Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6221, as amended, the Veteran Owned Small Business Protection and Clarification Act of 2008. This bill, as amended, would amend title 38, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to include in each contract the Secretary enters for the acquisition of goods and services a provision that requires compliance with the contracting goals and preferences for small business concerns owned or controlled by veterans, and for other purposes.

H.R. 6221, as amended, does 3 very good things for veterans.

First, it closes a loophole in the service disabled veteran-owned business provisions in Public Law 109-461 to require that any VA agreement with other entities to provide contracting services include provisions to comply with those provisions.

Second, the bill would expand the types of VA work study jobs on college campuses to provide more jobs for student veterans, and widen interaction between veterans, the faculty, staff and most importantly, other students.

Finally, H.R. 6221, as amended, would take provisions from H.R. 6272, introduced by Congressman Welch to create the Military Occupational Specialty Transition (MOST) program, a modernized version of the old Service Members' Occupational Conversion and Training Act or SMOCTA.

Focusing on veterans whose military specialty does not translate well into civilian life and who do not have other training opportunities available under title 38, this bill will benefit veterans whose job skills no longer match what is needed by today's economy.

I appreciate our colleague from Vermont, Mr. Welch, for his bill which would renew funding for the old Service Members' Occupational Conversion and Training Act or SMOCTA. Again, in a bipartisan manner, the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee has brought us a bill that meets Mr. Welch's goal of providing a training program for veterans who finish military service with few or no skills that are transferrable to civilian life.

Mr. Speaker, I extend my gratitude to Chairman Filner, Subcommittee Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin and Ranking Member Boozman for working together to bring this bill to us as a bipartisan effort to make veterans more competitive in the job market.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6221.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 674, a bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to permanently establish the Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans, which is set to expire December 31, 2009.

I commend my colleague from Illinois, Luis Gutierrez for introducing this bill.

Mr. Speaker, in 1994, under Public Law 103-446, the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act, Congress established the Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans.

The Committee is comprised of veterans who represent their respective minority groups and are recognized authorities in fields pertinent to their needs. The Committee's goal is to: promote the use of VA programs, benefits, and services by minority veterans; make benefits and services more accessible to minority veterans; and, evaluate current programs and make recommendations on how VA can better serve minority veterans.

As I previously stated, authority for the Committee will expire December 31, 2009. By supporting H.R. 674, we eliminate the expiration date and permanently extend this important committee to ensure the perspectives of minority veterans are considered during the establishment of VA benefits and services.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5892, as amended, the Veterans Disability Benefits Claims Modernization Act of 2008, a bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to modernize the VA disability benefits claims processing system, to help ensure the accurate and timely delivery of compensation to veterans and their families.

I commend the leaders of the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, Chairman John Hall and Ranking Member Doug Lamborn, for introducing and developing this comprehensive bill. Their bipartisan efforts will help make substantial improvements to the veterans' benefits claims process.

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability compensation payments fulfill our Nation's primary obligation to make up for the economic losses and losses of quality of life that result from service connected injuries. In recent years, VA has required increasingly longer periods to process the thousands of claims it receives each year. This has resulted in a backlog of benefits claims that VA has been struggling to overcome.

This bipartisan bill is intended to improve benefits claims processing so that our veterans receive their benefits with the speed and accuracy that they deserve. It is comprised of a number of recommendations for improvement that originated in other bills. Such recommendations include: better utilization of information technology, a quality and training assessment program for the certification of each VA claims processor, and a study of a new rating schedule to help ensure that the VA rating schedule, which consists of a complex set of regulations used to determine the appropriate level of compensation for veterans' disabilities, adequately compensates veterans for both loss of earnings and loss of quality of life.

Our veterans, who have sacrificed so much for the freedoms we cherish, must be assured that the compensation they receive for disabilities is based on information that is both credible and fair.

By supporting H.R. 5892, we will initiate steps to ensure that VA benefits and services are of unsurpassed value to veterans.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Offered By: Mr. Buyer

Amendment No. 1: Page 34, line 21, after the dollar amount

insert ``(increased by $150,000,000)''.

Page 38, line 23, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced

by $150,000,000)''.

Page 40, line 9, after the dollar amount insert ``reduced

by $150,000,000)''.

Offered By: Mr. Buyer

Amendment No. 2: Page 34, line 21, after the dollar amount

insert ``(increased by $7,000,000)''.

Page 38, line 23, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced

by $7,000,000)''.

Page 40, line 9, after the dollar amount insert ``reduced

by $7,000,000)''.

Madam Speaker, I rise to honor and bid farewell to an exceptional leader, patriot, and friend, James M. Lariviere, as he retires from civilian Federal service. A Marine Corps Reserve colonel selected for promotion to brigadier general, he is returning to active duty to continue his distinguished military career.

