Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act

Mr. President, we are 4 months into the fiscal year, and our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have still not agreed to a deal to fund the Federal Government, including the Department of Defense. In a matter of days, we will face the prospect of a long-term continuing resolution or government shutdown if an agreement on overall funding levels cannot be reached.

From the moment President Biden submitted his budget request, Republican leaders said his proposed $12.6 billion increase for defense was not enough. So, on a bipartisan basis, we worked to raise that number to a level proposed by the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee and supported by every Republican on the committee as well as the 88 Senators who voted for the final National Defense Authorization Act.

But even with that defense number in hand, our Republican colleagues continue to draw out negotiations on a top-line funding number for the Federal Government. In doing so, they risk pushing us into a full-year continuing resolution that would fund defense at a level that is less than President Biden's initial request.

Let me say that again. They were deeply critical of the President's proposal. They worked and we worked with them to get a robust increase in defense spending, and now they are prepared to accept a number even below President Biden's request.

Make no mistake, a full-year CR will short-change our military, and it will disrupt the efficient operations of the Federal Government in the midst of international tension, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and a fragile economic recovery.

As my colleague from Ohio just pointed out, we are in a serious confrontation on the Ukrainian border between Russian forces and Ukrainian forces. And we have indicated that we want to help. A big part of that help would come from the Department of Defense, but it would be very difficult with a continuing resolution to marshal the help and support to our colleagues and our friends in Ukraine.

As I noted, the outlines of a reasonable agreement for both defense and nondefense funding have been evident for some time. Indeed, the National Defense Authorization Act, which passed on a bipartisan basis in December, set a funding level for defense that is 5 percent higher than last year's enacted level. It reflects the level proposed by Ranking Member Inhofe. And, as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I fully supported that funding level and cosponsored Senator Inhofe's amendment to authorize the increase.

For his part, Senator Leahy has adopted the NDAA defense funding levels in the bills that the Appropriations Committee introduced in November. He accommodated that increase by reducing funding for domestic programs by $22.5 billion from the level in the administration's request.

So Democrats have agreed to increase defense funding and to reduce nondefense funding from the levels requested by the President. In doing so, Democrats proposed a budget that funds defense activities at a level that is higher than nondefense activities.

Let me underscore that point, because GOP leaders often say there should be parity between defense and nondefense spending. Senate Democrats have proposed spending bills that have $777.5 billion for defense and $753 billion for every other discretionary program--the VA, education, agriculture, FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and so on. Democrats have offered our Republican colleagues nearly everything they have asked for, but they won't take yes for an answer.

As we drift toward the full-year CR, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are reacting with nonchalance to the impacts on defense.

Let me remind my colleagues what a full-year CR will mean for national defense. It will mean that defense spending would be about $37 billion lower than the levels set out in the NDAA and lower than the funding levels requested by President Biden--yes, those levels they criticized so aggressively that President Biden suggests. If they pursue this path of a CR, the numbers for defense will be less than the President's initial request.

It means military personnel accounts will be funded $5 billion below what the Department requested. A CR means DOD will have to cannibalize other accounts in order to provide the pay raise and other benefit increases that our servicemembers rightfully deserve.

It means the Pentagon may have to delay or suspend permanent change- of-station moves and accession of troops--again, all of this in the context, as my colleague from Ohio pointed out, of a major crisis in Europe and a growing concern about Chinese activities in the Pacific.

It means training and readiness accounts will fall about $5.3 billion short of what the Department requested. And the key to the morale of soldiers--among one of the most important keys--is that they are well trained and they are prepared. We owe it to them to give them that training and ensure they are prepared.

It means the military healthcare account will be short over $1 billion.

A CR also means that we will be tied to funding priorities from a year ago, even though circumstances have changed markedly. For example, our military engagements with Afghanistan and Eastern Europe are vastly different from last year. Funding will be trapped in the wrong accounts and the Defense Department will not have the flexibility to move it where it is needed.

