Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1585) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes.

Madam Chair, I come to the floor once again to defend veterans and the country. And I'm also equally disappointed that there are not many veterans willing to stand in the well against provisions in the Defense bill that would increase the price of prescription drugs in the VA.

Now, why don't I have enough friends in the well? Well, they're going to have to answer for themselves for that question.

But what is occurring here in the House is an assault upon drug manufacturers in the country. There is this quest and design that, let's get what available drug there is out there to everyone at the lowest price. How wonderful that would be.

We, in this country, have a unique system. It's called the free market. It's called capitalism. We say unto the world, bring your greatest minds to America. You can go to the capital market, you can make an investment at risk to press the bounds of science that will increase the quality of life of our people and those around the world.

Yet, there's an assault upon that system. The assault continues. It began in January whereby the Democrat majority wanted to extend Medicare drug pricing by saying, let's take the VA Federal Supply Schedule and extend that into the Medicare. Bad idea. Democrats tried that back in 1990 and found out that, whoa, that increased drug prices to veterans, and repealed it. But they passed it again in January.

Now, what did they do in the Defense bill? In this Defense bill they've now taken the extension of the Federal Supply Schedule and extended it into the retail drug pharmacy benefit.

When I did the redesign of the TRICARE pharmacy benefit in the Department of Defense, I created not only the retail network pharmacy benefit, I created the out of retail network pharmacy benefit, and at no time did I ever, ever, believe that we would extend Federal Supply Schedule into the TRICARE pharmacy.

So what is about to happen? When you take the system in the VA and you extend that, and you create the pool and make it larger, you are cost shifting. And when you cost shift, you're going to increase these prices in the VA.

Now, in the VA that's about 7 million veterans. It's about 1 percent of the market. You say, oh, Steve, that's not a big number. Well, it is ironic to me how Members will pound their chests and say, well, you know, I said no to an increase in a pharmacy copay, but they're about to vote ``yes'' to increase drug prices for veterans when they vote for this Defense bill. This is wrong, and it should not be done, and I'm appealing to Members not to do this.

And I am disturbed, disturbed that my good friend, Ike Skelton, denied two of my amendments. I've worked for 15 years with Chairman Skelton on many, many different issues, and I am stunned that he would deny my opportunity to offer two amendments.

One was very simple. It would be to have the Secretary certify that before he could implement this program you have to certify it will not increase prices on the VA. Why would you deny that amendment?

They are going to deny the amendment because they know, going into this, that the creation of this program is going to increase prices on veterans. I just cannot believe we're about to do that here.

Secondly, we should listen to the experts. If you're about to deny a particular drug under the formulary on TRICARE, you'd better have a pretty good reason, and we ought to be able to go to the committee to do that. But they're not going to do that. At this point I am pretty disturbed.

Madam Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

I do not.

Thank you very much for yielding.

I am back on the floor, and I am here to make an appeal to my good friend, Ike Skelton. I am here to make an appeal, Mr. Chairman, because I need you to help me. Help me understand why I shouldn't be so upset here today. You have a provision in the bill that is going to open up the Federal Supply Schedule and extend that pricing into DOD whereby when you do that we expand the pool. When you expand the

pool, you cost shift. Not only do you cost shift, you are going to increase pharmaceutical costs onto 7 million veterans.

So our history here is that it was a Democrat-controlled Congress back in 1992 that said we are going to create the Federal Supply Schedule and we are going to do this cost control. Why? Because if anyone is entitled in our society to have this benefit, it is our disabled veterans. Then what happened? Then in the 1990s we sort of reformed eligibility with regard to the VA and expanded that criteria so the Federal Supply Schedule expanded beyond the disabled veterans now to all veterans.

And now what has happened, you want to expand it, Chairman Skelton, into the DOD TRICARE pharmacy benefit program. When you do that, we are going to increase the price of prescription drugs for veterans.

Do not go home and pound your chest and say I am denying increase in copays when you are about to vote for increases in drug prices for 7 million veterans.

Chairman Skelton, I offered two amendments before the committee, and they were both denied.

Announcement by the Acting Chairman

Madam Chairman, I offered two amendments directly to the Rules Committee asking one of my colleagues, who is the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, to do these amendments, and they were denied. It was dumbfounding to me.

