Floor Statements

I thank Mr. Crowley for yielding time, Madam Speaker, and I rise in strong support of the Iran Freedom Support Act. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this important legislation and ask for its immediate passage.

It would be difficult to overstate the danger Iran represents. Unchecked Iranian nuclear proliferation, combined with increasing support for international terrorism, will help to further destabilize the entire region.

Iran currently possesses ballistic missiles capable of striking 1,200 miles away. This places U.S. forces in this region, moderate Islamic Arab countries located in the region, as well as the State of Israel in grave danger. Imagine, if you will, if these missiles had nuclear delivery capability.

For over two decades, the Iranian regime has been pursuing a covert and now overt nuclear program. It has manufactured centrifuges, sought completion of heavy-water reactors, and experimented with uranium enrichment. According to one weapons inspector, it has already converted 45 tons of uranium into gas, enough to build more than one nuclear bomb.

In a perfect world, we should be able to rely on the United Nations to curb Iranian nuclear proliferation. In a perfect world, the eight reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding Iran's violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty would be enough to motivate action. In a perfect world, all of the members of the Security Council would appreciate the seriousness and catastrophe of a nuclear Iran. But since we cannot count on the international community, China and Russia are far too interested in Iranian oil and Iranian trade money, the

United States must step up the pressure and do what is right.

This bill, in my opinion, accomplishes that goal. U.S. sanctions would dramatically increase the pressure on the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear ambitions and allow international inspections of their facilities. Since the President of Iran was elected last summer, Iran's stock market has lost 40 percent of its value, there has been a capital flight of more than $200 billion, and Iran's manufacturing sector is increasingly dependent on imports. Iran is struggling financially. This legislation will further squeeze Iran and deny it the financial resources to continue its path towards nuclear armament.

There is no debate, not anywhere, not in this body, that Iran is a radical and fundamentalist country headed by a President who is willing to share nuclear technology with the most unstable countries in the world, and by mullahs who raise religious fanaticism to a new art form. Every pronouncement this President makes further dramatizes how mentally unstable and unbalanced and dangerous he is. The United States must act quickly and decisively if we are to counter the continuing threat posed by the Iranian regime. We must deny Iran the technology and assistance and financial resources it needs to pursue this unacceptable behavior.

I have no illusions. I can't guarantee that the sanctions contained in this bill will have the desired effect, but I do know that it is a far better alternative to invading Iran or bombing Iran. And unlike the Iraq Freedom Act, which many people have cited today as a reason not to pass this particular piece of legislation, there is nothing in this act that we are debating today, there is nothing in this legislation that can be construed as authorizing use of force against Iran, and none of the assistance should be used to support covert action that is contained in the legislation.

Madam Speaker, later today, the Bush administration, with the aid and comfort of the Republican Congress, will once again propose to remove all congressional oversight of nuclear waste in this country to be stored at Yucca Mountain and double the amount of nuclear waste to be stored in the mountain.

Let me remind everybody that Secretary Bodman, the Secretary of Energy, just testified last week that he has no idea how much Yucca Mountain is going to cost, and he has no idea how long it is going to take to ensure that they could build Yucca Mountain; but he wants to remove congressional oversight over the nuclear waste budget.

Let me remind everyone, there are no radiation standards now. The court threw them out. There is no way to safely transport nuclear waste across our country. And after 9/11, it is incomprehensible to me that we have not come up with a threat assessment. There are no canisters that currently exist that will not corrode. We have a thousand e-mails from the scientists at the National Geologic Survey that demonstrate that they fudged or made up the scientific data that went into making the decision that Yucca Mountain was okay.

Now they want to eliminate the oversight of Congress over the budget of Yucca Mountain. I think that would be a dereliction of our duty. We ought to stand up to the administration and do our job.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution expressing the sense of Congress that Saudi Arabia should end its economic boycott of Israel. I want to personally thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) and my very good friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), for introducing this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, no one is born knowing how to hate. Hate needs to be taught. The Saudi Kingdom, our so-called partner in peace and ally in the fight against terrorism, has turned teaching hatred into a perverted science and a twisted art form.

