Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the heartbreaking stories my colleagues are telling about these young people coming across the border and being exploited and hurt and injured just confirm the wisdom of the approach the Republicans have taken to this problem based on common sense and long experience. It is called law enforcement. This is not complicated.

In order to protect these kids, protect the people of the United States, protect the communities along the border, we believe strongly in enforcing the existing law and in ensuring that the people of the United States are protected against the lawlessness: the drug dealers, the cartels, the smugglers, the gun runners who are coming across the border and exploiting these kids.

This is not a complicated problem. It has worked for years in Texas. We understand the border problem. It is simply a matter of law enforcement. No nation can survive that doesn't secure its borders and enforce its laws.

By enforcing the law and by bringing peace and quiet to the border, you will also ensure that free trade--that legal trade back and forth between Mexico, our biggest trading partner--can proceed as it should. Laredo is the largest inland port in the United States, and in order for businesses to do their jobs, they have got to have peace and quiet, and that means law enforcement.

That is the Republican approach to this problem. Enforce the law.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Houston Jewelry, a Houston family-owned and operated business since 1866, which has specialized in diamonds and fine jewelry since 1953. A true ``Texas Treasure,'' this jewelry store can trace its history all the way back to the family's general store on Main Street. The Donsky-Solomon family is now in its fifth generation of active management of the business.

The history of this family store mirrors that of Texas itself. What started out as a frontier general store in the young, burgeoning town of Houston, grew and matured to become one of ``America's Best Couture Jewelers'' and a multiple winner of the Better Business Bureau of Houston's Award for Excellence. Like the city of Houston, from humble beginnings, the store owned by the Donsky-Solomon family has now earned national and international recognition. From the sale of staple and fancy dry goods to fine jewelry through catalog and online sales, each generation has enhanced the business it inherited. Weathering storms, economic busts, and national depressions, Houston Jewelry has been a steadfast testament to the power of determination, innovation, and family bonds. Their contributions to Houston are unquestioned, and I wish them continued success.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, in years to come, when history books look back and ask the question why America went bankrupt, they are going to look at my colleague Ted Poe's amendment as exhibit A. It is very unfortunate that my friend and fellow Texan (Mr. Poe), who has until today portrayed himself as a fiscal conservative, would offer an amendment to force the people of my district to spend money we don't have on a project we don't want and that is unaffordable, unnecessary, and unapproved by the voters. These are my constituents, and it has no effect on Mr. Poe's district or on anyone else's district.

No, I will not yield.

The amendment is very narrowly drawn, Mr. Chairman, so that it only affects my district. I wrote this amendment because it says that no money can be spent on rail in my district. In the boundaries of District Seven, which is west of Shepherd on Richmond, and on Post Oak, north of Richmond and south Post Oak, those lines are entirely in my district.

The people of my district--I have polled them--oppose this line, and 80 percent of the folks who own property or who live or work on those two streets don't want it. The voters did not approve the line on Richmond. It was not on the ballot. The people on Post Oak do not want it. It will destroy The Galleria.

Mr. Poe is advocating for the construction of rail on Richmond and Post Oak, which will destroy those two streets. The Richmond line is not approved by the voters, and the Post Oak line will destroy that area. Houston METRO has no money to build it. They can't afford it. There is no money in this bill or in any other bill to pay for these lines. In fact, for the lines that have been approved by the voters, METRO is building a rail line on the east side of town, which I support, because the voters approved it. The local transit authority is spending $3,000 an inch to build a rail line on the east side of Houston.

This is a waste of money. We simply cannot afford it. That is why the Citizens Against Government Waste opposes Mr. Poe's amendment. That is why Americans for Tax Reform opposes Mr. Poe's amendment. That is why the National Taxpayers Union opposes Mr. Poe's amendment. The Club for Growth opposes Mr. Poe's amendment because it is amendments like this-- those attempting to force us to spend money we don't have on projects we don't want--that are completely unnecessary, of which the voters did not approve and that are going to bankrupt this Nation. Imagine if you did not want to build a pool in your backyard but that your next-door neighbor had the deed restrictions changed to force you to build a pool in your backyard. That is exactly what this amendment is.

This amendment affects only my district. I am doing my job as their Representative to protect my constituents' quality of life and to protect their pocketbooks against a rail line that we cannot afford and that nobody wants and that voters did not approve. That is why I am proud to have the help and support of Chairman Latham and of the ranking member, Mr. Pastor. Americans for Tax Reform, the National Taxpayers Union, Club for Growth, and Citizens Against Government Waste are all in opposition to this amendment as are the people whom I represent.

I am very disappointed and disheartened that my friend Mr. Poe would stand up and offer this amendment and call the Katy Freeway a concrete monstrosity. The Katy Freeway is my pride and joy. The first thing I did when I got elected to Congress was to get the Katy Freeway built without a single earmark and without any new Federal money. We got it built in 5 years and 3 months, and it went from eight lanes to 22 lanes. The economic growth on the west side has ballooned because of the Katy Freeway, and that freeway is moving more cars in less time and at more savings to taxpayers than is any other transportation project in the history of Houston.

I am proud of the Katy Freeway. I am immensely proud to represent my district. This amendment and the language in the bill affect only my district and are in complete conformity with the voters' decision in 2003. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing Mr. Poe's amendment and vote ``no.''

I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for joining me in the opposition of this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank General Eric Shinseki for his service to the Nation, as an Army general, as Secretary of the VA, and I am glad that he made the right decision today in accepting responsibility for these terrible systemic problems that we have seen throughout the VA that the inspector general has confirmed extend throughout the entire system of veterans being forced to wait for health care. It is an absolutely unacceptable situation, and General Shinseki has done the right thing by accepting responsibility as the man in charge. I urge him and the mid-level and upper-level leadership of the VA to do the right thing as well and accept responsibility.

We need to see these veterans given access to health care immediately. Every one of them is on a waiting list that has kept them from access to doctors, and they need to immediately be put into a private hospital in the VA system as quickly and as humanly possible. The Congress has given the VA all the money they need, all the authority they need, to do their job to make sure these men and women who have served our Nation and defended our freedom get access to the best medical care in the world.

