Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, our job description is ``Representative,'' and we are reelected every year to come to change the law, no matter what might have happened in previous Congresses.

Today, in a few hours, the Nation is going to see the constitutional conservative majority in the House stay true to our word to our districts and to our Nation to stand on principle. We will have the courage of our convictions to do what we need to do to slow down this destructive law that was rammed through this House in less than 24 hours--so rapidly that even Speaker Pelosi said we had to pass the law to find out what was in it.

We are elected every Congress to come back and try to change the law. But today, the Nation will see the courage of the conviction of the constitutional conservatives that are in the majority in this House doing our job for our districts and our Nation. We will be 100 percent unified in this effort because we're standing on principle.

Mr. Speaker, the Democrat side of the aisle can say it until they're blue in the face that the sky is green. That doesn't make it green. It is not true.

This legislation is designed to keep the government open by fully funding it at levels that the Senate has already agreed to.

I think it's also good to get a few other things straight around here and point out that Social Security checks, even in the unlikeliest event the government were to close down, will continue to flow because employees of all mandatory programs administered by the government are considered to be essential. Social Security checks are obviously essential. Those employees are essential. Social Security will continue to flow.

My colleague from Texas said that children would be thrown off of their parents' insurance policies. That law took effect last year. It's not affected by what's before the House today. My colleague also said children or people with preexisting conditions could be denied coverage. That is also incorrect, because that law took effect last year.

The bill before the House today fully funds the government. We are even separately funding the military, and we are going to give a stark choice to the President of the United States and the Senate: Do you want to shut down the government or do you want to force on the American people a 2,500-page bill that was forced through here so fast that Speaker Pelosi said that we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it?

One of my colleagues from North Carolina just pointed out that many Americans are waking up today to discover there is a 3.8 percent tax on the sales of their homes. How many other surprises do we have in this 2,500-page bill?

All Republicans are asking tonight is to give the Nation a year to study a 2,500-page bill that even Speaker Pelosi didn't have a clue as to what was in it. We as a Nation deserve to read and understand one of the most important pieces of legislation passed in the history of Congress--which will socialize the greatest health care system ever created. We are in the House tonight, fulfilling our responsibility as adults to fund the government, to fund the military--and by the way, the Senate has had the Defense Department appropriations bill for over 90 days and the Military Construction and VA for 90 days each.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, as we say in Texas, it's time to get a few things straight around here.

We in the House of Representatives passed a Defense Department appropriations bill back in June. We passed a Military Construction-VA appropriations bill back in June to make sure our veterans were taken care of. We passed legislation to protect our homeland. The Department of Homeland Security is fully funded. Everything the President asked for and everything the agencies asked for passed out of the House earlier this summer. We even passed an Energy and Water appropriations bill.

They are sitting in the Senate, and they could have been passed back over here very, very easily because the Senate has been known to move like lightning when they need to. They've even deemed the bills before they've passed. Yet, in the democratic process, all of us have learned ever since elementary school that the democratic process requires compromise: two sides that disagree find a way to come closer together.

For the first time today since 1979, the President of the United States reached out to the dictator in Tehran, who has sworn to erase Israel from the map. The President of the United States will talk to the dictator of Tehran, but he won't even negotiate with the House of Representatives--with the majority that was elected by our constituents to do everything in our power to delay, defund, or stop ObamaCare.

The last time we sent this bill to the Senate, it was a complete and total defunding of ObamaCare. It stopped it cold. We have compromised as the democratic process requires. Tonight, we offer the Democrat minority a compromise. Let's just delay it for a year. Let's give the Nation a chance to see what's in that 2,500-page bill that Nancy Pelosi had no idea what it was. At the time, she said that we have to pass the law before we find out what's in it. We are discovering every day new horror stories.

The American people deserve to have time to see what this monstrosity will do before it is implemented. We are simply offering a compromise of a year's delay. We are even fully funding the troops--another compromise. That's the way it works in the democratic process, but it's hard to do it with people who won't even talk to you.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Oregon is correct. It is important that the Congress get our work done on making sure that our military is fully funded and paid, that our veterans, the military construction, the bases around the world are taken care of, that Homeland Security is taken care of. But we have done that. It has already been done in the House.

The Senate has had our Homeland Security appropriations bills for over 3 months. The Senate has had possession of a military construction and veterans appropriations bill for over 3 months. The Senate has also had the Department of Defense appropriations bill for over 3 months. Yet they have irresponsibly chosen to just sit on them to set them up for this moment, because they know that House Republicans are devoted to delaying and defunding ObamaCare, one of the most destructive pieces of legislation ever passed by Congress that will destroy jobs and cripple this economy and socialize the greatest health care system the world has ever created.

We are committed as constitutional conservatives to doing everything in our power to make sure that we delay and defund ObamaCare. But at the same time, we have already done our job in making sure that our military--our men and women in uniform--have everything they need if the Senate will only do their job.

Mr. Speaker, I think it's important for the country to know that the House of Representatives has done its job in passing the most important appropriations bills to make sure that our military is fully funded, that our veterans are taken care of, that the essential functions of Homeland Security are taken care of.

In fact, we passed those bills. The Defense bill out of the House on July 24, the Homeland Security bill was passed on June 6, and the Military Construction and Veterans appropriations bill was passed on June 4. We've also passed out of the House the Energy and Water appropriations bill. And the Senate has been sitting on these bills for over 90 days.

