Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance Enhancement Act of 2005

Mr. President, I have sought recognition in these waning hours of the 109th Congress to provide a summary of the good work accomplished over the last 2 years on behalf of America's veterans, and to comment on comprehensive legislation that is now pending in the Senate. I provide this summary in my capacity as chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, a title I will soon pass on to my friend, Senator Danny Akaka of Hawaii.

Before the 109th Congress convened, I made a decision to serve as chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

for two fundamental reasons. The first and most important was that our country was at war and continues to be at war, and a nation at war, with hundreds of thousands of young men and women having spent extensive tours overseas in hostile lands, fighting for our country, deserves the full attention of the Senate. Many have died during the course of combat operations. Others have been seriously wounded. Thousands more will transition out of the military service in the coming years and will attempt to reenter the workforce or go to school under the Montgomery GI bill. There simply was no greater calling than for me to assume the leadership role to ensure our Government was effectively assisting the current generation of America's veterans and their families.

Second, I have always been nonplused, I guess, at the characterization that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs was a ``B'' committee. This characterization exists despite these facts. Mr. President, 24 million Americans have served in the military and are potentially eligible for VA-administered benefits. In addition, VA will soon have a budget over $80 billion, which is one of the largest and fastest growing budgets within Government. And finally, VA has the second largest Federal workforce of any Government agency.

Therefore, it was my goal to elevate the committee's profile and the importance of the veterans' benefits and services by embarking on a course of vigorous oversight and legislative effort and, I believe, accomplishment.

It is my humble opinion that I share the credit with 13 other members of the committee. One of them is here on the floor with me, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, who also served not only on the authorizing committee with me but chairs VA MilCon and has played a critical role in veterans issues. We have been diligent and active participants of the committee, and the business of this committee, in my opinion, has been extremely productive in the last 2 years.

The committee held 52 hearings during the 109th Congress. From the start, our focus was on the combat wounded, the combat deceased, and their families. We held a hearing on the difficulty that surviving spouses have in getting timely and effective, consistent information regarding their benefits following the active-duty death of their loved one.

We held several hearings on whether returned combat veterans are provided with a seamless transition--many of us have heard those words used--from active duty to civilian life. We are still working with DOD on that, to make sure it is truly seamless.

We focused on medical and vocational needs of our severely wounded. We examined the research being done within the VA to advance our understanding of various diseases and disabilities confronting veterans in the hope that advances in medical science and technology could one day improve their lives. And there is clear evidence today that that very thing is happening.

The committee was particularly active in examining VA's budget needs, and no one can argue about the high priority this Congress placed on funding the VA system.

The total VA budget will have increased from approximately $63 billion at the end of fiscal year 2004 to over $80 billion upon enactment of a fiscal year 2007 appropriations bill, an increase of 27 percent.

In addition to resources provided, this Congress has put in place a system of accountability to ensure that the appropriations provided to VA are being used to meet the needs of those who rely on the vital health care provided by VA facilities around the Nation.

By law, VA now submits quarterly reports to the Congress on its budget that contain a comparison between VA's planned expenditures and actual expenditures.

More importantly, VA is required to include quality indicators in this report, such as the percentage of primary care appointments scheduled within 30 days of a patient's desired date.

I am confident that the Congress has the mechanisms in place to know, on short order, if VA's budget needs are outpacing its resources, and is therefore equipped to take swift remedial action if necessary.

On the legislative front, the Senate has continued to do the work expected of it by the men and women we serve and represent. Let me give a quick accounting of the legislative provisions that were enacted into law during this Congress:

First S. 1234 and S. 2562. In both the first and second sessions of the Congress, cost-of-living-adjustment legislation was enacted to increase the rates of disability compensation and survivors' compensation. Benefit rates were increased by 4.1 percent for 2006 and will be increased by 3.3 percent for 2007.

Second, Traumatic Injury Protection under Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance, T-SGLI. In many instances the wives, parents, and other family members of servicemembers who are traumatically injured incur substantial financial obligations in order to spend time with their loved ones during recovery periods at military hospitals.

Under the provisions of Public Law 109-13, those traumatically wounded since the start of OIF and OEF as a result of combat wounds are eligible for financial payments which range from $25,000 to $100,000 for qualifying injuries, depending on severity. To date, more than 2.500 wounded servicemembers have received payments as a direct result of this legislation.