A CR will prevent the Defense Department from effectively modernizing and reinvesting in new programs. Because new program starts are not allowed under a CR, the Department of Defense will be forced into funding legacy systems that are outdated and inefficient. Meanwhile, important new initiatives and acquisitions would be delayed.

We won't be able to fund three additional ships and seven more Joint Strike Fighters in the Navy's 2022 budget. The Marines would have to delay procurement of the MQ-9A Reaper UAV, and the Amphibious Combat Vehicle.

The Space Force would have to cut two of the five planned national security space launch missions, and the Air Force would have to delay the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent Program and the long-range standoff weapon.

DOD also won't be able to start over 100 military construction projects--new facilities that our servicemembers need to do their jobs safely and effectively. This includes, among others: $32 million in Air Force corrosion and simulator projects in Florida, $55 million for a joint operation center at Fort Polk in Louisiana, $56 million in total projects for Wisconsin, $75 million in total projects for Georgia, $94 million in total projects for Michigan, $161 million in total projects for Texas, $186 million in total projects for California, $251 million for a runway extension at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska, $251 million in total projects for South Dakota, and $321 million in total projects for North Carolina.

Finally, a CR will disrupt DOD's partnerships with outside partners in the private sector and academia, and with our allies, because they inject uncertainty, instability, and additional costs to R&D and acquisition processes.

In short, a yearlong CR will make us less competitive with our adversaries and less able to respond to the rapidly changing global landscape, which was illustrated so eloquently by my colleague from Ohio. It would be a self-inflicted wound at a dangerous time for the country and our international partners.

The impact will not only be felt on the defense side of the ledger. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to produce new and potentially dangerous strains, we risk losing $5 billion in research at the NIH and $2.4 billion in funding for our public health infrastructure, including funding for the CDC, BARDA, and the National Disaster Medical System.

And a CR would sacrifice $3 billion in new investments in mental health, and

one of the obvious outcomes of this pandemic is the mental health challenge that is facing all Americans, and particularly young Americans.

We risk losing a proposed $400 increase in the maximum Pell grant, just as schools and students are trying to finalize financial aid packages. Too many students have put off their college education due to economic hardship and uncertainty during the pandemic. This Congress should not make matters worse by withholding student aid.

A CR would also be a slap in the face to the Capitol Police, who have been stretched to the limit in the aftermath of the January 6 assault on the Capitol. It would deny the department needed funding to hire new officers, for overtime and retention payments, as well as resources for officer wellness and mental health support.

Chairman Leahy has bent over backward to engage our Republican colleagues. Four months into the fiscal year, we need them to reach an agreement. Otherwise, we risk a full-year CR in which everybody loses-- most of all the American people.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, today I want to speak about a piece of bipartisan legislation that Chairman Tester and I introduced with the unanimous support of every member of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, both Republicans and Democrats.

Consensus is often hard to find, as we know, in this body, but caring for our Nation's veterans--our heroes--has a way of bringing us together. I tell Kansans back home that the Senate on veterans affairs is one of the few places left on which Republicans and Democrats find common ground. I hope that continues, and I hope that spreads.

Caring for our Nation's veterans is an honor that we all have, and when you reach an agreement between some of the most liberal members of our committee and the most conservative members of our committee, you know that you have a really good deal.

I first learned about the issue of toxic exposure years ago, while attending an event for Vietnam veterans at home in Kansas. After hearing about their struggles with exposure to Agent Orange, I introduced the Toxic Exposure Research Act, which was signed into law in 2016 and mandates research on health conditions of children and grandchildren of veterans who were exposed to toxins during their military service.

Our military veterans and their families and their survivors know exposure to toxic substances has become commonplace in modern warfare. Regrettably, the negative long-term health effects are sometimes not identified until long after the time of exposure, leaving veterans to face serious medical issues years after their service.

Toxic exposure during military service has created significant healthcare concerns for veterans, going back to mustard gas exposure in World War I and, most notably, the Vietnam generation's exposure to Agent Orange.