Mr. Speaker, the President has very few responsibilities set out in the Constitution. One of those specific responsibilities is Commander- in-Chief. And it's been reported that the President recently said that the troops in the field might not be paid unless the CR was passed.

Well, the Senate has had these bills for over 90 days. And I think it does not--how does that reflect on the Office of the President, for the Commander-in-Chief to say that the troops are not going to be paid, when, in fact, we've already passed the legislation out of the House-- and the Senate's been sitting on it for over 90 days--to make sure the troops are paid?

We, in the House of Representatives, the constitutional conservative majority in the House, are keeping our word to the Nation and to our constituents to do everything in our power to defund, repeal, delay, whatever it takes to stop the most destructive piece of legislation ever passed by this Congress.

And I don't think it should be called ObamaCare. It should be called ``DemocratCare'' because it was done with 100 percent Democrat support. Not a single Republican voted for it because we recognized the damage it would do to the economy and to our magnificent health care system.

The Democrats passed this bill on their own and, all of a sudden, they're discovering, as the asteroid enters the atmosphere, they've got a big problem because it is causing doctors to leave the profession. It's driving up the cost of health insurance premiums. It's raising deductibles. People are losing their health insurance and being dropped into these nonexistent exchanges.

One other problem that I just discovered and that no one is, I think, aware of yet, are nonprofit organizations who have been lifting people out of homelessness or addiction and giving them job skills and training them, and they find local employers that are willing to take these folks and give them a clean slate, a fresh start, and a new job, and it would wipe out any convictions they've had. They wipe out any history they've got of drug addiction.

These nonprofit organizations have suddenly discovered that the employers are pulling up the drawbridge because, all of a sudden, the employer could be faced with--he's got to decide, as an employer, do I have to provide health care coverage for this, essentially, volunteer, this worker who was previously homeless and had no job skills, and I could be fined for every employee in the company.

So the disasters continue to unfold. It's urgent the House of Representatives--we will all, I know--stand together working and doing everything we can to repeal, delay, defund ``DemocratCare,'' using every legislative tool at our disposal.

I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota for the time.

Mr. Speaker, the Founding Fathers created this magnificent institution to protect our liberty. The purpose of the House, the Senate, the entire Federal Government was created to protect our liberty.

House Republicans are united in our opposition to ObamaCare because it is one of the most massive intrusions into the individual privacy of Americans that the Federal Government has ever attempted. It is an attempt to socialize the greatest health care system the world has ever seen, and we will see intrusions into the private lives of Americans on a scale never seen before.

So I just want to reassure the American people that we are united as conservatives, as constitutional conservatives, to do everything in our power to repeal, defund, delay, do whatever it takes to stop the socialization of American medicine and the destruction of the most important right we have as Americans--to be left alone.

I thank the chairman.

Madam Speaker, today, the constitutional conservatives in the House are keeping their word to our constituents and our Nation to stand true to our principles to protect them from the most unpopular law ever passed in the history of the country, ObamaCare, that intrudes on their privacy. Our most sacred right as Americans is to be left alone.

We have also kept our word today in this continuing resolution to ensure that our government continues to operate while we negotiate in good faith with the President and with the Senate to find a way forward.

Our short-term continuing resolution fully funds every aspect of the government. In fact, it's important for people to remember that the Senate has had the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs bill for over 3 months, so they could have passed it a long time ago.

The Senate has had the Defense appropriations bill since late July. So they could have passed that bill a long time ago, put it on the President's desk, and we could have been sure that our military would have been paid.

The Senate has had the Department of Homeland Security bill since early June, and they've done nothing.

The Senate has had the Energy and Water bill since July 10 and have done nothing.

So we have done our job. We in the House, the constitutional conservative majority, have kept our word to our constituents and to our Nation to do our job to fund the essential aspects of the government and to ensure that we've done everything in our power to protect our constituents from the most unpopular piece of legislation ever passed in the history of the Congress, ObamaCare, by permanently and totally defunding it while protecting the core functions of the government.

It's essential that we pass this continuing resolution today from the perspective of our veterans so we ensure we have the funding available to handle the disability claims backlog, to ensure that we have the resources necessary for the military to continue to build the facilities they need around the world, and to ensure that our men and women have everything they need to protect this great Nation and our freedom in every corner of the planet.

I urge Members to join me in supporting this continuing resolution and to keep our word to defund ObamaCare.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate very much the gentleman from Georgia filing this important legislation. I feel my day is not complete if we don't get a chance to vote to cut spending and abolish ObamaCare.

We were sent here by our constituents to protect the Treasury and do everything we can to keep the government out of their lives and out of their pockets. Yet ObamaCare contains more than 20 tax increases and gives the IRS unprecedented authority to collect personal health information from more than 300 million Americans.

ObamaCare requires all insurance companies to report to the IRS the name, address, identification number, and type of insurance policy purchased by every customer, along with a determination of whether or not the insurance was ``government approved.''

I'm very proud to be a co-author of Dr. Price's legislation that will prohibit the IRS from collecting our personal health care information. The IRS has proven they cannot be trusted by targeting organizations based on their political affiliation. Since the IRS has admitted this, I've heard from so many constituents who are members of patriotic organizations. They've stepped up for the first time in their lives to get involved in politics and organizations like the Texas Tea Party, the Katy Tea Party, and the King Street Patriots. For standing up as patriots and trying to do the right thing for the right reasons, they were targeted by the IRS and harassed.