Throughout his life Jim Lariviere has been a devoted servant to his country and fellow citizens. A native of Rochester, New York, he earned a bachelor's degree in history from the Citadel in 1979. During my freshman year at the Citadel, Jim personally ensured that I was ``squared away'' when I navigated the trials and tribulations of ``knob year'' in the Corps of Cadets. While at the Citadel, Jim distinguished himself with scholarship having worn academic gold stars, and with military bearing as a member of the junior sword drill, Summerall Guards, and as Regimental Adjutant for the Corps of Cadets.

Upon graduation, Jim was commissioned as an officer with the United States Marine Corps. During his time on active duty, Jim Lariviere commanded a force reconnaissance platoon in Beirut, Lebanon, and served as a company executive officer, company commander, assistant operations officer, and White House Social Aide. He is a graduate of the Amphibious Reconnaissance School, U.S. Army Ranger School and earned the privilege to wear the Navy Marine Corps Parachutist Insignia. In every assignment he excelled in his service, being recognized by numerous awards and medals, including: The Bronze Star, Meritorious Service Medal (2), Navy Marine Corps Commendation Medal (4), Joint Service Achievement Medal, Joint Meritorious Unit Citation, Afghanistan Campaign Medal (with 2 campaign stars), Global War on Terrorism Medal. Jim also holds a masters degree in national security affairs from Georgetown University and he is a graduate of the Air War College.

Jim left active duty, transitioned to the Marine Corps Reserve and joined my congressional staff in 1993, bringing his military values and experience to the United States House of Representatives. Jim successfully balanced his Reserve duties with a career on Capitol Hill. Initially, he worked on my office staff as the military legislative assistant handling national security, veterans', and technology issues. He also acted as the lead staff member for the House National Guard and Reserve Components Caucus. In February 1999, he joined the professional staff of the House Armed Services Committee as a member of the policy group where he had responsibility for a wide variety of defense policy issues including national security and military strategy, force structure policy, on-going military operations, peacekeeping, and military readiness policy.

In 2003, Jim Lariviere joined the firm of Holland & Knight LLP as a Senior National Security Policy Advisor, working directly with the late Congresswoman Tillie Fowler. He also served as a consultant to the Defense Policy Board. In May 2005, he returned to Capitol Hill as the Republican Staff Director of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs during the 109th Congress, when I was chairman. While staff director, he was ordered to active duty in Afghanistan from June through December 2006. While in Afghanistan as part of operation Enduring Freedom, he served as Deputy Director for Training Operations, Plans and Education at the Combined Security Assistance Command. During the same period, he also served as mentor to the G-3 of the Afghan National Army. For his military service in Afghanistan he was awarded the Bronze Star.

During his tenure as staff director, he led and supervised the committee and subcommittee staffs in their legislative and oversight work, which included the enactment of the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance Enhancement Act of 2005, which became Public Law 109-80, and the Veterans' Benefits, Health Care and Information Technology Act of 2006, which became Public Law 109-461.

When I became the Ranking Republican Member in 2007, Jim Lariviere continued as the Republican staff director. He was instrumental in the minority staff development of a Republican alternative budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2008 and 2009 and in a successful amendment to the Wounded Warrior Act, which was incorporated into the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, Public Law 110-181. His tireless efforts resulted in significant improvements in the care and treatment of injured or ill servicemembers returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Jim has spent his life dedicated to serving this Nation. As he takes yet another step in continuing that service, as a warrior, a leader, and a patriot in every facet, I am confident that he will do so with strong devotion to the country and to men and women who defend our freedom and way of life.

I am honored to call this family man my friend. He has earned the respect and admiration of all who know him and he embodies the principles and character that epitomizes what is expected of a model Marine Corps officer, or any officer.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me today in recognizing the remarkable career of Jim Lariviere and to thank him for his leadership and honorable service to our country. I say to him, ``Bravo Zulu'' and wish him, his wife, Virginia, and their four children, much success and happiness during the next chapters of their lives. ``Hit it smack''

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the Veterans Health Scholarship Act of 2008. This legislation would extend the authority of the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, to reinstate the Health Professional Scholarship Program and give priority to veterans in awarding these scholarships.

VA is known for its high quality health care. However, the supply of highly trained medical personnel is not growing as fast as the demand, and VA struggles to recruit highly trained health care professionals critical to providing veterans the care and services they need.

The Health Professional Scholarship Program was originally established to improve recruitment and retention and help reduce the national nursing shortage. VA lost an important tool to meet their current and anticipated staffing needs when the program expired in 1998 and was not reinstated. As concerns over recruitment and retention of health care professionals increase, it is especially important that we enhance opportunities to educate a new generation of VA health care providers. Reinstating the authorization for this program will provide VA another tool to attract qualified health professionals to care for our nation's veterans.

