Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. Mr. Chairman, earlier this year, the VA made a priority request for $32.5 million for urgent and necessary upgrades for the spinal cord injury unit at the Zablocki VA Medical Center in Milwaukee.…
Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
Mr. Chairman, earlier this year, the VA made a priority request for $32.5 million for urgent and necessary upgrades for the spinal cord injury unit at the Zablocki VA Medical Center in Milwaukee. However, the subcommittee mark made a point of zeroing out this project. My amendment would restore the funding for this requested priority.
Mr. Chairman, I can tell you that I am new to this body, so I was very curious as to why they would do this. Clearly the Zablocki spinal cord injury unit is not a ``bridge to nowhere.'' It is one of only 23 spinal cord injury units in the country, serving more than 500 veterans as in-patients and over 10,000 patients on an outpatient basis each year.
Nationally, there are over 44,000 veterans suffering from spinal cord injuries that are now paraplegic and quadriplegic. At such a critical time when we are at war and the number of injured soldiers continues to increase, I had to ask myself, Mr. Chairman, what are they doing and why are we doing this?
So what I did as a new Member is I went to something called the committee record, I believe, and what they said here is that they did this because this was of ``relatively low priority.''
Well, I was really confused then, Mr. Chairman, because I then checked with the budget documentation submitted by the Department of Veterans Affairs and discovered that they had listed this as their number one priority for fiscal year 2007. Further, they went on to describe the spinal cord injury unit at Zablocki as having by far received the highest score under their project scoring session.
Mr. Chairman, I don't stand under this E. Pluribus Unum boring Members on and on often. I am here because I truly am trying to understand how other projects with lower priority scores were, indeed, funded.
As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, I will submit for the Record this corroborating evidence that this indeed is a highest priority of the fiscal year 2007 projects.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $283,670,000
for Construction, Major Projects for fiscal year 2007. This
is a decrease of $690,930,000 below the fiscal year 2006
enacted level and a decrease of $115,330,000 below the budget
request. When adjusted for supplemental funding, the
recommendation is $323,430,000 below the fiscal year 2006
enacted level.
The Committee recommendation does not include funding for
refurbishment of operating rooms at the Columbia, Missouri
VAMC, and refurbishment of the Spinal Cord Injury Center at
the Milwaukee, Wisconsin VAMC, both of which are relatively
low priority projects. The estimate submitted in the budget
for the Capital Region Data Center project includes a
contingency reserve of over 25 percent, well in excess of
needs for such a project. The funding for this project is
therefore reduced by $5,000,000, leaving 12.5 percent for a
contingency reserve. The Committee recommendation includes no
funding for the replacement hospital in Denver, Colorado. The
Committee notes that less than two years ago, when original
planning funds were appropriated for the Denver facility, the
estimated total cost of the project was $328,000,000. The
current estimate for the project is in the range of
$621,000,000, almost double the previous estimate. This is
not the only instance of large cost growth for construction
projects of the Department, but this is a project at a stage
where work can be halted before significant and irreversible
financial damage is done. The Committee is concerned with the
rapid escalation in the cost of building new facilities and
cautions the Department that few, if any, projects will be
approved in the future if such costs are not brought under
control.
The Committee recommendation also includes a general
provision which places restrictions on the use of funds
previously appropriated for a new facility in Biloxi,
Mississippi. It is the Committee's direction that no funds
can be expended on a new facility unless it is a joint-use
facility shared with Kessler Air Force Base.
The specific amounts recommended by the Committee are as
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Location and description 2007 request recommendation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Veterans Health Administration [VHA]:
American Lake, WA Seismic $38,220 $38,220
Correction, NHCU & Dietetics.
Columbia, MO, OR Replacement.. 25,830 0
Denver, CO Replacement Medical 52,000 0
Center Facility..............
Long Beach, CA Seismic 97,545 97,545
Correction, Bldg. 7 & 126....
Milwaukee, WI Spinal Cord 32,500 0
Injury (SCI) Center..........
St. Louis (JB), MO Medical 7,000 7,000
Facil Improv & Cem Exp.......
Advance planning fund: Various 39,255 39,255
locations....................
Asbestos abatement: Various 5,000 5,000
locations....................
Claims Analyses: Various 2,000 2,000
locations....................
Judgment Fund: Various 2,000 2,000
locations....................
Hazardous Waste: Various 2,000 2,000
locations....................
Facility Security Fund: 4,000 4,000
Various locations............
Mr. Chairman, I do, briefly.
Mr. Chairman, I understand that I will have to concede to the point of order, but I can tell you that I did not perceive that I had to provide an offset for this funding because it was deemed as the highest, the highest, priority.