Veterans Traumatic Brain Injury Treatment Act of 2007

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 860, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 1585) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on this conference report.

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

I rise today in strong support of the conference report on H.R. 1585, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.

I must tell you, Mr. Speaker, that I'm so extremely proud of the members of the Armed Services Committee, of all of those who worked hard in and out of the Armed Services Committee to make this happen. And a special thanks to the fantastic staff that we have supporting us, Erin Conaton, Bob Simmons, who is the leader of those on the other side of the aisle regarding the staff, and everyone just pitched in so very, very well.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. As a matter of fact, I think it's the best bill in decades that this Congress has put forward. It's good for our troops, good for our families, it will help improve readiness of our Armed Forces, and it will bring new significant oversight to the Department of Defense in areas where oversight was sorely needed in the past.

Let me begin by saying that the Armed Services Committee has remained committed to a tradition of bipartisanship, and we appreciate that, and we have all throughout the year.

Special thanks to our ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) and today to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) who's been such a great help through the years.

When the 110th Congress began, we laid out, from the Armed Services Committee, six strategic priorities, and we have met them in this legislation. The bill before us is the culmination of our efforts. It addresses strategic priorities in important ways. It includes a 3.5 percent across-the-board

pay raise, it protects the troops and their families from escalating health care fees, and includes well over 100 other measures, both large and small, regarding quality of life. It is especially important because it adopts the elements of the Wounded Warrior Act which passed this House earlier in the year 426-0. And I think that that, in and of itself, is a major victory for those in uniform.

It addresses readiness. It establishes a new, high level board of military officers, the Defense Materiel Readiness Board, to grapple with the growing shortfalls confronting the Armed Forces. The bill allocates $1 billion to a Strategic Readiness Fund.

The bill will bring much needed oversight to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It does so by instituting new reporting requirements developed on a bipartisan basis.

The bill builds on the successful passage of H.R. 1, which fully implemented the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. H.R. 1585 authorizes the funding required to carry forward that act by continuing, and this is important, and expanding the Department of Defense's cooperative threat reduction program and the Department of Energy's nuclear nonproliferation programs. Mr. Speaker, these programs address perhaps the single largest threat to the American homeland, the threat of nuclear terrorism and other weapons of mass destruction, and we address that very carefully in this bill.

We also include $17.6 billion for the mine resistant ambush vehicle, which is known as MRAP, to protect our troops in Iraq and in future conflicts. It does a great deal in the area of funding for our various ships, including production of two Virginia-class submarines per year by 2010, and adds eight C-17s to meet the needs of the demands of global power projection.

One of the most important elements of this bill, in addition to the money and the hardware, is a requirement that the Department of Defense perform a quadrennial review of its roles and missions. The first time this was addressed, and the last time it was addressed thoroughly, was back in 1948 at the behest of President Harry Truman and his then Secretary of Defense, James Forestal. The review we require in this bill causes a full examination as to whether the Department of Defense is truly developing the core competencies and capabilities to perform the missions assigned to it and whether those capabilities are being developed in the most joint and efficient way by the military services. Much has changed since 1948. Technology has changed and has blossomed and mushroomed, and that's why it's important that we update, by way of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense, the Key West agreement that was met back in that year of 1948.

I am very, very pleased with this bill, Mr. Speaker. I think that history will say that this one was a comprehensive, if not the most comprehensive, Defense authorization bill that our Congress has passed in decades.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record, regarding the Key West agreement of 1948, a statement by Sam Rushie, who is the supervisory archivist of the Truman Library in Independence, Missouri.

On December 19, 1945--3 months after the end of the Second

World War--President Truman recommended to Congress that the

War and Navy Departments be unified in a new Department of

National Defense. In his statement to Congress, Truman

declared, ``One of the lessons which have most clearly come

from the costly and dangerous experience of this war is that

there must be unified direction of land, sea and air forces

at home as well as in all other parts of the world where our

Armed Forces are serving. ``We did not have that kind of

direction when we were attacked four years ago--and we

certainly paid a high price for not having it.''

