Protect Military Dependents Act

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the VET-TEC Authorization Act of 2023, as amended. In 2020, when our country experienced record unemployment, VET-TEC was a bright spot of veteran employment.

To date, nearly 5,000 veterans have found employment from the program at a salary of over $65,000 a year.

Today, veterans are employed at record-high levels. The Biden economy has brought veteran unemployment to the lowest level ever on record. Let me say that again. The Biden economy has brought veteran unemployment to the lowest level ever on record.

The legislation before us adds 5 more years to the VET-TEC program, providing VA an additional $337 million to get more veterans hired in the high-technology field.

This program was created by Speaker McCarthy in the Forever GI Bill, and I respect the fact that it is a big priority for the Speaker and my friend Chairman Bost. While I support the legislation, I wish to share my concern about moving a bill with such a large cost

when we have so many provisions awaiting action by this Congress. The $413 million price tag of this bill dwarfs the costs of many of the bills we must pass to address veteran homelessness.

This is an expensive bill in a fiscally uncertain time. While we all appreciate veteran employment programs, veteran unemployment is the lowest ever on record. A VET-TEC extension is nice to have, but with veterans experiencing homelessness and food insecurity, there is action on those programs that we must have.

As ranking member of this committee, I have the responsibility of weighing priorities and choosing between worthy policies that help veterans. I know the chairman and his colleagues on our committee share my goal of ending veteran homelessness.

When we considered this legislation in our committee, I offered an amendment to this legislation to make permanent some basic authorities which lowered veteran homelessness by 11 percent during a public health emergency. This amendment cost only $6 million in mandatory spending.

Last year, the chairman himself made it clear: ``No veteran should be without a place to call home. I am glad that the most recent estimate showed fewer veterans living in homeless shelters last year. That is why we must continue our work to ensure that the rubber is meeting the road and every veteran has access to safe, stable housing and the help they need to thrive.''

Chairman Bost is correct. The work must continue. We must continue the ongoing work, which has already helped so many veterans and can help so many more.

The reason given for not moving this bill was that it implicates the Toxic Exposure Fund, or TEF. I understand the chairman is concerned about how the Congressional Budget Office scores bills with TEF implications. I am concerned too, and I have spoken extensively on this.

However, there has yet to be a solution proposed for the TEF that does not undermine its purpose, which is to protect funding for toxic- exposed veterans and acknowledge this as a cost of war.

In light of this, I am asking that we come together and work on mutual priorities so that we can responsibly and equitably pass legislation using the limited offsets available to us.

I think the chairman believes, as do I, that providing basic needs for homeless veterans deserves to be on that priority list.

Therefore, I ask my colleague, the chairman, if he will commit to bringing Representative Cherfilus-McCormick's bill, H.R. 645, to the floor without delay,

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of a colloquy, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost), and ask if he will commit to this.

Mr. Speaker, I am reclaiming my time.

Mr. Speaker, I was waiting for the answer.

Mr. Speaker, I reclaim my time.

Mr. BOST: Mr. Speaker, I am committed to addressing the veterans homelessness.

Mr. Speaker, I am reclaiming my time.

I simply ask the gentleman whether he will work with us to bring Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick's bill to the floor. That is the question that I will yield for an answer.

Will the gentleman work with us?

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time.

I am grateful that I hear some kernel that they will work with us in a bipartisan way. What does worry me is the gentleman mentioned over the next few months. I can maybe tolerate the next few months in terms of can we come to an agreement by the fall when the temperatures start to fall, but even the hot summers, in some parts of the country, would require us to work much more expeditiously.

These pandemic authorities that expanded our ability to help veterans who are homeless expired on May 11. For the last 11 days, VA and its community partners have operated with fewer authorities and less funding to help homeless veterans.

VA's ability to quickly bring a veteran in off the streets and get them the services they need to put them on their way to stable, permanent housing has been greatly diminished.

Prior to the pandemic, we were maintaining the status quo. The number of veterans experiencing homelessness had remained basically stagnant year after year for quite some time. For every veteran housed, another veteran would fall into homelessness.

