A bill to amend the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 to modify the termination date for the Veterans Choice Program, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 544) to amend the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 to modify the termination date for the Veterans Choice Program, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and add extraneous material into the Record.

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

I rise today in support of S. 544. Congress created the Choice Program in 2014 to ensure that veterans waiting in line at the Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities across the country had an option of seeking care in their communities. Though Choice is far from perfect, 3 years later, more than a million veterans have used it to get care they needed faster and closer to home.

Choice has also led to a nationwide conversation about the importance of the VA healthcare system, the need for VA to be a better partner to community providers and hospitals everywhere, and the actions we must take to ensure that VA is well positioned to provide high-quality care to veterans for generations to come. As chairman, I am wholeheartedly committed to seeing that conversation through to a solution.

We are currently refining legislation that will provide a long-term path to make the VA healthcare system and VA's care in the community programs, including Choice, work better for veterans, for VA, for community providers, and for taxpayers alike. Our goal is to have that solution on the President's desk later this year.

However, Choice is expected to sunset just four short months from now on August 7, 2017. And when it does, the VA expects to have anywhere from $800 million to $1.2 billion left in the Choice fund.

Absent enactment of this bill or legislation like it, on August 8, those funds will no longer be available to help veterans get the care they need, with potentially tragic consequences.

During a full committee hearing last month, Secretary Shulkin testified:

``Without congressional action, veterans will have to face longer wait times for care.''

He went on to say that allowing Choice to sunset would be ``a disaster for American veterans.''

With the passage of this bill today, we can get one step closer to avoiding that disaster.

In anticipation of the program's expiration, VA has already started halting referrals to Choice for services, like maternity care and oncology care that typically require lengthy episodes of care. That means that veterans with cancer or veterans who are pregnant can no longer choose to take advantage of Choice care if they live far away from a VA medical facility or have to wait more than 30 days for the next VA appointment.

As if that wasn't bad enough, if Choice is not extended by the end of April, VA will have to stop sending referrals to Choice for many other services that veterans are relying on.

To prevent this, S. 544 would remove the August 7, 2017, sunset date from the Choice program. This will allow the program to continue working for veteran patients until all the money remaining in the veterans Choice fund--the money that Congress provided 3 years ago for this exact purpose--is fully expended.

It would also ensure that, as we move forward with ongoing efforts to create an enduring solution to the problems VA is facing, veterans are not cut off from potentially lifesaving or life-preserving care.

The bill would also eliminate the requirement for VA to act as the secondary payor for nonservice-connected care provided under Choice. This would bring Choice in line with VA's other care in the community programs and remove a pain point that, while well-intentioned, has impeded the provision of care for certain patients and challenged VA's ability to issue reimbursements to community providers in a timely consistent manner.

In addition, the bill would authorize VA to share medical record information with community providers who are jointly treating veteran patients. This would ensure that the clinicians caring for veterans, both in VA and community medical facilities, have all the information that they need to make well-informed treatment plans and provide the highest quality care.

Subsequent redisclosure of medical records information would be prohibited, meaning that personal patient information would be safeguarded from inappropriate disclosures.

As chairman, as a veteran, and as a doctor, I cannot think of anything more important that we can do today to help our Nation's veterans and pass this legislation out of the House of Representatives and swiftly deliver it to the President's desk for his signature.

I urge all of my colleagues to join me in doing that by supporting this bill today.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Ranking Member Walz, for his kind words and his hard work on this legislation also.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), the vice chair of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Coffman), my good friend, a veteran of both the Marine Corps and the Army, twice deployed to Iraq, and a very active member of the committee.

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

I look forward to working with Ranking Member Walz and our fellow committee members to strike the appropriate balance between ensuring protections that are in place to provide provider agreement authority from being unfairly utilized and reducing administrative burdens on small providers.

However, absent passage of this legislation today, veterans with serious need will not be able to get the care they need. Already, veterans who are pregnant or who have been diagnosed with cancer have been unable to take advantage of the increased access to care that the Choice Program provides.

