[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12135-12139]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 3230, PAY OUR GUARD AND RESERVE 
                                  ACT

  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to instruct at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Gallego moves that the managers on the part of the 
     House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two 
     Houses on the House amendment to the Senate amendment to the 
     bill H.R. 3230 (an Act to improve the access of veterans to 
     medical services from the Department of Veterans Affairs, and 
     for other purposes) be instructed to recede from disagreement 
     with section 601 of the Senate amendment (relating to 
     authorization of major medical facility leases).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7(b) of rule XXII, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gallego) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Miller) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, we have all heard so much about the 
challenges that the VA faces and how it has totally, thoroughly, and 
completely failed many of our veterans.
  This motion to instruct the conferees would be a motion to ask that 
we essentially recede to the Senate provisions on leases per VA 
facilities.
  What this would do would be to provide and expand 26 VA facilities 
from across the country and improve access to care for our Nation's 
veterans, including the 1.7 million veterans from across Texas.
  In the district that I represent, as an example, District 23, which 
comprises about 24 percent of the land area of Texas, it is 800 miles 
or so from one corner of the district to the other, and in that 
district are a very large number of veterans. The challenge is, first 
off, to be able to get the veterans who have served, who are from the 
rural areas, to get them access to the nearest VA facility.
  From my hometown of Alpine, for example, to El Paso, where there is a 
VA clinic, it is some 220 miles. If you live further south in Brewster 
County, that distance is longer. If you live here in Eagle Pass, in 
Maverick County, for example, you have got to go all the way down to 
the Rio Grande Valley before you find the nearest veterans facility--
actually, all the way down to Corpus.
  The Senate provisions would allow for an additional 26 facilities, 
including a new facility in Lubbock and improvements and consolidations 
to facilities in San Antonio that are critical to veterans and their 
families. New facilities will help address the wait times for medical 
care where it is needed for veterans in our communities.
  Frankly, these facilities will help open up appointment slots. 
According to an internal VA audit that has been released, there are 
more than 57,000 patients who have waited at least 90 days for their 
first appointment. Unfortunately, some VA facilities in Texas have 
among the highest average of wait times in the Nation, and that is 
totally inexcusable. It fails the people who stood up and served their 
country and did so much to maintain and protect our freedom.
  While we need to explore all our options, including more contracted 
care to address the backlog, we also have to make sure that the VA has 
the capacity to fill the needs of our vets, and especially for those 
who have unique health care needs.
  I maintain that regardless of where you live in Texas or any other 
State, you have as much right to health care as any veteran from any 
other part of the State. And by creating an additional 26 facilities, 
you would actually be creating more slots and giving more access to 
more people.
  For rural vets who face additional barriers--for example, if you are 
driving from Alpine to El Paso, that is 220 miles, and you need a 
driver, and that driver has to take time off from work; you need 
probably to spend the night in El Paso, that is a hotel room; and you 
have got to eat while you are there, so that is meals--all of those, 
additional expenses.
  The other thing, frankly, is that many of the rural vets tend to be 
older, sicker, and poorer than the general population. These additional 
facilities may very well be lifesavers for that population.
  These new facilities will help address wait times for medical care 
where it is needed, and they are crucial. Frankly, I know there has 
been a conversation on the House side with my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle about creating more facilities than 26.
  I know that my friends from Oklahoma, for example, would like to see 
an additional clinic in Tulsa that would serve Oklahoma. Oklahoma 
veterans, as Texas veterans, as veterans across the board in every 
State, deserve more access to health care and better access to health 
care.
  This week, in fact, the Acting Secretary of the VA, Secretary Gibson, 
told members of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee that we need to 
increase the internal capacity at the VA. And while we need to do a lot 
more than just that, these additional facilities would help achieve 
that goal.
  One thing is clear. We have a growing demand for care. As we draw 
down from all of the places where we are right now--Afghanistan, for 
example--as we change the shape of our military going into the future, 
we will have more and more veterans entering the health care system. 
They deserve better treatment than the veterans in our health care 
system have had.
  Frankly, the entire system needs to be upgraded and to provide A-1 
quality health care to each and every person