During the pandemic we approached the homelessness crisis head on and with the urgency it has long deserved. It is incredible to me that we were able to reduce homelessness during COVID-19 by 11 percent. During the darkest days of that pandemic, VA actually reduced homelessness by 11 percent. It permanently housed over 40,000 veterans last year alone. We know these authorities accelerated VA's progress in ending veteran homelessness, and we can't lose that momentum.

I am pleased to hear the chairman wants to work together to extend these authorities and get homeless veterans into housing.

Mr. Speaker, I just say let's prioritize H.R. 645 in the coming days, not the coming months, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna), my friend and colleague from my home State who serves on the Armed Services Committee and the Oversight Committee.

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

I commend General Bergman for the section of the VET-TEC bill which includes addressing this issue related to burials and the cost that the veteran's family has to bear, but I find it peculiar that the majority would take pains to include this legislation, which I have no quarrel with and support, but could not deal with and chose not to deal with the expiring authorities to deal with our homeless veterans.

Americans care deeply about the homeless veterans in our country and are offended that we would have anybody who wore the uniform of the United States be homeless.

There are elements of this bill that came up in markup. They brought the bill to the floor, the VET-TEC bill, which includes many elements, but they specifically chose to leave out addressing the expiring authorities that we have used to bring down homelessness by 11 percent. I am afraid we are going to lose momentum.

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

Mr. Speaker, I realize the chairman and all of us in the veteran space have had our differences with the way the Congressional Budget Office scores the TEF. However, I would assert that we cannot use that as an excuse for why we don't address veteran homelessness.

Mr. Speaker, the expansion of VET-TEC as a program is to the tune of nearly one-half billion dollars--$413 million--at a time when my colleagues on the other side are looking to make draconian cuts to the nondefense side of the ledger, which veterans do fall within. They are expanding a program that addresses veteran employment at a time when veteran unemployment is at its lowest.

What I want to compare is the $6 million to the nearly one-half billion dollars that the Republicans want to expand this program by. I, too, stand behind veteran employment programs and effective ones at that. However, should we be expanding it and authorizing for 5 years this program, VET-TEC, when we are allowing a $6 million program to care for homeless veterans, to get them off the streets, to expire?

It is a rather rich situation that my colleagues want to expand spending and spend more on a program whose urgency is really in question because the Biden economy, as I explained, has brought veteran unemployment to its lowest levels ever. They want to expand spending in that program by an enormous amount, yet they want to eliminate $6 million in authorizations to take care of our homeless veterans. This makes no sense at all to me.

I support the chairman's bill, but I hope he will work with us to solve this problem in a matter of days and not months.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1669) to amend title 38, United States Code, to make permanent the high technology pilot program of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1669, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Representative Ciscomani's bill, H.R. 1669, as amended. The bill would enhance the fund, the VET- TEC pilot program at the Department of Veterans Affairs. The VET-TEC pilot program was coauthored by Speaker McCarthy and Congressman Ro Khanna in the Forever GI Bill in 2017.

Now, this program provides post-9/11 GI Bill-style benefits to veterans so they can attend short-term training that leads to jobs in the information technology sector. The education and employment program has been a wildly successful program. It has helped thousands of veterans not only find a job, but a career and a promising future in the technology sector.

This program is an example of a government program that truly works for our veterans. VET-TEC has an 80 percent graduation rate, a 62 percent employment rate, and an average salary of $65,000 a year. Veterans using this program are going into careers with the best tech companies in the world.

The reason this program works as well as it has, I think, is that the schools only receive the full amount of the tuition and fees when the student gets a job in the tech industry.

Now, this level of accountability is honestly something I think we should be looking at for other Federal Government programs. Thousands of veterans achieving the career of their dreams has proven to me that it is time to expand VET-TEC.

Now, Representative Ciscomani's bill makes important changes to the pilot program to make it even stronger so that it can continue to help even more veterans find their American Dream. Improving VET-TEC program has the full support of the VA and many veteran service organizations.

Three weeks ago, VET-TEC providers told us that the program had run out of funds and they are no longer allowed to accept new students. Over 2,500 student veterans will miss out on the chance for a better career this year if Congress is unable to fix this problem. It goes without saying, the time is short and the need to help our veterans continue to access this training is great.