Last year the Bush administration supported Saudi Arabia's accession to the World Trade Organization. As a condition of joining the WTO, the Saudis agreed to end all boycotts of Israel. Their Foreign Minister repeated this pledge to our Secretary of State. Israel is our strongest ally in the Middle East. This boycott has hurt Israel's economy since its founding in 1948. The Israeli Chamber of Commerce estimates that Israeli exports are 10 percent less than they would be without the boycott; investment in Israel, 10 percent lower.

It is no surprise to me that the Saudis have not honored their commitment to end the boycott. The reasons to me are painfully apparent: anti-Semitism and a hatred for Israel. Saudi Arabia continues to be one of the few nations to participate in the boycott when many of its neighbors have given up. In 1990, Egypt was the first nation to abandon the boycott. Jordan followed in 1995. The Palestinian Authority dropped the boycott in 1995 as well. In 1994, several of the gulf states abandoned their secondary and tertiary boycotts. In 2005, just last year, Bahrain announced it was completely withdrawing from the boycott.

The Saudi government has repeatedly said that Saudi Arabia is not anti-Semitic. Oh, really, Mr. Speaker. These are the same Saudis that support terrorism, export terrorism, finance terrorism, the same Saudis that spew racist and anti-Semitic hatred, and the same Saudis that have the worst record on the planet when it comes to religious intolerance and discrimination.

The Saudis say they share our values. Exactly what values do they think they share with the United States? They do not value a hate-free education for their children. Saudi schoolbooks paint an ugly, distorted portrait of a world in which Israel does not exist. The 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by so-called Zionist conspiracies, and the anti-Semitic and fictitious ``Protocols of the Elders of Zion'' is taught as actual history. These schoolbooks are the official publications of the education ministry.

They do not value religious freedom and pluralism. Saudi Arabia bans all religions except Islam. Saudi Arabia's religious beliefs have even gone so far as banning the Barbie doll, calling them Jewish toys that are offensive to Islam.

They couldn't value honesty because last year the Saudi Crown Prince told Saudi television that ``Zionists'' were behind the attack at the oil facility in Yanbu. The Crown Prince also is

quoted as saying, ``Our country is targeted. You know who is behind all of this. It is Zionism.'' That is dishonest. That is a lie, Mr. Speaker.

The United States Congress, by voting for this resolution, can take a strong stand against this type of religious and racial intolerance. Congress can take a strong stand on behalf of a fellow democracy and our most reliable ally in the Middle East. And Congress can take a strong stand to demand that the Saudis live up to their obligations and promises, the ones they made in order to get into the WTO with American support.

I urge the Saudis to fulfill their international obligations and promises by ending the Israeli boycott. I urge immediate passage of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, just when I think the Department of Energy couldn't become more incompetent or dangerous, they do something that proves me wrong.

You will find this cartoon character on a taxpayer-funded Web site run by the Department of Energy. His job, Yucca Mountain Johnny, is to convince kids in Nevada that nuclear waste is okay and that the State of Nevada is a safe place to store nuclear waste.

What really bothers me is the message that Yucca Mountain Johnny is giving to our school children. This is akin to Joe Camel telling our school kids that smoking is healthy.

The Department of Energy ought to dump Yucca Johnny and his slanted, one-sided view of how our Nation should address the issue of nuclear waste disposal. We should stop using taxpayers' money to spread this message. It is despicable.

The Las Vegas Sun wrote in an editorial on March 25, ``Children don't need a cartoon character to tell them what is easily understood by most people: nuclear waste is dangerous. Don't let anyone bury it in your backyard.''

Save the people of the State of Nevada, the school children, and get rid of Yucca Mountain Johnny. It is disgusting.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this morning, I came to the floor of the House and stood in the well to tell the American people about a cartoon character by the name of Yucca Mountain Johnny that the Department of Energy has created which has been funded by the taxpayers of the United States of America.

The purpose of creating this cartoon character is to help convince the children of the State of Nevada that storing radioactive toxic nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, is okay for them. It is bad enough that the Department of Energy has been trying to convince the people of the State of Nevada and the United States of America that shipping 77,000 tons of toxic nuclear waste across 43 States to be buried in a hole in the middle of the Nevada desert where we have got groundwater problems, seismic activity, volcanic activity, is good for the health and well being of this Nation.