I want to make sure the VA understands that the Congress is going to continue to do everything that needs to be done to ensure those veterans are taken care of.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage in a colloquy with my chairman.

I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Reclaiming my time, I join the chairman in strong opposition to this amendment. The last

thing we need to do is take resources away from our men and women in uniform on the front line defending us, enforcing our laws.

The date that the chairman mentioned, April 19, 1995, it is important to remember that was the Oklahoma City bombing, when a lot of law enforcement officers lost their lives in Oklahoma City. I urge all Members to oppose this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I wish to reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against the Grayson amendment on the ground that it constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.

The amendment does seek to change existing statutory law in a bill designed to appropriate money by amending an existing provision, adding the word ``or incest'' to the list of exceptions contained in the statute.

Making a determination whether incest has occurred is not currently required by this statutory provision and would result in a requirement that the new determination be made. So, therefore, the amendment falls outside of the standard of ``merely perfecting'' precisely because it requires a new determination that is not required under the current provision.

The amendment expands the universe of exceptions, Madam Chairman, provided for in this section, and the existing determinations of whether the life of the mother is in danger or there has been a rape do not provide the information that would allow the determination that incest has occurred.

As a result, the amendment violates clause 2 of rule XXI which states:

``An amendment to a general appropriations bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Yes, I would be glad to reserve the point of order.

Madam Chairman, I do insist on the point of order and ask the Chair for a ruling.

Parliamentary inquiry.

If I could ask the gentleman to confine his remarks to whether or not his amendment changes existing law.

Madam Chairman, when I was first assigned to the Appropriations Committee, I asked specifically to serve on the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Committee because of my passion for the sciences, for NASA, for law enforcement, but especially to serve alongside Frank Wolf.

I have come to know Frank Wolf as a model public servant. He is someone who always does the right thing for the right reasons, and the country is generally going to miss this good man. I can't think of a single issue that we have dealt with in this bill that Frank hasn't been the first to see the problem approaching over the horizon--he has recognized from the beginning.

When we took the majority several years ago, Chairman Wolf, Chairman Rogers, all of us in the majority, as fiscal conservatives, recognized the urgent need to prioritize our constituents' hard-earned tax dollars and target them on those areas that are the highest priority for our Nation.

This bill, as Chairman Rogers said, is a true reflection of Frank Wolf's priorities, the fact that it is one that we are all able to work on together, without regard to party labels, because we found common ground.

One of the great joys of serving on this committee is to find so many areas where we are able to work together and find areas of agreement when it comes to the sciences or law enforcement.

The work that Chairman Wolf has done, for example, in protecting persecuted Christians and religious minorities around the world, this committee, all of us, Democrat and Republican alike, have been there to support him.

Chairman Wolf was one of the first to spot the problem of cyber crime coming primarily out of Communist China. Frank was one of the very first to ring the firebell and warn us of the dangers of the People's Liberation Army and the cyber attacks on this Nation and on private industry. We have now recognized the scope of that problem, and it is because of Frank Wolf's leadership that we are in a position to fight it.

Frank Wolf has led the way in strengthening the FBI and their war on terrorism and fighting human slavery

around the world in this bill and in previous bills to help local law enforcement agencies clean up the backlog of rape kits, preventing abuse in our prisons, preventing the release of Guantanamo terrorists into the United States, Frank Wolf has led the way.

It was Chairman Wolf's bill to create the Select Committee on Benghazi. Anywhere he sees a problem and genuinely recognizes in his heart of hearts that that is something that is for the good of the Nation, he has been fearless about stepping forward and dealing with it.

In the area of the sciences, we see Chairman Wolf's leadership in increasing funding for the National Science Foundation and NASA and

Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of the gentleman's amendment, because as the Congress has learned today in the VA inspector general's report, quoting directly from that report:

The inspector general's review at a growing number of VA

medical facilities has confirmed that inappropriate

scheduling practices are systemic throughout veterans health

administration.

To date, our work has substantiated serious conditions at

the Phoenix health care system.

And as my colleague said, they have initiated reviews at 42 others. They have already identified an additional 1,700 veterans waiting for primary care appointments but who were not on the electronic waiting list. Until that happens, the inspector general states, the wait time is not even started.

This report is deeply, deeply disturbing, and as it comes to those individuals, my good friend from Pennsylvania is correct, there are no conclusions yet drawn about whether or not anyone died as a result of being denied access to the VA because the inspector general doesn't have enough evidence yet.

As he says in the report:

We are not reporting the results of our clinical reviews as

to whether or not someone may have as a result of a delay

died or been adversely affected while on a waiting list.

To quote the inspector general:

These assessments need to draw conclusions based on

analysis of medical records, death certificates, and autopsy

results. We have made requests to appropriate State agencies

and issued subpoenas to obtain those records. They are

gathering the information.

The gentleman's amendment is an attempt to add additional funding to the Department of Justice to pursue criminal investigations and pursue criminal charges. I sincerely hope that that does not come to pass, but we have a report right in front of us today that tells us it is headed in that direction.

The inspector general has said in this, again, preliminary report, they find that inappropriate scheduling practices are a systemic problem nationwide in the Veterans Affairs Department.

It is just appalling and unacceptable.

The VA staff at two VA medical facilities deleted consults without full consideration of the impact to patients. Multiple schedulers described to us a process they use that essentially overrides appointments to reduce the reported waiting times.

The inspector general found out that at the Phoenix health care center certain audit controls were not even enabled. This limited the ability of the Veterans Affairs Department and the inspector general to determine whether any malicious manipulation of the electronic medical records occurred.

Somebody turned off--or didn't even turn on--the audit controls that would allow a criminal investigation to determine whether or not there was a malicious intent.

This is outrageous. It is unacceptable. As chairman of the Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee I assure you that our subcommittee--I know Chairman Miller and your subcommittee and the United States Congress--is going to devote every resource, every tool, every asset at our disposal to assure veterans are given immediate access to health care. They have earned it. They deserve it. They are going to get right in immediately, whether it is a VA hospital or another hospital.