On May 13, 1946, Truman met with Secretary of War Patterson

and Secretary of the Navy Forrestal, and he urged that the

Army and the Navy reach a compromise on the problem of

unification.

The President's proposals were finally enacted on July 26,

1947, as the National Security Act, the main feature of which

was the establishment of a unified Department of Defense.

That same day, the President issued Executive Order 9877, an

attempt to define the functions of the Army, the Navy, and

the newly created Air Force within the unified National

Military Establishment. However, bickering between the

services continued, especially over issues that the Executive

Order had failed to address specifically. Many of these

issues concerned the functions of the Navy. The Army regarded

the Navy's Marine Corps as a rival for control of combat

operations on land; similarly, the Air Force viewed Naval

Aviation as an infringement on its jurisdiction over air

operations.

In an effort to resolve these conflicts, Secretary of

Defense James Forrestal summoned the Joint Chiefs of Staff to

a meeting at Key West, Florida in March 1948. Following

suggestions made by Forrestal, the Joint Chiefs drafted a

directive entitled ``Functions of the Armed Forces and the

Joint Chiefs of Staff,'' popularly known as the ``Key West

Agreement.'' Forrestal submitted this proposal to the

President in late March. On April 21, 1948, the President

issued Executive Order 9950, revoking his earlier executive

order. This cleared the way for the Secretary of Defense to

issue the new directive that same day.

With modifications, the Key West Agreement continues to

govern responsibilities within the armed forces to this day.

In contrast to the broad language of the earlier executive

order, Forrestal's directive specified the primary and

secondary responsibilities of each branch of the service. In

a tenuous compromise, it was agreed that the Navy would not

establish a strategic air component, but would be permitted

to have aircraft carriers and use its aircraft against inland

targets. (This was interpreted by the Navy as an endorsement

of the projected new supercarrier, the USS United States.)

The Air Force would retain primary responsibility for

strategic air operations and air defense. At the same time,

it was agreed that the Marine Corps would be preserved, but

would be limited in size to four divisions, and would

cooperate with the Army in planning amphibious operations.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to yield 4 minutes to the

gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), my friend who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces.

Mr. Speaker, first let me thank my friend from Mississippi for the historical reference back to 1944 regarding the fuel situation, and I think that the subcommittee is making a substantial contribution in requiring the nuclear ships that it does.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, the gentleman from Arkansas, Dr. Snyder.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), who is also the chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Unconventional Threats and Capabilities.

Will the gentleman from Alabama yield, please?

I thank the gentleman, and I do appreciate his concern on this issue. Protecting classified material of course is the utmost importance, and the standards for protecting this material should be consistent across government as well as industry. In that regard, I intend to work very closely with my friend, the gentleman from Alabama, on the issue, starting with the request of the Department of Defense to obtain their plans for meeting the 2012 deadline for phasing out containers used by defense contractors that have not been approved by the GSA.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend, the gentlelady from California, who is also the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, Mrs. Tauscher.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend and colleague from California, who is the chairwoman on the Subcommittee on Personnel, Mrs. Davis.

It appears we have no additional speakers except myself.

Mr. Speaker, before I make my closing remarks, I would yield 1 minute to my friend from Iowa, a member of the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Loebsack.

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

Mr. Speaker, we have a good number of provisions that have not been fully discussed today, including contracting reform and acquisition reform. We did speak of roles and missions. But I wish to stress, Mr. Speaker, of the years I have had the privilege

of serving in this body, this has to be the best, most comprehensive, troop-friendly, family-friendly and readiness-friendly bill that we have ever had.

When it first came to the House before we had our conference, it had a very, very strong vote here, and, Mr. Speaker, I hope we have as strong a vote when we seek the final passage on this bill today.

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

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

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 860 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my friend and colleague from Washington on the Rules Committee, Mr. Hastings. All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials into the Record.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, House Resolution 860 provides for consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 1585, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, under the standard conference report rule.

Madam Speaker, today the Congress will promote a stronger and safer America by approving the National Defense Authorization conference report and this rule. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, which is chaired by the distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), I am pleased to report that the committee has worked in a bipartisan manner to ensure that our brave men and women in uniform have the tools they need to keep America safe and strong.