Today the IRS is spending 80 percent of its budget trying to implement ObamaCare, and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew recently testified the IRS has approximately 700 full-time staff working on ObamaCare implementation. Now the IRS wants to hire an additional 2,000 bureaucrats to continue to implement ObamaCare.

I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Lynn Forney Young on her election as President General of the Daughters of the American Revolution. Lynn, a fourth generation DAR member, joined the Tejas Chapter in Texas in 1977 as a Junior member and throughout her thirty-six years of continuous membership has distinguished herself at every level of service in the National Society.

She served her chapter in seven offices including Chapter Regent and in thirteen committee chairmanships. In addition to holding nine state chairmanships in the Texas State Society, she served as State Parliamentarian, State Recording Secretary, State Chaplain, State Vice Regent, and State Regent. She was appointed to six National Vice Chairmanships, has held three National Chairmanships including Americanism, Printing and Publications, and State Regents' Dinners, and has served on the national Investment and Personnel Committees. She attended the Volunteer Field Genealogy Course, served as a DAR Museum Correspondent Docent, and currently serves as a VAVS Deputy Representative.

Lynn has attended every Continental Congress since 1980, serving as a Congressional page for eight years and on three Congressional Committees. Honored by the Texas Daughters as their State Outstanding Junior Member, State Outstanding Chapter Regent, and State Outstanding Conference Page, she is the only member in the state to be so recognized. She holds membership in the Executive Club, National Officers' Club, State Regents' and State Vice Regents' Clubs, National Chairmen's and National Vice Chairmen's Associations, Outstanding Junior Club, Heritage Club, 1890 Giving Circle, and Founders' Club. She has served on the Advisory Boards of Crossnore School and Kate Duncan Smith DAR School as well as on the Tamassee DAR School Regents' Council.

Each year during Lynn's term as State Regent, Texas recorded a net gain in membership. Additionally, she encouraged, and Texas Daughters enthusiastically embraced and supported, four major projects: an exhibition of DAR Museum quilts at the International Festival in Houston, the erection of a monument at the Texas State Cemetery to the patriots of the American Revolution buried in Texas, and major financial support for the restoration of the historic Texas Governor's Mansion. Her State Regent's Project brought together the State and National Societies in a cooperative effort to produce a new membership recruitment video, ``Today's DAR,'' which celebrates the work of the chapters on the local level and highlights the variety of programs and opportunities for service that make the DAR relevant in today's society.

Through the years, Lynn has been an avid supporter of the National Society Children of the American Revolution, having served as Senior Society Treasurer and President, Senior State Registrar, First Vice President, and President and Senior National Vice President of the South Central Division.

Lynn received a B.S. degree from the University of Houston, worked as a Legal Secretary and Paralegal for seventeen years, was a law firm administrator and bookkeeper for three years, and currently serves as the bookkeeper for the family cattle ranch.

A pillar of her church and community, Lynn served the Presbyterian Church as an Elder, Lay Minister and Clerk of the Session. She has served on the Steering Committees of both the DAR Houston Fisher House and Homes for Our Troops. She was named one of the Outstanding Young Women of Montgomery County, Texas and in 2007 received the Inspire Women Outstanding Community Leader Award. Married to Steve Young, she is the mother of one DAR daughter and one son and the loving grandmother of two grandsons.

Lynn's devotion to DAR and unwavering commitment to its ideals and mission are evidenced by her many years of service. Her experience, keen sense of business, proven leadership abilities and vision, together with her beautiful style and grace, will certainly help to strengthen the organization and ensure that it will continue to grow and prosper.

Please join me and the Texas Daughters of the American Revolution as we congratulate Lynn Forney Young on her recent election as the first DAR President General from the great state of Texas.

Thank you, Judge Poe.

Of course, I will continue to work with you and the committee, as I always have. I'll continue to support the will of the voters, as I have always supported Federal funding for those rail lines. It's been approved by the voters. And I look forward to continuing to work with you and my colleagues with the eastern area, as I have with Congressmen Gene Green and Sheila Jackson Lee, to support those lines in their districts that were on the ballot and were approved by voters.

Thank you. I look forward to working with the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

My amendment will restore state sovereignty over public education and restore parental rights over the education of their children by restoring the State legislature's power to accept or reject Federal education grant dollars.

I've worked closely with the committee to ensure that this amendment supports the goals of local control and flexibility as promoted by H.R. 5, and I sincerely appreciate Chairman Kline's support of this important amendment, as well as his continued leadership to improve our Nation's education system.

State legislatures, Mr. Chairman, should have the ability to make an informed decision regarding Federal grant dollars just as a patient consents to a medical procedure after a doctor explains the risks and benefits.

I'm grateful for RSC Tenth Amendment Task Force Chairman Rob Bishop's support and co-authorship of legislation we filed in this regard and the support of the National Taxpayers Union and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste because my amendment will actually ensure that if State legislatures reject the grant dollars, they will be dedicated to reducing the deficit and paying off our outstanding national debt.

Finally, it should be noted that the Congressional Budget Office indicates that my amendment will have no impact on directed spending.

I want to thank Chairman Kline again for his support and urge my colleagues to support both my amendment and the underlying bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I'd point out that the amendment, in fact, upholds our system of dual sovereignty and ensures local control over local dollars, and the legislatures will actually be able to conduct this vote as a part of their regular legislative proceedings during their annual budget vote.

