U.S.C. 1423 note); and
       ``(ii) at the time of the individual's death resided in the 
     United States; or
       ``(B) who--
       ``(i) the Secretary determines served with a special 
     guerrilla unit or irregular forces operating from a base in 
     Laos in support of the Armed Forces of the United States at 
     any time during the period beginning February 28, 1961, and 
     ending May 7, 1975; and
       ``(ii) at the time of the individual's death--

       ``(I) was a citizen of the United States or an alien 
     lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United 
     States; and
       ``(II) resided in the United States.''.

       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this Act shall 
     apply with respect to an individual dying on or after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BARRASSO (for himself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Enzi, Mr. McCain, 
        Mr. Coburn, and Mr. Chambliss):
  S. 2339. A bill to amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care 
Act to

[[Page 7913]]

require States with failed American Health Benefit Exchanges to 
reimburse the Federal Government for amounts provided under grants for 
the establishment and operation of such Exchanges; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, yesterday I came to the floor to address 
remarks made by the majority leader. Just yesterday the majority leader 
came to the floor and said the Republicans were ``going quiet'' on 
health care. Senator Reid said ObamaCare is no longer high on the 
Republicans' radar screen. Yesterday I said that it was certainly still 
very high on my radar screen and that Republicans have every intention 
of continuing to focus on the Democrats' health care law and all of its 
harmful side effects.
  Americans all across the country have been feeling those damaging 
side effects of the President's health care law, and the side effects 
are getting worse. Hard-working middle-class families who didn't want 
this health care law in the first place are facing higher premiums. 
They are facing smaller paychecks. They are facing fewer jobs, fewer 
doctors, and many other problems as a result specifically of the 
President's health care law.
  Today I want to talk about another side effect of the law; that is, 
the millions, if not billions, of taxpayer dollars that have been 
absolutely wasted by bureaucrats who set up State health insurance 
exchanges that have failed. Under the health care law, States could 
choose to set up their own exchange or to use the Federal exchange. 
States got Federal grants to help plan which one they would do. If a 
State decided to set up its own exchange, it got even more money from 
Washington to cover the costs.
  So how much money are we talking about? Well, according to the 
Congressional Research Service, the Federal Government has awarded 
grants of over $7.4 billion as of this March.
  People all across the country know the Federal exchange was an 
absolute train wreck when it was launched. In one State after another, 
the State exchanges also have been collapsing and costing taxpayers a 
fortune. Now some of those States have absolutely given up. They have 
decided they want to scrap their own systems and go into the Federal 
exchange after all--an option they had at first, but they decided to go 
first to the State exchange and now it has failed. What they have done 
is they have spent a lot of taxpayer money--money Washington sent to 
them. Where is the money? The money is gone. Their system doesn't work, 
and now what they want to do is have a fresh start.
  President Obama says Democrats should forcefully defend and be proud 
of the law. I want to see where the people are now coming to the floor 
to forcefully defend and be proud of this health care law.
  I ask the President--is he proud that these ObamaCare exchanges are 
failing all across the country? Are Democrats who voted for this health 
care law ready to forcefully defend all the taxpayer dollars that we 
now know have been wasted? Democrats don't want to talk about the law's 
expensive side effects or about the Americans harmed by the law.
  Republicans have been offering solutions. Today Senator Hatch and I 
are introducing legislation that would address these State failures and 
protect taxpayers. After all, that is what Americans want. They want 
accountability for their hard-earned taxpayer dollars. This bill, 
called the State Exchange Accountability Act, says that if the State 
got Federal money to set up its own exchange and later decided to give 
up and move back on to the Federal exchange, it would have to pay back 
the money. It is that simple. Taxpayers shouldn't have to pay twice for 
the mistakes of incompetent State bureaucrats who couldn't set up a 
working health care exchange. States would have 10 years to pay back 
the grants. They would have to pay them back in full. I know State 
budgets are tight, so they wouldn't have to come up with the whole 
amount all at once. They would pay back 10 percent of the total each 
year for the next 10 years. These States that walk away from their 
exchanges are conceding that they wasted the money they received, and 
it is only fair that these States should repay the American taxpayers.
  The failure of these exchanges and the money squandered on them was a 
side effect of the health care law. Democrats told States they could 
set up these exchanges and Washington would pay the bill. So some 
States didn't really care what it cost. They didn't care if the work 
was being done well or even done at all. As far as they were concerned, 
don't worry, whether it works or not it is somebody else's money.
  Well, this bill I am introducing today tells these State 
bureaucracies that it is time for them to care about the money they 
have wasted. This won't fix all of the harmful side effects the 
Democrats created with the health care law, but it is a start, and it 
is the right thing to do.
  If you want a sense of how big the problem is, look at an article 
that ran in Politico on Monday this week. The headline is ``Four States 
in a Fix Over Their Troubled Exchanges.'' The article talks about four 
State exchanges that basically embraced ObamaCare: Massachusetts, 
Maryland, Nevada, Oregon. It says that these four State exchanges spent 
at least $474 million and ``are now in shambles.''
  Look at it--Maryland, $118 million; Massachusetts, $57 million; 
Nevada, $51 million; for Oregon, $248 million of taxpayer money from 
around the country was sent to Oregon for programs that are now in 
shambles. So now some of these States want even more money to fix what 
has gone wrong in the first place.
  According to Politico, Maryland spent $118 million to set up its own 
exchange, and State officials did such a bad job that they are now 
planning to scrap the whole thing and use software from Connecticut's 
exchange. Massachusetts spent $57 million. Politico called the program 
in Massachusetts ``fatally crippled.'' Nevada spent $51 million. 
Politico says salvaging that exchange ``would be a huge feat.'' Oregon 
spent $248 million to set up its own exchange. It was such a 
spectacular failure that CNBC ran a headline on May 5 stating ``FBI 
probing Oregon's ObamaCare exchange.'' The FBI is probing the exchange. 
The State plans to use the Federal exchange from now on, getting rid of 
their State exchange. That is the kind of double-dipping our bill goes 
after.
  Why should Democrats in Washington, DC, be telling taxpayers across 
America that they have to pay for the failures of State officials in 
Massachusetts, Nevada, Maryland, Oregon, and other States that may find 
themselves in the same situation?
  Democrats have said and the President continues to say that he wants 
everyone to have a fair shot. Are Americans from other States who have 
to pay higher taxes because of these failed exchanges getting a fair 
shot? Well, they are not.
  Our bill will start to give a fair shot to Americans who don't want 
to pay twice to bail out incompetent State bureaucrats. It will give a 
fair shot to Americans who want to reclaim some of their hard-earned 
taxpayer dollars.
  This is just one of many ideas Republicans have offered and will 
continue to offer to create a patient-centered approach to health care. 
The plans we have offered will solve the biggest problems families 
face, which is the cost of care and access to care, problems that seem 
to have been ignored when Democrats forced this law through Congress. 
That means measures that would allow small businesses to pull together 
in order to buy health insurance for employees. Small businesses 
deserve a fair shot. It means letting people shop for health insurance 
that works for them and their families--not what the government says is 
best for them but what they say is best for themselves and their 
families. People deserve a fair shot at buying a plan that is best for 
themselves and their families. It means adequately funding State high-
risk pools that help people get insurance--people who have disease, 
people who are sick--without raising the costs for healthier people. 
These are just a few of the solutions Republicans have offered and 
continue to offer to give Americans real health

[[Page 7914]]

care reform and a real fair shot, health care reform that gives people 
the care they need from a doctor they choose at lower costs, without 
all of the harmful and expensive ObamaCare side effects.

                          ____________________