Our military personnel and their families have sacrificed so much in past years and continue to do so. In recognition of their service, this Congress is proud to make important improvements in military pay and benefits. We have raised the pay of our brave men and women in uniform beyond the levels set originally by the President. And when our brave men and women in combat are injured in the line of duty, they deserve top quality medical care. The Walter Reed scandal drew back the curtain on some of the challenges that the military community faces when it comes to serving our brave men and women when they return from the battlefield. Unfortunately, the military health care system was not providing consistent, excellent care for our wounded soldiers. So, Madam Speaker, one of the highlights of this bill are our efforts to improve assistance to wounded warriors. These provisions have been worked on throughout the year in a bipartisan way to improve the health care for our wounded servicemembers because they deserve nothing but the best.

We move beyond the ``support our troops'' rhetoric and enact substantive improvements that will restore confidence in the quality of care that our brave men and women in uniform deserve when they return from the battlefield. This includes assistance to their very supportive families, because supporting our troops does not simply mean that you salute and send them off to war and then ask them to serve and sacrifice for our great country, but supporting our troops means that we continue to support them when they return home.

This bill improves the screening for traumatic brain injury and post- traumatic stress disorder. I am very proud to recognize the efforts of my hometown VA Medical Center, the James A. Haley Medical Center, which is home to one of the four polytrauma centers in the country where we have so many dedicated doctors, nurses and psychologists and folks in physical therapy. They are so dedicated to these brave men and women that come home with the worst injuries. But we have got to do more. And that is contained in this bill.

This bill also mandates that the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs establish a standard for rating servicemembers' disabilities that takes into consideration all of their medical conditions.

An important part of improving the health care and mental health care for our wounded warriors is tackling the bureaucracy that has blocked their access to health care. So we require expedited action, provide medical advocates, improve support services for families, elevate the care for traumatic brain injuries and aid the polytrauma centers in VA hospitals across the country that are serving the most critically wounded troops.

This bill also blocks an increase that was proposed by the White House to health insurance premiums for military families and troops under the TRICARE system. It is inexplicable how the White House could propose health insurance premium increases at a time when we are asking so much of our brave American men and women in uniform. So, proudly, the Congress, in a bipartisan way, blocks these health insurance premium increases.

Madam Speaker, we know that because of the multiyear, sometimes seemingly unending war in Iraq, that the readiness, the military readiness of our country has suffered over the years. Well, this bill restores the readiness of our Armed Forces, including equipment repair, so that our soldiers go to battle with the most up-to-date equipment available. In terms of readiness, we have authorized moneys for a new Strategic Readiness Fund and to address equipment deficiencies. We have all heard stories of soldiers, especially the folks in our National Guard and Reserves, who are having problems with equipment shortages and even receiving the necessary training that they need before heading off to war. In some cases, the National Guard has been unable to help in the traditional disaster response roles in their local communities due to this problem. Well, this bill tackles that so we can improve the readiness of the National Guard and Reserves so they can do their jobs safely, efficiently and effectively.

Madam Speaker, this bill also calls for greater accountability over the waste and fraud in Iraq that has been all too prevalent under this administration. This includes the troubles we have had with various contractors. As we see from the fallout of the Blackwater contracting debacles, there has been so much waste and fraud in contracting in Iraq and under this White House that we are not going to put up with it any longer. This bill substantially improves oversight of the multibillion- dollar and sometimes sole-source contracts that have been approved during this war in Iraq.

The Armed Services Committee, under Chairman Skelton's leadership, also requires additional accountability measures for Afghanistan, including a new Inspector General for Afghanistan reconstruction, as we cannot sanction the waste and fraud that has accompanied the administration's Iraq reconstruction.