[[Page 12136]]

who has served in uniform and their families. We must grow the 
capacity. We must continue to ensure quality and to meet the growing 
demand for our veterans.
  These leases that I am talking about in some 18 States, they will 
help address some of the underlying problems that lead to treatment 
delays. If you look at it, we are funneling all of the veterans into a 
very few health care facilities across the country. If we accede to the 
Senate's suggestion for additional facilities, we will have community-
based outpatient clinics, for example, or primary care clinics or 
specialty clinics. It will be a huge help to everyone, and that is 
incredibly important.
  As you look at this map, it gives you some idea of just one microcosm 
in one congressional district in this country what difference 
additional VA facilities would make.
  Look at the distance from the nearest facilities. If you live here 
along the Texas-Mexico border and you are trying to go up to the 
nearest facilities, which are either in El Paso or in Big Spring or 
over here in San Antonio, the distances are enormous. That is so much 
to ask of a World War II vet or a Korean war vet who is getting older, 
who is having to ask for help from somebody, for somebody to take time 
off of work to take them for a basic appointment, and then, frankly, as 
we have seen, to be unable to get the health care that he or she needs 
and deserves.
  There is no part of the population in this country that is more 
deserving of health care than our veterans who have served in uniform 
in any conflict; or, frankly, even if they haven't been in conflict, 
they have stepped forward, they have put themselves at the Nation's 
disposal, and they have protected our freedom each and every day that 
they wore that uniform. They deserve much better than they have gotten 
over the course of history.
  And I would point out, this isn't a new issue. There were more than 
15 reports at the VA that have indicated that care was substandard. 
Congress has known about this for a long time.
  The challenge with Congress is that it is a crisis management 
institution. Whatever the crisis of the day is, that is what Congress 
responds to. And if there is a subsequent crisis that takes the first 
crisis off of the front page, then suddenly Congress is reacting to the 
new crisis and forgets about the old one.
  This is too important to forget about. This is too critical to our 
veterans. It has to be taken care of; it has to be resolved; and it has 
to be resolved once and for all so that there are not an additional 15 
reports out there about problems at the VA, so that we don't hear every 
day from the American Legion or the Veterans of Foreign Wars or any of 
these other organizations that for years have been telling Congress 
that the VA has problems.
  Let's step forward. Let's fix it. Let's fix it now, once and for all. 
And we can take that first step, as a body, Mr. Speaker and Members. We 
can take that first step as a body by making sure that there are at 
least--at least--26 new leased facilities across the country that will 
take care of this issue and that will provide additional service to our 
veterans across the country.