Even with record-high inflation and soaring interest rates, because of the Biden administration, veterans using this program have shown that they can still achieve high-paying jobs.

Representative Ciscomani's bill, as amended, also includes several other bipartisan bills, including General Jack Bergman's bill, H.R. 234, which would allow survivors of veterans to receive the burial allowance benefit if their loved one passes away at home while receiving VA Hospice care, rather than in a VA facility.

Representative Arrington's bill, H.R. 1169, would also allow veterans to receive their GI Bill electronic notifications virtually.

Representative Obernolte's bill, H.R. 746, would include nondegreed pilot programs into the Veterans Readiness and Employment program.

Representative Van Orden's bill, H.R. 1798, would protect the spouses of servicemembers from GI Bill debt.

Representative Kiggan's bill, H.R. 1635, would eliminate a nearly 70- year-old rule that limits the GI Bill payments that survivors and dependents receive in the Philippines.

With the inclusion of these bills in H.R. 1669, we would make great improvements in how our veterans can use the GI Bill benefits.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Student Veterans of America, Veterans of Foreign War, The American Legion, the VET-TEC Working Group, and Disabled American Veterans for supporting the proposed legislation today.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1669, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, while I understand the concerns expressed by the minority, I point out that the program has been a huge success in helping veterans gain meaningful employment.

We have been very successful in recent years in reducing veterans' unemployment, and now is not the time for us to take our foot off the gas. I believe a successful education program, such as this one, is one of the best ways to reduce veteran homelessness.

Mr. Speaker, I would also point out that the minority has had ample time and opportunity to express their concerns of legislation hearing on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am getting to my answer.

Mr. Speaker, they were also given a chance to submit markup at a full committee markup, and yet, the first time I have heard these concerns was late last week.

The bill, through regular order, as amended, was offered for the minority Representative, Mr. McGarvey, to reduce the length of time in the program. That amendment was accepted and included in the bill.

The length of the program was subject to bipartisan agreement. I recognize that the minority has valid concerns about spending and limited resources that we have worked with. The problem was made worse with the passage of the Toxic Exposure Fund, the PACT Act, that requires mandatory spending for many of the VA programs.

Mr. Speaker, I repeat my plea that my friends on the other side of the aisle join me in developing a resolution to the issue.

Mr. Speaker, I will address veterans homelessness, as I have always said I would. It is very concerning to me. We are currently working on a package to address the issue, but I am not going to pit one group of veterans against another. I would like my friends in the minority to work with me to develop legislation to address veteran homelessness in a bipartisan, fiscally responsible way over the next few months.

The answer is yes, we will work with you, but we have got to actually sit down and work together to figure out the problem of the expense and knowing how it is and where it is that we make the investment that still balances. That is the answer that I will give to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I will, and we will, work on this priority. What we can do is chew gum and walk at the same time, and that means we can go ahead and not only work on homelessness but also this bill, as important as it is. I appreciate the gentleman's concern, but believe me, our side of the aisle has just as much concern about our homeless veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Miller-Meeks).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Ciscomani), the sponsor of the main part of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bergman).

Mr. Speaker, one thing that needs to be very, very clear, the Bergman bill does not have a TEF issue, a toxic exposure fund issue. That is where the concerns are.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am going to say a couple of things that I have said on this House floor before. I am going to say them again.

The gentleman referred to our cutting veterans. Actually, we are increasing over the President's budget. We will get more into that later this week in committee.

Let me also say this, Mr. Speaker. I will repeat my plea right now that our friends on the other side of the aisle join me in developing a solution to an issue that he has decided is not anything more than a political ploy, trying to say that we are going to cut benefits by straightening this problem out.

We are not. We will not. Let me say this again on this floor: Veterans are not being cut, period.

This is a good piece of legislation. It is bipartisan.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage all the people on our side of the aisle and on both sides of the aisle to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for all of his support for these bills that not only make life better for the veterans but also for their families.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1669, the VET-TEC Authorization Act, which, as amended, includes the text of legislation I originally introduced as H.R. 234, Gerald's Law.