Sure. If Federal discounts expand, price levels would be pushed up, the VA would pay a higher price for the drugs it provides to veterans. So this would place an increased pressure on the funding of veterans health care.

GAO even did an analysis of the expansion.

We asked them to look at it with regard to Medicare, when you tried to do it on Medicare, and pass the House. We know that any time you expand Federal pricing and you increase the pool, drug prices in fact will go up.

As a matter of fact in 1990, talk to Chairman John Dingell because he passed that back in 1990, and they realized they made a mistake and it increased the price on veterans, and we had to repeal it. I ask you to talk to Chairman Dingell.

I reclaim my time. Who has a lot to lose? We all have a lot to lose. If you want to open up and do price controls in pharmaceutical manufacturing, we all lose as a society. We will all lose.

Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Buyer

Madam Chairman, I think we only have about 2\1/2\ minutes left on this side. I would continue to reserve and ask my good friend from Missouri to recognize some more of his speakers.

I want to thank all Members who participated in the general debate, and all the great subcommittee chairmen and ranking members, and the chairman of the committee for putting together this great bill, and will now enter the amendment process.

There is just one point that I wanted to make in listening to my colleague finish up in talking about the mental health of America's soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines.

One observation that I have made over the years in being around people that wear the uniform is that while a number of the stresses and the difficulties that have been spoken of are real, it is also real that the coolest, calmest, most balanced, most stable American citizens, I believe, are the folks that wear the uniform in Iraq and Afghanistan. And while it is true that enemy fire can hurt you and damage you mentally as well as physically, it is also true that that fire can make you stronger.

Having spent time with guys like Chuck Yeager, guys like the great Vic Taylor, many others who have been under fire and in various situations in real combat in the world's wars, it has always occurred to me that the people who have the greatest mental stability are people that come out of the combat zones.

So I want to make sure that this debate doesn't send the message that somehow Americans who wear the uniform are victims, and that the inevitable result of their wearing the uniform and serving in combat is that they are going to somehow be damaged mentally, because that is not the case.

And I would just conclude by reflecting on the fact that I take a number of folks who are wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan hunting, which the Hunter family likes to do, and I take them hunting with my grandchildren. And there are few people that I will trust my grandchildren with, but the people I will trust my grandchildren with out in the great outdoors, with loaded weapons, are members of the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps who have been to combat. Those people have the greatest sense of balance and sense of judgment.

And, again, in my mind, America's citizens who are the coolest and the calmest under fire and have the greatest sense of balance and judgment are people that wear the uniform and have been in combat.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I rise to speak about the amendment. I don't rise in opposition to the amendment, but I would like to take the time and address the issue.

Madam Chair, we've looked over the amendment. It's really an adjustment of a part of the base bill that we have that allows for this memorandum of understanding between these three primary entities, State, DOD and AID, to make sure that they have an understanding of authorization of the carrying of the weapons by contractors, the rules of engagement, coordinating movement of contractors, collecting information relating to offenses under UCMJ and also, additionally, what the gentlelady has offered in her amendment, the issuance of guidance on all equipment, including uniforms, body armor, weapons and the collection of information related to casualties suffered by contractors.

And our only concern, of course, is that we have enough time for this memorandum of understanding to be put together after the bill becomes law, which in some cases is late December, hopefully long before then. And so what we do need is to have the ability of the administration, if they don't have that together. And one thing we all agree on is you've got to do this right when they do it, when they issue this memorandum of understanding. So they need to have time to do it; that we do have a waiver or an extension of time that would be allowed.

And so I've talked this over with the gentlelady, who is the author of the amendment. She's amenable to extending the time period for this memorandum of understanding to be worked out, and the chairman has graciously agreed that he also supports that.

And so just in a simple informal colloquy, I'd just ask the chairman if it's his agreement that, in conference, we would work to extend the time wherein the memorandum of understanding could be worked out if, in fact, it can't be done within 90 days of the first of January 2008. Would the gentleman agree to effect that in conference?

Absolutely.

I would further ask the gentlelady if that's fine with her, if she would be in accord with that.

Thank you very much. In that case we support this amendment and would not object to its adoption.

Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentlelady yield?