As it says in the language itself, the vote will be taken by the State legislatures as a part of their budget vote. This is a vote they take as a part of their regular legislative session. It's no additional burden on the States. We are simply ensuring transparency and ensuring that the legislatures fully understand the implications of accepting the Federal dollars. Those dollars, for example, that Texas rejects, we want to make sure go toward deficit reduction and paying down the national debt.

It will be no additional burden on the states. In fact, this amendment will reaffirm and restore our Constitution system of dual sovereignty where the States retain a residuary and viable sovereignty over those issues that deal exclusively with the citizens of their own State.

I want to thank Chairman Kline again for his support and urge Members to adopt this amendment and the underlying bill.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Actually, the money will continue to flow to the States as it does today. The State law already sets up a mechanism for the money to flow through the States to local school districts. So that money will continue to flow. Also, under the language of my amendment, the Federal Government has an unshakeable obligation to ensure equal protection and due process.

So that 14th Amendment obligation on the Federal Government is undiminished and is expressly reaffirmed in my amendment so that there will be no discrimination nor imposition on every American's right to equal protection and due process.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I urge the House to adopt the amendment and support Chairman Kline's underlying bill and move for passage.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chair, I hope to provide some clarity to this by quoting directly from the guidance that the agency has given us. Now, it's important to remember that this is guidance, not a rule. The Obama administration, President Obama has repeatedly and proudly said that if Congress won't act, he will. Last week he said he was going to stand up and, through executive order, do all that he can to try to bring carbon emissions under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government and try to restrict CO2 by executive order.

Here the Obama administration is doing what the law says it can't do, and that is expand the jurisdiction of the EPA and the Army Corps by guidance, not by using a rule. The law says they have to issue a rule, get public input, have hearings. Here they simply got a bunch of their lawyers together and issued guidance to their agencies around the country. And to quote directly from the guidance, the Obama administration directs:

The agencies to interpret waters in the region to be the watershed boundary defined by the geographic area that drains to the nearest downstream traditional navigable water or interstate water through a single point of entry.

The geographic boundary, every stream, every rivulet, no matter how vertical it is, the Supreme Court and the statute said the EPA is limited to regulating navigable waters. The way this reads, literally, the EPA and the Army Corps now, through this guidance, have the authority to regulate every single stream of water that drains in the geographic area, in the watershed boundary, that drains to the nearest traditional navigable water.

That is an incredible expansion of Federal power. As the gentleman from Idaho quite correctly said, this was done outside of the normal rulemaking process because the Obama administration knew that the public would overwhelmingly disapprove of this, that the Congress would disapprove of this, that this goes beyond what the Supreme Court intended, that this goes beyond what the law allows, so they did it through the back door using lawyers and bureaucrats to write a 33-page document that you literally have to go to the back end of to learn that they are attempting to exercise jurisdiction over every stream of water in the geographic area that drains to the nearest navigable waterway.

That's why Chairman Frelinghuysen and Chairman Rogers included this language to cut off funding for the implementation of this rule, because we've discovered that the Obama administration will do whatever they want, regardless of the Constitution. They ignore subpoenas. They ignore congressional hearings. They ignore letters from Congress. They ignore everything except when you cut off the money. That's the only way to make the Obama administration follow the law.

Vote against this amendment to ensure that the Obama administration follows the law and that we protect private property rights and keep the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers off of people's private property across America. I urge Members to oppose the gentleman's amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment No. 66 in the bill is very straightforward.

The Medal of Honor is our Nation's highest award, given only to those soldiers who have performed personal acts of valor above and beyond the call of duty. The medal has been made of brass. My amendment today would ensure that from this day forward, the Medal of Honor be made of gold. It's the least we can do for our bravest soldiers who have earned America's highest award, and I would move passage.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill under consideration and include extraneous material on the consideration of H.R. 2216, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

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

It is my privilege, along with my good friend from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), to present to the House for its consideration the 2014 appropriations bill for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs.

One of the most important obligations this Congress has is to ensure that our men and women in uniform have everything they need to do their job without worry. We think of ourselves on this subcommittee as the peace-of-mind committee for our military so that they can focus on their missions, standing on the walls of Rome, protecting our freedom, at the far corners of the world.

I think of all the appropriations bills we consider, we're honored to bring this one to the House first because of its importance to our men and women in uniform, to their families, and to our veterans who have served our Nation. We want to be sure, as I say, that they have no worries and that they don't ever have to look over their shoulder and be concerned that the United States Congress and the American people don't support them 110 percent, as we have done in this legislation, which my colleague from Georgia and I have drafted arm-in-arm.

This is a bipartisan bill that we present to the House today to ensure that the military construction needs of the armed services are fully met. We have also done our best to ensure that when our men and women in uniform retire and move into the Veterans Affairs system, they will have the best medical care possible and that this backlog of disability claims that's been plaguing us for a number of years will be cleared as rapidly as possible.

We've done this in a way that's also fiscally responsible. We have found every dollar we could that was left unspent from previous years and returned that to the taxpayers. At the same time, we make sure that our veterans and our men and women in uniform have everything that they need to do their job.

Our committee has also been very committed to ensuring that their families are taken care of and that the Defense Department schools on bases are the best that they can be and in the best condition that they can be in. I know all of us as parents are concerned about the quality of our kids' education. The last thing that a man or woman who's deployed at a United States base overseas--we don't want them to worry about the caliber of the school that their children are attending. So we've also placed emphasis on the ability of our military base commanders to contract with the State in which they're located to set up charter schools at their military bases if the base happens to be located in an area where the local schools can't provide the quality that they need.