Even as VA is experiencing recruiting difficulties, many servicemembers from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom are trained combat medics responsible for providing frontline trauma care on the battlefield. When they come home, we can provide the opportunity for these new veterans to continue their medical education, and use their knowledge and experience to provide needed services to their fellow veterans.

Madam Speaker, the quality of health care available to our veterans is dependent on the ability of VA to recruit and retain qualified health care personnel. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in this effort to build a new generation of health care professionals and cosponsor the Veterans Health Scholarship Act of 2008.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, Electronic Reporting Act. This legislation would require VA to submit to Congress reports required by law in an electronic form.

VA is required to submit numerous reports to Congress on issues ranging from assistance provided to homeless veterans to the establishment of new cemeteries. This fiscal year we will receive over forty reports mandated in title 38, United States Code.

Requiring VA to submit these reports electronically would be more efficient and reduce paper waste. It would also maximize the utility of the information created, collected, and provided to Congress in these reports.

Madam Speaker, VA submits thousands of pages of reports to Congress each year and I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in this effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government information management.

Madam Speaker, I am introducing the Veterans Revenue Enhancement Act of 2008, which would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish today not more than seven consolidated patient accounting centers.

The concept of the Consolidated Patient Accounting Center, also known as CPAC, was included as a demonstration project in the Conference Report, House Report 109-95 and Conference Report 109-305, in 2005 accompanying H.R. 2528, requiring the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, to initiate a revenue improvement demonstration project within 60 days after enactment of the bill, Public Law 109-114. The VA followed the recommendations in the report, and created the Mid-Atlantic Consolidated Patient Accounting Center demonstration project located in Asheville, North Carolina.

A recent GAO report reiterates previous findings that third party billing and collection processes at the Department continue to be ineffective and limit the revenue received by VA from third party insurance companies. Hundreds of millions of dollars continue to go uncollected, dollars that could be used to further improve the quality and quantity of veterans' health care.

With the establishment by VA of the Mid-Atlantic Consolidated Patient Accounting Center in Asheville, North Carolina, the collection of third party revenues has improved significantly at the medical centers in VISN 6. By implementing best practices, a standardized revenue cycle for business processes and training of personnel, the majority of the GAO report recommendations on maximizing third party revenue collections have been met.

The demonstration project has proven to be very successful in enhancing the revenue of the department by more than $12.5 million in increased collections in FY 2007 and $6.5 million so far in FY 2008 to an overall $19 million total. Building on this success, my legislation would permit the VA to continue this successful venture at the Mid- Atlantic project in Asheville, North Carolina, and direct the Secretary to establish an additional six centers throughout the country in the next five years.

I urge my colleagues to support the Veterans Revenue Enhancement Act of 2008.

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

I rise in support of H.R. 2818, as amended, the Veterans Epilepsy Treatment Act of 2008. It's a bill to amend title 38 of the United States Code to provide for the establishment of Epilepsy Centers of Excellence in the Veterans Health Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

I would like to thank the Health Subcommittee chairman, Mike Michaud, and Ranking Member Jeff Miller for their work on the bill. They determined that existing six new centers spread throughout the country without utilizing the clinical and scientific expertise available within the VA's polytrauma rehabilitation centers was probably not the optimal approach. So working in a bipartisan manner, this legislation was amended to ensure that there will soon be five polytrauma rehabilitation centers.

We also need to recognize that we have many of these 89,000 veterans who live in rural areas and also will be traveling distances, we need to acknowledge, to these rehabilitation centers; so there is an energy cost issue, which we are going to address here in a moment.

The VA has a long history of providing specialized treatment and research on epilepsy. In 1972, recognizing that head trauma, whether mild or severe, is a risk factor for developing epilepsy, the VA created dedicated centers

to improve the quality of care for veterans who may develop posttraumatic epilepsy as a result of military service. Today the VA operates seven sites with advanced capabilities to monitor and perform epilepsy surgery.

There are, as I said earlier, approximately 89,000 veterans, many of whom also live in rural America, with epilepsy enrolled in the VA health care system. And with the prevalence of combat-related traumatic brain injury among our returning OEF and OIF servicemembers, it is important that the VA is a national leader in the prevention, treatment, and research on epilepsy.

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

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

Let me speak to a couple of matters relative here to the House in how we manage the House's business. First I will speak with regard to process.

We are bringing eight veterans bills to the floor all as individual bills. That is very concerning to me because these could have been placed all in one omnibus bill that we would then bring to the floor. It would create better management of the floor. So why is this brought as eight individual bills on suspension? My guess, Mr. Speaker, is that the House is now performing what I would call filling the time. Why are we filling time? Well, because this Congress isn't working on some of the most important issues facing this country.