I would also note that, since Choice granted VA provider agreement authority in the Choice Act 3 years ago, the committee has not heard a single instance where that authority has been improperly utilized or resulted in unfair labor practices.

Furthermore, the exclusion afforded in the Choice Act is no more generous than providers under Medicare or in TRICARE currently enjoy, and there is no reason why providers accepting veteran patients should have to deal with more administrative burdens than providers under Medicare and TRICARE. I can assure you, as a Medicare provider and a TRICARE provider, that is enough burden.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance), my good friend and fellow classmate.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Costello), a former member and a very active member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

I want to thank the majority and the minority staff that worked on this bill, and certainly the Senate, Senators Tester and Isakson, and the committee on the Senate side for getting this over here in a timely way. We needed to do this now so that we could continue care for patients that would go past August 7. We have people right now who are getting care that is going to be long term, and they would be cut off or couldn't use the Choice program.

We have heard a lot of the problems with Choice here, but it has also helped a lot of veterans. What we feel like we want the opportunity to do now is be given a little bit of time, in a bipartisan way, to work out the problems with this.

I think this goes for everyone on our committee: At the end of the day, our purpose, our goal is to provide access and the best quality of care for veterans that this country can deliver. That is the goal of our committee in a bipartisan way.

With that, once again, I encourage all of my Members to support this legislation.

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

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the bipartisan Veterans Choice Program Improvement Act. I will start my remarks by saying that Chairman Isakson was here earlier, and he had a meeting he had to get to. Johnny has been through a tough surgery, and it is good to have Johnny back. But the fact of the matter is he supports this bill. He is an original cosponsor of this bill. The same could be said of Senator Blumenthal, who also had a meeting and wanted to be here, once again. We heard from Senator Schatz earlier. This bill truly has bipartisan support, not only in the VA Committee but also in this body.

The reason people support this piece of legislation is because it brings much needed reforms to the Choice Program while ensuring that veterans can access care in their communities. It is a good bill.

A few years back, the Choice Program was established with the very best of intentions. In my home State of Montana, it is a fact that veterans were waiting far too long for an appointment at the VA and oftentimes had to drive over 100 miles for the appointment. The Choice Program was supposed to allow these veterans to access care closer to home. Unfortunately, it has not been working out the way it should, and veterans have been inundated with redtape and a government contractor that struggles to schedule appointments and pay providers on time. That is why we all worked together--Democrats and Republicans and even Independents--on this bill to put forth these much needed reforms.

The Veterans Choice Program Improvement Act cuts redtape so veterans can access care more quickly. In fact, I made it clear from the get-go that I would not vote to extend the Choice Program until Congress and the VA have addressed some of the biggest concerns I have been hearing from Montana veterans and community providers.

Once we get the bill passed, this program reimburses community providers more quickly for the care they provide to our veterans. It reduces out-of-pocket costs for veterans receiving care through the Choice Program. It improves the sharing of medical records between the VA and the community providers to better ensure seamless care for veterans, whether they are seeing a VA doctor or a doctor in their community. It allows the VA to access all the funding initially appropriated for this program to ensure that veterans' access to care is not disrupted.

This bill is not going to fix everything, but it is certainly a step in the right direction. With this legislation, combined with assurances that I have received from VA Montana, VA folks within the State will be allowed to schedule appointments for Montana's veterans directly instead of going through an inept government contract.

It is my hope that we can make the Choice Program work the way it was

intended when we first set it up, with the goal of serving those who have served our country.

I again express my appreciation for taking this bill up on the floor, this Veterans Choice Program Improvement Act, and I think it is a prime example of how this body needs to work together to solve problems--in this case, for our veterans community. We should push this bill out as soon as possible.

I yield the floor to Senator Moran.

Mr. President, I would like to thank the good Senator from Kansas for his comments and his leadership not only on the VA Committee on which we both serve but also as chairman of the Appropriations MILCON-VA Subcommittee, the subcommittee that really sees how the money is going to be utilized within the VA. I think Senator Moran has covered just about all of it. I just want to go back and say one thing.

