[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1599-1603]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         CLAY HUNT SUICIDE PREVENTION FOR AMERICAN VETERANS ACT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of H.R. 203, which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 203) to direct the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs to provide for the conduct of annual evaluations of 
     mental health care and suicide prevention programs of the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, to require a pilot program on 
     loan repayment for psychiatrists who agree to serve in the 
     Veterans Health Administration of the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 12 
noon will be equally divided in the usual form.
  The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for up to 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                Department of Homeland Security Funding

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank Senator Grassley for his 
remarks. As chairman of the Judiciary Committee and a longtime vigorous 
leader in the U.S. Senate, I know he was here and saw the problems of 
the 1986 amnesty. It had bad ramifications in a lot of ways. I believe 
if we listened to the experience of Senator Grassley and his 
understanding of what is at stake, we would all be in a lot better 
shape than we are today.
  The American people want a lawful system of immigration. They want 
one that is fair to applicants who want to come to America. They are 
not for eliminating immigration to America. They want a system that 
allows people to apply, wait their turn, and if they are qualified, be 
admitted; if they don't qualify, not be admitted. They want that 
enforced. They don't believe we should have open borders and open visa 
programs that allow people by the millions to come unlawfully into this 
country. The President obviously has a different view. As a result, we 
are in a situation in which the Constitution is at stake in a lot of 
ways.
  We will vote after lunch on moving forward to the Department of 
Homeland Security bill. The Department of Homeland Security bill, 
passed by the House of Representatives, fully funds the Department of 
Homeland Security. The basic funding mechanisms and agreements and 
allocations of money in that legislation were approved on a bipartisan 
basis. The House of Representatives simply said: Mr. President, the 
money in the Department of Homeland Security funding mechanism will be 
spent for lawful purposes. That money will be spent to secure the 
homeland in an effective way. That money, however, will not be spent by 
anyone to take actions outside the lawful limitations and lawful powers 
of the Department of Homeland Security. But that is what the President 
wanted to do, and that is what he wants to do through his Executive 
action.
  They are now leasing a new building across the river in Crystal City. 
They are hiring 1,000 new Federal employees. Those Federal employees 
will be processing the applications for up to 5 million people and they 
will be providing those people with photo IDs. These are people in the 
country unlawfully. They are not lawfully allowed to work in America. 
Businesses aren't allowed to hire people who are here unlawfully.
  It is plain and simple. They are not eligible to qualify for Social 
Security or Medicare. So the President has declared he is going to set 
up this office. They will process these individuals, and they will 
provide up to 5 million photo IDs, 5 million Social Security numbers, 
and the right to work in America. They will be allowed to participate 
in Social Security and Medicare.
  He says: I am entitled to do that. Well, he is not entitled to do 
that. As scholar after scholar and as common sense tells us, the 
President doesn't have that power. That is what this is about.
  The House barred any spending on this unlawful activity--an activity 
the President asked Congress to allow him to do and which Congress 
rejected. This proposal was presented to Congress, and Congress refused 
to pass it. But he is doing it anyway. It is an arrogant overreach, a 
direct challenge to the historic role of Congress in our American 
system.
  Our Democratic colleagues say they don't want controversial 
immigration riders on this bill--controversial immigration riders. In 
other words, they don't want the Congress to do what it is required to 
do--fund the programs it believes need to be funded and not fund 
programs it doesn't believe should be funded.
  As a matter of policy, Congress has not adopted and does not support 
what the President wants to do. In fact, it has prohibited it. It has 
no duty whatsoever to allow the President to spend moneys of the United 
States of America to advocate a program they don't approve of, or 
certainly one that is unlawful. That is what this is all about. Our 
colleagues are voting to block the bill that would fund Homeland 
Security at the level the President has asked for. So there is no 
policy change here. Every lawful activity of Homeland Security is 
funded.
  There was a headline in the New York Times today. I am going to push 
back a little on my colleagues because they have been spinning this 
idea that somehow the Republican House, in sending this legislation 
over that funded Homeland Security, is disrupting the fair flow and 
causing controversies within our funding mechanisms of Congress. The 
headline from an experienced reporter's article in today's New York 
Times is: ``Democrats Look to Protect Obama's Immigration Directives.''
  That is exactly what this is about, colleagues. At least seven of our 
Democratic colleagues have explicitly said they don't agree with the 
policy of the President with regard to Executive amnesty and providing 
work permits and Social Security to people unlawfully here. But they 
are now united. We are told all of them are going to stand together to 
protect President Obama's immigration directives.
  When they were running for office during the campaign last fall, 
people