I just wanted to thank the gentlelady for, respectfully, for her addition to this amendment and her concern about the contractors. And you know, just reflect for a second, that our contractors who go over to the warfighting theaters in Iraq and Afghanistan undertake enormous danger, and a large number of them have been killed and wounded. And many of them, the ones that I have met, are largely American veterans who have, they go for two reasons; one is they do make good money. It's a job, it's a worthwhile job. They feel like they're supporting our country. They also have a great, the ones I've talked to, have a great deal of concern for the troops. They have a feeling of partnership with the people that wear the uniform of the United States, and they are a great asset to this country. And I think it's appropriate that we follow, we carefully watch how they're treated and how they're protected. I think that's absolutely appropriate.

I thank the chairman for embedding this base provision in the base bill, and

members on the Republican and Democrat side who've worked to put this together, and I thank the gentlelady for her thoughtful addition.

Would the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and on our side we think this is an excellent amendment. And I want to thank the gentleman whom I've traveled with to the warfighting theaters, and thank him for his concern for our troops, and we support the amendment strongly.

Madam Chair, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the committee members and Chairmen Skelton and Snyder for their support of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program in this year's Defense authorization bill in the en bloc amendment. Inclusion of this program in the bill will move us forward as we seek to fill a gap that has only widened as our Nation has come to rely increasingly on the National Guard and Reserves to assist in combat operations.

Based upon his experiences as a returning Vietnam War veteran, Minnesota National Guard Adjutant General Larry Shellito took the lead to build a reintegration program for returning Guardsmen who lack the established support infrastructure of their active duty counterparts. General Shellito and the Minnesota National Guard leadership have developed an innovative program to change how returning soldiers and airmen are reintegrated back into their communities.

Through experiences drawn from the deployments of smaller units to Iraq and Afghanistan and Kosovo, they developed a unique combat veteran reintegration program with a focus on supporting soldiers and their families throughout the entire deployment cycle. This multifaceted program includes workshops for families and communities to help them for their servicemember's return and training events at 30, 60 and 90- day intervals for servicemembers following their demobilization.

The training events have given Guardsmen and Reservists the opportunity to engage VA and health care representatives, while also allowing platoon sergeants and commanders to check in with their troops. Experience has shown that catching signs of post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, or even marital problems early can prevent even more severe problems in the future.

I believe the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program represents the best ideas of not only Minnesota but also States and territories throughout the Nation that have stepped in to provide reintegration services to their troops.

As envisioned, the Yellow Ribbon program included members of the other Reserve components in only a voluntary, unpaid status due to financial constraints. So I would like to thank Chairmen Skelton and Snyder for their support in finding the additional funding necessary to expand this program beyond the National Guard to all Reservists.

Let me just close by saying that this program has the support of Lieutenant General Blum, the chief of the National Guard Bureau and many other organizations, the National Guard Association of the United States, the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States, the Naval Reserve Association, the Noncommissioned Officers Association, and the Retired Enlisted Association. I will submit those letters for the Record.

Again, I would like to thank Chairmen Skelton and Snyder for their hard work in making this possible.

Departments of the Army

and the Air Force,

Arlington, VA, May 4, 2007.

Hon. John Kline,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Congressman Kline: As you describe in your letter, the

Minnesota National Guard's ``Beyond the Yellow Ribbon

Reintegration'' program does a great job filling the gap in

transition assistance services experienced by all Reserve

Component members returning from a combat deployment. I

consistently hear from Adjutants General, our troops and

their families that the current transition program conducted

at the active component demobilization station doesn't well

serve the needs of the National Guard and the other Reserve

components.

We see, for example, that many DD Form 214, Certificate of

Release or Discharge from Active Duty, prepared at the active

duty demobilization station contain significant errors and

require correction at the home station. As you know from your

own military experience, the DD 214 is an essential ticket to

access veteran's benefits. The time required to correct these

forms is a burden on our veterans. Like the rest of the

transition assistance program of health care, education, VA

and employment counseling, Minnesota, among other states, has

demonstrated that it can be provided better at the home

station.