Despite these clear examples of lasting impact of military toxic exposures, struggles with health conditions associated with burn pits continue to plague the latest generation of veterans who served in the Global War on Terror.

I have spoken with veterans across Kansas and held a townhall meeting in my home State on the effects of toxic exposure on our veterans' health. My office continues to receive casework

from veterans regarding the burden of proof to gain access to healthcare. This legislation--the one that our committee will consider tomorrow--lessens that burden and creates a pathway for thousands of Kansas veterans and many more thousands of American veterans to receive healthcare for illnesses caused by toxic exposure.

For decades, toxic-exposed veterans have faced overwhelming barriers to getting VA healthcare and the services that they deserve. Post-911 veterans are the newest generation of American heroes to suffer from toxic exposures encountered in their military service.

These American heroes who put on the uniform and volunteered to go into harm's way on our behalf deserve to have their level of commitment matched by those of us who serve here in Congress. When our government sends troops to war, we make a pledge to care for them when they come home. Veterans who are made sick from service deserve medical care for those conditions.

The Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act is an important first step in making certain our veterans receive the care they need as a result of their service.

I appreciate the entire Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee for working together to craft this consequential legislation to care for our servicemembers who put their lives and health on the line for us. I also appreciate every member of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee--Senators Tillis, Hassan, Sullivan, Manchin, Boozman, Sanders, Cassidy, Brown, Blackburn, Blumenthal, Tuberville, Hirono, Cramer, Sinema, and Rounds--for working together to better the lives of those who have served. Additionally, I am grateful for the support of many VSOs--veterans service organizations--that represent millions of veterans across the Nation.

This legislation is part of a comprehensive and phased approach. This first phase provides the VA with the authority it needs to expand healthcare for combat veterans. For many who are sick and suffering, time is running out, and our first priority is to get these veterans their healthcare now.

Our bill would also mandate training for the VA healthcare providers and benefit specialists to ensure a level of competence across the Department to make sure veterans receive exemplary treatment and service.

Our legislation would direct the VA to incorporate a clinical screening to inquire about a veteran's potential exposures and symptoms commonly associated with toxic exposure.

I talked to a veteran today who said she has been to the VA twice for care and treatment and has never been asked about whether she encountered any substance that could have been damaging to her health during her service. After speaking with these veterans, I have come to understand that this basic and preventive act of screening is not part of enrollment or basic care provided by the Department. That must change.

Solutions to this complex problem cannot be generated by Congress alone and require a coordinated and systematic approach that involves partnering with the VA. My view is that we make a commitment to those who serve that we will do our work. This is a significant step in getting us to a point at which we are living up to that commitment and doing it in a way that is not damaging to any other veteran.

I urge my colleagues to read our bill, to grow their understanding of this complex challenge, and to join our committee, every single member of the committee, in passing this bill to get one step closer to providing care and relief on one of the most pressing challenges facing veterans today.

Mr. President, today I want to speak about a piece of bipartisan legislation that Chairman Tester and I introduced with the unanimous support of every member of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, both Republicans and Democrats.

Consensus is often hard to find, as we know, in this body, but caring for our Nation's veterans--our heroes--has a way of bringing us together. I tell Kansans back home that the Senate on veterans affairs is one of the few places left on which Republicans and Democrats find common ground. I hope that continues, and I hope that spreads.

Caring for our Nation's veterans is an honor that we all have, and when you reach an agreement between some of the most liberal members of our committee and the most conservative members of our committee, you know that you have a really good deal.

I first learned about the issue of toxic exposure years ago, while attending an event for Vietnam veterans at home in Kansas. After hearing about their struggles with exposure to Agent Orange, I introduced the Toxic Exposure Research Act, which was signed into law in 2016 and mandates research on health conditions of children and grandchildren of veterans who were exposed to toxins during their military service.

Our military veterans and their families and their survivors know exposure to toxic substances has become commonplace in modern warfare. Regrettably, the negative long-term health effects are sometimes not identified until long after the time of exposure, leaving veterans to face serious medical issues years after their service.