Madam Speaker, many believe that because of the White House's preoccupation in Iraq that that preoccupation has shortchanged the focus in Afghanistan where the Taliban allowed al Qaeda to flourish some years ago. And, after all, the ungoverned and dangerous tribal areas of Pakistan are just south of the Afghan border. Indeed,

just yesterday, listening to the Defense Secretary and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Armed Services Committee, it became apparent that we are not able to do as much as we would like to do in Afghanistan because of the resources that have been overwhelmingly devoted to Iraq. Well, in this bill, we direct more attention to operations in Afghanistan in addition to an Inspector General that will oversee reconstruction efforts. This bill contains a long-term plan to improve stability in Afghanistan.

Madam Speaker, many of the unsung heroes of our Armed Forces whose missions you never hear about are the brave men and women in America's special forces. I am very proud that the headquarters of Special Operations Command is located in my hometown of Tampa, Florida, at MacDill Air Force Base. This defense bill under Democratic leadership not only fully funds our special forces but goes beyond the Bush administration's budget request for these brave men and women, including a number of needs that were not proposed to be funded by the White House at all. Our commitment to special forces recognizes that we cannot rely overwhelmingly any longer on conventional forces in defense of our country. We have got to be smarter. We have got to be more strategic. And this bill authorizes the increases in special forces and also a new emphasis on more strategic action.

Oftentimes, to win a struggle, it is more strategic and smarter not to go in with guns blazing but instead to work with folks on the ground to prevent any terrorist inclinations from ever developing. This bill does that. We will invest additional resources to improve education and analytical intelligence surveillance. We harness the science and technology innovation in this great country by investing in information technology and other technologies to make sure that our troops on the ground have the best technology available across the globe.

Madam Speaker, this Defense authorization bill and this rule charts a new direction for true readiness, accountability and more strategic investments to protect our national security. It improves the health care needs for our wounded warriors and does a better job of helping our families work through the unending maze of benefits and paperwork that come from caring for an injured soldier.

I urge full, bipartisan support.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Skelton, and congratulate him on his outstanding leadership in shepherding this bipartisan bill through the Congress.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to an outspoken advocate for our brave men and women in uniform, Mr. Altmire from Pennsylvania.

Madam Speaker, I urge approval of the National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 1585, and this rule. This bipartisan bill improves military readiness and demonstrates our commitment to our brave men and women in uniform, including a 3.5 percent pay raise for these brave folks, a commitment to the National Guard and our Reserves, and an expansion and great improvement in the health care provided to wounded warriors who return from the battlefield. The bill also increases oversight and restores accountability over the waste and fraud that has occurred in the war in Iraq.

Madam Speaker, this bill will make America safer and stronger. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings of Washington is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 860 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 3. The House disagrees to the Senate amendment to the

bill. H.R. 2642, making appropriations for military

construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related

agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and

for other purposes, and agrees to the conference requested by

the Senate thereon. The Speaker shall appoint conferees

immediately, but may declare a recess under clause 12(a) of

rule I for the purpose of consulting the Minority Leader

prior to such appointment. The motion to instruct conferees

otherwise in order pending the appointment of conferees

instead shall be in order only at a time designated by the

Speaker in the legislative schedule within two additional

legislative days after adoption of this resolution.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by very, very sincerely thanking my good friend from Missouri, Chairman Skelton, for the great leadership that he has provided in the months past in writing the original version and then shaping the bill and then using his steady hand to guide us through the conference, of course with the help of my good friend, Ranking Member Duncan Hunter. Both of these leaders provided great direction for us, and I might say that the product of their work is here today. I agree with the chairman, that this is a very, very good bill, and I am very fortunate to be able to stand here today to say how important I think it is that we all support it.

Unfortunately, Ranking Member Hunter could not be here today, but I know he is very proud of this conference report as well. I'd like to thank all of the subcommittee chairmen and their ranking members for their hard work and leadership. It is responsible for almost 1,500 pages that this bill contains. And the staff that helped make this a reality, obviously Members would not have been able to be here today if it were not for them either.

This is a good, bipartisan bill. Last Thursday, the House Armed Services Committee filed this conference report after an overwhelming majority of conferees signed the report. Seldom in my career here have I seen this kind of agreement among Members on the bill. Our subcommittee chairmen and their ranking members will provide a detailed summary of the bill, so I will only highlight a few key areas.