Several states participated in a National Guard-wide

working group convened last fall to capture the best

practices nationwide. The recommendations of that working

group echo the results of previous twenty-four months of DoD

working groups in which my staff has participated. We have

just begun another DoD working group, this one chartered by

Congress on the subject of Guard and Reserve transition to

civilian employment. That report is due to Congress in

October 2007. There are several very effective programs in

our States to model--the solution set to this issue is well

defined. The National Guard Bureau has well documented

lessons learned from studying this issue. The need for more

time to accomplish transition assistance at the home station

is clear.

Providing a better transition and reintegration experience

for our Guardsmen is a top priority for me and Lieutenant

General Clyde Vaughn, the director of the Army National

Guard. There are currently 37,000 Guardsmen deployed to fight

the war on terror. It's expected that another 60,000 will

deploy within the next 18 months. Almost a full third of the

National Guard and their families will require transition

assistance in the near term. A national program, implemented

swiftly, would arrive just in time for them. I salute and

appreciate your continuing interest in the welfare of our

National Guardsmen.

Sincerely,

H. Steven Blum,

Lieutenant General, U.S. Army,

Chief, National Guard Bureau.

Madam Chairman, at this time I am pleased to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey, a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Madam Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) for the purposes of making a motion.

motion to rise offered by mr. buyer

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

Madam Chair, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).

Yes, I yield for purposes of the motion.

If the gentleman would yield and answer how it would raise the cost to veterans and explain how it would, that would be helpful.

According to whom?

Well, I am sure the pharmaceutical industry would tell you that because they have a lot to lose by expanding it.

Madam Chair, I want to acknowledge Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter for their good work on this bill.

This authorization has very strong provisions on mental health, a number of them addressing the stigma issues regarding mental health, identifying the reintegration needs of our Reservists. Our Reservists make up nearly half of those fighting on behalf of the war on terror.

Mental health nurse practitioners: It establishes a nurse practitioner graduate education program in the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences program that includes psychiatric mental health practices.

It has mental health counselors who can now be reimbursed by TRICARE for services provided to our troops and their families. These counselors are cost-effective and ready to serve the families of our servicemembers as well as our servicemembers themselves.

Also, we have the Mental Health Initiative that will coordinate the Department of Defense's research and development programs and provide opportunities for researchers to better improve identification and diagnosis of mental health problems.

Finally, we have the Psychological Kevlar, which will help us begin to prevent the post-traumatic stress disorder problems that we are seeing many of our soldiers come back from Iraq suffering from. It is important that we include in our basic training, before our soldiers go abroad, not only physical resiliency and training but mental resiliency and training, so that they are as prepared to defend themselves mentally as they are physically before it is too late, before they suffer the terrible psychological wounds that yield them so disabled in many respects after the war, when it is too late.

Finally, Madam Chairman, this bill includes provisions that will take account of measuring the quality and satisfaction of our military men and women in our military hospitals. We cannot wait for more of the kinds of Walter Reed anecdotal stories to rise to the surface before we begin to measure the quality and satisfaction in our military hospitals, and I am pleased to see this amendment adopted in the bill.

The authorization has very strong mental health provisions that will help address the stigma our troops confront in seeking mental health care, increase the number of mental health professionals to serve the mental health needs of our troops and their families, and advance research developed from the nation's academic and medical base to better improve DoD's mental health research and treatment programs.

Addressing stigma issues among reservists: The Secretary of Defense will establish a working group to identify the reintegration needs of our reservists. The working group will examine different programs operated by different services, States, and commands to help reservists. From there, it can identify best practices and develop plans to incorporate these practices across the military.

Mental health nurse practitioners: The establishment of a nurse practitioner graduate education program at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences. The program's specialties would include psychiatric mental health practice.

Mental health counselors: Mental health counselors can now be reimbursed by TRICARE for services provided to our troops and their families. The counselors are a cost-effective force ready to serve and help our service-members and their families.

Military mental health initiative: This initiative would coordinate the Department of Defense's mental health research and development programs and provide an opportunity for researchers to better improve the identification diagnosis, and treatment of mental health issues.

This plan will help incorporate evidence-based preventive and early intervention strategies into pre-deployment training, combat theater operations, and post-deployment service to strengthen our warfighters' psychological resiliency.

Introducing our soldiers to mental health care only after they have been exposed to combat is far too late. We need to familiarize our soldiers and their families with how to recognize and deal with the symptoms of combat stress and trauma--and the benefits of mental health care--from early on in their military career.