Toxic exposure during military service has created significant healthcare concerns for veterans, going back to mustard gas exposure in World War I and, most notably, the Vietnam generation's exposure to Agent Orange.

Despite these clear examples of lasting impact of military toxic exposures, struggles with health conditions associated with burn pits continue to plague the latest generation of veterans who served in the Global War on Terror.

I have spoken with veterans across Kansas and held a townhall meeting in my home State on the effects of toxic exposure on our veterans' health. My office continues to receive casework

from veterans regarding the burden of proof to gain access to healthcare. This legislation--the one that our committee will consider tomorrow--lessens that burden and creates a pathway for thousands of Kansas veterans and many more thousands of American veterans to receive healthcare for illnesses caused by toxic exposure.

For decades, toxic-exposed veterans have faced overwhelming barriers to getting VA healthcare and the services that they deserve. Post-911 veterans are the newest generation of American heroes to suffer from toxic exposures encountered in their military service.

These American heroes who put on the uniform and volunteered to go into harm's way on our behalf deserve to have their level of commitment matched by those of us who serve here in Congress. When our government sends troops to war, we make a pledge to care for them when they come home. Veterans who are made sick from service deserve medical care for those conditions.

The Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act is an important first step in making certain our veterans receive the care they need as a result of their service.

I appreciate the entire Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee for working together to craft this consequential legislation to care for our servicemembers who put their lives and health on the line for us. I also appreciate every member of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee--Senators Tillis, Hassan, Sullivan, Manchin, Boozman, Sanders, Cassidy, Brown, Blackburn, Blumenthal, Tuberville, Hirono, Cramer, Sinema, and Rounds--for working together to better the lives of those who have served. Additionally, I am grateful for the support of many VSOs--veterans service organizations--that represent millions of veterans across the Nation.

This legislation is part of a comprehensive and phased approach. This first phase provides the VA with the authority it needs to expand healthcare for combat veterans. For many who are sick and suffering, time is running out, and our first priority is to get these veterans their healthcare now.

Our bill would also mandate training for the VA healthcare providers and benefit specialists to ensure a level of competence across the Department to make sure veterans receive exemplary treatment and service.

Our legislation would direct the VA to incorporate a clinical screening to inquire about a veteran's potential exposures and symptoms commonly associated with toxic exposure.

I talked to a veteran today who said she has been to the VA twice for care and treatment and has never been asked about whether she encountered any substance that could have been damaging to her health during her service. After speaking with these veterans, I have come to understand that this basic and preventive act of screening is not part of enrollment or basic care provided by the Department. That must change.

Solutions to this complex problem cannot be generated by Congress alone and require a coordinated and systematic approach that involves partnering with the VA. My view is that we make a commitment to those who serve that we will do our work. This is a significant step in getting us to a point at which we are living up to that commitment and doing it in a way that is not damaging to any other veteran.

I urge my colleagues to read our bill, to grow their understanding of this complex challenge, and to join our committee, every single member of the committee, in passing this bill to get one step closer to providing care and relief on one of the most pressing challenges facing veterans today.

Mr. President, I rise this afternoon here on the Senate floor to mark what will soon be the passage, in just a matter of moments, of a vital veterans bill and to thank my colleagues--both Republicans and Democrats--who came together to support the Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act. This is an important bill, and it will remove hurdles for post-9/11 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, in particular, who were exposed to burn pits, so they can receive healthcare from the VA without delay.

This legislation is cosponsored by every single member of the Senate VA Committee, and I commend each of my Senate colleagues in their support for this legislation.

Supporting our veterans has a way of bringing us together, and I am so glad that is true. I am on the floor this afternoon with the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, and I appreciate how he and my Senate colleagues understand the urgency of this bill and are quickly moving to pass it by unanimous consent.

Post-9/11 veterans are the newest generation of American heroes to suffer from toxic exposure encountered during military service; and passing this legislation marks just a first step--a first step--of a phased approach to solving the complex challenges of caring for those veterans exposed to burn pits and other toxic exposures.