                              {time}  1615

  I point out that these additional facilities are in places like 
Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Puerto Rico, California, Connecticut, 
Massachusetts, Missouri, Tennessee, Illinois, Nebraska, South Carolina, 
Arizona, New Mexico, New Jersey, Georgia, Hawaii, and Kansas.
  Whether you are a Democratic Member of this body or a Republican 
Member of this body, you should be in favor of additional VA 
facilities. You should be in favor of broadening up that funnel so that 
it is not so clogged up and we are not trying to put so many people 
through such a narrow slot and create all of these problems where 
people don't get the health care that they need and deserve.
  New facilities, as I said, will help address the wait times for 
medical care where it is needed. And as a guy who represents a vastly 
rural area but who also represents urban areas in El Paso and San 
Antonio, I will tell you that this helps everybody. It helps every 
single veteran, whether you are a rural guy or an urban guy, whether 
you served in uniform in World War II or whether you are a serviceman 
or -woman from the most recent conflict. You deserve, and America has 
made a commitment to you, that you will get health care, and you will 
get quality health care.
  This is the first step in that direction. It is incredibly important 
that, right, left, center, Democrat, Republican, or Independent, 
whatever you think you are, you ought to be in favor of additional 
facilities for the VA, you ought to be in favor of better health care 
for our veterans, and you ought to be in favor of using the Senate 
language.
  Frankly, again, I know that there are some Members, my colleagues who 
are from Oklahoma, who would like to see additional facilities and who 
would want one in their State. I agree with that too. The more that we 
can do to help our veterans and to meet our commitment, the more we 
ought to do. And, frankly, we ought to do a lot more than we have been 
doing.
  Again, I move that we instruct the conferees on H.R. 3230, the 
Veterans' Access to Care through Choice, Accountability, and 
Transparency Act of 2014, to recede to the Senate provisions on leases 
for VA facilities under title 6, section 601. It is incredibly 
important not only to me, not only to the 23rd, but it is important to 
435 Members of this body, and it is important to every single veteran 
in every single one of our congressional districts.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the 
motion to instruct and yield myself such time as I might consume.
  Mr. Speaker, while I can appreciate the work that has been done on 
the other side of this building over in the Senate, I would remind the 
House that it has been the House committee that has conducted the 
oversight that has brought this issue to light. The corruption and the 
arrogance that has taken root at the Department of Veterans Affairs did 
not, as my colleagues say, did not happen overnight.
  But I just want to tell my colleagues a little of the history about 
what brings us here today. From the 9th of June to July 24, the House 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs will have held 12 full committee 
hearings highlighting the problems that exist at the Department of 
Veterans Affairs. But beginning with the 112th Congress, the House 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs has held 196 hearings, of which 126 were 
oversight hearings, and in the 113th Congress alone, we have held 96 
hearings to date. We are doing our work.
  As a result of our work, both the House and the Senate correctly 
moved to address the problems that exist at the Department. And as is 
often the case, the bills we pushed through have reflected our good 
intentions, but there has been a vacuum while waiting for the CBO to 
score the bills.
  It is important to remember that the current scandal at VA really 
entails two issues: timely access to the health care that veterans have 
earned, and accountability because of the culture of corruption that 
exists among far too many senior leaders who have put their own welfare 
ahead of those they are supposed to be serving.
  The CBO finally provided us with a formal score on the Senate 
amendment on the 17th of July. Since that time, and even prior to that 
time, my staff has been in daily contact with our Senate counterparts, 
and we are making progress on the conference report.
  There are differences of opinion as to what the final conference 
report, in fact, is going to say. That is the nature of our work. But 
to my knowledge, there is no impasse that has been reached at this 
point. Now, I am confident that the good will on both sides of the 
aisle and both sides of the Hill will present a report that both the 
House and the Senate can pass before the August recess, so it really 
makes no sense to take the Senate position on the leases at this time. 
In fact, some of

[[Page 12137]]