We are going to fix this problem and make sure that those that are on the waiting list are taken care of immediately. And those who have been denied care--God forbid somebody died as a result of being denied care--that is going to result in criminal charges, which is what the gentleman's amendment is intended to do--to make sure the Attorney General has the resources to follow the facts where they may lead.

We need to be careful to follow the facts. But I am quoting directly from the report. This is absolutely unacceptable. It is outrageous. This is the opportunity during this debate on this bill to add additional resources to the Attorney General's office so they can hire the investigators and attorneys that are necessary--when this inspector general's report is final--to pursue criminal charges, if they are merited.

So I strongly support the gentleman's amendment. This is another arrow in our quiver to do everything in our power to protect the health and well-being of the men and women of this country who have served us so well in defending our freedom and our prosperity.

I urge all of us to support the chairman's amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on consideration of H.R. 4486, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

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

It is a real honor and a privilege for me to present the Veterans Affairs and Military Construction Appropriations bill to the House of Representatives with my good friend from Georgia, Sanford Bishop.

This is a bipartisan bill that we produced together with unanimous support of the committee and the subcommittee to ensure that our veterans and our men and women in uniform have everything that they need to do their job with complete peace of mind.

In fact, I often think of the job of this subcommittee as the peace of mind subcommittee, to be sure that our men and women in uniform have everything they need when it comes to their physical infrastructure and that, when they leave the services and go into the VA system, they have everything they need.

Making sure that our men and women in uniform have everything that they need and making sure that our veterans when they leave the service have the best possible medical care this country can provide is one of those fundamental functions of the government. We have an obligation as guardians of the Treasury and as good stewards of taxpayers' hard- earned dollars to ensure that this vital, core function of our Federal Government is fulfilled to our veterans and to our men and women in uniform.

In this appropriations bill, we have included $71.5 billion in discretionary funding, which is $1.8 billion less than last year and $398 million less than the budget request. We have provided the full budget request number of $6.6 billion for military construction projects, and while we have provided $1.8 billion less in fiscal year '14, we have included $64.7 billion in discretionary funding for the VA, which is about $1.5 billion more than last year. We have included an additional $20 million to get at the claims backlog and $17 million more than was requested for electronic medical records.

In this legislation, we are ensuring that we have continued strict oversight of the VA in their reporting requirements on the claims backlog. The length of time it takes veterans to receive the disability benefits that they have earned is just unacceptable, so Mr. Bishop and I have included language in this bill to have very strict reporting requirements over which we will continue to exercise vigorous oversight in the months ahead at the VA to ensure that the claims backlog is reduced.

We are also introducing a mechanism here that we have found to be very, very effective in the case of electronic

health records. The VA and the Department of Defense are operating two completely different medical record systems that don't talk to each other. So, when you are in uniform in the Armed Forces and leave and go into the private sector and when the VA picks you up, the VA can't read your medical records. This is unacceptable. Since 2008, the Congress has had laws on the books that require the VA and the Department of Defense to have transparent, interoperable medical records that would be easily and quickly readable when a servicemember leaves the active service and goes into the VA system. Yet they are still not there, so we have in this bill a mechanism that says you are only going to get 25 percent of your money up front on implementing electronic health records until you come back to the committee and show us that you are meeting your obligation under the law to provide an immediate, seamless, and transparent transfer of your medical records from the Department of Defense to the VA.

In particular, I want to thank Chairman Rogers for his support in this effort. He had a constituent of whom I am confident he will talk about in a minute--a young man in his district who really struck a chord with me. It is a tragic example of how unacceptable this is, that one agency can't read the medical records of the other. He is a young man who was injured. He lost his eyesight, I believe, Mr. Chairman, in Afghanistan. He had the vision in one eye lost, but had damage in the other eye. He still had some vision in the other eye, so when he left the service to go into the VA and when the VA needed to work on his other eye immediately in order to save his vision, the VA could not read the medical records provided to them by the Department of Defense. The doctors at the VA, understandably being cautious and concerned and being unable to read the records, didn't operate as quickly as they should have, and the young man lost his eyesight as a result of the medical records being unreadable by the VA. It is tragic, unacceptable, and utterly outrageous.

I am working closely with the chairman of the armed services Appropriations subcommittee. Chairman Rogers has been terrifically helpful in this as has Ranking Member Lowey and my good friend Mr. Bishop from Georgia. We are working with the armed services subcommittee in Appropriations to put identical language in the bill so that the DOD is in the same boat.

You are going to have to earn your money. Prove to us that you are obeying the law, that you are fulfilling your obligation to our veterans and to our men and women in uniform, and then we will release the money. Follow the law and you will get your money. It works every time in the private sector. Certainly, I am confident that it is going to work here. I often think of the fact that I have been using an Apple Macintosh computer since they first came out in 1985. I never dreamed that you would be able to use a Windows operating system on a Macintosh computer, but, today, you can run Microsoft Word and other Windows programs on a Macintosh operating system. Surely, if Apple and Windows can work it out, the VA and the Department of Defense can as well. This bill ensures that that is going to happen. If they want to see the rest of their money, they are going to have to obey the law and get an interoperable, transparent medical records system in place.

Mr. Chairman, we have also limited the availability of construction funds in this bill to 5 years for hospitals that the VA builds so that the veterans don't have to wait endlessly for the completion of a hospital. I will never forget when I first got this marvelous assignment--I was assigned by Chairman Rogers to handle this important bill--that the Denver hospital had $900 million, I believe, set aside, squirreled away in a hole. I don't think they had signed a contract or turned a spade of dirt, but they had $900 million squirreled away for years--that they had not used--in order to build that sorely needed hospital in Denver. That is just unacceptable.

This money that we are privileged to be stewards of was earned by our constituents by the sweat of their brow and their hard work, and it is our responsibility to ensure that the money is wisely spent, that it is spent to ensure that the law is enforced and, above all, that we do not spend any more than is absolutely necessary to fulfill the fundamental obligations of the United States Government. At the top of that list is to ensure that our veterans receive the medical care they have earned, that they receive the disability benefits in a timely fashion that they have earned, and that our men and women in uniform have all of the physical facilities they need to do their jobs with the peace of mind and the assurance that the United States Congress and the American taxpayers are right there with them, looking over their shoulders, to take care of them.