We are going to have a unanimous consent. I am told there will be an objection to it. That is truly unfortunate because this has been a bipartisan effort. It has cleared everyone in the Senate except one person, to my knowledge, and I think that is unfortunate.

One of the complaints I hear is that the primary payer provision of this bill is the problem. The primary payer provision of this bill requires the VA to be exactly that--the primary payer of the bills. My question would be, Why is this a bad thing? Right now veterans are being hamstrung and delayed, and the folks who provide the benefits, the providers, are not getting the dollars in a timely manner. I would just ask, if the VA is not going to be the primary payer, who is?

These folks have put it on the line for this country, and they come back in different shape than when they left, after they bore the battles of war. Some of the injuries are seen; some of the injuries are unseen. And we are not going to say ``You know what. Don't worry about it. We are going to make sure you get the care, and we are going to make sure it is paid for''? It is part of the cost of war. So when we send our young men and women off to war, we ought to be thinking about this stuff. And we have a solution. We have a solution to part of the problems with the Choice Program.

If we get this bill passed, it will give us the opportunity to work together to get a long-term bill passed before the first of the year to really address the needs of our veterans so that there are wraparound services at the VA that veterans can count on.

I would just say that this is supposed to be a very deliberative body, and for the most part, it is pretty deliberative. But when you have a situation of a program that we put into effect--that Congress passed and the Senate had a big part of writing--and it is not working, we ought to fix it, and this bill fixes it in good part. We have some more to do, as I said, but this bill is a step in the right direction in cutting redtape and making it easier for veterans to find care and get care, whether it is in the VA or outside the VA. It

is also something that the Veterans Administration sorely needs to move it forward.

I just want to say that we come in here and we have good arguments and good discussions, and sometimes politics comes into the discussion. In this particular case, folks have come to the table--whether it is Senator Isakson or Senator McCain or Senator Moran or me or any of the others on the Veterans' Affairs Committee--and we have come up with a solution that 99 percent of the people in this body agree with, but we can't get it across the finish line. And we wonder why our popularity is in the single digits in this country.

I am just going to close by saying I want to thank everybody from both sides of the aisle who worked together to get this bill crafted and get this bill to this point. I hope that at some point in time, people will take a look at this bill for what it does and realize that there aren't bogeymen in this bill, that our veterans deserve us to work together to find solutions to move the ball forward so they can get the healthcare they were promised when they signed on the dotted line to protect this country.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I was going to ask for unanimous consent that S. 544, the bill we have been talking about, be discharged for immediate consideration, and then someone would have to object to that unanimous consent request--otherwise it would move forward.

I am going to do this on Monday. I hope the Senator who is truly going to object to this will have the opportunity to talk to Secretary Shulkin and Chairman Isakson, and he will find out that both those people are in support of this bill.

Hopefully we can come in and do a unanimous consent and get this bill passed on Monday. This is a bill that is good for America's veterans. I think it is good for our community providers, and I think it is very good for the VA. We will hold off today and take care of this after the weekend.

I would like to once again thank all the folks who worked on this bill. A special thank-you to Senator Moran for his statements today.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota, for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 544. This legislation ensures that the approximately $1 billion left in Choice funding is spent on the critical mission of providing veterans timely access to care.

It would be an abdication of our responsibility to veterans if we allowed this money to go back to the Treasury instead of going to those who need and deserve our support.

I appreciate the efforts from my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for advancing this legislation.

The Choice Act was designed as a rapid response to the veteran wait time crisis, but its framework and implementation has been deeply flawed. Objective analyses found that it is not meaningfully reducing veterans' wait times, and its arbitrary standards have added a layer of confusion for both patients and providers.

There is bipartisan consensus that these concerns must be addressed when the Choice Act sunsets and the funding expires. We can and must do a better job of prioritizing and streamlining veterans' access to care in the community. We can and must do better than the existing Choice Act.