Our soldiers are trained from the moment they enter basic training or boot camp on how to physically protect themselves from harm.

We need to ensure that they are just as well trained in protecting themselves psychologically as well.

Madam Chair, when speaking about mental health, we should be speaking about it in terms of a positive. That is what makes us stronger. I think when the gentleman says that when we speak about mental health, we want to be careful so as not to make people feel like they are victims, looks at it in a negative way.

Frankly, I am proud that at John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center at Fort Bragg the Green Berets have insisted that they have psychiatrists on call 24 hours, 7 days a week, not because they are the weakest branch of the military, but because they are the strongest and they want to remain the strongest. And they know that if they are to remain the strongest, they don't want to be thinking about anything else in their mind when they use their sharpshooter and they are called to duty for this country, where they are going to parachute in and use their technical expertise they have been trained to do. They know that they want to be able to do that job sufficiently, and that is why they have had this important mental health allowed for them, and that is why I think it is so important to have these facilities available for them.

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

Mr. Chairman, as legislators, we meet once again to address the wide range of important national security activities undertaken by the Departments of Defense and Energy. We all take our legislative responsibilities very seriously, and this is especially true during a time of war.

And it's always true of my good friend and colleague, Ike Skelton, the great gentleman from Missouri, our chairman. I want to thank Chairman Skelton for the excellent job that he's done in putting this bill together, and also thank all of our subcommittee chairmen and ranking members who have put together a composite that very strongly meets the needs of our men and women in uniform.

As a result of Mr. Skelton's efforts to put forward this bill, our committee reported out the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 last Wednesday. The vote was unanimous, 58-0.

I support this bill. It reflects our committee's continued strong support for the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces, and in many ways this bill is a very good bill.

It authorizes the President's request for $503.8 billion for the fiscal year 2008 base budget of the Department of Defense and national security programs of the Department of Energy. This amount provides for end-strength growth in both the Army and Marine Corps, continuing initiatives started several years ago by the Armed Services Committee.

In fiscal year 2008, the Army would be authorized 525,400, which is 3,000 more than authorized last year, and the Marine Corps would be authorized 189,000, 9,000 more than last year. The bill also includes $142 billion to cover fiscal year 2008 war costs, as requested by the President.

Some of the initiatives in this legislation continue or build upon successful programs or reinforce good legislation that the House has already passed. For example, this legislation has provisions that are essential to maintain a robust defense industrial base. Last year, the Defense authorization bill tried to strike a fair balance between requiring the use of domestic specialty metals for our weapons systems and offering a waiver process in case sufficient metals are not available. H.R. 1585 establishes a formal rulemaking process for waivers that apply to multiple contracts to facilitate transparency and the gathering of broad industry input. In this way, the market will be able to respond to supply shortages, fostering investment in domestic industries.

Other initiatives in this bill modify existing authorities or establish promising new programs and policies, such as adding $4.1 billion for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, so-called MRAPs. Separately, H.R. 1585 levels the playing field between U.S. companies and foreign countries with which we have free trade agreements. It rectifies a critical flaw in the U.S. Code that effectively penalizes U.S. companies for complying with U.S. law, while allowing foreign manufacturers to provide noncompliant components and systems.

These and other sections go a considerable way in ensuring that our brave men and women in uniform have the best available tools to protect our national security interests, but this bill is not a perfect bill. We can and we should improve it.

This legislation cuts missile defense programs by almost $800 million. In 2006, there were about 100 foreign ballistic missile launches around the world, including from North Korea with short-range missiles and a longer-range TD-2 missile; and from Iran with its development and testing of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. I wonder whether in the face of this growing threat we should be slowing down the development and fielding of a robust, layered ballistic missile defense system that would prove critical to our Nation's defenses.

This bill recommends a reduction of more than $860 million for the Army's Future Combat Systems program. In the past, our committee made smaller cuts to drive behaviors that would lead to a successful system. With the magnitude of this cut, I worry about the long-term impact on the capability of the U.S. Army and wonder whether we should not restore some of this funding to ensure that the Army is as prepared as possible to meet future challenges.