As of December 1, 2005, all servicemembers and Reservists insured under the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance program are also covered under the T-SGLI benefit. The coverage extends to all qualifying injuries regardless of whether injuries are incurred as a result of combat.

Under the provisions of H.R. 3200, the maximum coverage for members of the Armed Forces and veterans of the Service Members Group Life Insurance and the Veterans Group Life Insurance benefit was increased from $250,000 to $400,000.

The bill, as enacted, also requires that spouses be notified when members insured under T-SGLI elect less than maximum coverage or designate a beneficiary other than the spouse or the children or the child.

In fiscal year 2006, the National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 1815, under provisions of H.R. 1815 and as a result of veterans committees oversights, the Department of Defense was directed to provide customized integrated information to survivors of those killed on active duty about their future Federal benefits through an Internet Web site.

I was amazed when we started these hearings that we were still dealing with a hodgepodge of approaches of how we dealt with the surviving spouse of a lost one.

DOD was also directed to develop a uniform policy on providing casualty assistance to survivors. I would like to especially thank Senators Warner and Levin for their cooperation on that bill.

Also under H.R. 1815, a provision was adopted to prohibit military funeral honors and burial in VA national cemeteries and in Arlington National Cemetery to any person who is convicted of a Federal or State capital murder for which a sentence of death or life in prison may be imposed

We had an example of a fellow from Maryland who had killed two elderly people and was sentenced to death, died in prison, and was buried at Arlington. This provision was adopted following our committee's oversight and hearing of that double murder that I just expressed. I will speak more to my colleagues about the status of the double murder incident in a moment.

In June of 2006 President Bush signed into law S. 1235, a bill to help severely injured servicemembers in their transition from the military to their civilian lives. It authorizes VA to make grants available--ranging from $2,000 to $14,000--to assist with housing adaptations on a family member's home in which a severely disabled veteran is living.

It allows servicemembers, who have been legally determined 100 percent disabled when they separated from the military, up to 2 years from that date to apply for premium-free Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance coverage. Finally, it enables them to convert their coverage to Veterans' Group Life Insurance, or an individual plan or policy, during the same 2-year period.

As to H.R. 5037, undoubtedly most of my colleagues are aware of the fringe

group which has used its protected free speech rights to deliberately disrupt funerals of our military heroes. That is why the Senate voted unanimously to put reasonable restrictions on demonstrations at VA cemeteries and Arlington National Cemetery.

An amendment was put forward on the floor of the Senate balancing the rights of grieving families to a dignified funeral ceremony; the rights of private property owners who live near cemeteries to be free from overly intrusive Federal laws; and the rights of demonstrators to have their message heard. The amendment was accepted, the bill was passed, and it is now Federal law.

In addition to the bills already enacted into law, the House and Senate Committees on Veterans' Affairs have agreed on a comprehensive substitute amendment to S. 3421, which has cleared the House and awaits Senate action. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

S. 3421, the ``Veterans Benefits. Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006,'' contains provisions that would: enhance veterans' health, education, memorial affairs, and other benefit programs; improve VA's information technology infrastructure; authorize the construction of needed VA medical facilities; improve services for homeless veterans; remove the remains of a convicted double murderer from Arlington National Cemetery; and, I am proud to say, repeal an outdated and paternalistic law that limits the ability of veterans to hire an attorney to represent them during the VA claims process.

While a fuller accounting of the provisions of S. 3421 can be found in the Joint Explanatory Statement language accompanying the amendment text in the Congressional Record--and I ask unanimous consent that the Joint Explanatory Statement be printed in the Record along with the text of the substitute amendment to S. 3421,--I will make a few remarks about three provisions of note that I have championed.

Mr. President, currently, veterans and other claimants seeking veterans' benefits may not hire an attorney until the VA administrative proceedings have been completed--a process that often takes several years.

That law flows from a Civil War era policy intended to protect veterans from unscrupulous attorneys. That policy arose at a time-- unlike today--when attending law school was not required to become a lawyer and there was no effective professional oversight of lawyers.

In recent months, it has become abundantly clear that many veterans and their survivors want the option of hiring an attorney to help them navigate the increasingly complex VA system. In fact, the prohibition against veterans hiring attorneys is considered to be unfair and outdated by a broad spectrum of individuals and organizations, including veterans' organizations, veterans' advocates, judges, law professors, and bar associations.