Now, the Choice Act was a temporary emergency measure to address an unacceptable crisis. Unfortunately, it contained language that undermined protections against workplace discrimination for Federal contractors. The next iteration of this law cannot subvert the rights of those who treat and serve our veterans.

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs continues to be a vital tool for ensuring fairness and equality in the workplace. It should apply to everyone that does business with the Federal Government because the Federal Government cannot endorse discrimination of any kind.

I will fight to ensure that this committee and this Congress restores their commitment to equality and fairness as we develop a more streamlined and thoughtful method for connecting veterans with community care.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter echoing these concerns from the Human Rights Campaign, the National Women's Law Center, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and the National Partnership for Women & Families.

April 5, 2017.

Dear Representative: We write to express our serious

concerns about H.R. 369/S. 544, which would eliminate the

sunset of the Veterans Choice Program. The Veterans Choice

Program currently includes a provision exempting it from

oversight by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance

Programs (OFCCP). This has diminished civil rights

protections when the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

enters into federal contracts for veterans' health care

services. The Veterans Choice Program was always intended to

be a temporary solution to ease the health care access crisis

faced by the veterans receiving care through the VA. We fear

that removing the sunset will open the door to extension of

the program, including extending the provision that strips

critical equal employment opportunity protections from the

men and women serving our nation's veterans. OFCCP must have

full jurisdiction to protect against employment

discrimination and promote equal employment opportunities.

The antidiscrimination rules enforced by OFCCP ensure that

federal contract dollars further equal employment opportunity

and are not used to subsidize unlawful discrimination. OFCCP

plays a unique and vital role in combating unlawful

employment discrimination by federal contractors on the basis

of sex, race, national origin, religion, color, sexual

orientation, gender identity, and disability. It also

enforces the Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance

Act, or VEVRAA, which requires nondiscrimination and

affirmative action for special and disabled veterans of any

war, campaign, or expedition in which a campaign badge has

been authorized. In addition, OFCCP guides contractors and

subcontractors on affirmatively promoting equal opportunity

in the workplace and promotes fair and nondiscriminatory

federal contractor workplaces. Many of its regulations

require contractors to take affirmative steps to expand the

pool of individuals from which it recruits, and evaluate

their own practices to identify and address conduct that

limits equal employment opportunities for protected classes

of workers. By conducting compliance audits and systemic

investigations, through its data collection and investigative

authority, OFCCP can aid contractors in identifying and

resolving practices that limit equal employment

opportunities, without relying solely on individuals who are

willing to risk retaliation to challenge unfair employment

practices. OFCCP's historic and current role in ensuring

artificial barriers do not restrict employment based on sex,

race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation,

gender identity, disability, or veteran status has improved

opportunities for a wide range of workers across the country

and has ensured that federal tax dollars do not subsidize

discrimination.

Carving out the VA provider agreements from these

antidiscrimination protections, affirmative action rules, and

data reporting requirements has the effect of narrowing

employment opportunities for women, people of color, people

with disabilities, veterans, and LGBT individuals and removes

critical tools for ending employment discrimination and

harassment. Extending the provision that weakens these

protections ultimately threatens harm not only to workers,

but to those who depend on them for care.

There is no appreciable administrative burden that

justifies continuing to suspend these protections and

requirements. Federal contractors and subcontractors with

less than 50 employees and $50,000 in contracts or

subcontracts are not covered by OFCCP's affirmative action

requirements. More than 94 percent of health care and social

assistance firms had fewer than 50 employees in 2009. The

larger providers, those with 50 or more employees and $50,000

or more in federal contracts, should be well-equipped to meet

the minimal administrative obligations associated with

maintaining an affirmative action plan.

The carve-out of VA contractors from the employment

discrimination rules applicable to federal contractors not

only has a detrimental impact on the workforces affected, but

sends a disturbing message that ensuring fair treatment for

women, people of color, LGBT people, veterans, and people

with disabilities is unnecessary and inconsequential. It sets

a precedent for future carve-outs and represents a step

backward from equal opportunity. Any continuation of the

Veterans Choice Program must ensure OFCCP jurisdiction to

enforce the antidiscrimination rules and other equal

employment opportunity protections for these providers.