the provisions in the Senate version are similar to the House bills 
that have been waiting in the Senate for months, and they could have 
been sent--any one of them--on to the President for his signature.
  That brings me to the specifics of the motion to instruct today. On 
December 10, 2013, the House passed H.R. 3521 by a vote of 346-1. That 
bill contained provisions to authorize 27 VA community-based outpatient 
clinics. It includes the Tulsa, Oklahoma, clinic that my colleague 
referred to as not being in the Senate bill. And like nearly a dozen 
other House bills passed in a bipartisan fashion, they are stalled in 
the Senate. The Senate could pass and send the 27-clinic bill that we 
sent over to them in December today.
  Mr. Speaker, I must point out that on a total of six different 
occasions, Senator Vitter from Louisiana and others, both Republican 
and Democrat, have gone to the Senate floor to request a vote on H.R. 
3521 and have been blocked by the Democrats in the Senate. Perhaps the 
motion to instruct today should be revised to instruct the majority 
leader of the Senate or others in the Senate Democratic Caucus.
  Again, Mr. Speaker, we are making progress on the conference report, 
and to recede at this point to the Senate position would be premature 
at best.
  Now, let me spend a few moments talking about the VA budget needs. In 
each of our annual budget hearings, Members have repeatedly asked the 
Secretary of the VA: Do you have the resources that you need to get the 
job done? And every single time, the Secretary has said ``yes.'' And 
now today, suddenly because of the oversight of the House Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs, Acting Secretary Gibson testified before the Senate 
that they will need approximately $17.6 billion in additional resources 
to meet current demand for the remainder of this year and into 2017.
  In his testimony, Acting Secretary Gibson stated that about $10 
billion of this money would go to purchase care and to hire 10,000 new 
clinical staff. He further stated that the purchased care would decline 
over time with a gradual shift back to reliance on internal VA care. He 
also said about $6 billion would be spent on new infrastructure.
  So, what the Acting Secretary is saying is, give us billions of more 
tax dollars to continue reliance upon care that will continue to force 
veterans to drive, as my colleague has said, in far too many cases 
hundreds of miles for the care that they have earned, and, oh, by the 
way, give us billions of more dollars to dump into our construction 
program that has been shown to be so ineptly managed to result in major 
projects being on average 35 months--not days--35 months behind 
schedule and at least $366 million over cost.
  Now, again, Mr. Speaker, why would we automatically stand up, salute, 
and write a check when the inspector general and the GAO have both said 
we cannot trust VA's numbers on multiple occasions? So the Department, 
which Rob Nabors describes as having a ``corrosive culture,'' now asks 
for nearly $18 billion.
  Look, we can't allow the Department of Veterans Affairs to continue 
to consider itself a sacred cow above serious oversight on how the 
already significant resources we provide to the Department have been 
spent. Decades of a kid-glove approach by Congress to holding VA 
accountable has led us to the issues that confront us today. So I would 
urge my colleagues to oppose the motion to instruct.
  At this time, I would like to yield as much time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Jolly).
  Mr. JOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition, respectfully, to this motion not 
because anybody here opposes expanded access to care. I believe we all 
do. But I oppose it today because it interferes, I believe, with the 
urgency of getting a clean bill out of conference.
  Mr. Speaker, the chairman has done great work. There are bills over 
there that the Senate could approve tomorrow. But if we encumber our 
conferees and we encumber this conference committee any more, we risk 
delaying final passage of a bill that is intended to get health care to 
the veterans now to clear the wait list now. That is the urgency.
  We all have ideas for long-term reforms. This Member has his own 
ideas for long-term reform. We have to work those through the process. 
I believe we should consider giving every veteran a Choice Card and let 
them choose where they want to go. I believe we should consider 
competitively awarding management contracts for many of our VA health 
care facilities so that veterans who want to stay in the VA health care 
system can do so but can rely on more efficient and more responsible 
management. I think we should consider streamlining DOD health with 
TRICARE, with the VA, and look for efficiencies there.
  But those are all matters for another day, for another committee 
hearing, for another bill, and for another piece of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, we should not encumber our conferees any more than they 
already are in having to negotiate with the Senate. The fact is the 
Senate bill is encumbered with labor provisions and directed projects, 
and these labor provisions and these directed projects do absolutely 
nothing--nothing--to get the veterans off the wait list now.
  Let's have the conferees agree to what we can agree to, which is, if 
you live more than 40 miles away from a VA facility, then give them 
immediate access to private care. If they are on a wait list, give them 
immediate access to private care. We can pass those now. The conferees 
can agree to that.
  And here is the absolute absurdity to all of this. I am a new Member 
with a new perspective. I understand how this body works. But we have 2 
to 3 weeks left before we go back to our districts for August recess. 
We have a President who, every single day, demands that this Congress 
provide funding for expanded health care to those who are coming here 
illegally right now. We cannot honestly have a dialogue and suggest 
that we need to immediately fund health care for those who are coming 
here illegally if we have a VA bill that is stuck in a conference 
committee and is encumbered by unnecessary provisions.
  We should demand that our veterans receive the health care services 
that they deserve before we begin to have a conversation with the 
President about how we ever expand health care services to those who 
come here illegally.
  So I appreciate my colleagues' concern for expanded care, and I agree 
with that. There is a bill that has been passed and is sitting in the 
Senate. The Senate should pick it up and pass it. But encumbering the 
conferees is not the right way to do this. Frankly, it complicates the 
process and delays the process. We need a VA reform bill back here from 
conference committee as quickly as possible to ensure that our veterans 
receive the health care that, frankly, this House supported with 390 
votes when this bill passed. This is not a controversial measure.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chairman's work on this, and I know 
that the chairman has the same dedication that my colleague does to 
expanded care. We will continue to work these issues. But the immediate 
need is to expand health care choices for our veterans today, and as I 
mentioned, before we ever begin to talk to the President about 
expanding health care for those who come here illegally.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman.