For these reasons, I am very pleased that a compromise version of legislation I authored was accepted that would allow veterans to hire attorneys after a veteran files a Notice of Disagreement with VA's initial decision on their claim.

A provision of S. 3421 will enable the spouses of seriously wounded veterans to obtain educational assistance benefits sooner than they have ever been able to before.

The need for the educational assistance provision was brought to my attention by U.S. Army SFC Jeff Mittman, a young man who was blinded after an attack in Iraq and is being treated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Sergeant First Class Mittman's wife would like to begin receiving educational assistance benefits from the VA while her husband undergoes treatment in order to improve her job opportunities once he is officially discharged from service, but is now prevented from doing so by law. If enacted, S. 3421 would remove that barrier.

Finally, S. 3421 would remove the cremated remains of a convicted double murderer from Arlington National Cemetery.

In the summer of 2005, we learned that the remains of a brutal murderer--Russell Wayne Wagner--were placed in the Nation's preeminent military cemetery, Arlington National Cemetery.

I was appalled to discover that the law enacted in 1997 to deny capital offenders from burial in national cemeteries did not apply to Wagner.

This was also quickly brought to my attention by the Senator from Maryland, Barbara Mikulski. We joined together in that effort. The answer was it couldn't happen, it couldn't be removed because of the law.

While we moved swiftly to close the loophole that permitted Wagner's burial in the first place, the question remained: Should his remains continue to be included among the scores of honored dead in Arlington? For me and Senator Mikulski, who joined me in this effort, the answer was ``no.''

That is why I am so pleased that S. 3421 would direct the Secretary of the Army to remove Wagner's remains from Arlington.

As I stated last summer, we must not dishonor the sacrifices made by those memorialized at our Nation's military cemeteries by including among them individuals who, through their own heinous acts, have grievously dishonored themselves because at another time in their life they were veterans.

S. 3421 is an impressive assortment of legislation. It contains the collective work of more than 44 Senators. I want to take some time to single out a few of them.

Senators Burr and Obama for their work on the homeless assistance provisions of the bill; Senators Hutchison, Feinstein, Graham, Landrieu, and Murray for their work on the construction provisions; Senators Thune, Salazar, and Burr for their work on the rural health components of the bill.

And lastly, the committee's ranking member, and a true friend of veterans, Senator Akaka.

I ask my colleagues for their vote. And I thank every Senator on the committee and in the Senate for their support in seeing this, and all of the other veterans' bills, through the Senate.

I also want to thank my House colleagues, in particular Chairman Buyer, Ranking Member Evans, and Acting Ranking Member Filner. We were able to come together in the spirit of compromise in the final hour on some key provisions, and it is a fitting way to end this Congress.

As we head into a new Congress, I want to extend my best wishes to my friend, and soon-to-be chairman, Senator Akaka. It has been a pleasure working with a Senator of his quality, and I pledge that as ranking member I will strive to emulate the kindness, cooperation, and ``aloha'' that he showed me during my time as chairman of this great committee.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I commend the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. Senator Craig has done an outstanding job of making sure the laws that weren't working, where we were not doing what we should be doing to help our veterans, were changed.

He has worked a long time on the bill now coming to its final passage--finally. He has been working on it for 2 years, that I am aware. He has done a terrific job. There is a lot of authorization that is essential to go forward next year on appropriations.

I appreciate the work of the Senator. He is retiring as chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and going to ranking member. I know his working relationship with the new chairman is such that we will continue to see progress in this area.

military construction appropriations

I will talk about the continuing resolution being passed by the House in a few hours that will be sent to the Senate. We will send that bill to the President to meet the midnight deadline so Government can continue to function.

I am talking tonight about this bill with very mixed feelings because I am chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans' Affairs and Related Agencies, and I wanted to pass the full bill, the appropriations for military construction, and I wanted to make sure we covered our veterans' needs. It is an important subcommittee, of which I have served as chairman these last 2 years. I have worked with my ranking member, Senator Feinstein, to assure we had the funding we needed. Senator Feinstein and I were ready to go on our bill. It passed in September. It is a bill that passed unanimously in the Senate. I know everyone agreed we had

covered the bases that need to be covered to do what is right for our military--active duty and the veterans--who have served our country in the past.