Most importantly, this bipartisan bill takes care of the brave men and women serving our country at home and abroad. It authorizes $506.9 billion in budgetary authority for the Department of Defense and the national security programs of the Department of Energy. Additionally, it supports current operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the global war on terrorism by authorizing $189.4 billion in supplemental funding for operational costs, personnel expenses and procurement of new equipment for fiscal year 2008.

This amount provides for end-strength growth in both the Army and the Marine Corps, continuing initiatives started several years ago by the Armed Services Committee, by authorizing increases of 13,000 Army and 9,000 Marine Corps active duty personnel to sustain our required missions.

Additionally, this conference report authorizes a 3.5 percent pay increase, as the chairman remarked earlier. These pay raises for all members of the Armed Forces for 2008 are extremely important.

We talk a lot about quality of life and here we're doing something about it. Some of the initiatives in this legislation continue successful, practical programs such as the Commander's

Emergency Response Program, which is working well in battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan. Other initiatives reinforce good legislation that the House has already passed, such as the Wounded Warrior legislation to address the challenges that face our recovering servicemembers and their families. Still others modify existing authorities or establish promising new programs and new policies.

Some of the new programs and policies include these:

Providing $17.6 billion for the mine resistant ambush protected vehicle, an armored vehicle which will save lives going forward; setting guidelines for all private security contractors operating in Iraq and Afghanistan and other areas where we have combat operations. And we know from recent news reports how important this provision is.

We also authorize eight additional C-17s to support the intratheater lift requirements and meet the airlift needs for the increased end strength in the Army and Marine Corps.

We added major acquisition reform initiatives, such as establishing new responsibilities for the Joint Requirements Oversight Council and mandating that new acquisition programs be aligned with the missions of the Department and the competency and capability of the service proposing the program.

And finally, we acted to elevate the chief of the National Guard bureau to a four-star general and adopted many of the recommendations of the Commission on National Guard and Reserve Corps.

Just as importantly, this legislation avoids contentious language, such as the hate crimes provision, which would have put our bill at risk of a Presidential veto. I want to acknowledge the leadership of Chairman Ike Skelton, whose hard work in shepherding this vital legislation through the conference has guaranteed that our servicemen and women will get what they need, and they will get it when they need it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Chesapeake, Virginia (Mr. Forbes), the ranking member of the Readiness Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Hagerstown, Maryland (Mr. Bartlett), who is the ranking member of the Seapower Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rehoboth, Alabama (Mr. Everett), the ranking member of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee.

(Mr. EVERETT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York, the ranking member of the Military Personnel Subcommittee, Mr. McHugh.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota, a retired U.S. Marine Corps colonel, Mr. Kline.

I yield 1 minute to my friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

I want to say a word on behalf of the Air Land Subcommittee. I want to first thank our great subcommittee chairman, Mr. Abercrombie, the gentleman from Hawaii, for his outstanding work and for his great cooperation on our subcommittee.

The major highlights of the Air Land Subcommittee's portion of this bill provide aircraft providing multiyear procurement authority for the CH-47 helicopter program; ensures continued development of two options for the propulsion system for the Joint Strike Fighter; authorizes $2.3 billion for eight badly needed C-17 aircraft; and allows the Air Force to proceed with their request to divest 24 C-130E and 85 KC-135E aircraft. These retirements will greatly help the Air Force. The aircraft are grounded or are unable to be used in combat operations.

The land forces under our subcommittee benefited from several areas of upgraded armor: the mine resistant ambush protected MRAP vehicles; the up-armored Humvees; the body armor that we provide in the IED fragment armor kits are very important elements of the bill. We also authorized $3.4 billion for the Army's future combat systems.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Defense continues to have acquisition directives that are rarely followed. This is not a good thing. Requirements for advancement through research and development to procurement, these provisions are routinely waived by the Department of Defense. It is hard to know if acquisition policies actually work if we rarely follow them.

Mr. Speaker, the conference report takes steps to address some of these issues, and I am encouraged by some of the things that I have recently seen and heard coming from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics.