That is why this is the ``peace of mind'' committee, and it is a privilege for me to serve with my good friend from Georgia (Mr. Bishop). So that my good friend Mr. Bishop can address the House, I reserve the balance of my time.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH30AP14.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH30AP14.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH30AP14.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH30AP14.004

Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Kentucky, Chairman Rogers, the distinguished chairman of the full committee.

Mr. Chairman, if I could ask how much time do we have remaining in this part of the debate?

Mr. Chairman, I have the pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), the chairman of the Defense Subcommittee.

I yield the gentleman such time as he may consume.

Mr. Chairman, at this time it is my privilege to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby), a member of our subcommittee who does a superb job representing her constituents.

Mr. Chairman, can I ask how much time we have remaining?

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

Mr. Chairman, I want to be sure to acknowledge and thank my friend, Mr. Cuellar, from Laredo. We have been good friends and served together in the Texas House. I am sure he remembers the appropriations committee in the Texas House. And we understand the value of the power of the purse.

We are indeed using the power of the purse to achieve the goals that Mr. Cuellar has just mentioned, that is, ensuring the claims backlog is dealt with and that the Department of Defense and the VA have an interoperable medical record.

There really is no more powerful check and balance that the legislative branch has over the executive branch than the power of the purse, which originates in the House.

Article 1, section 9 says that no money may be drawn from the Treasury, except by appropriations.

We are working together arm-in-arm, just as we did in the Texas House, in support of our veterans and military.

In fact, we also have found great common ground when it comes to law enforcement on the border, something that his folks in Laredo have a keen interest in: safe streets, good schools, a strong economy. And that all begins with law enforcement.

I want to thank the gentleman from Laredo because it has been a pleasure working with him on so many of these good issues.

We could have not gotten to this spot, Mr. Chairman, without the help of the committee staff. We have got an extraordinary group of people who have made this possible. The Appropriations Committee is blessed to have had professionals here who have helped us for years.

I want to particularly thank Donna Shabazz, Sue Quantius, and Sarah Young, and make sure that we also recognize the extraordinary contributions by Matt Washington and Tracey Russell.

This has really been a team effort. It is an extraordinary complex piece of legislation to ensure that not only the money that our taxpayers have worked so hard to earn is wisely spent, but that the agencies that are the beneficiaries of these hard-earned tax dollars understand that with the receipt of this money comes the obligation to ensure that it is spent wisely. We are going to continue with aggressive oversight.

When it comes to oversight, Mr. Chairman, I also want to mention that

we are going to have an amendment later today by the Congresswoman from Phoenix to deal with this really deeply concerning situation that we have seen arise in the Phoenix VA where you have got a doctor claiming that folks have lost their lives. They were unable to get access to the medical care they have earned from their medical service at the Phoenix hospital.

That is another way to enforce the law. With additional funding, we are going to use the inspector general's office to investigate this and find out what is actually going on. In that case, if there has been deliberate or intentional refusal to admit veterans to the VA hospital in Phoenix, there are going to be criminal charges.

Certainly, our heart goes out to those families in Phoenix. We are all committed to make sure that any veteran, any member of the military who has served this country, has immediate access to the best medical care in the world.

And that is why this is such a bipartisan bill and one that we offer to the House today, arm-in-arm. Both the gentleman from Georgia and the people of Texas that I represent were pleased to present this to the House and encourage the Members to support it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I join Mr. Bishop in urging the House to approve this legislation, and I agree with him wholeheartedly about making sure that any check--any check that our veterans have earned doesn't ever come back with insufficient funds.

It is one of the fundamental obligations of the Federal Government to ensure that our veterans are taken care of, they are given everything they need while they serve and they are in uniform, but then also that they are given access to the best medical care the country can provide to them once they enter into the private sector.

We have, in this legislation, given everything that the veterans have asked us for. We have made sure that the VA is fully funded, but we are using the power of the purse to ensure that the law is obeyed. We are making sure that our constituents' hard-earned tax dollars are spent wisely and frugally and carefully and that they actually reach the veterans who need them the most.

We are in an extraordinary era, Mr. Chairman. Survival rates are higher than they have ever been for our men and women in uniform. If they are lucky enough to survive their initial injury and make it to an aid station, the survival rate is in excess of 98, 99 percent.

It is absolutely extraordinary, the blessings of modern medicine. The work that the VA has been doing in prosthetics and helping these young men and women recover from their injuries is extraordinary.

This is our first obligation as a government, is to ensure that the men and women who make it possible for us to be here in a free society and debate legislation like this, that they are given everything that they have earned by their service to the country.

An important part of this is to be sure that we are also talking to our constituents about the budget problems that lie ahead of us and the importance of making sure that the social safety net, the social safety net that is out there--Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid--those programs remain solvent.

They are, right now, headed into bankruptcy, and we have got to make sure that we deal with those bigger problems for the longer term, so that we can continue to fully fund the needs of our veterans and our men and women in uniform.

It truly has been a privilege for me to work on this subcommittee with my friend from Georgia (Mr. Bishop). The State of Georgia and the State of Texas--I feel a special kinship with the people of Georgia because they have a commitment to the military that is commensurate to that of the people of Texas.

We both admire our men and women in uniform immensely, and this is a piece of legislation that our folks back home, Mr. Chairman, may not see much disagreement, but that is because we are, all of us, so strongly in support of making sure that our men and women in uniform can focus on their mission and protect this Nation with complete peace of mind.

I urge all the Members of the House to support this legislation which is presented to them by the unanimous vote of the subcommittee and the full committee.

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

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I want to rise in strong support of this amendment, and I thank my colleague from Georgia for working with us and making sure that we get this done.

We are long overdue for an antiballistic missile site in the continental United States, here on the east coast in particular.

My good friend from Ohio (Mr. Turner) is absolutely right. We face an increased threat environment. That is putting it mildly.