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim the 
balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 18\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I am in my first term as a Member, and growing up as a kid in Alpine, 
Texas, I always heard the saying with respect to things that were 
really, really hard, and that saying was it takes an act of Congress to 
do that, and for the first time in my life, Mr. Speaker,

[[Page 12138]]

I finally understand what that means because part of our challenge as 
an institution is that we are so wrapped up with who goes first, 
whether it is the House or the Senate.
  The House passed a bill by 390 votes. That is great. The Senate 
version passed by 93-3, and here, we are discussing whether the House 
version or the Senate version is better, and in the meantime, we are 
failing our veterans.
  My own view is that people across the political spectrum, veterans 
and nonveterans alike, are tired of the political blame game and the 
finger-pointing. Notice that not once did I ever really talk about the 
differences between Democrats and Republicans because, frankly, there 
are both Democratic veterans and Republican veterans and Libertarian 
veterans and Independent veterans and apolitical and nonpolitical 
veterans.
  The issue of veterans should not be something that we pound each 
other over the head on. The issue of veterans is something that should 
bring us all together in a cohesive fashion, so that we can move 
forward as a country and show the rest of America that Congress can 
actually function as intended, that it can actually work its will as a 
body and move a product forward.
  The idea that we would have to wait for a clean bill, that we would 
have to wait for procedure to take its course and for things to happen 
is telling people we will get to it.
  Along the border, there is a saying, and that saying is manana. 
Manana seems to be the busiest day of Congress' week. Manana, we will 
do it tomorrow. Tomorrow seems to be the day that Congress takes action 
on every single issue, and veterans are too important to be left until 
tomorrow.
  The American people view Congress as an institution that is very full 
of hot air, and they don't understand why we recess in August when it 
is hot here because we would fit right in with the rest of the 
environment in the month of August.
  The approval ratings for Congress are lower than they have ever been 
since the Gallup organization started taking polls, and it would appear 
to me that there is good reason for that.
  I have great respect for the chairman and the other Members of this 
body. Their work, I admire. I don't admire, though, how much time it 
takes for this Congress to move forward. Another day, another hearing, 
another conversation, another headline--all of that while another 
veteran waits, and another veteran waits, and another veteran waits.
  My motion to instruct doesn't touch topside or bottom the rest of the 
Senate bill. My motion to instruct talks about one particular provision 
of the Senate bill, and that one particular provision deals with 
additional space--additional leases for additional facilities.
  It doesn't talk about choice cards or private pay or the rates or any 
of those other things which are crucial issues and important. My motion 
just deals with this issue that I talked about earlier, which is the 
funnel. We have such a narrow opening in this funnel that we try to 
channel all of our veterans through, and there is not enough space.
  There are not enough resources there. We don't have adequate health 
care providers in the mental health fields, for example. We don't have 
enough specialists. We don't have enough places to put them. We don't 
have enough facilities. People have to go too far in order to get their 
health care, and as a result, they are not getting their health care at 
all.
  Mr. Speaker, manana isn't good enough. Manana, tomorrow, should not 
be the busiest day of our week. This is not an issue or question that 
should be left for tomorrow. This is an issue that Congress can decide 
now, immediately.
  We can instruct our conferees not on the rest of the aspects of the 
bill because I understand that takes time and negotiation, but we can 
come together on one part of the bill. We can come together to the one 
part of the bill that says we need additional facilities, not only in 
Texas--although Texas needs them--but in other States as well. That 
serves all of our veterans well.
  This isn't about a Democratic position or a Democratic Senate versus 
a Republican position and a Republican House. This is about our 
veterans who served every day in uniform, who sacrificed every day, so 
that 435 people here in this body and 100 people in the body across the 
way could serve and do our jobs and vote and participate in the 
American democratic experiment.
  We wouldn't be here participating in this American democratic 
experiment, but for the service and the sacrifices of our veterans. If 
we recognized that, if we truly recognized that, then we would step 
forward now, not tomorrow. We would step forward now and admit that we 
desperately need additional VA facilities.
  We desperately need those 26 additional places. We could put off for 
the conferees and allow the conferees the latitude to discuss all of 
the rest of the bill, but we ought to be able to come together on that 
one thing, and that one thing is those additional 26 facilities.
  Waiting for a clean bill, I can't tell you, Mr. Speaker, how many 
times in meeting with the VA or the VFW or the American Legion or any 
one of the number of organizations like the Vietnam Veterans, I can't 
tell you how many times they tell me they have been asked to wait 
another day--wait, you will get your bill; wait, we will take care of 
you; wait, we understand you are important.
  They don't need a pat on the head. They don't need a pat on the 
shoulder. What they need is what they have earned, and what they have 
earned is health care. Those 26 additional facilities would help us get 
them their health care and help us get them exactly what they need and 
what our government has committed to them, regardless of party, 
regardless of rhetoric, regardless of partisanship, regardless of 
blame, regardless of whatever.
  If I started by saying it takes an act of Congress to do this, this 
is a great opportunity for Congress to step forward and say, through an 
act of Congress, we understand how important the veterans are, and we 
are not saving that until tomorrow--you will get your 26 facilities, 
your 26 additional facilities.
  We will broaden that pipeline, so that more veterans across this 
country will have access to health care, and we will do it now.
  Mr. Speaker, I don't think that is too much to ask.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, who has the right to close?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has the right to 
close. The gentleman from Florida has 18\1/2\ minutes remaining, and 
the gentleman from Texas has 10 minutes remaining.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  It is curious to me that my colleague talks about not waiting, not 
waiting, not waiting--manana.
  The House passed a bill in December--in December. How much longer do 
veterans have to wait before the bill that resides in the Senate is 
passed? That is what we have been waiting for.
  I cannot figure out what my colleague has against the veterans in 
Tulsa, Oklahoma, because that is the clinic that is missing out of the 
bill that he is wanting to instruct us to accept. Why would we not give 
access for care to the veterans in Oklahoma? It doesn't make any sense.
  So when my colleague says manana, saying that, for some reason, we 
are trying to delay access to care, I say, oh, no--oh, no. What this 
bill actually does is it expands care way beyond what VA has ever 
purported to be able to do.
  The clinics that we are talking about authorizing may not even be 
necessary in future years--I am not talking about these specific 
clinics--because veterans will be able to go out into the private 
sector.
  No longer will there be a bottleneck within the Department of 
Veterans Affairs providing access to care for the veterans. You see, 
that is what has happened with VA really since the 1940s.
  They have been trying to force veterans to drive for hours to 
facilities to get their care in places that they don't