Unfortunately, our full bill is not going to pass. It is not going to pass because, first, it was held up in the Senate for appointing conferees, held up by a few Senators who thwarted the majority. I was very disappointed we lost those weeks. Our Appropriations Committee chairman Thad Cochran tried, as I, to pry the bill out so we could go to conference and work with the House.

Finally, this week, through the leadership of Senator Frist and Senator Stevens from Alaska, the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, we were able to alleviate all of the concerns raised and get the bill to conference.

Then, unfortunately, the members of the House committee had determined we did not have enough time to conference the bill. I think we did have enough time. We had the time to do all of the construction that should be started right now. However, that is not going to happen.

I would not have allowed this bill to go forward, and I would be speaking against it right now if we did not have a provision in the House-passed continuing resolution that will give budget transfer authority to the Department of Veterans Affairs so that there will be no medical need, no service need, no payment to any veteran that will not be made before this continuing resolution runs out.

If that provision had not been added in the bill, we would not be passing this bill tonight because I would be talking all night to keep it from passing.

I called the Secretary of Veterans Affairs this afternoon, and I asked him if he could assure me that there would be enough money in the accounts from which they could transfer to assure that all of the medical needs, including surges in medical needs, would be able to be given. The Secretary assured me that is the case. The Secretary said they had enough surplus money, enough rainy day fund money, and enough money in the other accounts that they would not hurt the other accounts and they would be able to transfer. He did say that by the time we got to February 15, if we didn't have a full bill, they would be beginning to run into trouble. He gave me his word--and I know his word is good-- that if they see some shortfall that would start happening before February 15, and if there is no bill, he would call me immediately, and we would begin to work on a supplemental approach.

I am certainly going to trust his word. Secretary Nicholson has been a man of his word throughout these years I have worked with him. He is a veteran himself, a distinguished veteran. He knows the veterans issues. He cares about veterans. He will call, as he did last year when he saw a looming shortfall and he asked for help and we gave him the help to assure the veterans' needs would be met. We are going to cover it, and we are going to do it in a way that will assure that the medical care is given.

I have to say, I am disappointed we are going to adjourn without completing the full bill, without completing the military construction so it can start right away, without completing the appropriations and the priorities that we are putting in the next year for veterans. I know they will not suffer in any way because Secretary Nicholson assured me of that.

I will be watching. I will be staying on top of the VA's financial situation throughout this period that the continuing resolution is going to run, to the middle of February. If a problem arises, I will not stop advocating for the supplemental appropriation that will be necessary to assure we have the funding we need.

We will work together in this Congress to assure that the men and women who are protecting our freedom, as we speak today, get the quality of life they deserve. We will continue to work together to assure that the veterans who have served our country, who have answered the call of our country, are given everything to which they are entitled and which we owe them.

I am going to be the ranking member of this subcommittee next year, having served as chairman for 2 years with a wonderful ranking member, Senator Feinstein. It has been pure joy. She has a wonderful staff. We have never had a disagreement that couldn't be worked out. We have made sure the priorities, which are the same for both of us, have been met. I will be a loyal ranking member, and I hope the new chairman will have the same relationship and the same overall goal for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs that Senator Feinstein and I have had. I believe he will.

I am going to vote for the continuing resolution. However, I could not be more disappointed that we did not pass the full appropriations bill for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs. I know the veterans will be taken care of, and I know the military construction will begin with the new starts a couple of months late. We will get those projects done with that small delay. I am going to make it my priority to assure that happens.

Senator Stevens has come to the Senate. I want to say, in addition to Senator Cochran, Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye have been the advocates for our military throughout the time I have been in the Senate. I am honored to be a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. I know those two leaders work together, as Senator Feinstein and I do, and that is with one goal: to make sure the military, who are in harm's way, who are fighting so we may speak freely in this Chamber, who are fighting for our children and grandchildren to have the freedom we enjoy and that has been given to us by generations past, will have the opportunities they deserve, and that is the quality of life that we can give them.

I thank the Senate for coming to the end with this continuing resolution. I will support it.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I would just like to clarify, with the Senator from Alaska on this subject, that the Senate did act. The Senate did pass our bill, and we did appoint conferees, and it was a lack of willingness on the part of the House to have conferees meet with the Senate. His disappointment is the same as mine.