We have in this appropriations bill, as I say, fully funded the Department of Veterans Affairs. Some of this money is advance appropriated. So while we've got a total funding level in this bill for 2014 of $73.3 billion, that's

$1.4 billion more than last year. We provide an additional $2.1 billion more than last year for the Department of Veterans Affairs. But of that increase, $1.9 billion was provided as an advance appropriation from previous years.

The Congress began several years ago to appropriate funding in advance for our Veterans Affairs Department to ensure that because of the uncertainty and the unpredictability of the appropriations cycle, again, we want our men and women in uniform and our veterans to have absolute peace of mind and no worries as they serve our country or as they move into retirement in the veterans hospital system, so we advance appropriate some of this money.

Any reductions that we made in this bill, again, were done to make sure that we're doing our part to control spending at a time of record debt and deficit, which is at the top of our minds. As fiscal conservatives, we want to ensure that we have done everything in our power to reduce the debt and to reduce the burden that is passed on to our children and grandchildren.

So we have not provided funding in the bill for 10 military construction projects that the committee believed it lacked sufficient justification for. And we funded only what the Department of Defense expects to spend in fiscal year 2014 for six military construction projects. We've also reduced the funding available for the Contingency Construction account, which has not even been used since fiscal year 2008. Our marvelous staff did a good job in identifying $659 million in unobligated balances from previous years for construction projects that have been left unspent, and we're able to return that to taxpayers.

We have also reduced the Department of Veterans Affairs request for funding in a program where they substantially overestimated their projections. The scope of this committee's jurisdiction also includes military memorials and cemeteries. We've made sure those are fully funded and that our memorials and cemeteries here in the United States and around the world are going to be well tended and that veterans, no matter where they may be in the United States, will be able to get the health care and benefits that they have earned by their service to this country.

We did everything we could in this bill to ensure that our men and women in uniform are taken care of and that our veterans are taken care of, but we are very concerned about the backlog in the disability claims that the VA has accumulated. The VA has promised us that they would have the backlog cleared up by the year 2015, so the bill contains very strong language that holds the VA to account ensuring that they will give the committee and the Congress detailed accounts and reports to ensure that they stay on target. Mr. Kingston of Georgia is going to offer an amendment later, which I intend to accept, to help ensure that the VA holds themselves to the standard that they have set for themselves to reduce the backlog.

And then, finally, Madam Chairman, I want to mention something that we are particularly exercised about. Our committee chairman, Hal Rogers from Kentucky, has told us a story that I have never forgotten of a young man who I believe was wounded in Afghanistan--Iraq, who lost one eye, lost eyesight in one eye. When he left the service to go into the VA system, in order to save his remaining eye, he had to have medical records that could be read by the VA doctors. And because of bureaucratic inefficiency and pure idiocy, we've got a completely separate set of medical records in the DOD and the Veterans Administration. And for years, taxpayers have spent upwards of a billion dollars or more over the last 10 years to get the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs operating in a single, using a single unified medical record so that when a young man like this moves out of active service and into the VA, when it's a time- critical surgery such as this young man needed to have to save his eyesight, that the doctors in the VA could read those medical records and get him the help that he needs. But, sadly, because of bureaucratic inefficiency and refusal to cooperate--and, of course, we're all human and we're all flawed, but there's this instinctive human, I think, reaction to make sure you protect your own turf. Whatever it is, the VA and the DOD have not adopted a unified medical record. As a result, this young man lost his eyesight. He could not get the surgery he needed in the VA, and he is now permanently blinded as a result of the failure of these two departments to do their job.

Now, the week before last when we were considering this bill in committee, the Secretary of Defense, Mr. Hagel, said that the DOD was just going to go ahead and adopt their own medical record system separate from the VA. This is just unacceptable. I ask all my colleagues in Congress to work with Mr. Bishop and me and to work with Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Lowey, with the members of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, the members of the Armed Services Authorizing Committee and the members of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee so that we develop identical, parallel language that compels the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to come up with a single, integrated, unified medical record so that no one will ever suffer the fate that this young man did who is now permanently blinded because of bureaucratic inefficiency.

It's unacceptable. The Congress won't stand for it any longer, and we've got strong language in this bill and will continue to work to strengthen it to ensure that these men and women, as they move from their days of uniformed service to the country into the VA, that it is seamless, that it is easy, that they can get their disability claims handled in a timely and efficient manner and that they can get their medical records read quickly and efficiently by the doctors in the VA system who do such a good job.

We deeply appreciate our extraordinary staff working together with my good friend from Georgia (Mr. Bishop) in a truly bipartisan way. I'm proud to present to the House, Madam Chairman, the 2014 Military Construction and VA appropriations bill for approval by the House, a bill that is fiscally conservative and responsible yet fully funds and takes care of our men and women in uniform and our veterans in a way that they deserve, because our men and women who have fought so valiantly for this country deserve nothing less than the very best of the United States Congress, and we've done that for them in this bill today.

I reserve the balance of my time.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH04JN7.005

Madam Chairman, the House budget that we adopted set a total spending limit of $967 billion in the 3 years that the Republicans have had the majority in the House and the leadership of Chairman Hal Rogers of Kentucky. For the first time since

World War II, we have reduced annual spending from year to year, each year, under Chairman Rogers' leadership.