[[Page 1600]]

were saying they didn't agree with him. Now, when the issue hits the 
floor and we have an opportunity to do the normal and rational thing 
and not fund an unlawful policy, they are all sticking together like a 
palace guard around the White House to protect Obama's immigration 
directives. This is a sad thing and a disappointing thing to me. The 
article goes on to say:

       Democrats are hoping they can force the new Republican 
     majority to drop the immigration provisions and send the $40 
     billion spending bill to the President.

  Congress is spending $40 billion on homeland security. All of that 
money is directed to legitimate lawful policies of Homeland Security 
and not allowing any of it to be spent on unlawful, unapproved policies 
in Homeland Security--an absolute power that Congress has, a duty that 
it has. Congress is violating its fundamental duty if it allows the 
President to carry out power he is not authorized. It is absolutely 
violating its duty if it supports and funds actions by the President to 
violate the law. It has a duty to say no to the President who 
overreaches.
  The article goes on to say:

       But Democrats have decided to shut down debate on the 
     measure altogether, fearful that it could lead to the bill's 
     approval and could prompt negotiations with the House that 
     would put them at a disadvantage.

  Fearful that the process could lead to the bill's approval during 
negotiations with the House--isn't that what legislation is all about? 
Isn't that what it is all about? Shouldn't our colleagues have the 
right, if they don't like the language that constricts the President's 
power to carry on this unlawful act, to offer an amendment to strip it 
out? They have the ability to strike that language. Why don't they do 
that? No, they are blocking even moving to the bill in its entirety. 
Then they are attempting one of the most through-the-looking-glass, 
down-the-rabbit-hole arguments you have ever heard. They are saying 
Republicans are shutting down Homeland Security when they are not 
passing the bill that is on the floor today and we will be voting on. 
They are rejecting it. All it does is fund the Department of Homeland 
Security at a level agreed upon on a bipartisan basis, $40 billion.
  What kind of world are we in when we do that? I would like to ask who 
is being protected here. The answer is clear. The New York Times said: 
They are protecting President Obama's political immigration directives.
  I would ask this. Isn't it our duty to protect the Constitution? 
Isn't it our duty to protect the laws of the United States of America? 
Isn't it our duty to protect American workers from the decline in wages 
and their job prospects as a result of now legalizing 5 million people 
to be able to take any job whatsoever in the entire American economy, 
including working for the county commission, the power company, the 
trucking companies?
  Isn't that what our duty is? Who should we be protecting here? 
Shouldn't we be protecting a lawful system of immigration?
  But the President wants to take money. He wants Congress to 
appropriate money to give him at Homeland Security so he can spend it 
to undermine the law of the United States of America. What an 
unthinkable thing that is. But that is fundamentally what is happening. 
He wants and is demanding that this Congress not follow its promises to 
the American people--not follow its lawful and constitutional duty--but 
to give him the money so he can carry out a policy in contradiction to 
the laws of the United States of America and to the good policy of 
America. This is the way we do business in this country.
  I think the reason our Democratic colleagues don't want to move to 
the bill is because they don't want to debate the substance of it. That 
is not a good reason. They don't want to debate the substance of it 
because their position is untenable. The American people understand 
that Congress is not shutting down the government and is not shutting 