It is not. And Yucca Mountain Johnny has got to be dumped before there is a nuclear dump at Yucca Mountain. But the latest thing that has just occurred that I want to share with the American people, through you, Mr. Speaker, is it makes Yucca Mountain Johnny pale in comparison.

Let me read to you what came over the wire today that I read: ``The U.S. military plans to detonate a 700-ton explosive charge that will send a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas. `I don't want to sound glib,' says the head of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, `but it is the first time in Nevada that you will see a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas since we stopped testing nuclear weapons.' ''

Well, it isn't glib to me, Mr. Speaker. It is a very serious thing when I have an administration official, the head of an agency, stating that he is going to detonate a 700-ton bomb that is going to send a mushroom cloud over the community that I represent, where my parents live, my children live, and 700,000 Nevadans live as well. So I called this gentleman, and I asked him to please explain this quote.

Glib? He is going to send a mushroom cloud, detonate a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas, Nevada. Well, he said, it was a poor choice of words, but that is what we are going to do. So I asked him, When is it going to take place? It is going to take place in June. I said, Is it really going to be a mushroom cloud over the State of Nevada. Isn't that a tad insensitive given the fact that we had nuclear experiments and weapons detonated at the Nevada test sites in the fifties and the sixties? He said, Well, it might have been a little insensitive, but that's what we are doing.

So I said, Well, is it going to be over Las Vegas? Well, not really Las Vegas. I misspoke. It is going to be at the Nevada test site. I said, Well, will we be able to see it from Las Vegas? Yes, you're going to be able to see it from Las Vegas. Well, how big is it going to be? Well, we don't know yet how big it is going to be. I said, Well, where at the Nevada test site is it going to be detonated? He said, Well, we are doing studies, and it is going to be detonated in a place that is safe.

I said, Well, how can it be safe when there were over 900 nuclear detonations in the fifties and sixties and that land is very toxic and very radioactive? He said, Well, we are going to do it in a place that isn't radioactive, although he couldn't tell me where, he couldn't tell me how.

If I can continue reading this, he says: ``We also have,'' are you ready for this, this man doesn't realize how serious what he is proposing is, ``we also have,'' are you ready for this, ``a 700-ton explosively formed charge that we're going to be putting in a tunnel in Nevada.''

So I said to him, Well, if it's in a tunnel, how come we are going to get a mushroom cloud? Oh, well, I wasn't quite right about that either. It's not really in a tunnel. It's going to be above ground. I said, Well, how can it be above ground at the Nevada test site and not disturb the dirt that is radioactive? He said, Well, we're taking care of that too. I said, What happens if there's wind? Is the wind going to be blowing this mushroom cloud to Las Vegas? Is it going to Utah? He couldn't tell me that either.

This is a serious issue for the people of the State of Nevada. It's bad enough that we didn't get prior notice, and obviously the congressional delegation wasn't briefed; but the people of the State of Nevada haven't been briefed either. But if you look further at this press release that has been sent out, it says the Russians, the Russians have been notified of this test. So we have notified the Russians. We just neglected to notify the Americans?

I think this is a bad idea. We need more information. And before you start detonating 700-ton explosive devices at Nevada test site, we'd better do a thorough study of the environmental impact. Because if you are going to be disturbing that dirt that is radioactive and having a mushroom cloud out of Las Vegas, the people of Las Vegas, the people of the State of Nevada better know about it, and we better stop this madness if that is what is going to happen.

So I call upon this Defense Threat Reduction Agency to work with my office, work with the congressional delegation from Nevada, and let's figure out if we can maybe put this explosive detonation some place else where there aren't 1.6 million southern Nevadans and hundreds of thousands of tourists in the Las Vegas area at the time.

Madam Speaker, if the Bush administration does not act within the next 2 months, seniors who sign up for the Medicare prescription drug plan will be severely penalized. In less than 60 days, seniors who have not yet signed up for the plan will face a Bush Medicare drug tax for the rest of their lives.

The President has shown no interest in extending this arbitrary deadline. If the President won't act, Congress must.

House Democrats did not support this debacle of a prescription drug plan, but we don't want to see seniors penalized because the Republicans voted to create a confusing plan that most seniors believe won't work. Seniors need more time to make the right decision. They are understandably confused.