It's also, I think, important for the country to know that one of the first and most important responsibilities of the chairman of the full committee is to take that total spending number that's given to us by Chairman Ryan's Budget Committee, that $967 billion--Chairman Rogers, one of his first responsibilities is to take that $967 billion and use his best judgment to allocate or divide that money among the subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee. And it's a real tribute to this good man's commitment, a demonstration of his commitment to our men and women in uniform, a vivid illustration of the bipartisan nature of this bill, that with the help of Ranking Member Lowey, that Chairman Rogers gave this subcommittee for military construction and VA allocation that enabled us to fully fund the request to the military and the Veterans Affairs.

It is my privilege now, Madam Chairman, to recognize the distinguished chairman of the full committee, Hal Rogers of Kentucky, who has done so much to save our taxpayers' hard-earned dollars, and do everything that can be done to help support our men and women in uniform, and yield him as much time as he may consume.

Madam Chairman, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry).

Madam Chairman, at this time I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished and valued member of our subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart).

Madam Chairman, I yield myself just a moment to particularly point out and thank my friend from Laredo.

Mr. Cuellar and I have worked together since 1986 in the Texas Legislature. The people of the United States often read in the national press that Democrats and Republicans don't get along. That's just simply not true. Henry Cuellar and I have been the best of friends since 1986. Mr. Bishop and I worked together beautifully on this subcommittee. This bill is a great example of bipartisan cooperation, and it's a privilege to work on this committee where we really don't pay attention to party labels as we try to do what is best for the country.

At this time, Madam Chairman, it's my privilege to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Will the gentleman yield?

Madam Chairman, I would say to the gentleman from Georgia that both Mr. Bishop and I and the subcommittee are keenly aware of these terrible tragedies in Atlanta and the very critical and important inspector general's report, and we intend to aggressively pursue the recommendations in the inspector general's report and work with you and the delegation from Georgia to ensure that this does not happen again.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Of course we will do all we can to work together.

Madam Chairman, it's a pleasure to bring this bill to the House and to recommend it to every Member of the House to support this bipartisan bill to make sure that our men and women in uniform--as my good friend, Sam Farr, said, this is such a privilege to be on this committee, the only one in Congress that can ensure the quality of life and peace of mind of our men and women in uniform and our men and women who, once they've served our country, move into the VA system. And I would urge the adoption of the bill by the Members of the House.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I rise in opposition to the amendment.

I share my colleague from Georgia's passion and commitment to reduce the deficit to avoid passing on this debt to our children. This bill has bipartisan support. It has been put together very carefully to ensure that we're supporting our men and women in uniform, and I'm looking forward to finding ways to save money in other parts of the appropriations bill and in the parts of the budget that are actually, truly crushing our kids with debt and deficit.

It's the social safety net that has grown so tremendously that is causing the greatest burden on our kids, the Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid. The growth of these programs has been so astronomical it's swallowing up almost all of our national income on an annual basis. And that's where we need to focus our attention is saving those programs from bankruptcy. In fact, that's where we will really save the big money for our children in the future.

Medicare is in such dire straits that if you're 54 years of age or younger, the Medicare hospital fund can only pay about 50 cents on the dollar of the benefits that have been promised. So the

Medicare program, for all intents and purposes, for people that are 54 years of age or younger, is bankrupt.

And the Social Security program, if you're 47 years of age or younger, that program is bankrupt because it can only pay about 60 cents on the dollar.

So we've got to, as a Congress, in order to save our Nation from bankruptcy, to save our kids from crushing levels of taxation, to prevent this mountain of debt from being passed on to our children, save Medicare and Social Security from bankruptcy. And that's what Congressman Ryan, chairman of the Budget Committee is working on. Congressman Sam Johnson from the Ways and Means Committee is working on legislation to save Social Security, and that's where we're going to save the big money.

On things like NATO, we have over 600,000 troops in Europe. We have 127 military installations. I am no fan of the United Nations, but NATO has served a vital role since the end of World War II in preserving the peace in Europe. We've expanded NATO membership now to the former countries of Eastern Europe that were behind the Iron Curtain.

It was NATO and the leadership of President Ronald Reagan and the resolute courage of our men and women in uniform that led to the fall of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Iron Curtain. But for NATO, but for that strategic alliance, we may still be facing Communist Russia. Today the Soviet Union is gone, the Iron Curtain is gone, and many of those nations that were once in the Soviet Bloc are members of

Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment and move to strike the last word.

Madam Chairman, I oppose this amendment because I share the gentleman's concern about the debt and the deficit. As I mentioned a moment ago, the way we're going to save the country from bankruptcy and protect our kids from this crushing debt burden that they're about to inherit to is rescue Social Security and Medicare from their certain bankruptcy, which is just around the corner. The Republican constitutional conservative majority of this House is working hard to develop legislation to save those two programs from bankruptcy. But this amendment would zero out the funding that the Congress has invested in the acquisition and construction of military facilities and installations for NATO.

NATO has been a vital part of our Nation's security since the end of World War II. We have over 600,000 men and women in uniform in Europe who depend on the resources that this Congress provides to them, in part, through the work of NATO. We have 127 military installations in Europe that depend, in part, on the work that is done through our contribution to NATO.

If the gentleman offers an amendment later on, for example, on the foreign operations part of the bill to cut funding for the United Nations, I look forward to supporting that because I have no particular love for the United Nations. They vote against us at every chance they get. We contribute the majority of money that the United Nations receives and they happily vote against us at every opportunity.