Mr. Speaker, this conference report supports our military men and women and provides them with the equipment they need while at the same time taking steps to redress acquisition concerns of Congress. This conference report certainly in this regard deserves all of our support.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the Chair as to how much time is remaining on each side.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Akin).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the chairman as to how many additional speakers he has.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. First let me, again, sincerely thank Chairman Skelton for the great job that he has done here bringing us to the floor with this bill today.

Mr. Speaker, President Ronald Reagan used to say that all of the things that Congress does are important and all the programs that we fund are great programs and important programs. But then he would say, ``But none of that really matters much if we don't have a good system to protect the American people and our national security.'' I have kept that in mind ever since I was a freshman here, because that was when I heard him say that.

I believe that this bill today carries on that same kind of tradition, because we work together as Republicans and Democrats, understanding that we have a finite amount of money and resources to put toward our national security, and therefore it's incumbent upon us to do it the best way we can.

We do face a multitude of threats to our way of life and our national security interests, and as legislators, we therefore must accept that it is our responsibility to ensure that our brave men and women in uniform have the best available tools at their disposal to combat those threats and protect those interests.

The provisions of this bill go a considerable way in demonstrating that kind of support. And so I urge all Members to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Let me first take this opportunity to thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, Mr. Michaud, as well as the subcommittee's ranking member, Mr. Miller, for their leadership in developing this legislation.

H.R. 2199, as amended, the Traumatic Brain Injury Health Enhancement and Long-Term Support Act of 2007, seeks to improve the treatment of veterans suffering with traumatic brain injuries, often referred to as TBI, and the care for veterans who live in rural communities.

However, I would comment that several of the provisions included in this legislation are similar to initiatives that already exist or are getting underway. For example, section 2 of the bill would require the VA to screen eligible veterans for symptoms of traumatic brain injury and create a TBI registry. These are also the recommendations of the President's task force on returning global war on terror heroes. In addition, in March 2007, Secretary Nicholson directed a number of changes to improve the way the VA provides care to our newest combat veterans.

These veterans initiatives include screening all OEF and OIF combat patients for TBI and for PTSD; providing each polytrauma patient with an advocate to assist them and their family; mandatory training for all VA health care personnel to recognize and care for patients with TBI; and establishing an outside panel of clinical experts to review the VA polytrauma system of care.

Additionally, the bill would provide five new centers for TBI research, education, and clinical activities. During the 108th Congress, we recognized the frequency and unique nature of the polytrauma/blast injuries resulting from the global war on terror. These injuries require an interdisciplinary program to handle the medical, psychological, rehabilitation, and prosthetic needs of the injured servicemember.

Public Law 108-422, the Veterans' Health Programs Improvement Act of 2004, directed VA to establish ``an appropriate number of centers for research, education, and clinical activities to improve and coordinate rehabilitative services for veterans suffering from complex multitrauma from combat injuries, and to coordinate these services with the Department of Defense.''

The centers required in Public Law 108-422 became the Polytrauma System of Care. There are four centers located in Richmond, VA; Tampa, FL; Minneapolis, MN; and Palo Alto, CA. The committee strongly recommends that the new TBI centers be colocated with the VA's polytrauma rehabilitation centers. In this way, we can capitalize on the experience and expertise available at the polytrauma centers and enhance the ability to understand and treat the entire spectrum of the TBI injury from mild to most severe.

I want to thank Mr. Michaud for recognizing that we can actually get some benefits by the colocation of these services where TBI is already located. Because we take and concentrate such expertise, the colocation can only have benefits. And the gentleman worked with me, and I think because TBI have a number of comorbidities such as PTSD, depression, anxiety disorders, and while these issues may appear with TBI, they may also exhibit themselves separately from TBI, and I think that is exactly what Mr. Michaud is trying to get to. So I want to thank the gentleman for his leadership and for bringing this bill to the committee, along with your staff, for their good work.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Michaud because he did his committee work. He did his committee work because we brought a bill to the floor. Yes, under suspension, Mr. Filner, but he did his committee work. He filed a report which allowed us to work with him. When you don't file a report, you deny the minority their opportunity to be heard.