For further information, please contact the Human Rights

Campaign, the National Women's Law Center, the Leadership

Conference on Civil and Human Rights, or the National

Partnership for Women and Families.

Sincerely,

National Women's Law Center.

Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

National Partnership for Women & Families.

Human Rights Campaign.

Mr. President, I appreciate the remarks, as well as the working together with the Senator from Montana as we tried to make certain that a program that is so valuable to veterans across the country--in my case particularly, veterans who live in rural America, in Kansas--to make certain that veterans can attain the care they have earned and the care they deserve.

We had a scandal at the VA in which many tragic things happened, and Congress came together at that time and passed the Choice Act. What that law basically has given our veterans is, if they live more than 40 miles from a VA facility--in other words, if they live a long distance from access to care--they can, at their choice, have that care at home: hometown hospital, hometown physician, pharmacy, physical therapy. They can see a provider in their hometown.

In so many instances in Kansas--in fact, I have mentioned this before on the Senate floor. The House district I represented as a Congressman is larger than the State of Illinois, and there is no VA hospital in that congressional district. So veterans not having to travel 2, 3, 4, 5 hours to Denver or to Wichita or to Amarillo is of such value to our veterans, particularly those who have a disability or are aging. What we did in the passage of Choice was so useful to so many veterans.

The other part of that was that if you couldn't get the care you needed within 30 days at the VA, you could then attain your care at home. Again, with the backlog that was occurring at the VA, the lack of providers, this became important to another set of veterans who, because of their health condition, couldn't afford to wait that long to see a physician, to have surgery.

This is important legislation. If you are somebody who cares about veterans, you need to be in favor of this Choice Act. If you are someone who cares about particularly rural or veterans who need timely care, you especially ought to be supportive of Choice.

The challenge we have is that the Choice Act is expiring. It expires August 7, and it needs to be extended. There are dollars available in the program. Mandatory spending is available to pay for the services to a later date.

As the Senator from Montana indicated, there are a number of provisions that haven't worked very well in Choice because of the bureaucratic nature of the program, the way the program has been established. One of those that are most important is that you have veterans on one side who need the care and choose Choice, but you also need a willing provider. The local hospital, the local physician needs to be willing to provide that care. I have never known a provider who was not honored to provide care to a veteran, but the challenge in many instances becomes whether that provider, that doctor or hospital gets reimbursed, gets paid.

This legislation has a number of reforms, but in my view, one of the most critical and most important is to make the VA the payer, to make the VA be the entity that writes out the check to pay the hospital bill, to pay the physician for the services provided.

So this is another reform that improves really on both sides. It eliminates some of the bureaucracy that a veteran goes through and the number of times a veteran may receive a notice that he or she owes money that should be paid by the Choice Program, and it also encourages--by paying them--the physician or the hospital to provide the service. These are important reforms, important changes in the Choice Act that are worthy of our support.

What is transpiring here are a couple of reforms to the Choice Program and its extension to a later date, until the money expires, so the Choice Program can continue, and Congress can now take that time to determine what we want to do with the Choice Program into the future after that point in time. I appreciate the way in which this legislation has worked.

Often I get asked whether there is any hope that Congress can work together, that Republicans and Democrats can solve problems. This is an example of where that is taking place today, by the care and concern we all have for our veterans and the good will that exists by those who serve in Congress to make sure that good things happen for our military men and women who are now veterans.

I regret that the chairman of the Veterans' Committee, the Senator from Georgia, Mr. Isakson, is unable to be with us, but, as the Senator from Montana indicated, he is fully supportive of this legislation. In fact, he is an original sponsor of the legislation.

I add my voice and ask my colleagues to agree to the unanimous consent resolution, that this legislation be passed. It will be another step in solving problems and caring for those who served our Nation.

Yesterday, I was at the Arlington National Cemetery--a reminder of the debt we owe to so many people. Those are veterans who are now deceased. Those are military men and women who have now died. Those who are living deserve the care and treatment that our VA can provide and the opportunities that our providers in our hometowns can assist in providing.