And finally, this bill provides significant resources for shipbuilding. I am concerned, however, that we have not fully funded two of the three additional ships that the language purports to have added. The bill is approximately $145 million less than the amount the Navy needs to buy and take delivery of an additional dry cargo ship, which was number two on the Navy's unfunded priority list. Also, the bill provides $588 million for advanced procurement for an additional ship-set of reactive plant heavy components for a Virginia-class submarine in 2008, but it remains up to future Congresses to complete the funding and turn these components into an additional submarine before 2012.

As in years past, I believe that this legislation reflects many of the Armed Services Committee's priorities in supporting our Nation's dedicated and courageous servicemembers.

I want to thank again Chairman Skelton for putting together an excellent bill and helping us stay focused on delivering a bill that helps us protect, sustains and builds our forces.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to improve and pass H.R. 1585.

Mr. Chairman, at this point, I would like to yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).

Yes, I yielded for purposes of the motion.

Madam Chairman, at this time, I would like to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Everett), the ranking member of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee.

Madam Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland) for purposes of a motion.

Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Westmoreland

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.

The bill before us today begins to address our growing concerns about the readiness posture of our Armed Forces.

I would like to thank the ranking member from my subcommittee, Mrs. Davis from Virginia, for her help in bringing together this excellent bill. I thank Chairman Skelton and Mr. Hunter.

Mr. Chairman, our troops and their equipment have been stretched by extended combat operations, and the strain is evident in declining readiness, shortfalls in training and difficulties equipping our forces. These problems have grown to immense proportions, and this bill is a significant step to reverse the decline and rebuild our military.

Included in this bill are some significant readiness policy initiatives and investments that will help restore the readiness and posture of our military.

First, this bill establishes a Defense Readiness Production Board to identify critical readiness requirements and to mobilize the defense industrial base to speed up the production of military equipment. This board will bridge the gap between readiness needs and resources to help repair our worn out equipment that has been used time and time and time again.

The bill also creates a $1 billion Strategic Readiness Fund to give the board and the Department of Defense the ability to rapidly attend to pressing readiness needs.

This bill begins to address other shortfalls in maintenance and training by providing $250 million for unfunded training requirements and an additional $150 million to restore aviation maintenance shortfalls.

We are very concerned about the readiness of our National Guard. Our bill requires the Department of Defense to begin measuring the readiness of the National Guard units to support emergencies in their home States, such as the recent tragic tornadoes in Kansas. These readiness reports will allow the Congress and each State's Governor to evaluate the need of each State and address problems before a disaster occurs. To help restore the shortfalls, the bill includes a $1 billion investment in National Guard equipment.

We also included provisions that require plans and reports to Congress on reconstituting our prepositioned war stocks.

Mr. Chairman, we also authorized more than $21 billion for military construction, family housing and to implement base realignment and closure. Those funds include money to support growth in force initiatives for the Army and the Marine Corps and to provide facilities to accommodate new recruits and missions.

Other significant provisions include proposed changes to the National Security Personnel System and the depot initiatives.

Mr. Chairman, this is a very, very good bill, and I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill.

I rise in support of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. The bill before us today begins to address our growing concerns about the readiness posture of our armed forces. I would like to thank the ranking member from my subcommittee, Mrs. Davis from Virginia, for her help in bringing together this excellent bill.

Our troops--and their equipment--have been stretched by extended combat operations . . . and the strain is evident in declining readiness, shortfalls in training and difficulties equipping our forces. These problems have grown to immense proportions, and this bill is a significant step to reverse the decline . . . and rebuild our military. Included in the bill are some significant readiness policy initiatives and investments that will help restore the readiness posture of our military.

First, this bill establishes a Defense Readiness Production Board to identify critical readiness requirements and to mobilize the defense industrial base to speed up the production of military equipment. This board will bridge the gap between readiness needs and resources to help repair our worn out equipment.

The bill also creates a $1 billion Strategic Readiness Fund to give the board and the Department of Defense the ability to rapidly attend to pressing readiness needs. This bill begins to address other shortfalls in maintenance and training by providing $250 million for unfunded training requirements . . . and an additional $150 million to restore aviation maintenance shortfalls.

We are very concerned about the readiness of our National Guard. Our bill requires the Department of Defense to begin measuring the readiness of National Guard units to support emergencies in their home states--such as the recent tragic tornadoes in Kansas.