But when it comes to NATO, that's of strategic importance to the security of the United States. And while I share the gentleman's passion to cut the deficit and the debt, let's save it for cutting the United Nations and foreign aid, other than for Israel. I'm wearing proudly my pin of the two lone star States, the State of Texas and the State of Israel. Except for our funding for the great State of Israel, which we need to preserve and protect, I look forward to helping the gentleman cut foreign aid and cut funding for the United Nations, but not for NATO.

I urge the House to reject this amendment.

I will happily yield to my friend from Georgia.

Madam Chairman, reclaiming my time, the gentleman is correct that $200 million is a lot of money, but we have to preserve our investment in NATO. I would point out that the former Soviet Union is sending submarines into the Gulf of Mexico. The former Soviet Union, now Russia, is aggressively sending their strategic nuclear bombers pushing up against the outer limits of our airspace around Guam and around Alaska.

So the Russians are no longer overtly and openly Communist, but they are not necessarily our friends. They and the Communist Chinese are aggressively attacking the United States in the cyberworld. If a state of war could be declared in the cyberworld, a state of war already exists. The Communist Chinese have already attacked us and are at war with the United States over the Internet and over in Russia, as well. They are not our friends. And we, of course, are going to look for every opportunity to work together with them, but NATO is a vital part of America's strategic security.

I urge defeat of the gentleman's amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment.

We'd be happy to accept it. I think it's more than reasonable to report that you're going to expend more than $15,000. Certainly, we want to help make sure that our officers have everything that they need, but it would be nice to have them report it. And I would be willing to accept the gentleman's amendment if my colleague from Georgia is in agreement.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

I agree with my colleague from Georgia, and we look forward to working closely with you to be sure that we continue to address these vital issues.

Will the gentleman yield?

Madam Chairman, I have no objection to the amendment.

I want to acknowledge and thank the gentleman from Oregon for his long labors and support of this important work to identify and cure these invisible injuries that many of our soldiers have suffered as a result of concussion, as a result of the circumstances of battle in which they find themselves.

We appreciate your good work, sir, and I will continue to work with you. I thank you for the amendment. I have no objection.

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to the amendment. The gentleman is absolutely right. We're all committed to making sure that when our veterans return home, they are fully employed and well taken care of.

I thank my friend from the Texas Legislature, Mr. Gallego, for offering his amendment, and we have no objection.

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

Mr. Chairman, I have no opposition to the gentleman's amendment and share his frustration and concern, as Mr. Bishop and I and the subcommittee have done in this bill repeatedly throughout the series of our hearings to literally pound on the VA to get them to move more rapidly on this backlog.

We have included, Mr. Bishop and I, in this bill, very powerful and strong reporting language that we're going to get detailed information on a level that we've never seen before from the VA. In fact, later today we're going to have an amendment from Mr. Kingston of Georgia that I will support that will hold the VA to the same standard as the private sector in that either they meet their performance levels that they have set for themselves or they will not be paid, as they are in the private sector. You miss your goal, you don't get your full compensation.

We are addressing this in a number of different ways. I think the gentleman's amendment is helpful and constructive in driving home the point to the VA that it's absolutely vital that we get this backlog disposed of and that we expect the VA to live up to the time line that they've promised us, and that's to eliminate the backlog within the next 24 months by the year of 2015.

And so we have no opposition to the gentleman's amendment, and we appreciate his concern for ensuring that our men and women in uniform receive the disability benefits that they have so rightly earned.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today with an amendment to clarify the House Appropriations Subcommittee's intent with regard to the integrated electronic health records system that we want the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs to adopt.

This issue necessarily involves two appropriation subcommittees and two authorizing committees, Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs. We have talked with our friends on the authorizing committees and agree that the best way forward is for language to be included in each one of these bills that conveys a unified position.

I am confident that all parties in Congress and in the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs share the same goal of having an integrated, unified health record.

My amendment removes some of the specificity of the original House language, but retains the reference point of an integrated record. This allows all sides to continue to spend more time to develop mutually acceptable language that we can carry in the National Defense Authorization Act and other legislation as we move forward with this bill as well, which clearly defines the intent of Congress that we will have an integrated record with its capability of helping our men and women in uniform when they move out of active service into the VA.

We are unshakeable in our commitment, as a Congress, to make certain that we solve this problem as quickly as humanly possible. I can tell you that the subcommittee, the committees of jurisdiction, the entire Congress is tired of the delays. We're tired of postponement. We're tired of disputes. This has to be solved immediately.

And I'm going to continue to work aggressively with our colleagues on the authorizing committee and with our good friends on the Defense Appropriation Subcommittee, all of us together, arm-in-arm, regardless of party, from all parts of the country, to make sure that we get one single, unified, integrated electronic medical record as fast as humanly possible.

So that's the reason I offer this amendment today, and I urge its support.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 59, line 18, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.

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

Mr. Chairman, this language is in the bill because it has strong, bipartisan support. The American people do not want these terrorists, these criminals, captured either on battlefields overseas or who have sworn to kill innocent American men, women and children housed in American prisons.

In the Second World War, Nazi soldiers--saboteurs--landed on Long Island and on the beaches of Florida carrying explosives with the intent of killing innocent Americans. Franklin Roosevelt, as President, when they were captured, they were held and tried in the military, and within 90 days they were executed. The prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, quite frankly, are being treated much more leniently than I think they should be, than most Americans think they should be.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strenuous opposition to the gentleman's amendment. I'd like to, if I could, yield the remainder of my initial time in opposition to my good friend, the chairman of the Commerce, Justice, Science Subcommittee, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).