Gerald's Law was drafted and introduced on behalf of Gerald Elliott, a U.S. Army veteran and a resident of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, as well as on behalf of his family and the thousands of other veterans like him.

A lifelong Yooper, Jerry was a member of The American Legion Post 363 and was an active volunteer with U.P. Honor Flight and the Iron Mountain VA Hospital.

After a cancer diagnosis in 2019, Gerald received his care at the Iron Mountain VA. As the disease progressed and he was placed on hospice care, he decided to go home to enjoy his final days with his family.

Following his death, Jerry's family discovered that even though he received hospice care through the VA, his family did not qualify for burial benefits after his death; that is, burial benefits for Jerry himself. That is because under current law, VA hospice care provided at home does not qualify as a death under VA care and is, therefore, not covered under the nonservice-connected burial and plot benefit.

As a result of this quirk, if a veteran with a terminal illness wants the full burial benefit, they would be forced to die in a hospital or nursing home under the VA auspices instead of transferring to home hospice care. This is just, I am sure, a mistake. This injustice is unacceptable and unconscionable.

No veteran should worry about losing VA benefits for their family when choosing to spend their final days in the comfort of their own home. Gerald's Law will address this by extending VA burial allowance eligibility to veterans whose passing occurs at home while receiving VA hospice care if they were previously receiving VA hospital or nursing home care.

I am thankful for the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs for their work to assist the thousands of veterans and family members being denied benefits due to this legislative oversight.

H.R. 1669, which includes Gerald's Law and other bipartisan, commonsense reforms, was approved unanimously by the committee in April.

Mr. Speaker, I urge every Member of Congress, every Member of the House, to support its passage on the House floor today.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Bost for yielding me time to talk about this important bill.

I am grateful that my bill, H.R. 1669, the VET-TEC Authorization Act, is being considered today on the House floor. This bipartisan effort would extend the invaluable program for our veterans, the Veteran Employment Through Technology Education Courses, or VET-TEC program.

The VET-TEC pilot program allows eligible veterans to gain experience and training in high-demand tech jobs. Since the start of the VET-TEC program in 2019, introduced by Speaker McCarthy, over 12,000 veterans have completed the program in areas like computer programming, software development, data processing, and other in-demand careers. This is crucial to strengthening our American workforce, while enabling our vets to have a clear shot at the American Dream, a dream they have fought to protect for so many of us.

Of the veterans that completed the program, roughly 62 percent were offered a job related to the training they received, with an average salary of around $65,000 a year. These results show that the program works, and by extending the program, we will ensure veterans will be able to participate in the program in the coming years. Not only has this program been beneficial for our veterans, but it is crucial for our employers, as well. We need a skilled workforce working in the tech industry, and our veterans are the perfect fit.

I am proud to have partnered with Chairman Bost and Congressman Khanna on this legislation, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure the men and women who served our country can continue to grow in the civilian workforce, as well.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill today.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Bost for yielding me time.

As a 24-year Army veteran, I understand the importance of improving services for veterans as they transition to civilian life. VET-TEC is a pilot program that started under President Trump and was led by Speaker McCarthy. Let me repeat that. VET-TEC is a

highly popular and successful program that was started under President Trump that allows eligible veterans to use GI Bill-style benefits to attend innovative job training programs to prepare them for future employment in the technology industry.

Through this program, veterans can get training in high-demand areas, including computer software, computer programming, data processing, information science, and media applications. In addition to this, employment may help prevent and treat homelessness. We have seen 62 percent employment and $65,000 per year average salaries.

I am grateful that my colleague, Representative Ciscomani, introduced this important piece of legislation, which will help grow our economy and get veterans back to work. As a physician, it is no small aside that the dignity of working and having a purpose in life may also help improve mental health, which may also help improve homelessness.

The VET-TEC Authorization Act proves our commitment not only to maintaining funding levels but increasing support for veterans.

Last Congress, I led legislation to extend this important program, and I am proud to support this legislation today. This program has been widely popular and successful, and this is exactly the type of taxpayer-funded program that we can all support.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this important legislation.