The North Koreans, who are still at war with us--we are only under an armistice in North Korea. The North Koreans have demonstrated that they actually have a nuclear weapon in hand.

Visual satellite observers--I am an amateur astronomer, and as a member of a group of amateur observers of artificial satellites, one of the members of our network actually observed and tracked the North Korean intercontinental ballistic missile overflying the United States December 12 of 2012.

That is the first time the North Koreans had demonstrated the ability to actually fly an intercontinental ballistic missile payload over the United States. That missile flew over Pensacola, Florida, Mr. Chairman. It came up from the south and flew over the southeastern United States and exited the United States over Michigan. So the North Koreans have already demonstrated they have got the ability to deliver a nuclear weapon to the United States. So it is imperative that we move immediately to design and build an antiballistic missile site on the east coast of the United States.

I want to compliment my good friend from Ohio for bringing us this amendment, and it is my privilege to support it. I urge the adoption of the amendment and urge the Department of Defense to build this antiballistic missile site as fast as humanly possible.

I yield back the balance of my time.

It would be my privilege.

Will the gentleman yield?

I want to assure my good friend from Florida, Chairman Mica, that I look forward to working with you to ensure that the VA does complete its independent study of this facility, and I hope that report is going to come back and show the continued need for the Baldwin Park facility.

I will work closely with you, sir, to make certain that the Veterans Administration does everything in its power to support the results of the independent study and work to keep that facility open.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Yes, of course, I completely agree with you that one of the fundamental obligations of the United States of America is to ensure that these men and women who have served their country have earned that piece of earth as a convenient and dignified final resting place.

I completely agree with you, Mr. Lamborn, that this project is too far along, and it is important that we fund it in fiscal year 2016, and I will work with you and your colleagues from Colorado to ensure it is funded.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment and urge my colleagues to adopt it. I am, as we all are, appalled, mortified, and heartsick over these reports out of the Phoenix VA. It is appalling to think that any veteran who has served our country would be denied access to medical care, much less lose their life or have permanent damage to their health.

I cannot imagine the agony these families are going through, so therefore the amendment is a good idea to give an additional $1 million to the inspector general, who is capable of conducting the type of investigation necessary to determine what actually happened here. In the instant, if there does, indeed, appear to be deliberate, intentional refusal to put these folks into the VA system, there will be criminal charges, and we will make sure of that. We will make sure that if anyone has been denied service, they are held accountable for it.

It is an appalling set of circumstances genuinely. It is a terrible reflection on all the good men and women, the doctors, and the health care professionals that work throughout the VA system do, do their best to provide top quality medical care to our veterans as they come out of Active Duty service to the country.

So we are anxious to see what the facts are and criminal charges be pressed if, indeed, it turns out to be as we have seen in the press, so I strongly support the amendment and urge Members to adopt it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. Along with the electronic medical records, there is no more important thing this committee and this Congress can do to help our veterans to ensure the rapid disposal of this terrible backlog in disability claims.

I fully support the amendment. It builds on the $20 million increase we have already provided in the bill. I assure my colleagues that Mr. Bishop and I will continue to exercise aggressive oversight to ensure the money is

spent wisely and carefully to reduce the backlog and that the VA meet their deadlines to get the backlog disposed of as quickly as humanly possible.

I support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment.

This is something that we have all worked together arm in arm and welcome the additional resources with the assurance to our employers-- the taxpayers--that we will provide aggressive oversight and ensure that the money is actually used to reduce the backlog as fast as humanly possible and, above all, to enforce the law because the greatest check and balance we have as guardians of the Treasury and good stewards of our taxpayers' hard-earned tax dollars is the power of the purse.

I welcome the gentleman's amendment and look forward to supporting it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Will the gentleman yield?

Yes, I have. It is an ongoing problem trying to get any of the agencies to tell you what their administrative costs are. It is extraordinarily important. I really appreciate you bringing it to our attention. We are going to continue to work on this with you and other Members to ensure that our constituents' hard-earned tax dollars are spent wisely.

Mr. Chair, if the gentleman will yield, I would point out I have a software application on here called Dragon Naturally Speaking. You just talk into it and it transcribes it instantly. As we used to say, ``Get with the nineties,'' get with the modern era and just download a few apps on the computers.

We will bird-dog them relentlessly. That is absurd.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

We have presented this piece of legislation to the House in a bipartisan fashion. We have got unanimous support for it. This is one of those areas where we have an honest but earnest philosophical disagreement.

This is something my good friend from Virginia (Mr. Moran), has been pursuing over the years, but it is, again, something the constituents I represent, the folks of Texas, I know oppose the idea of giving constitutional rights to enemy soldiers captured on foreign battlefields, especially these cowardly terrorists who hide behind women and children and launch sneak attacks against our men and women in uniform.

We have asked the Congressional Research Service to attempt to tell us when, if ever, constitutional rights have been granted to enemy soldiers captured on foreign battlefields. The Congressional Research Service tells us the only example they can find is Manuel Noriega, the dictator of Panama, who was captured during the Bush 41 administration and brought to trial in Florida.

The individuals at Guantanamo Bay are the most dangerous, radical individuals that have been captured during the war on terror. These folks are extremely dangerous.

Any evidence that has been gathered, for example, even if they were to be transferred to the United States and given a criminal trial under the Constitution, which I strenuously object to, but even if they were brought to the United States and put on trial, how would any of the evidence gathered against them in Guantanamo be used to convict them?

So this presents unsurmountable problems and is a divisive issue that is going to cause a tremendous amount of disagreement among the Members of Congress on a bill that has enjoyed unanimous and enthusiastic support from everyone in this body to make sure that our veterans and our men and women in uniform are taken care of.

It is essential that this amendment be defeated in order to make sure that enemy soldiers are not given the protections of the United States Constitution. It is fundamentally something I strenuously disagree with, as do my constituents, and I urge the Members of this House to reject this amendment. And I hope to also have the support of the people of Georgia in opposing this amendment as well.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. Many Members have also requested language that would ban performance bonuses for senior-level executives at the VA in response to the concerns Mr. Rothfus has just mentioned.