[[Page 12139]]

want to have to get their care at, to get their care when VA says they 
will get their care, not when the veteran says they want their care, so 
let's change the formula a little bit. Let's give veterans their care 
where they want to get it and when they want to get it.
  So I say to my friend that if we truly want to service the most 
veterans, you have got to ask the Senate to pass the bill that we 
passed in December because, for some reason, the Senate doesn't want to 
put a clinic in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
  Mr. Speaker, we have no additional speakers at this time, and I urge 
my colleagues to oppose the motion to instruct.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Let me start by, in all sincerity, saying that I have the greatest 
respect for Chairman Miller and the work that he has been doing. I 
follow his comments and his remarks and his committee regularly because 
the issue of veterans is an issue that is near and dear to my heart, as 
it is to so many of us, and I have great respect for his views and his 
expertise.
  While I may differ in my opinion, I certainly would never, ever think 
that his motives are impure because they are not. He is very sincere 
and very driven to help, but here is what I don't understand. For 
veterans across the country, they don't care, in my view, if the first 
two letters on a bill are H.R. or S.
  That makes no difference, topside or bottom, to any veteran that I 
have ever talked to. I would urge my colleagues to talk to as many 
veterans as they can and to ask them specifically: Does it matter to 
you if this is a Senate bill or a House bill? I guarantee you that 
every veteran across the country will say, no, it doesn't matter.
  So the idea that we are stuck here at this point in the process 
because the House wants a House bill and the Senate would like a Senate 
bill, frankly, that is ludicrous, and it is offensive to the veterans 
who have served our country.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GALLEGO. I am happy to yield.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. It is not a House bill or a Senate bill 
question because this is a House bill that the Senate amended, so it is 
not a matter of whether it is a House bill, House resolution, Senate 
bill, Senate resolution, it is a House bill that the Senate has 
amended.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding.