I am going to start working on January 4, when we are sworn in to the new Congress. And I hope we can take the bill that has been passed unanimously by the Senate and work through the appropriations process and pass this bill before the continuing resolution is ended on February 15. We do not have to wait until February 15. And once the committee is constituted, and we have a chairman and a ranking member, I will be the ranking member, and I will work with the chairman. And I hope we can pass this bill because it is in very good order and it was unanimously supported by the Senate. And I think we are pretty close to what the House passed. I think, with a strong will, we will be able to come in before February 15 and start those projects about which the Senator from Alaska just spoke.

So I will look forward to working with him in the new year, both for Defense appropriations and for this Military Construction bill and the Veterans Affairs bill and the military quality of life that is in the bill that we passed in the Senate earlier this year.

I thank the Senator.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3200) to amend title 38, United States Code, to enhance the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance program, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, on July 14, 2005, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs reported H.R. 3200, the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance Enhancement Act of 2005. Among other things, this bill would provide a permanent authorization for increases in maximum life insurance coverage under the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance, referred to as the SGLI program, and the Veterans' Group Life Insurance, referred to as the VGLI program from $250,000 to $400,000.

Public Law 109-113, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act For Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief of 2005, increased the maximum coverage to $400,000 under these programs. However, the authorization expires on September 30, 2005.

It is my understanding that the Senate included the termination date, which was approved in the conference report, to afford the legislative committees the jurisdiction and opportunity to hold public hearings and further consider the specifics of the emergency authorization before it could be made permanent.

The increased level of coverage was requested by the President because of concerns over death benefits for the survivors of servicemembers being inadequate as our Nation fights the global war on terrorism. H.R. 3200 would also repeal the provision of Public Law 109- 13 which prevents a married servicemember from declining SGLI coverage, or opting for an amount less than the maximum, without the written consent of the spouse. Public Law 109-13 mandates spousal consent, even in cases where the couple is estranged, as long as they are legally married.

The committee does not believe providing a spouse such veto authority over life insurance elections is good public policy. The spousal consent requirement could also result, for example, in a servicemember's spouse excluding stepchildren as beneficiaries. The government should not interfere legally in a servicemember's highly personal choices about such family matters.

H.R. 3200 would instead require the military service Secretary concerned to provide written notification to the spouse or the next of kin of an unmarried servicemember as to the servicemember's insurance election.

The committee believes that this is the preferable way of ensuring that the spouse or beneficiary is informed about this important financial decision, while preserving the individual right of the servicemember to make decisions about life insurance coverage.

Finally, Public Law 109-13 also provides for a new traumatic injury program. The traumatic injury program provides financial assistance in the amounts from $25,000 to $100,000 to servicemembers who suffer certain traumatic injuries.

The traumatic injury protection under current law is mandatory for servicemembers who elect SGLI coverage with premiums paid by the servicemember. No hearing had been held on this new program until June 16 of 2005, when the Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 3200 in its draft form and on the traumatic injury protection program.

H.R. 3200 would allow a servicemember to decline traumatic injury coverage. This program authorization will be effective December 1, 2005, for servicemembers, but it is retroactive to October 7, 2001, when Operation Enduring Freedom began, for qualifying losses that are a direct result of injuries incurred in Operation Enduring Freedom and/or Operation Iraqi Freedom

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would like to acknowledge the contributions of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) for his hard work on this legislation. On April 16, 2005, Mr. Renzi introduced H.R. 1618, which would create a traumatic injury protection program similar to what was enacted in Public Law 109-13.

On June 16, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) testified before the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, and his comments helped shape the bill which we are currently considering today. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) is a strong supporter of our Nation's servicemen and women, and I appreciate his input.

I would also note that I have had continuous dialogue with the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi), and I deeply appreciate his passion. In having grown up in a military family, he has great understanding of the sacrifices of the men and women who wear the uniform.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi).

Madam Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley), a member of the committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards), of the Subcommittee on Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations when they took up this matter at the request of the President.

I also would like to commend the hard work of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, in the consideration of this bill in a timely fashion and ensuring that the Servicemember Group Life Insurance Enhancement Act of 2005 was quickly passed.

I also want to note that the gentleman has been actively involved in these insurance provisions since we were first made aware of them. Following the submission of the supplemental, he convened a roundtable with the administration officials, and he has taken a lead on the crafting of this bill; and I want to thank him for his efforts.