If the President won't act, House Republicans must join us in extending the deadline for seniors to sign up for the new drug plan. Democrats have introduced legislation that would give seniors 6 additional months to decide on the best plan for them. What is fair is fair. We simply cannot allow the Bush Medicare drug tax to take effect.

Mr. Speaker, a newspaper article headline states, ``Yucca In need of Repair After 9 Years.'' It says that Yucca Mountain research facilities, from ground support to railroad tracks, need repairs after just 9 years of use.

Now this is the same Yucca Mountain that the Energy Department is proposing to put hundreds of thousands of tons of toxic radioactive nuclear waste for hundreds of thousands of years.

Just this past week Energy Secretary Bodman said, ``There are problems with the U.S. Geological Survey work that was done,'' and we now know that the work was fudged and they made up the data. ``There are problems with the EPA standards,'' and we know they are short by 290,000 years. ``And there are problems with the efforts of the Department of Energy.''

What did the Department of Energy just say: They can no longer estimate how long it will take to ready Yucca Mountain to accept nuclear waste or how much it will cost.

The latest estimate is $308 billion, and now the Energy Department says that might not be right. It is time that we stop this boondoggle, end this project and let us figure out a sane and sensible way of dealing with nuclear energy in this country.

Mr. Speaker, it seems that every time the Palestinian people take one step forward, they take two steps back. When Abu Mazen was elected, he pledged to root out terrorism and end corruption within the Palestinian Authority. Unfortunately, he has done nothing to help his people. He has continued the corruption that is rampant in the Palestinian Authority, and he has refused to disarm and dismantle the terrorists and their terrorist organizations.

We all know that Yaser Arafat did a tremendous disservice to the Palestinian people. He was a disgrace to humanity. Abu Mazen and the Fatah Party have done, sadly, no better. They had a historic opportunity to make peace. Instead, they chose a path of continued corruption, terror, and violence.

This resolution sends a strong and unambiguous message: if you choose terrorism, the United States will not support you. Road map to peace is also unambiguous. The Palestinian Authority must denounce terrorism, disarm and dismantle the terrorist infrastructure and shut down the terrorist organizations before, before, there can be a two-state solution.

Hamas has never accepted Israel's right to exist, and it has never accepted the peace process. It continues to support terrorism and violence. In fact, Hamas not only supports it, it is it. Since 1989, Hamas has killed more than

500 people, including more than two dozen American citizens.

Just last week, and this is after the election, so if anybody thinks being elected to the Palestinian Authority is going to moderate Hamas, just last week the leader of Hamas reiterated their commitment to destroy the Zionist state. Hamas also promised that the armed struggle will not end.

Hamas' control of the new Palestinian government further undercuts the ability of its government to engage in true reforms and further strengthens the enemies of Israel and those who oppose peace.

Hamas must disavow its stated goal of destroying Israel and change its charter to recognize Israel's right to exist as a free and independent Jewish state. Until the Palestinian government recognizes Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, renounces its demand for right of return, which will create two Palestinian states, not a Jewish state and a Palestinian state, ceases all forms of incitement and violence, condemns terrorism, dismantles its terrorist infrastructure, and, most important, removes terrorist organizations from the government, Congress must end all U.S. aid.

If negotiating with terrorists is not an option for this country, and it is not, then funneling Americans' hard-earned tax dollars to terrorists certainly is not an option either.

I argued unsuccessfully while I was standing in this very spot that the United States Congress should not give additional aid to the Palestinian Authority until they demonstrated with deeds, not rhetoric, with deeds that they were serious about making peace with Israel and took concrete steps to show us that they were indeed serious. Unfortunately, my colleagues did not agree with me, and we continued to fund Abu Mazen and the Palestinian Authority, although they did nothing to earn our trust and they certainly did nothing to earn taxpayers' hard-earned dollars.

I urge in this resolution that my colleagues stand with me in supporting the resolution that will end all U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority until Hamas recognizes Israel's right to exist and, indeed, does it with deeds, not words.

Mr. Speaker, due to a medical issue, I was unable to vote yesterday on rollcall No. 633, H. Res. 602, providing for the consideration of H.R. 2830, the Pension Protection Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Lantos for his leadership on this and so many other issues.