down Homeland Security. Our Democratic colleagues are the ones that are 
refusing to pass the legislation that would fund Homeland Security. The 
President is backing them up and encouraging them, and apparently he 
has had success. He twisted arms or something because at least seven of 
the Members said they didn't agree with this, and more probably would 
have, had they been asked. But no, not now. Now they are all standing 
together with Senator Reid, the minority leader of the Senate, to 
advocate this policy.
  I don't appreciate it being said time and again by so many of our 
Democratic colleagues and the President that somehow Congress is acting 
improperly and that Congress is not funding Homeland Security. This is 
through the looking glass. This is beyond acceptance. I think the New 
York Times pretty well said it correct. I don't believe the media is 
buying this argument. I don't think the American people are buying this 
argument, and Congress shouldn't buy the argument. The right thing to 
do, colleagues, is to get on the bill.
  Let me say this to my Democratic colleagues. I know many of you are 
uneasy about this. Let's get on the legislation. There will be 
amendments. There will be a number of amendments. Perhaps things could 
develop in a way that you can support them. We will protect the lawful 
constitutional powers of Congress and fund Homeland Security. We will 
do it in a way that strengthens the rule of law in America and 
strengthens our ability to have integrity in the immigration system. It 
creates a system the American people rightfully have demanded, pleaded 
for, and prayed for, and that Congress and the politicians have failed 
to produce for now over 40 years. That is the problem. The American 
people are angry, and they are not angry at immigrants. All of us have 
friends and relatives and neighbors who have immigrated to America. We 
are not against immigrants. I think there is a growing unease out there 
about the willful refusal of Congress to do what it takes to fix this 
system.
  I would just say one more thing. American wages are down. Wages fell 
in December 5 cents an hour--not a good event after we have been told 
everything is getting so much better. There is a limit, colleagues, to 
how many people we can bring to America to take jobs when we have a 
limited number of jobs and falling wages.
  We have the lowest percentage of Americans in the workforce working 
today since the 1970s. Things aren't going good. We can't accept 
everybody in the whole world to take jobs here.
  We just had a report produced yesterday that said we have now 
discovered there are another 5 million people who have been--it looks 
to me--admitted to work in the country unlawfully. Through the Freedom 
of Information Act, it was discovered that not only do we have a 
million people a year come to America with green cards and permanent 
residency, we have 700,000 guest workers that come every year. Add to 
that the asylees, plus the refugees and other people. What they found 
out was we have now--in the last 5 years under this administration--
given work authorization to 5 million more people than anybody knew. Do 
we think this doesn't impact people's wages, impact women to have a 
better job, their children to have a better job?
  Somebody needs to be thinking about this. There is a limit here, and 
it is obvious the limits need to be discussed. We need to create a 
lawful system which protects American workers. We need to be less 
concerned about protecting President Obama's unlawful directives and 
more concerned with protecting the interests of the American working 
person.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for such time as I may consume.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I rise to speak on the Clay Hunt 
Suicide Prevention for American Veterans Act, a most important piece of 
legislation. I would like to thank Senator Isakson in particular for 
expediting this legislation through the Veterans' Affairs Committee. I 
admire his leadership. I

[[Page 1601]]