These readiness reports will allow the Congress and each State's Governor to evaluate the needs of each State and address problems before a disaster occurs. To help restore the shortfalls, the bill includes a $1 billion investment in National Guard equipment. We also included provisions that require plans and reports to Congress on reconstituting our prepositioned war stocks.

We authorized more than $21 billion for military construction, family housing, and to implement base realignment and closure. Those funds include money to support ``grow-the-force'' initiatives for the Army and Marine Corps . . . and to provide facilities to accommodate new recruits and missions. Other significant provisions include proposed changes to the National Security Personnel System, depot initiatives, and numerous important policy initiatives for the Department of Defense.

This is a good bill, and I am pleased to have helped write it. It reflects our bipartisan desire to improve readiness and provide for our men and women in uniform.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight a very important issue facing our Nation that is addressed in this legislation, mental health care for our troops. The mental health implications of extended and repeated combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan are now only beginning to be understood.

Among Vietnam-era veterans, the lifetime rate of PTSD, sometimes taking decades to appear, is 30 percent. According to the VA, the current rate for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans is already 20 percent. The mental health needs of the generation of combat veterans that we are creating will face this country for decades to come.

We must realize that the nature and scope of warfare has changed, bringing a new level of stress to combat deployments that is fundamentally new. Even in the Green Zone of Baghdad soldiers are repeatedly attacked and regularly attacked.

The troops must cope with ongoing severe stress for months to come. Experts tell us that extended periods of stress like this, with no way to alleviate it, create the conditions where PTSD is most likely to develop.

According to a recent report in the New England Journal of Medicine, 95 percent of troops in Army and Marine units report having been shot at during their deployment, and 95 percent report seeing dead bodies, 89 percent report being ambushed or attacked. One in five is currently suffering from depression, anxiety or stress while deployed. Twenty percent are now facing marital problems, including divorce or legal separation from their spouse. The after-effect of these extended and highly stressful combat deployments will continue to affect their families, the military and our communities for many, many years to come.

I believe that we need to shift towards preventive care. What we know from our experience is that PTSD not being treated can start a downward tragic cycle of addiction, isolation and despair. This bill improves a mental health training for military case managers working with outpatient facilities like Walter Reed so they can identify problems early.

This way we can help provide treatment before returning servicemen are discharged and left to fend for themselves. This bill also creates critical new funding to best identify practices. Mental health is critical for our troops, and I am very interested in passing this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight a very important issue facing this country that is addressed in this legislation: mental health care for our troops. The mental health implications of extended, and repeated combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan are now only beginning to be understood.

Among Vietnam-era veterans, the lifetime rate of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, sometimes taking decades to appear, is about 30 percent. According to the VA, the current rate for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans is already 20 percent.

The mental health needs of the generation of combat veterans that we are creating will face this country for decades to come. We must realize that the nature and scope of warfare has changed, bringing a level of stress to combat deployments that is fundamentally new.

Even the Green Zone in Baghdad is attacked regularly, and the lives of troops stationed there are literally at risk every single day of their deployments. The troops must cope with ongoing, severe stress for months on end. Experts tell us that extended periods of stress like this, with no way to alleviate it, create the conditions where PTSD is most likely to develop.

According to a recent report in the New England Journal of Medicine, 95 percent of troops in Army and Marine units report having been shot at during their deployment, and 95 percent report seeing dead bodies. Eighty-nine percent reported being ambushed or attacked.

One in five is suffering from depression, anxiety or stress while deployed. Twenty percent face marital problems including divorce or legal separation from their spouse.

The after-effect of extended and highly stressful combat deployments continues to affect military communities and families long after the service member has returned home.

I believe the most important shift is to move toward preventative care. What we know from decades of experience is that PTSD, left untreated, can begin a tragic downward spiral of addiction, isolation and despair.

This bill improves the mental health training for military case managers working with outpatients at facilities like Walter Reed, so they can identify potential problems early. This way, we can help provide treatment before returning servicemen are discharged and left to fend for themselves.

It authorizes critical new funding to identify best practices and build up our clinical knowledge of PTSD and how best to treat it. And it creates a mechanism to improve the transition from the DoD health system into the VA system, so that service members will not fall through the cracks.