I rise tonight in strong support of H. Res. 575, a resolution that expresses the sense of the House that Hamas should not be permitted to participate in Palestinian elections, and I urge its immediate passage.

I would also like to thank my colleagues who helped author this resolution and move it expeditiously to the floor: Mr. Cantor, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr. McCaul, and Mr. Wexler.

The goal of this resolution is to send a strong and unambiguous message to Abu Mazen that Hamas and the other terrorist groups should not be allowed to participate in the upcoming Palestinian elections. They should be prohibited from participating in the government and the Palestinian Authority should take affirmative steps to disarm and dismantle them. When Abu Mazen was elected, he pledged to root out terrorism and end corruption in the Palestinian Authority. To say he has not lived up to his pledge would be a decided understatement.

I believe Yasser Arafat did a tremendous disservice to the Palestinian people; and I believe that if Abu Mazen does not step up soon, lead his people and do what he has promised to do, that he will also be doing a tremendous disservice to the Palestinian people.

The very first step of the road map to peace is not only the denunciation of terrorism. That is the easy part. It is the dismantling and the disarming of the terrorist infrastructure and terrorist organizations. Abu Mazen has yet to take this essential first step.

No one disputes that Hamas is a terrorist organization. It has conducted numerous suicide bombings inside Israel and is responsible for the death of countless innocent people. Hamas does not accept Israel's right to exist and has never accepted the peace process. They this week announced, I am sorry to say, they vowed to end the truce they negotiated with Israel and vowed it will end by the end of this year.

Instead of striking out against Hamas and instead of stepping up to the plate and disarming the terrorists and dismantling their terrorist organizations, Abu Mazen's latest strategy is to try to co-opt them and bring the terrorist organization Hamas into his government. Allowing terrorist organizations to participate in the election process will not see them wake up the day after the election, embrace each other, sing Kumbaya and strive for peace and recognition of Israel. Instead, it will give them a dangerous foothold in the Palestinian Authority within which they can operate and further embolden those who support terrorism and the destruction of the State of Israel.

Hamas' participation in the election can only continue a long-running cycle of violence and terror. It undercuts the ability of the Palestinian government to engage in true democratic reforms and further strengthens the enemies of Israel and those who oppose peace. Hamas and other terrorist groups should be banned from the upcoming elections and from any future role in government until and unless they recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, cease all forms of incitement and violence, condemn terrorism, and dismantle their terrorist infrastructures.

Mr. Speaker, the goal of passing today's legislation is to help businesses in the gulf coast region reopen their doors and get people back to work. However, this legislation excludes perhaps the most important industry in the region that employs over 50,000 people in Mississippi and Louisiana and pays over $800 million in State and local tax revenue, that is, the gaming industry. The gaming industry has made substantial contribution to the regional economy of the gulf coast and will invest billions of dollars as it rebuilds, making it an essential part of restoring employment, economic growth, and tax revenue to the area.

I am dismayed that the biased view of one congressman has resulted in this bill excluding a group of employers that provide good jobs and tax revenue to the hurricane-ravaged region. I am astounded that one Member who has a long-held contempt for the gaming industry can insert language in this legislation, which is supposed to be helping the victims of Katrina, that will prevent thousands of our fellow citizens from going back to work, going back to their homes, reuniting with their families, and begin to live a normal life again. I am angry that we are carving out an exception for one business in this legislation, a legitimate business, a well-regulated business, a business whose companies are traded on the New York Stock Exchange, a business that employs thousands of people in the region and generates millions of dollars in tax revenue. This makes no sense. And I am outraged, if I may say so, Mr. Speaker, that the Republican leadership has caved in and agreed to this provision because it is rumored that this congressman threatened to withhold his support from tomorrow's tax reconciliation vote unless his provision was put in the Katrina vote, contrary to what it will do to our fellow citizens.

Trading thousands of jobs for our fellow citizens for a vote is an affront to those people who need these gaming jobs to get back on their feet again. Shame on this body for allowing the gaming industry or any industry to be discriminated against in this legislation.