admire his commitment to the veterans of America. It has been a 
pleasure to know him and to serve in the Senate with an advocate for 
our American veterans.
  I would also like to thank Senator Blumenthal, whose partnership I 
have been with for a long period of time. Without his leadership and 
support, this legislation would not be coming to the floor.
  Every day approximately 22 American veterans commit suicide, totaling 
over 8,000 veteran suicides each year. I repeat: 8,000 veteran suicides 
each year. It is evident by these staggering numbers that our military 
and veterans affairs programs are not effectively treating post-
traumatic stress disorder, known as PTSD, and other mental health 
illnesses that can lead to suicide. There are too many disconnected and 
ineffective treatment programs, and as a result our service men and 
women are suffering from the bureaucracy.
  Against this backdrop, I wish to highlight the story of Clay Hunt, 
for whom this proposed legislation is named. Clay enlisted in the 
Marine Corps in May of 2005, deployed to Al Anbar Province near 
Fallujah in January 2007.
  During that deployment Clay Hunt was shot in the wrist by a sniper's 
bullet that barely missed his head, a wound for which he received a 
Purple Heart. Despite having been wounded, Clay Hunt volunteered and 
graduated from Marine Corps Scout Sniper School in March 2008.
  After another deployment to Afghanistan, Clay was honorably 
discharged from the marines in April 2009. After returning home, Clay 
suffered from the effects of PTSD for many years and struggled with 
inadequate care at his local VA hospital. Subsequently, Clay took his 
own life in March 2011 at the age of 28. Clay is only one example of 
veterans who are trying to make their way in our country today, but who 
suffer, more so than they have to, because of Department of Defense and 
Department of Veterans Affairs mismanagement of resources for suicide 
prevention and mental health treatment.
  This bipartisan bill will lay the foundation for improved mental 
health care and better suicide prevention resources for our American 
servicemembers. Specifically, this bill would require an independent 
evaluation of existing suicide prevention programs at the DOD and VA, 
gauge their effectiveness, and make recommendations for consolidation, 
elimination, or improvement.
  Additionally, this legislation would establish a new single Web site 
that provides information for veterans regarding available mental 
health care services, create a pilot loan repayment program to recruit 
more psychiatrists to treat veterans at the VA, improve the exchange of 
training best practices and other resources among the VA and nonprofit 
mental health organizations, create a community outreach pilot
program to assist with and mitigate the stressors of servicemembers 
transitioning to civilian life, and provide a 1-year extension for 
certain combat veterans to enroll in the VA.
  Our Nation has a moral obligation to identify, resource, and make 
available to our veterans effective forms of treatment to help 
eliminate suicide resulting from severe combat-related psychological 
trauma. This bill is an important step to improve the care we provide 
to the men and women who have sacrificed for all of us and to whom we 
are forever indebted. We owe it to these brave men and women to act 
now.
  Obviously I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation.


                         The President's Budget

  Mr. President, I would like to briefly discuss the President's budget 
request for fiscal year 2016 as it relates to the Veterans' 
Administration. In this year's budget request, the President has stated 
he will submit legislation to reallocate part of the funding for the 
Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014, legislation he 
signed into law just last August, to other programs within the VA.
  In other words, he wants to take money from the Veterans Access, 
Choice and Accountability Act and put it into other programs within the 
VA--a bill we just passed last August. It clearly suggests that the 
President of the United States is disconnected from the needs of our 
veterans and he may be more solicitous about supporting a bloated, 
demonstrably dysfunctional bureaucracy than ensuring that quality care 
is available to our veterans.
  Our veterans have suffered long enough with wait times and scheduling 
delays at the VA, and deserve to have the right to choose where and 
when they get their health care. Taking funding away from this 
legislation, especially the choice card, shows a complete disregard for 
our veterans' well-being and the service they provide to our country.
  If or when this legislative proposal comes to the Hill, I would urge 
my colleagues to vote against it--in fact, not even consider it.
  I want to thank my colleagues. I am sure we will have an overwhelming 
vote today. I think it is an important step forward.
  I would like to thank all of the veterans organizations and veterans 
advocates who have made the Clay Hunt Suicide Prevention Act for 
American Veterans a reality. But I would also like to urge my 
colleagues to understand that this problem, this serious problem, of 
8,000 veteran suicides each year is not going away anytime soon. So do 
not believe the passage of this legislation will somehow be a cure-all. 
That can only come through long and persistent efforts and care and 
concern for our veterans who have given so much to their country. So I 
am very honored to be a part of this legislation.
  Again, I want to thank the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs 
Committee and the ranking member, Senator Sanders. I would like to 
thank Senator Burr, who was ranking member previously.
  My friends, we have a long way to go. We have a lot of young men who 
have not been able to come all the way home. It is our job and our 
obligation to do everything we possibly can not only to honor them but 
to see that they have a safe and secure future, and one in which the 
thought of suicide would never be any consideration.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong 
support for the Clay Hunt Suicide Prevention for American Veterans--
SAV--Act, of which I am a cosponsor.
  This bill addresses a true public health crisis facing our Nation's 
military members and veterans: suicide. You see, an estimated 22 
veterans commit suicide every day. According to data from the 
Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, young veterans are particularly at 
risk, dying by suicide more often than both Active-Duty troops and 
civilians. In fact, the Department of Defense, DOD, reports that in 
2012 and 2013 more veterans died by committing suicide than died in the 
Iraq and Afghanistan wars. This is a serious problem that must be 
addressed.
  The legislation being considered today is named for a marine who 
served in Iraq and Afghanistan and who committed suicide in 2011. He 
was 28. After being honorably discharged from the Marine Corps, Clay 
Hunt sought VA medical care for post-traumatic stress disorder. He 
constantly voiced concerns about the care he was receiving, both in 
terms of scheduling and the treatment received, which consisted solely 
of medication.
  Clay decided to move closer to his family but had to wait months to 
see a psychiatrist at the VA medical center. After the appointment, 
Clay called his mother on his way home and told her that the VA is way 
too stressful of a place and that he can't go back. Two weeks later, 
Clay took his own life. Despite Clay Hunt's proactive and open approach 
to seeking care to address his injuries, the VA system did not 
adequately address his needs.
  Unfortunately, this story is far too common. In 2014, Jeremy Sears, a