I join him in grieving for those veterans who lost their lives as a result of the Legionnaires' disease outbreak. My heart goes out to them and their families.

The authorizing committees have, indeed, as Mr. Rothfus says, taken action on this issue. The GI Bill Tuition Fairness Act of 2013 that passed in February contains a 5-year ban on performance bonuses for VA Senior Executive Service employees.

In February, the Chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee introduced legislation that would give the VA Secretary complete authority to fire or demote Veterans Affairs senior executive employees based on performance. That is a sorely needed performance tool that the VA Secretary, I know, will use.

Mr. Chairman, we have also included language in our report reiterating that the Secretary of the VA already has all the authority they need to reward employees for good performance and withhold rewards for poor performance, just like the private sector.

That is a question I specifically asked during our hearing with the VA Secretary, and we have established that from the Secretary's own testimony, reaffirmed that in our bill itself.

The Secretary demonstrated his commitment to linking awards to performance when he withheld awards for everyone in the Veterans Benefit Administration last year because the claims backlog targets have not been met.

This is, I believe, an important amendment. I support it and urge the Members of the House to support it to send a clear signal to the VA that the Members of the United States Congress are unhappy with their performance, and they need to step it up.

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

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part, Mr. Chairman, that an amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law, and the amendment in this case requires a new determination.

I would ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment because, even though I am a strong believer in the 10th Amendment and public health and public safety is reserved to the States under the 10th Amendment, here we are talking about Federal facilities.

Marijuana is prohibited under Federal law. Any Federal facility funded with Federal dollars--I think it is entirely appropriate that it continue to be prohibited on a Federal facility. This is an issue that should be left to the States.

Nothing is prohibiting a veteran from seeking medical attention in a State where this is legal or where medical marijuana is permitted. They can certainly go to a private physician. Frankly, in the States where it is legal, in some of these States, I think they are even working on vending machines for them.

I understand the gentleman's position, but again, these are Federal facilities funded with Federal dollars. It is prohibited under Federal law, and it is an issue best left to the States.

I think we would all do better as a Congress to honor the 10th Amendment and leave those issues involving public health and public safety to the States. We ought to focus on the issues specifically delegated to the Federal Government by the Constitution and leave the vast majority of issues in the hands of voters, their local elected officials, and State officials. This is certainly one of them.

When it comes to a federally-funded facility, I think it is appropriate that

the VA has a policy against their doctors prescribing or recommending the use of a substance that is prohibited under Federal law. If they need it, they can go to States where it is permitted. I urge Members to oppose the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

Very quickly, we are talking about those States where it is already permitted--either medical marijuana is in Colorado, and I think Washington State has already permitted it.

It is a 10th Amendment issue. It is something that is left up to the States, but we are talking about federally-funded facilities, and that is the concern here, in a federally-funded facility, where it is illegal under Federal law, that is the problem.

This is a federally-funded facility.

Because it is prohibited by Federal law.

Will the gentleman yield?

That is absolutely a valid issue for the States to take up. We should all honor the 10th Amendment. The Constitution delegates limited powers to the Congress. If it crosses State lines, interstate commerce, that is a valid Federal concern. If it is using Federal dollars, that is a valid Federal concern.

But that debate, you are exactly right, should be held at the State level. When it comes to police powers, public health, public safety, that is reserved to the States under the 10th Amendment, and I would absolutely agree; but in a Federal facility, that is different.

That is using Federal dollars to talk about a substance that is prohibited under Federal law. I have a problem with that.

I would simply point out that a Federal employee who is paid with Federal tax dollars is obligated to follow Federal law.

It is prohibited under Federal law.

My point is simply that a Federal employee drawing his paycheck from Federal tax dollars obviously is obligated to follow Federal law.

Marijuana is prohibited under Federal law, and that is my point.

I urge Members to oppose the amendment for that reason.

Certainly.

Will the gentleman yield?

Absolutely. Of course. I look forward to working with you and your office.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and, therefore, constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.

The rules states in pertinent part that an amendment to a general appropriations bill shall not be in order if it changes existing law.

This amendment, Mr. Chairman, requires a new determination, and I would ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise and report the bill back to the House with sundry amendments, and with the recommendation that the amendments be agreed to and that the bill, as amended, do pass.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9 a.m. tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 637 a vote on ordering the previous question, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 638 a vote on approving the resolution, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 639 a vote on approving the journal, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Thank you, Chairman Carter.

Mr. Speaker, the question we are about to vote on is very simple: Do you support--yes or no--fully funding our law enforcement officers on the border and our Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officers?

This is not complicated. It is not anything more complicated than we are, as the majority in the House, seeking to find areas of agreement. Common sense and common courtesy and any negotiations require that you find areas of agreement that are absolutely essential, set those aside, and move on to the issues where you may have some disagreement.

This is not complicated. Yes or no, do you support fully funding our Border Patrol agents and our Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents? That is the only issue before us.

We have, as a Congress, already fully funded our military. We made sure that our men and women in uniform were paid. We have already, in this House, set aside funds to make sure that our veterans are paid. We passed legislation to ensure that they receive all the benefits that they have earned by their service to the country.

Any negotiation--anyone, anywhere in the country--if you have a disagreement, you find areas where you can agree that are very important and you get those behind you, and then you get to those areas where there are disagreements.

There are fundamental important differences that are a core principle to us as constitutional conservatives. We do not want to participate in bankrupting the United States of America. We do not want to participate in socializing the greatest health care system the Nation has ever and the world has ever created. We will not idly stand by and allow our children and grandchildren to inherit such a crushing level of debt and taxation that they cannot afford and their quality of life will be diminished. These are matters of core principle to us.

Our right to be left alone as Americans is, I think, one of our most important. Certainly, Texans feel that way. But, first and foremost, we believe in law enforcement. We believe in supporting our military, and we urge our colleagues to vote with us today to enforce the law.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 370, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 72) making continuing appropriations for veterans benefits for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on House Joint Resolution 72, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

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

We bring before the House today, Madam Speaker, legislation that will ensure that our veterans are given the benefits that they have earned and that there's no delay in the processing of disability claims.