The gaming companies remain committed to the communities and the people in the hurricane-affected region. I hope Congress will come to our senses in conference and ensure that every business is treated fairly and given the opportunity to recover from Hurricane Katrina.

This Christmas, while we, Members of Congress, are sitting by our fireplaces in our comfortable homes, surrounded by our families, let us think about the thousands of victims of the Katrina hurricane who are homeless, who are jobless, away from their families this year and maybe next Christmas too, because this single congressman dislikes one business in this country and is putting his personal feelings above the well-being of our fellow citizens. This is a shame. It is an embarrassment, and we ought to rethink this and give tax breaks. If we are giving to one business, we should be giving to all and not be discriminating because of a personal dislike by one Member of this body.

Mr. Speaker, I voted to give President Bush the authority to go into Iraq. I'm not on the left; I'm not on the right. I'm on the side of our country and I'm on the side of our troops. I can't imagine why the Republicans have brought this Bush-Hunter resolution to the floor. How does this help our troops serving in Iraq? How does this help make our Nation safer?

For the past two years, the Republicans have taken any criticism of this war and labeled it as unpatriotic and as an attack on our troops. Criticizing the way the war has been prosecuted--criticizing the way it has been bungled--is not unpatriotic. It is the ultimate act of patriotism.

John Murtha is a 37-year veteran of the Marine Corps. He served in Vietnam. He was awarded the bronze star. He received two purple hearts. Now Mr. Murtha has provoked an important debate--one we should be having in this body. Mr. Murtha has the right to have these ideas discussed. Our troops have the right to have these ideas discussed. The American public has the right to have these ideas discussed.

We send young men and women to war. We are responsible for them. We must be diligent in our oversight. That's our duty.

What we are doing here tonight is a waste of time and does a tremendous disservice to our troops. Talk about patriotism--this is not patriotism. This is a cheap political stunt and an affront to those serving our Nation so far from home.

The President wants to stay the course. What does that mean? 700 attacks a week against our troops; no winning strategy; no plan; no end in sight.

Let us not embarrass ourselves any further, and vote against the Hunter resolution.

Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I do not plan to object, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana for an explanation of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I would like to thank Chairman Buyer, Ranking Member Evans and Subcommittee Chairman Miller, as well as Senator Craig and Senator Akaka for moving forward on this bill.

As a result of their cooperation, the men and women currently receiving benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs will receive a well-deserved increase in benefits as of January 1, 2006.

We must not allow the compensation received by veterans, disabled in service to our Nation, to erode in value as the cost of living rises. S. 1234, the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2005, will help our service-disabled veterans and their survivors maintain the purchasing power of their benefits in 2006 by providing a 4.1 percent increase in benefits.

Single veterans rated at 100 percent disabled will see their benefits rise from $2,299 a month to $2,393 a month. Veterans who are married or have other dependents will see their benefits increased proportionately. This bill will help VA beneficiaries maintain the value of their benefits.

No amount of money can adequately compensate our veterans for the deterioration of their health or families for the loss of a loved one. It is important that the benefits, which our Nation provides to partially compensate for such losses, do not lose their value over time.

In 2004, over 28,000 veterans in Nevada received disability compensation or pension payments from the VA, and thousands of Nevada families and survivors receive VA cash benefits. The action we are taking here today will help the Nevada veterans and families who depend on these VA benefits.

I am very disappointed that the bill does not contain a provision approved by the House earlier this year to include the transitional DIC benefit in the COLA. As a result, the value of the $250 transitional benefit paid to surviving spouses with minor children for their first 2 years of eligibility will unfortunately erode in value in 2006.

Unfortunately, our widows and orphans are going to have to survive on a stagnant benefit. Our Gold Star Wives, the spouses of veterans who have perished in our current conflict, and their children certainly deserve better than this.

I understand the urgency of passing this COLA so that veterans and their dependents will receive a timely increase in VA benefits. I hope that before this Congress recesses for the year, the increase in DIC benefits and other provisions passed by the House and Senate can be enacted into law. Those who have served this Nation deserve no less.

S. 1234 will receive my full support, and it deserves the support of all Members of this House.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), the chairman of the full committee.

Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I yield to the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth), ranking member of the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

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

I want to thank Chairman Buyer, Ranking Member Evans, Subcommittee Chairman Boozman, and Ranking Member Herseth for bringing this bill to the floor. Ms. Herseth has been detained at a legislative hearing before the Resources Committee concerning the bill she has introduced. I hope that she will be able to join us before the debate on the bill is completed, but I want to particularly thank her for her input into this important piece of legislation.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 3665. As amended, the bill before us would provide greater flexibility to the VA's Adaptive Housing Grant program. It also includes measures to extend the Department of Labor's Veterans Employment and Training Service. The bill also includes language from H.R. 1773, which Ms. Herseth introduced to make the Native American Veteran Home Loan program permanent.

Section 102 of the bill would make permanent the Native American Housing Loan program, currently a pilot program administered by the Veterans Administration since 1993. The Native American Housing Loan program has provided more than 443 direct loans nationwide since its inception. By all accounts, the pilot program has been a great success and, in fact, currently does not require any government subsidy.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that enactment of the provision would generate savings of $1 million over the next 5 years. Section 103 of the bill would authorize non-Native American veterans married to a Native American spouse and living on trust or tribal land to fully participate in this direct loan program. Because certain tribal sovereignty rules prohibit ownership interest by nonnative persons, they have been unable to qualify for this home loan program. The language in section 103 would make it possible for a nonnative military member or for a nonnative military member or veteran to qualify for a VA loan if he or she shares a meaningful interest rather than an ownership interest with their respective spouse in their home.

Madam Speaker, on this Friday we will celebrate and honor the service of our Nation's veterans. Hopefully, we will all be in our home districts attending Veterans Day parades and other activities that we share with our veterans. As I do so, I am mindful that over 3,000 veterans in Nevada are homeless. Most of them are living on the streets in Las Vegas. The number of homeless veterans in America is, I am sorry to say, a national disgrace and simply must be addressed. According to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, there are already 400 veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan who have sought shelter through homeless programs.

I strongly support the provision in H.R. 3665 which would reauthorize appropriations for the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program to help veterans get off the street and working again.

With increased efforts to deny VA benefits and, thereby, health care to veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder, I fear that our efforts to reduce the number of homeless veterans, many who are suffering from PTSD, may be at risk.

One homeless veteran who recently contacted the VA Committee had a VA claim pending for PTSD. We learned that because of a perceived pressure to deny claims, regional office adjudicators were afraid to accept the veteran's testimony of his Iraq combat experience, an article naming him and describing the attack, and a statement of his soldier passenger, who was wounded in the attack, as sufficient credible evidence of a stressor.

VA officials later acknowledged that the evidence provided by the veteran met the legal requirements and the claim was approved, finally.

This veteran's story is an example of how severely mentally disabled veterans are at risk of becoming homeless due to VA policies.

Congress must stop the administration's assault on veterans with severe PTSD. We must also provide opportunities to those veterans who are homeless due to their disabilities. H.R. 3665 will do just this.

I appreciate the cooperation of the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman) in including language I had suggested to eliminate the obsolete term ``helpless'' from title 38. Although severely disabled veterans may require significant help with activities of daily life, characterizing them as helpless is demeaning and, quite frankly, inaccurate.

The bill under consideration today will benefit our Nation's veterans and deserves the support of all Members of the House.

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

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from the great State of Hawaii (Mr. Case).

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, my community has the fastest growing senior population in the United States. I also have numbers of doctors that are telling me they can no longer afford to

care for their Medicare patients because of the Medicare reimbursement being so bad. We know that we have to fix this Medicare reimbursement for our doctors so they will continue to be able to afford to treat our senior citizens.

In the Senate reconciliation that they are introducing, they have a $10 billion fix so we could help the doctors, so they can continue to take care of our senior citizens. In the House version, they are saying they are not going to include the $10 billion, and the doctors are going to have to take care of themselves.

But the misery about this and the hypocrisy is the Republican leadership is telling the doctors, Don't worry about it. We're not going to put it in the budget reconciliation so that you can continue taking care of senior patients. We're going to put it in Labor-HHS.

Well, we have already passed Labor-HHS, and there is no $10 billion for the doctors.

So that means that we are perpetrating a fraud on the doctors, the patients, and the seniors in this country, and we need not to do that.