[[Page 1602]]

Camp Pendleton, CA, marine who survived several tours in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, also took his own life after struggling to receive 
adequate care from the San Diego VA Medical Center. It took the VA 16 
months to respond to Jeremy's disability claim. After the long wait, 
Jeremy received a letter that he had been denied all disability 
payments, despite reporting symptoms of traumatic brain injury and 
hearing loss from his military service. The 35-year-old former Camp 
Pendleton marine tragically took his own life almost 2 years after 
being discharged from service.
  These tragedies are unacceptable, and it is our moral duty to ensure 
that the men and women who bravely serve our country have access to the 
mental health care needed to address serious mental health conditions 
like depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.
  What does this bill do? The SAV Act is an important bill that will 
improve the delivery of mental health care to veterans and will address 
obstacles in the VA and DOD health care systems.
  Under this bill, special care and attention will be given to service 
personnel transitioning from Active-Duty to veteran status through 
community outreach and peer support groups. The legislation also calls 
for a one-stop Web site with suicide prevention resources for veterans. 
In addition, to make recruitment of mental health professionals easier, 
the bill creates new incentives for psychiatrists who agree to serve at 
the VA. Both Department of Defense and VA suicide-prevention programs 
will also be required to be evaluated each year to increase 
accountability and improve care. Lastly, this bill empowers the VA to 
collaborate with Veteran Service Organizations and nonprofit mental 
health organizations to combat veteran suicide.
  Suicide is a deadly epidemic for veterans that the Federal Government 
must address. This bill will be a starting point, by requiring the VA 
to prioritize suicide prevention. However, Congress must continue to 
work to address this critical public health issue, and I hope this will 
be one of many steps we will take to prevent veteran and military 
suicides.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support the passage of the Clay Hunt 
Suicide Prevention for American Veterans, SAV, Act.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I remain strongly committed to our 
veterans and their families. When America sends our men and women to 
war, we vow to care for them when they return. However, throughout the 
Nation, we have seen reports of our veterans enduring long wait times, 
substandard quality of care, and a lack of transparency at the 
Department of Veterans Affairs.
  In my great State of Oklahoma, we have a large population of veterans 
at roughly 340,000. From 2005-2012, there was an increase of 34 percent 
in the annual veteran suicide rate in Oklahoma, totaling 1,018 veteran 
suicide deaths. An average of 127 deaths per year is not acceptable. We 
must help our veterans get access to the best mental health and suicide 
prevention programs.
  I believe the Clay Hunt Suicide Prevention for Americans bill will 
provide opportunities for the VA to work collaboratively with local 
community organizations and require an evaluation of the various mental 
health care programs to identify the efficiencies or lack thereof. It 
will also allow the VA to compete in recruiting the necessary staff for 
the mental health care and suicide prevention programs. We cannot allow 
VA psychiatry positions to remain open for long periods of time, and 
the education loan repayment pilot program will assist the VA in 
attracting the much needed psychiatrists to support those currently 
employed with the abundant workload. With this bill, Congress will 
exercise its constitutional right to oversight of the VA while 
requiring the Department to use the resources it already has.
  Freedom is not free. Many of our veterans and their families have 
paid and continue to pay the price for us and our great Nation. It is 
our duty to honor the promises made to them in return for their 