Not every American chooses to wear the uniform and serve this country. Not every family stays up lonely nights and waits for a father, husband, mother, wife, or child to come home. Not everyone hears the call of their country and says `send me.' But for those who do, we owe it to be there for them when they get back.

I will be proud to vote for this legislation that supports our troops and brings a new focus on critical mental health issues.

Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Madam Chairman, I yield myself 3\1/2\ minutes.

Madam Chairman, most people don't realize while our troops are in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq, that their family members back home, if they want to send them a care package, whatever that care package may consist of, from a young child's homework assignment or a drawing or an artist's rendering, to just something from home to help them in their time of trouble, right now those families must pay for it. And on average, it's not unusual for a family to incur about $1,500 a year in postage to mail those packages.

My amendment would authorize free mailing privileges for family members of our servicemen and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. I believe the amendment offers tremendous opportunity to increase the morale of our troops overseas which, as we are well aware, is a necessary component to have a confident and fully prepared military.

I would like to thank, of course, Chairman Skelton, Ranking Member Hunter, Personnel Subcommittee chairman, Mr. Snyder, and my good friend, John McHugh from New York, for helping to bring this amendment to fruition.

I drafted the amendment in response to concerns expressed to me by many family members that it was becoming too costly to send those regular care packages to their loved ones overseas. I heard story after story of families that are already finding it hard to make ends meet now having to spend as much as $1,500 a year to mail care packages.

These packages, as I mentioned, bring a touch of home to our servicemembers. Pictures, cards, school projects from kids, and I'm told there's not good pepperoni in Afghanistan yet, so that comes as well. But they also provide the military men and women with basic necessities like additional shampoo or powder or perhaps phone cards.

In my district of Staten Island and Brooklyn, residents join together and raise money to help military families send these packages overseas. I was inspired by the outpouring of support for our servicemen and women, particularly in Dyker Heights, Brooklyn, where postal service employees raise money to cover the postage for every package sent to our troops. In Staten Island residents formed the Staten Island Project Home Front, Incorporated, a nonprofit organization dedicated to serving our deployed troops and their families by sending thousands of care packages. This month alone they sent over 230 packages to our soldiers overseas. It was with acts of generosity and patriotism such as these that prompted this amendment.

The amendment has also received the support of organizations such as the VFW, American Legion, National Association of Uniformed Services. And to quote the VFW, ``Letters and packages from home do wonders in boosting morale of our men and women serving in harm's way, and high morale transfers to combat ready and effectiveness.'' Comments such as this I wholeheartedly agree with.

It goes without saying that our servicemen and women are making enormous sacrifices fighting this war on

terrorism and defending freedom and liberty. They face great challenges under trying circumstances, and often without some necessities such as blankets or toothpaste. It falls upon their families back home to get them these supplies and to cover the cost of shipping them overseas. The amendment will make life a little easier for our soldiers and to ease the financial burden on those back home. It's a simple way of bringing a touch of home to America's heroes overseas.

In short, what it would do would give each family member a voucher, the equivalent of sending a 10-pound package every 2 months, and would reduce that cost to those families.

Madam Chairman, I'd also submit for the Record letters in support from the VFW and the American Legion.

Veterans of Foreign Wars of

the United States,

Washington, DC, May 15, 2007.

Hon. Vito Fossella,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representative Fossella: On behalf of the 2.4 million

members of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States

(VFW) and our Auxiliaries, I am pleased to offer our strong

support for the ``Supply Our Soldiers Act of 2007'' (H.R.

1439), which provides for free mailing privileges for

personal correspondence and parcels sent to members of the

Armed Forces serving on active duty in Iraq or Afghanistan.

As you are aware, letters and packages from home do wonders

in boosting the moral of our men and women serving in harms

way; and high moral translates to combat readiness and

effectiveness. Unfortunately, too many military families are

financially strained and cannot absorb the cost of postage to

send parcels on a recurring basis. Your initiative goes a

long way in eliminating that burden.

Thank you for taking the lead and introducing this measure.

We look forward to working with you to ensure it is enacted.

Sincerely,

Michael H. Wysong,

Director,

National Security and Foreign Affairs.

I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).

Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.