For way too long, we have heard from veterans who got sick after exposure to burn pits and need lifesaving care. There is a bipartisan consensus on our committee that this phased approach--delivering healthcare now and reforming the benefit system next--is the most effective pathway forward for toxic exposure veterans and all other veterans as well.

Servicemembers are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country. We know that. We respect that. We honor that. We must match that level of commitment by crafting thoughtful and effective solutions to make certain we hold up our end of the bargain and continuously work toward the best outcomes for those who served and sacrificed.

I once joined a roundtable in Wichita, KS, with local members of the Vietnam Veterans of America and was moved by their stories--not only of their own health consequences from Agent Orange but their concerns of how their exposure was affecting the health of their children and grandchildren. From that veteran feedback, I introduced the Toxic Exposure Research Act with Senator Blumenthal, which was signed into law in 2016.

I have since heard from many veterans in Kansas and across the country who are sick and dying from the effects of toxic exposure caused by burn pits. Addressing the needs of veterans exposed to burn pits cannot wait. This legislation could be lifesaving for those exposed or suffering. When our men and women in uniform go into harm's way on our behalf, we owe it to them to take care of them when they come home for whatever injuries are incurred during their service. This is not a question of resources; this is a question of getting reform done the right way.

The Senate soon will act to pass this bill, moving us closer to completing phase 1 of this approach to provide timely, sustainable care to our veterans. I will continue to work with veterans, advocates in the VA, and, importantly, my colleagues on the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs and its chairman, Senator Tester, of Montana, to make sure we are crafting legislative solutions that are veteran-centric.

I call upon my colleagues in the House to quickly take action and act on this bill and act on our promise as a nation so post-9/11 veterans who are suffering from toxic exposures can get the care they need.

I thank my colleagues on the committee, Chairman Tester, and our respective staffs for working to craft this feasible path forward. And I want to thank many veteran organizations that have expressed their support for this legislation, including the Disabled Veterans of America, Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Wounded Warrior Project, Iraq and American Veterans of America, the American Legion, Military Officers Association of America, and Military-Veterans Advocacy.

I am confident that if we continue to work together with the VA and with veterans' groups, we will keep the needs of veterans foremost in our minds and that we can deliver meaningful reforms for the current generation of veterans and for all those who come thereafter.

I yield the floor to the Senator from Montana.

Mr. President, I want to thank my friend, the Senator from Kansas, Senator Moran, the ranking

member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

When we started this Congress, the No. 1 issue that was put forth by the veterans service organizations representing the veterans in this country was toxic exposure. It was incumbent that the Veterans' Affairs Committee do something about toxic exposure. We created the bill called the COST of War.

We are at a point now where we are going to try to implement that bill in phases. The phase we are working on today has six major components to it. No. 1, it expands the screening period of healthcare eligibility for combat veterans who served after September 11, 2001, from 5 years to 10. No. 2, it provides an open enrollment period for any post-9/11 combat veteran who is more than 10 years from separation. No. 3, after we do the first two things, it tells the VA to have an outreach plan to contact veterans who did not enroll during their initial period of enhanced eligibility so that they can sign up for the potential benefits. It directs the VA to incorporate a clinical screening regarding a veteran's potential exposures and symptoms commonly associated with toxic substances. The fifth thing it does is it mandates toxic exposure early education and training for healthcare and benefits personnel who work at the VA. And, finally, it strengthens Federal research on toxic exposure.

This is a big bill; it is an important bill; and it does right by our veterans in this country. Toxic exposure is not something that is new. We have dealt with it since World War I, World War II, Agent Orange, and the Vietnam war, and, right now, toxic exposure due to burn pits.

When we get done with this process, it is not going to take an act of Congress to get the benefits they need to get moving into the future. This is a giant step forward in that regard.

So I want to thank both the minority and majority staffs, the Senator from Kansas, who has been an incredible help to be able to work together to get this to the point where it is today.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 263, S. 3541.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time.

I know of no further debate on the bill.

I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

I yield the floor.