I also want to commend the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley), the ranking member, for working with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller) on this legislation. Her input was valuable, and we appreciate her efforts on behalf of men and women who wear the uniform and our veterans.

I also again want to commend the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi)

for his contributions to this legislation. I also reserve the last of my thanks to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), the ranking member of full committee, for his good work.

Congress must act promptly to ensure permanent SGLI authorization is enacted before September 30 of 2005, or the coverage levels for servicemember life insurance will revert to $250,000 on October 1 of 2005. I do not believe any Member of this body would want to see that happen. I strongly urge my colleagues to give favorable consideration to H.R. 3200.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I wish to take a few minutes. I ask unanimous consent the Senator from Ohio, Mr. DeWine, be permitted to take the floor following my remarks.

Mr. President, we ought to understand what we are talking about now because the bills that are before the Senate now and the CR should have been enacted by October 1. This bill will move that money out to February now and will not be available to the department agencies until sometime in February.

I am concerned about this because prior to this Congress, the quality-of-life money for the members of the Department of Defense was under the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense that I cochair with my friend from Hawaii, Senator Inouye.

We are disturbed that Congress has not finished its work on the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill. To me, the failure to complete this work is inexplicable.

I am disappointed we are unable to reach an agreement with the House on the matters contained in this bill and to realize the necessity of completing action on the bill in total. We are neglecting our congressional responsibilities by not completing work on this bill. It is unfortunate. We have had a considerable amount of time to do so.

This is not a routine disagreement between Members of the House and the Senate. This is a disagreement that affects our Nation while we are at war. We have hundreds of thousands of service men and women deployed around the world. This sends a message we are not willing to take the time to finish the work necessary to assure they have the money, the funding, the facilities to do the work we have asked them to do. It will have an impact on military life and the morale of our armed services.

The Military Construction appropriations bill not only contains money for military construction and for quality of life, but it also contains the money for our veterans. In total, it provides critical funding for family housing, barracks, mission facilities, implementation of the base closure and realignment process, maintenance of defense and veterans facilities, environment cleanup, the Defense Health Program, and medical care for our veterans.

Now I am told that the CR does now come up to the President's request for

the medical health program, and that really removes part of my objection to proceeding on this bill. Without this bill, the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs have to contend with this continuing resolution. Most people do not understand it. It means these moneys will be postponed until mid-February, the additional moneys that are necessary to meet the additional demands being placed on our Armed Services before September 30. We are supposed to finish this bill by September 30.

I am told the Department of Defense will not be able to start a single military construction project, although those projects were authorized more than 3 months ago. It means the projects cannot be started until the regular bill is passed. I hope it will be passed in February.

Now, I took the time to go to Italy and look at the new Army base there and the new Air Force base there, as we are redeploying our forces from Germany and other places into Italy. Those projects involve barracks, quality of life facilities, and family housing. That cannot go forward. The money will not be available because it was not covered by the 2006 appropriations bill. It is not covered by this continuing resolution.

I think it is true now, because of what I mentioned, the Veterans' Administration should be able to sustain the medical care for our veterans without disruption. But I can tell the Senate, they will not be able to go much more than mid-February without running into real trouble. So one of the first bills that ought to be considered when we get back is the Veterans appropriations bill.

I am here tonight because I announced to our conference I would oppose this CR unless it contained these bills in it. After consulting, and my staff consulting, with the Department of Defense, the Veterans' Administration, and understanding what the House has done now since that time on the medical portion for the Veterans' Administration, it does not seem possible for me to do that now. All I can do is express my deep reservation about voting for this bill under the circumstances.

We should have had at least the balance of the military money and the veterans money made available by this Congress before we went home. And I am really disappointed it is not possible.

Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Texas, you wish the floor again? The Senator from Ohio would follow me, but you wish to comment?

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Texas for those comments.

My point is, the Congress as a whole should have finished its job. We should have done this job before this Congress ends, particularly for those bills which impact the men and women in our Armed Services, their families, and the veterans who have served, particularly the new class of veterans now who are coming out of the service, many of whom are wounded. Many of them have readjustment problems. This bill, the bill the Senator from Texas and her subcommittee prepared, would have answered many of those problems. It would have made money available now to deal with them.