We want to make sure that good things continue to happen. We want to improve the quality of service, get the problems out of the Choice Program, and make sure those who are so deserving of quality care actually receive it.

I yield back to the Senator from Montana.

Mr. President, it is my understanding that one of my colleagues is en route to speak and perhaps object to this motion that is to be made. I would ask my colleague from Montana if he would mind holding for a few moments until that Senator arrives.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. Speaker, I, too, rise in strong support of S. 544 to eliminate the sunset on the Veterans Choice Program.

This bill will basically allow the Department of Veterans Affairs to continue spending previously appropriated resources in the Veterans Choice Program to provide direct and timely patient care to veterans. It allows the VA to charge a veteran's healthcare insurer for nonservice-connected care so that veterans aren't sent expensive medical bills, wasting time trying to figure out how to get them paid. Finally, it allows the VA to share medical information with community care providers so patient care is better coordinated.

This legislation is identical to H.R. 369, which passed unanimously in our Committee on Veterans' Affairs. It includes amendments offered by members of that committee.

I would like to take a moment, Mr. Speaker, to congratulate and thank the chairman of the committee for the bipartisan way that he approached this. The issue of veterans care is a passionate issue for all of us.

The issue of the Choice Program arose out of the crisis in Phoenix and other places in 2014, and a sunset that needed to be addressed was handled in a professional manner. It brought all parties together. I think the chairman is going to get a unanimous vote. They have got one in the Senate.

I can see that, under less steady hands, where this may have bogged down, and I appreciate the chairman's sense of urgency in getting it to this point. It puts us in a good place. So thank you for that.

It also gives us the time we need to come to a bipartisan fix for the Choice Program. We know, under the Choice Program, veterans are still waiting too long to receive care. As we said, in 2014, we all supported the Choice Act because of the crisis. Throughout the country, veterans were waiting, and in some cases dying, because they were waiting for care. If we recall right, an honorable and decent man, the VA Secretary, resigned over this crisis. So this was an important issue that needed to be addressed. We passed the Choice Act so that veterans could get that care.

The Choice Program was created as a temporary fix, designed to end this summer or when the VA spent the $10 billion. As the chairman said, there is about $1 billion left in Choice. With veterans still in need of care, we cannot possibly allow that to go back without addressing where it needs to go. It would be a waste of money, a waste of time, and it would make veterans' wait times even higher.

The bill gives us time to rewrite the Choice Program. The bill will give us time to address all of the problems with Choice so that veterans' care is managed and coordinated with VA and community care providers and so that veterans do not have wait times. It will also make sure the money will continue to be spent on veterans' health care.

I look forward to working with the chairman. As I said earlier, his steady hand and visionary leadership has gotten us to this point. It will ensure that we can figure out what the next iteration of community-based care looks like, and we can come together, bring that to the floor, and get it passed.

For this reason, I would urge my colleagues to support this legislation so veterans can receive their care now while Congress continues to work to improve upon that.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Kuster), my good friend and a friend of all veterans, our ranking member on the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, at this time it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), my good friend and also a good friend of veterans, the vice ranking member of the full Committee on Veterans' Affairs,

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Brownley), the ranking member of our Health Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. O'Rourke), my good friend, the ranking member of our Economic Opportunity Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining? I have two speakers to go.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Correa), a good friend, a new member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, someone who came to the House of Representatives and asked to serve veterans and be on the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Kihuen), who has taken a keen interest in veterans' issues. I am grateful that he is here today.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to thank the chairman, the staff, and everyone who has been here.

I think, of all the committees that are modeling the behavior of democracy, bipartisanship, and what our government stands for, the Veterans' Affairs Committee is one that takes that responsibility seriously. The chairman always models it. I think this is a case of that.

You heard the speakers come here. This is a big issue. There may be some differences in how the delivery, long term, looks, but there is no division on getting the best and most timely care to our veterans.

With that, I encourage my colleagues to support S. 544.

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