Mr. Chairman, I would just also say that bringing these terrorists in to the United States we would be giving them American constitutional rights, a very precious, very special privilege that is reserved for the people of the United States. These people should be tried in military court and treated as prisoners of war and the criminals and the cowards that they are. And I urge a ``no'' vote against the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I believe Mr. Kingston has correctly identified the problem in the private sector. If you don't meet a performance goal, you're going to suffer a cut in pay. You can be discharged from your job. Mr. Kingston correctly points out that the VA set their own standard. They have set this goal of eliminating the backlog by the year 2015. Mr. Kingston's amendment simply says that, if they don't meet their own standard--their own yardstick, a measurement of success in reducing the backlog--that there will be a pay cut of 25 percent to the senior leadership that is responsible for setting this goal, that's responsible for leading the VA and executing this goal.

Congress is, frankly, tired of the delays, tired of the excuses, and we want our veterans to receive what they have earned. We want to be sure that they are given compensation for the injuries they suffered in the course of service to the United States of America, so I urge the adoption of Mr. Kingston's amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I ask unanimous consent to strike the last word.

I yield to my good friend, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mr. Chairman, it's common sense that your performance should be tied to your pay, so I urge the adoption of the gentleman from Georgia's amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I want to express my support for this amendment. I share the gentleman's intense frustration with the VA for their failure to meet their own guidelines and their own deadlines for eliminating the backlog, and I urge adoption of the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I just want to express my support for the gentleman's amendment and urge its adoption by the House.

I yield back the balance of my time

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

Mr. Chairman, I would rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. I share his concerns; and that's why, in section 227 of our bill, we included language that's very similar. And I look forward to supporting the gentleman's amendment and working with him in conference to make sure there's no duplication.

The committee is also concerned about increases in costs beyond that originally specified on the project, and that's why we included the section and why I welcome the gentleman's amendment and urge its adoption.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I move to strike the last word.

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

It is just common sense that the free market and competitive open bidding process is going to result in a savings to taxpayers. Davis- Bacon artificially drives up the cost to taxpayers at a time when we simply cannot afford it. With record debt, record deficit and at a time when all of us as stewards of the Treasury need to do everything we can to protect our constituents' hard-earned tax dollars, I strongly support the gentleman from Iowa's amendment, which is to make sure that we have a competitive bidding process in which the lowest price and, obviously, free market wages in this environment in the 21st century are going to be fair wages with good compensation and good benefits. We truly don't need to pay higher wages in an era of record debt and deficit.

I would, Madam Chairman, like to yield to the gentleman from Iowa.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam 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 am opposed to the motion to recommit.

Our third-highest priority in the Constitution is to provide for the common defense. This bill, more than any other, has been done in a bipartisan way; this bill more than any other is vitally important to the peace of mind, to the quality of life of our men and women in uniform when they're on Active Duty standing on the walls of Rome defending our freedom and protecting us and putting themselves in harm's way, and the peace of mind and comfort of their families back in the United States and around the world where they're deployed, and when they become veterans and move into the veterans system.

We in this subcommittee, more than any other in the House, have been bipartisan, arm-in-arm, doing everything in our power to help ensure that no man or woman wearing the uniform of the United States should ever worry for one moment about the quality of their life, about the quality of their health care. We think of ourselves as the peace-of- mind committee for the men and women in uniform defending the United States. There's been no more bipartisan bill than this one, there's been no more open bill than this one, there's been no more open process for amendment than the appropriations process.

It is possible, in fact, for you to walk down here on the floor and with a yellow notepad and a pen write an amendment and walk down and hand it to the Clerk at any point during the debate on this bill and have it considered by the House. Yet we got this amendment 3 minutes and 45 seconds before the debate began. It reflects so poorly on the House of Representatives for the minority to present an amendment that we would have happily worked with you on to have accomplished in a bill in an amendment form had you just brought it down to the floor.

In fact, we have given the Veterans Affairs Secretary everything that he's asked for. The Veterans Administration has been given massive increases in funding to handle the claims backlog. In fact, Congressman Kingston of Georgia just offered an amendment, which the House has approved, which will cut the salary of the senior leadership of the VA by 25 percent if they don't meet their own deadlines on reducing the backlog.

The United States Congress has literally done everything. We've given them every dollar, everything they have possibly asked for. We've offered you every opportunity to just walk down here and amend the bill, yet you give it to us 3 minutes and 45 seconds before the debate begins. This ought to be exhibit A of why we need a rule in the House that all amendments ought to be published at least 24 hours in advance on the Internet, especially a motion to recommit as embarrassing, frankly, as this one.

I am happy to yield my time to the chairman of the Veterans Committee, Mr. Miller.

I urge Members to defeat this motion to recommit and vote ``no.''

I yield back the balance of my time.

Offered by: Mr. Culberson

Amendment No. 9: Page 35, line 11, strike ``Act''and insert

``heading''.

Page 35, line 13, strike ``unless'' and all that follows

through ``Department:'' on page 36, line 16, and insert the

following: ``except for a health record as set forth in the

Joint Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2013-2015 of the

Department of Veteran Affairs and Department of Defense,

Joint Executive Council:''.