I am chagrined that bill is not going to pass. I think it is a failure of this Congress. And we ought to admit it is a failure. But as far as this Senator is concerned, we have done everything we can to try to rectify that. It is just not possible to get the Congress to vote. The House has already voted. I do not think it is possible for us to try to amend this bill now. And I am told the agencies involved have reviewed it and say they will find a way to continue their work until February without it.

That does not answer the question to me though because the things they should start now would be well underway by February, and it will not be possible with postponing this bill. It is a tragedy we are not able to complete our appropriations process, in my opinion.

I yield the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 3200) to amend title 38, United States Code, to enhance the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance program, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. MILLER of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, on July 14 of this year, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs reported H.R. 3200, the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance Enhancement Act of 2005. On July 26 of this year, the House passed the bill by a vote of 424-0.

Among other things, this bill would provide a permanent authorization for increases in maximum life insurance covered under the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance Program and the Veterans Group Life Insurance Program from $250,000 to $400,000.

Public Law 109-13, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act For Defense, the Global War on Terror, and the Tsunami Relief, 2005, increased the maximum coverage to $400,000 under these programs; however, the authorization expires in just 2 days, that is, September 30.

It is my understanding that during negotiations on the supplemental that the Senate included the termination date which was approved in the conference report to afford the legislative committees of jurisdiction the opportunity to hold hearings and further consider the specifics of the emergency authorization before it was made permanent.

The increased level of coverage was requested by the President because of concerns that death benefits for survivors of servicemembers were inadequate as our Nation fights the global war on terrorism. Further, Public Law 109-13 mandated spousal consent even in cases where the couple is estranged, as long as they are still legally married. The committee does not believe providing the spouse such a ``veto'' authority over life insurance elections is good public policy. The spousal consent requirement could also result, for example, in a servicemember's spouse excluding stepchildren as beneficiaries. The government should not interfere legally in a servicemember's highly personal choices about such family matters as this.

H.R. 3200, as amended, which the Senate passed yesterday, would instead require the military service secretary concerned to provide written notification to the spouse.

In an effort to expedite the passage of this bill as amended, we concur with the Senate's decision to drop the provisions stating that in cases of an unmarried servicemember, or a servicemember who marries while on active duty, notification be made to the next of kin or new spouse as to their insurance election.

The Committee believes notification is the preferable way of ensuring that the spouse is informed about this important financial decision while preserving the individual right of the servicemember to make decisions about life insurance coverage themselves.

Finally, Public Law 109-13 also provided for a new Traumatic Injury Protection program which goes into effect on the 1st of December this year. The committee has agreed to review this proposal in the coming year after having an opportunity to monitor the existing program. As amended, H.R. 3200 does not include this provision.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, like my colleague, I would like to say thank you to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), the chairman of the committee, and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), the ranking member, for their cooperation in this legislation. I also commend the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley), the ranking member on our subcommittee, as well as the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley), for working with me and drafting this compromise agreement.

I particularly want to thank those on the Senate side, Senator Craig and Senator Akaka, for ensuring that this important legislation was considered in the Senate and returned to the House to allow for final passage.

Congress has to act promptly to ensure permanent SGLI authorization is enacted before September 30, or else insurance coverage levels will revert to $250,000 on the 1st of October of this year. I do not think any Member of this body wants to see this happen.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3200, as amended.

For the benefit of my colleagues, the following is a joint explanatory statement describing the compromise agreement which we have reached with the other body.

Joint Explanatory Statement on Senate Amendments to H.R. 3200

H.R. 3200, as amended, the Servicemembers' Group Life

Insurance Enhancement Act of 2005, reflects a Compromise

Agreement reached by the House and Senate Committees on

Veterans' Affairs (the Committees) on the following bills

considered in the House and Senate during the 109th Congress:

H.R. 2046, as amended; H.R. 3200 (House Bills); and S. 1235,

as amended (Senate Bill). H.R. 2046, as amended, passed the

House on May 23, 2005; H.R. 3200 passed the House on July 26,

2005; and S. 1235, as amended, reported to the Senate on

September 21, 2005.

The Committees have prepared the following explanation of

H.R. 3200, as amended (Compromise Agreement). Differences

between the provisions contained in the Compromise Agreement

and the related provisions of H.R. 2046, as amended; H.R.

3200; and S. 1235, as amended, are noted in this document,

except for clerical corrections, conforming changes made

necessary by the Compromise Agreement, and minor drafting,

technical, and clarifying changes.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.