sacrifices.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I have spoken repeatedly on this floor 
about the cost of war. In doing so, I have tried to remind the American 
people and my colleagues that the cost of war does not end when the 
last shots are fired and the last missiles launched. The cost of war is 
very, very expensive not just in dollars and cents but in terms of 
human life and human suffering.
  The cost of war in Iraq and Afghanistan is almost 7,000 dead. Nearly 
52,000 servicemembers have returned with physical wounds; however, more 
than 200,000 service men and women are seeking treatment for post-
traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury.
  The cost of war is nearly 1,600 servicemembers who face amputations, 
to include a number of with multiple amputations.
  The cost of war is veterans returning home unable to find jobs and 
get their feet back on the ground financially.
  The cost of war is high divorce rates and the impact that family 
stress has on children.
  The cost of war is mothers losing their children to suicide.
  Late last session the Veterans' Affairs Committee heard from two 
mothers--Valerie Pallotta from Vermont and Susan Selke from Texas--
whose lives have been forever changed because of the wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan.
  The experience these two mothers shared with the committee goes well 
beyond anything I can put into words. They shared powerful stories 
about their own cost of war--the tragic suicides of their sons 
following their return from combat. They talked about their sons' 
struggles with post-traumatic stress disorder and efforts to seek help 
from the Department of Veterans Affairs. It is with the stories shared 
by these mothers in mind that I come to the floor today.
  As chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, I worked hard to 
listen to and address concerns brought to my attention by veterans, 
their family members and advocates within the military and veterans' 
community.
  The ideas in the bill under consideration--which will be voted on 
shortly--are the result of the work of the families and friends of 
those who have committed suicide, advocates, and countless others who 
continue to search and fight for solutions to address the staggering 
rate of suicide among veterans.
  This bill is a good start. Everyone needs to be thanked for their 
efforts, especially the mothers who came before our committee and 
shared their thoughts on mental health and suicide.
  But, we can never do too much in the area of veterans' mental health 
and suicide. That is why I intend to pursue additional enhancements at 
another time. I do not want to slow down the bill we will be voting on 
today--but I want my colleagues to recognize that much, much more needs 
to be done to assist veterans and families struggling with either their 
own mental health conditions or a loved ones' mental health condition. 
We can never do enough.
  Briefly, let me tell you what additional provisions I will be pursing 
at a later time.
  Currently, returning veterans have 5 years from their date of 
discharge to enroll in the VA health care system and receive free 
health care for their medical conditions resulting from their service.
  The bill we are voting on today would provide an additional 1-year 
window during which VA can provide health care for veterans whose 
eligibility for the initial 5-year period has lapsed.
  Now, is that exactly what I wanted? No. I think the period of 
eligibility for health care at VA following separation from service 
should be 10 years.
  We hear time and time again that for many veterans, problems do not 
necessarily manifest until years after they have returned from war. 
Then it might take some time before they actually seek assistance at 
VA. However, recognizing the importance of getting this legislation to 
the President's desk as soon as possible, I intend to pursue that 
provision at another time.
  During her testimony before this committee last session, Valerie 
Pallotta, the mother of a veteran who