Madam Speaker, the other day, President Obama gave us a list of things that are important and vital that the Nation do to make sure that there is no interruption in services. In particular, we as a Congress, as a House want to make sure that our veterans are taken care of. Everything they have earned through their service to their country, we want to make certain it is taken care of.

This legislation before us today is essential because the VA has told us that funds for these benefits will run out by the end of this month. So it's essential we pass this legislation right now.

Although the Veterans Health Administration is funded a year in advance, we have to pass this legislation today, Madam Speaker, to ensure that veterans and their survivors receive disability compensation benefits.

We have to pass this legislation today to make sure that 517,000 low- income veterans and their family members receive their pensions. We have to pass this legislation today unanimously so that three-quarters of a million students will receive their post- 9/11 GI education benefits. We need to pass this legislation today, Madam Speaker, so that 54,000 unemployed veterans will be able to be eligible for training assistance through the veterans retraining assistance program.

Finally, Madam Speaker, we also have to make sure we get this legislation passed so that 67,000 veterans with service-connected disabilities receive their vocational rehabilitation and employment subsistence allowances.

It's also important to note that this legislation will provide $223 million for cemetery headstones and burial plot allowances that our veterans by their service to our Nation have earned.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege at this time to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Madam Speaker, the only question before the House tonight is: Will we unite to support our veterans?

I am pleased, at this time, to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Roe).

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

I want to first say that today we've had a reminder again of how much we owe our men and women in uniform. And I want to express the gratitude of the Members of the House, the people of America to our men and women in uniform who keep our streets safe every day, and say that our hearts and our prayers are with those injured officers today, and to express our immense gratitude to each and every one of them all over the country and to our men and women in uniform around the world who make it possible for us to be here today in the greatest deliberative democracy ever created in the history of humanity. We owe it all to our men and women in uniform.

Moment of Silence for Officers Injured Today

Madam Speaker, I ask for a moment of silent prayer for those officers who have been injured today.

Madam Speaker, we are here today to work arm-in-arm in support of our men and women in uniform. I'm pleased at this time to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Roe).

Madam Speaker, at this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that, today, the only question before the House today is a ``yes'' or ``no'' vote whether or not you support funding our veterans.

This is not complicated. The Veterans Administration has said they will run out of money unless we pass this legislation today to make certain that our veterans who have earned these important benefits receive them.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Southerland).

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

I will remind all Members that the Veterans Administration has said that funds for these benefits will expire at the end of this month. Anytime you have a disagreement, you try to find those areas where you can agree and that are especially important, and set those aside. That's what we're doing today.

The House majority has brought this bill to the floor to ensure that our veterans and their survivors will receive their disability compensation. A ``yes'' vote will ensure that low-income veterans and their families get their pensions. A ``yes'' vote will ensure three-

quarters of a million students will receive their post-9/11 GI education benefits, that unemployed veterans will receive their benefits, and that 67,000 veterans with service-connected disabilities will get their vocational rehabilitation and employment subsistence benefits that they have earned by their service to the country.

Again, I stress the VA has said these benefits will run out at the end of this month. So we've chosen what is our highest priority, looking at our men and women in uniform--an area we are in complete agreement on--and brought it to the floor in good faith. We hope our colleagues will join us in voting ``yes'' or ``no'' in support of our veterans.

At this time I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).

Mr. LaMALFA I want to thank my colleague from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, we are here to honor our veterans--all Americans--for their job by the work we do here. It's been shameful the last few days to have our veterans come all the way to Washington, D.C.--our World War II veterans and some of the Korean veterans we've met as well--and find themselves blockaded unnecessarily out of what is theirs over the politics of a shutdown.

Now the politics of this shutdown come into this room here. We don't always get to do the perfect bill around this place. I see my Democrat colleagues basically yelling at us over, We want the perfect bill, we want it all in one.

When we can find the things we agree on, including this bill, including other measures put up in the last couple of days, we can all agree on this portion of any CR bill together. We can put this out and stop the hijinx, stop the politics, stop the games, and get this agreement done.

We all agree on this piece of legislation, that it should be done and it's the right thing. It will get veterans served and get them out of this mess, out of this pool of muck that we are in, fighting over this CR, fighting over this shutdown.

So let's agree today to get our veterans served and take the political football out, take the name-calling out--Republicans, Democrats, all that stuff--and get the job done. We're here to get the job done. On my farm, I don't want to get everything done in one day. You make progress a little bit at a time, one field at a time.

This is one field at a time here. We can do this bill. Instead of holding each other hostage because the Democrats want the perfect all- in-one-bill, we can do the pieces we agree on together.

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

I would simply point out very quickly there are no cuts in this bill. We're simply funding essential veterans services through December 15 at a level equal to the amount that we have already passed out of the House the first week of June. There are no cuts.

We want to make sure these essential services continue for our veterans and they don't see any interruption in services.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I want to point out very quickly, we are funding the most essential parts of the Veterans Administration, where we have been told they will run out of money within the next 30 days. We want to ensure that our veterans don't have a thing to worry about. We don't want their families, their children, their survivors to worry for one moment whether or not their benefits are going to be there.

We bring this bill to the floor today to ensure that they are taken care of, their peace of mind is secured. And also, this is clearly one of those areas--in support of our veterans--where we can agree.

Again, I stress, common courtesy and common sense tell us when you have a disagreement, you find those areas where you can come together and agree and put that behind you. That's all this is. It's not complicated.

Let's vote together today to make sure that our veterans programs are fully funded.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, could I inquire how much time is remaining.

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

It's important to remember that as we have done in the House and the Senate has done by unanimous consent, we have paid our Active Duty military. Their salaries are paid. So they don't have to worry about it as they stand on the walls of Rome in defense of our freedom.

Today, we bring this legislation to the floor to be sure that past generations of our military men and women who have served this country and defended our freedom and made it possible for us to be here today, that their benefits are fully funded.

We've been told straight up by the VA that the items that are before the House today will run out of money before the end of this month. This is not complicated. It truly is common sense and common courtesy to find those areas of agreement, set those aside, do those in priority order.