So I want to thank Mr. Michaud for working with us and for his leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman).

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to express my support for a provision in the bill that would require the VA to establish a TBI transition office at each of the polytrauma network sites. Not only is this vital for the DOD and the VA to provide for a seamless transition from active duty to veteran status, but it is also important for VA to aid in the coordination of veteran care between VA and other health care providers for services that could possibly not be provided by the VA. These transition offices would help coordinate veterans care for services not offered by the VA, and have the authority to arrange care with public or private entities to establish long-term neurobehavioral rehabilitation and recovery programs.

The bill also includes two rural health initiative provisions, one of which would establish a pilot program for vet centers in rural areas. H.R. 2199, as amended, included an amendment

offered by Mr. Lamborn of Colorado, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs. This amendment will expand the role of the mobile vet center pilot program to include helping veterans in need of assistance in the filing of benefits claims.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman who just spoke. As a retired sergeant major, we benefit by his expertise not only on the Veterans' Affairs Committee, but also in Congress. We have a lot of people here who have been enlisted, and we have had officers and generals and admirals, but when you get a sergeant major, they speak softly. And there's a reason the sergeant major speaks softly, because he doesn't have to speak loudly because they are so well respected. And so, Sergeant Major, your contributions to the committee are recognized and appreciated.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's comments that he just made. Before you take off, this issue, and I appreciate your interest in it because this is one of our great challenges. We've got the best helmet that we put on our soldiers and marines in the field and even some of the Air Force personnel, Navy personnel. And it protects them against ballistics, and it's the best in the world. But when it comes to blasts and crash, what it does to the brain, we're now on the forefront, and we are pushing the boundary of our knowledge.

And some of the world's experts now are not only at the polytrauma centers, but in particular, when these soldiers end up at Landstuhl, Germany, that's where they are. So they can immediately deal with these neurotraumas.

And when the gentleman said that there could possibly be thousands, what we do know is that at the polytrauma centers, those who are actually being treated for traumatic brain injury, there's less than 400 cases.

But the gentleman is right with regard to individuals who may have had a concussion. Yet, how severe is the concussion?

And if the science is unknown, and we're trying to understand that. That's the purpose of Mr. Michaud's bill. And I appreciate the gentleman's interest, would love to continue to work with you in your interest.

I'd bring to your attention the Veterans Health Administration Directive 2007-013 released April 13, 2007, establishes the VA policy and procedure for screening and evaluation of possible TBI in OEF and OIF veterans. This directive states, ``Not all patients who screen positive have TBI. It is possible to respond positively to all four sections due to the presence of other conditions such as PTSD, cervical cranial injury with headaches and inner ear injury, for example. Therefore, it's critical that patients not be labeled with a diagnosis of TBI on the basis of a positive screening test. Patients need to be referred for further evaluation.''

So we are in an area of science whereby the sand shifts directly under our feet, and I would look forward to working with the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

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

At the May 9, 2007, full committee hearing on the results of the President's Task Force on Returning Global War on Terror Heroes, in response to my questioning about the actual number of TBI cases treated in VA as inpatients, Secretary Nicholson responded that VA has treated 369 veterans in its polytrauma centers so far for TBI.

Secretary Nicholson also commented that the VA has the capacity in their polytrauma centers, and that many of the patients in the polytrauma centers are active duty military.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that it is conceivable that at some point one of these needed Traumatic Brain Injury Centers of Excellence could be located in the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, which could be named the Raymond G. ``Jerry'' Murphy Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, if Chairman Filner would clear either H.R. 474 or take up Senate bill 229 for consideration on the floor of which that Senate bill, Mr. Speaker, sits at your desk.

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

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

(Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, this rule allows for the consideration of the conference report to accompany the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. This conference report is largely bipartisan, as it should be, and is an example of what Democrats and Republicans can accomplish when working together.

This conference report contains important authorizations for increases in force protection and retains provisions of the overdue Wounded Warrior Assistance Act. By passing these provisions, we will help provide the tools needed to protect our men and women currently deployed in the global war on terror. We will be setting up the improvements needed to ensure excellence in our military and veterans care system.