[[Page 1603]]

succumbed to suicide, talked about her desire to see complementary and 
alternative medicine opportunities expanded at VA.
  While VA has made significant strides in providing complementary and 
alternative medicine at VA medical centers, access to such services is 
not standardized across VA. I commend VA's current efforts, but more 
must be done.
  I will pursue expanding access to complementary and alternative 
medicine at another time, so that we can increase the likelihood that 
veterans will get the care that not only meets their needs, but their 
personal preferences, as well.
  We have also heard that families, who are caring for loved ones with 
mental health conditions, are highly stressed and looking for resources 
to help their loved ones. At the moment, VA has only limited capacity 
to offer support and education to family members and caregivers of 
veterans with mental health conditions. This is an issue I will pursue 
in the near-future.
  We could never do too much to help veterans and their family members 
after these veterans return from war. As I said earlier, this bill is a 
good start--but we have much more to do.
  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I know we are close to a vote on the Clay 
Hunt suicide prevention bill. As chairman of the Veterans' Affairs 
Committee, who has just left the Veterans' Administration this morning 
after a 3-hour meeting with employees, I want to tell all of the 
Members of the Senate how much I appreciate their commitment to this 
bill, how much I would appreciate their vote in favor of this bill.
  Every day in America, 22 veterans commit suicide. Every year in 
America, 8,000 veterans commit suicide. Eight thousand is more than all 
who have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last 13 
years. Suicide is a critical problem in the VA. The Clay Hunt bill 
focuses and targets on what we need: more psychiatric care, more 
accountability in the VA, and an investment in the future of our 
soldiers who have come home after defending our country for ourselves.
  As chairman of the committee, I want to thank Senator McCain, Senator 
Blumenthal, Senator Boozman, and Senator Burr for their tremendous 
effort and work to bring this about. I want to thank the members of the 
committee who unanimously passed this out, including the Presiding 
Officer, in the very first meeting of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.
  I encourage every Member of the Senate to vote for the Clay Hunt 
suicide prevention bill and make an investment in the future of the 
lives we will save of our veterans who return with mental health 
problems.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I want to begin by thanking Chairman 
Isakson for giving the Clay Hunt Suicide Prevention for American 
Veterans Act the priority it needs and deserves. I know the Presiding 
Officer, as a veteran, understands and supports the vital mission of 
this legislation.
  I also want to thank the veterans service organizations, particularly 
the IAVA, for the critical role they have played in heightening 
awareness and educating the American public about the scourge that 
veteran suicide reflects in our society, the unacceptable 22 veterans 
who commit suicide every day in the greatest, strongest Nation in the 
history of the world.
  Our veterans all too often succumb to the invisible wounds and inner 
demons that come home with them. They lack the mental health care they 
need and deserve because the VA lacks the resources to provide that 
health care.
  I know the VA is committed to do better. Senator Isakson and I have 
just returned from 3 hours at the VA, where we heard the Secretary, as 
well as his top-ranking staff, commit to using this act as a means of 
enhancing and increasing the quality and quantity of mental health care 
our veterans deserve. Far too many of our veterans have succumbed to 
suicide, including a friend of mine, Justin Eldridge, whose widow 
Joanna was my guest at the State of the Union.
  She has struggled in the wake of his death with their children to 
survive this tragedy. Her courage and strength mirror those same 
qualities of bravery and fortitude demonstrated by Susan Selke who 
testified before our committee about her son Clay Hunt, for whom this 
bill is named. My hope is we can continue this bipartisan work 
together.
  I thank Senator McCain, the cosponsor of this bill, and hope we keep 
faith with all of our veterans and make the VA the pioneer and champion 
of mental health care so we end the scourge of veteran suicide in this 
great Nation.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this measure.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ISAKSON. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum 
call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask for a vote to be called, and I ask 
that it be a rollcall vote on the Clay Hunt Suicide Prevention for 
American Veterans Act.
  I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The bill was ordered to a third reading and was read the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the 
question is, Shall the bill pass?
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cruz). Are there any other Senators in the 
Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 99, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 50 Leg.]

                                YEAS--99

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Flake
     Franken
     Gardner
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kaine
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Paul
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Vitter
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Kirk
       
  The bill (H.R. 203) was passed.

                          ____________________