We've made sure the current generation of military men and women are paid. We're now, today, making sure that our veterans of previous generations are fully compensated for survivor benefits, for low-income veterans, for student 9/11 GI benefits, for unemployed veterans. We're going to make sure that veterans with service-connected disabilities are taken care of.

What we attempted to do--and as my colleague from Georgia knows, we've always worked arm-in-arm in support of those veterans--is to find those areas where the help is needed most urgently and to set that aside and get 'er done now before these benefits run out.

And the vote today is very simple: yes or no, will you vote to support America's veterans and honor them for their sacrifice and make sure they don't miss a minute, that there's no bubble in the pipeline of the benefits that they have earned by their sacrifices for this great Nation.

This is a simple yes-or-no vote in support of our veterans.

I urge passage of the legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's motion.

Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order that the instructions contained in the motion violate clause 7 of rule XVI, which requires that an amendment be germane to the bill under consideration.

As the Chair recently ruled on October 2, 2013, the instructions contain a special order of business within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules. Therefore, the amendment is not germane to the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I insist on my point of order.

Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the appeal on the table.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 72) making continuing appropriations for veterans benefits for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous materials on House Joint Resolution 72, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

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

Throughout human history, whenever there has been disagreement in ages, ages past, that has been settled with armed conflict. But in a civilized world, we settle those disputes in an amicable way under the law.

In this remarkable House Chamber, we are surrounded by images of great lawmakers from throughout human history. It is, I think, incumbent upon us as lawmakers, as civilized human beings, to use a little common courtesy and common sense to find areas of agreement and set those aside, get those behind us, and then move on to those areas where it is more difficult to find agreement.

In the House of Representatives, the constitutional conservative majority in the House has attempted to do so many times here over the last several weeks. When it comes to funding the government, the House of Representatives has sought to do so and, in fact, has done our job.

In the first week of June, the House of Representatives passed legislation to fully fund the Department of Defense. In the first week of June, the House of Representatives passed legislation to fully fund our Department of Veterans Affairs and Military Construction requirements of our men and women in uniform around the world.

We also made sure in the first month of the summer that the House of Representatives passed legislation to fully fund the Department of Homeland Security and sent that to the Senate as well. We have even passed an appropriations bill to fund the departments of the government that are responsible for the Department of Energy and the Department of Water. That legislation was also passed out of the House this summer and sent to the Senate.

It is common courtesy and just common sense that where you have a disagreement, you sit down and you work it out. If you've got serious disagreements, you, again, find those areas where both sides can agree there is common ground and put those behind us.

What better place to start, Mr. Speaker, than with the veterans who have served our Nation in defense of our freedom who make it possible for us to enjoy the prosperity, the liberty passed on to us by our ancestors. It is a real privilege for me to serve with my good friend from Georgia (Mr. Bishop) and my colleagues on this subcommittee for appropriating funds for the operation of the Veterans Affairs and Military Construction to be sure that our veterans receive everything that they have earned for the sacrifices they have made on behalf of this Nation.

So we have brought the bill to the floor today as an obvious area of agreement in support of our veterans to ensure that not only are their health benefits taken care of, which under current law they are a year in advance, but we are here today to ensure, to absolutely guarantee, that there is no interruption to the veterans who are applying for disability compensation.

We have had a terrible backlog in disability claims that the committee has worked together arm in arm in a bipartisan way to ensure that it is fully funded. We included in our bill, which was sent to the Senate in the first week of June, language that would ensure that the Veterans Administration lives up to their own deadlines on handling those disability claims.

But the legislation before us today would also ensure that veterans receive on-time compensation for their pensions, for their post-9/11 education training, and employment assistance. Again, common courtesy and common sense compels us to do what is right by our veterans to find those areas of agreement.

We bring this bill to the floor today, Mr. Speaker, in order to ensure that these veterans are fully protected, that they have a transition into civilian life that is as easy as humanly possible, and that they don't encounter any delays as they move into civilian life.

This bill, as the other does, provides funding through December 15 for VA disability claims, education, and employment benefits and provides $2.5 billion for claims processing to make sure that we are getting at the claims backlog.

I look forward to hearing from my colleague from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), and reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I think it's important to point out that, as I said earlier, with any disagreement, you find those areas in which you are in agreement. You come to an agreement and make sure you get the most important things done first and set them aside. The House and the Senate have actually done that.

We note that our military has been paid. Legislation to fully pay for our military was passed by unanimous consent in the Senate, and it was passed out of this House. I would also reiterate that the House has done its job in

funding our veterans in passing this legislation in the first week of June and in funding our Department of Defense in the first week of June. We have done our part.

This shutdown that we face today is a deliberate result of the Senate's refusal to take action on the legislation that we sent them over 90 days ago, and that's why we are bringing this bill to the floor today, because this is one area in which we can all agree. Our veterans have earned our help, and they deserve our help. It is our duty to pass this bill as quickly as possible to ensure no interruption in the services that they have earned by their service to this Nation.

At this time, Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Nunnelee).

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that the only people who would be holding our veterans hostage would be those who would vote ``no'' against this legislation which we have brought to the floor today in an earnest, honest, commonsense, courteous way to ensure that our veterans are given everything they need for the service they have given this country.

It is my privilege at this time to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), who is the chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, can you tell me how much time I have remaining?

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Salmon).

Mr. Speaker, there's only one question before the House tonight: Will we unify in support of our veterans and ensure their peace of mind for themselves, their families, and their survivors, that they don't miss a moment of the benefits that they've so rightly earned?

At this time, it's my privilege to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Benishek).

Mr. Speaker, the only question before the House tonight is whether we will unite and fund the veterans who have served this Nation. That is the only question before us.

And at this time, it's my privilege to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bentivolio), a veteran of Vietnam and Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).

Mr. Speaker, if I could inquire how much time remains.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time we have remaining on each side.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, it's my privilege to yield our remaining 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Cotton), a distinguished Army Ranger who served this Nation both in Iraq and Afghanistan, to close.

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

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