There are also provisions in this conference report that are important to those that I represent in central Washington.

This conference report authorizes $29 million for the Yakima Training Center. This funding will be used to increase the size of the Army's training space, allow for urban operation training, and support the digital systems used by today's Stryker forces. This new range is expected to be completed in August of 2009 and will provide critical training for our active duty and Reserve Army soldiers.

In addition, I am pleased that this conference report extends the operation of the Ombudsman for the Energy Employees Occupation Illness Compensation Program Act. The Ombudsman's office plays an important role in assisting workers at Hanford and other sites seeking illness compensation that they are due. I might add, Madam Speaker, this issue goes way back to the Second World War when we were involved, obviously, in atomic power. Hanford, which is in my district and a county adjacent to my district, played an important part of that and those workers that worked at those sites in many cases gave the ultimate sacrifice as our men and women overseas did, but in a kind of different setting. This compensation program, I think, is very important for those that worked at the Hanford site and other sites during the Second World War.

Madam Speaker, again, I would like to stress that this conference report was achieved in a bipartisan manner, and I hope to see more bipartisan conference reports brought to the floor as Congress wraps up its business in this first session of the 110th Congress.

As the first session of the 110th Congress comes to a close, I am disappointed that Democrat leaders are still intent on micromanaging the war on terror by blocking the funding requested for all our troops on the battlefield. At a time when both Democrats and Republicans are seeing recent progress in the war on terror, this approach, frankly, Madam Speaker, strikes me as unnecessary, divisive and dangerous.

If a supplemental spending bill is not signed into law soon, some Army civilian employees may get layoff notices before the Christmas holidays, and if this funding continues to be delayed, Department of Defense officials have reported that it could affect as many as 200,000 civilian employees and contractors.

Madam Speaker, I am also concerned that Democrat leaders continue to use delaying tactics to block a vote on a final bipartisan bill to fund veterans services.

This inaction is causing our veterans to lose critical funding each and every day. As I have done in the past, Madam Speaker, I will later be asking my colleagues to defeat the previous question in order to appoint conferees and quickly approve a veterans funding conference report that, again, has strong bipartisan support and which is long overdue.

With that, Madam Speaker, I reserve my time.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey, who's a member of the Armed Services Committee and former member of the Rules Committee.

Madam Speaker, understanding that the gentlewoman is prepared to close, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I must ask once again my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that I can amend the rule to allow the House to immediately act to go to conference with the Senate on H.R. 2642, the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs funding bill, and to appoint conferees.

Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that a final veterans funding bill is sitting waiting to be acted on and that the Democrat leaders have bent over backwards to prevent this Congress in this session from passing the final bill. Democrat leaders in the House have refused to name conferees, and instead have chosen to put partisanship and politics ahead of ensuring our veterans' needs are met. They have been stalling since September and have ignored the fact that the new spending bill began October 1 of this year, nearly over 2 months ago.

Since the beginning of the new spending year, our Nation's 8 million veterans have been waiting for their $37 billion in promised veterans benefits. Sadly, each day Democrat leaders choose not to act and move final funding forward, our Nation's veterans lose $18.5 million. Since the fiscal year began 73 days ago, our Nation's veterans are out $1.35 billion.

What is even more disappointing is that this bill has almost unanimous support, unanimous support, from Republicans and Democrats; yet we are not being allowed to pass it into law, and we are getting to the waning days of this session. Meanwhile, our Nation's veterans, who have sacrificed so much on behalf of our country, are left paying the price.

It is time, Madam Speaker, like in the underlying bill that this rule makes in order, to put partisanship and politics aside and work together to do what is in the best interest of our Nation's veterans. I see no better time than right now. By defeating the previous question, the House will send a strong message to our veterans that they have our commitment to provide them with the funding increase they need, deserve, and were promised.

Once Democrat leaders appoint conferees, the House can move forward and pass a stand-alone veterans funding bill, and it will pass with strong bipartisan support.

I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

With that, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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