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. GALLEGO. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield.
  I would point out that part of the conversation that we have had is 
asking the Senate to take action on a bill that the House sent over, 
when that is even a better argument for this motion, because the House 
bill is already back from the Senate in the House, and we can settle 
this question once and for all by instructing our conferees to accept 
that language.
  I would urge that we have 26 additional facilities. I would commit to 
the chairman that I will do all I can to make sure that it is not just 
26 facilities, that if it needs to be 27, I am happy to do that. I have 
worked in a very bipartisan fashion with the Democratic and Republican 
members of the Armed Services Committee, particularly the freshman 
members of the committee, in order to do that.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Will the gentleman yield again?
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I am always happy to yield.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Thank you very much.
  The problem we are going to have is that a conference report is a 
privileged report. It is not amendable. So you will not be able to add 
an additional clinic in the conference report.
  Even if we recede to the Senate position, we will be stuck with 26 
clinics. That is why it is critical that the House bill that has been 
languishing for 7 months that is over there be passed and sent to the 
President today.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, again, I am always happy. I love the 
process, and I am a huge believer in the democratic system, but I will 
tell you that the idea that we are stuck at 26 and we are stuck at 26 
forever is not a credible argument because there are other vehicles in 
the process that would be just as rapid and just as fast if we would 
get over this idea, this pride of authorship, and if we would all work 
together on a bipartisan basis to fashion a solution that all veterans 
can live with. That is incredibly important. For me, this is a starting 
point, not an ending point.
  It is important, it seems to me--and I hope to do that by example, 
Mr. Speaker, that we stay away from the finger-pointing and the blame 
game--that we not be guilty of the fiery rhetoric I have never 
understood.
  As a west Texan, my instinct is always to put fires out. It is never 
my instinct to add additional fuel. So the partisan fires that rage in 
this building, it seems to me, need to be put out, and the interest of 
the American people and, in this case, the American veteran need to be 
put first and foremost and at the front and center of everything that 
we are doing.
  We shouldn't stand and salute the VA, as the chairman has indicated--
I agree with that--but we should stand and salute every single veteran 
who has served and every single veteran who deserves health care and 
who doesn't get it.
  We should apologize, Mr. Speaker, to every single veteran who has 
stood in line for those months and months at the VA and not been able 
to make it through that small funnel, and we should apologize to them 
if we don't broaden that funnel to allow more people to get more care.
  Yeah, there may be changes to the system, but those changes to the 
system are further down the hall, further down the way, further down 
the road, further down whatever. Today, here, we are talking about 
additional VA facilities. That one question we can settle, we can 
settle tonight or tomorrow, whenever the vote is on this, and we can 
make sure that we expand that pipeline, so that we don't try to push so 
many veterans through this really narrow pipeline, so that some of them 
get squeezed out of the system.
  We should make that pipeline bigger so that more people get served, 
and each of us, each of us--Republican, Democrat, Independent, 
Libertarian, agnostic--each of us should be proud of that vote.
  Stand up and salute our veterans, stand up and salute our people who 
served, and stand up and admit that they need access to health care. 
That is what this motion does, Mr. Speaker.
  On that note, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  The question is on the motion to instruct.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________