We have about 35 legislative days left in this Congress. This Congress has not passed a single appropriations bill to run the government. This is a dysfunctional Congress, and we're failing to meet our responsibilities. So while we are not doing the responsibilities of the country, we have to fill time. So they turn to the Veterans' Affairs Committee and other committees and find what are all the bills that you've got out there that we can do on suspension, that we can do on the calendar? Let's fill the time. And that's what is happening here, and it's extremely bothersome to me.

Here the country is facing tremendous issues, whether it's the downturn of the economy, the issues relative to people leaving their homes. We have got an energy crisis with the challenge on how we're going to reduce our energy dependence on a lot of bad actors around the world. We have got the solvency of Medicare issue. We have got the Social Security issue. We have got the AMT patch. We have got immigration. No, this Congress, we're not going to work on those important issues, I guess must be the message that the country is receiving from our acts of today, because we're going to take up a lot of time here on the legislative calendar on eight individual veterans bills. Now, think about that. That's eight bills split up of 40 minutes on each bill. This is the House equivalent of dilatory tactics when it comes to working on what is important facing the country.

So I guess on the energy issue, I think my colleagues would immediately respond, well, my gosh, Steve, we just voted on price gouging. Okay. I think my Democrat colleagues think that to solve the energy crisis relative to the country, we are going to, let's see, tax the profits of oil companies. We're going to do price gouging legislation. Oh, there must be something going on out there in the futures market; so let's talk about speculators. Let's do nothing with regard to supply.

Now, I am in favor of these Centers of Excellence to advance and coordinate care for veterans with epilepsy. So why am I talking about these other issues? I'm talking about them because they are important issues also facing the country that this Congress is not addressing. And as we continue to work as a Congress to improve the quality of life for our veterans, we must examine the added burden that energy costs are placing upon those who served their country.

Americans are coping with increased energy prices, including veterans. Congress must act to decrease the energy costs. The energy bills we have been voting on in the House are fighting the smoke of the energy crisis in America, not fighting the fires. So my Democrat colleagues love to work on the demand side of the economic equation. Price is fundamental economics. You've got a supply and demand result in the increase in price.

We've got one of my colleagues here that wants a 50 cent consumption tax on gasoline. Why would they be proposing things like this? Well, you propose things like that because you want to compress demand on energy to change the American culture rather than opening up supplies.

Why is this such an important issue? It's an important issue because it impacts veterans. Energy price impacts veterans, and nationwide Americans are now spending nearly 4 percent of their aftertax income on gasoline.

So on this bill on epilepsy, we talked about the fact that we have got 89,000 veterans with epilepsy enrolled in the VA health care system. We now in this bill are saying that we are going to move them to the polytrauma centers. There are five polytrauma centers, which means that individuals to gain access to the polytrauma care centers now have to travel. How do they get there? They either get there through the airlines or through surface transportation. In order to do that, they're facing increased costs to the access of health care. That's why energy is also an important veterans issue.

We are importing over 60 percent of our oil from foreign countries, and as the price of gasoline increases, the cost of food, goods, and medical care go up. Veterans are being hit by increased prices at the pump, and Congress must make every effort to deal with the heart of the energy issue for every citizen and increase our energy supply. If we increase our supply, we will then decrease energy prices.

Many of America's veterans, as I said, live in rural areas, and they also then get hit the hardest by the increase in gasoline prices. While 4 percent may be the average amount Americans are paying, that figure has surpassed 13 percent in rural areas. Rural Americans are estimated to be paying now over $2,000 for gasoline this year, and this has a tremendous impact upon our--

Point of Order

I have the time, Mr. Speaker. I have not yielded for a point of order.

May I speak to the point of order?

Mr. Speaker, the bill before us creates these epileptic centers to be associated with the five polytrauma centers. In order for veterans to gain access to them, they have to be able to travel to get there. The increased price of energy is very important for veterans to be able to gain access to these centers.

It is pertinent, it is relevant, and it is material to this debate.

So have you overruled the chairman's point of order?

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair on the point of order.

I object.

I object.

Mr. Speaker, what I object to is the fact that the chairman of the committee must not care about the increased cost of energy prices on veterans in America. He must not care, Mr. Speaker, because he's so concerned that he wants to raise a point of order against me to silence the issue of the impact of energy prices at the VA on health care, on medical research?

Mr. Speaker, this is a very, very pertinent and important issue. The increased prices to the VA, a few years back we had an emergency supplemental, and part of that was because of the increase in energy costs to the VA. This is a pretty important issue.

So let me now embrace your counsel, Mr. Speaker, to me.

H.R. 2818, as amended, will improve the VA's research. Now why do I mention research? Well, because what we're doing here, we recognize the VA has a long history of providing specialized treatment and research on epilepsy. So now let's talk about the impact on energy prices on research. It's a proper nexus, would the Speaker not agree? The Speaker is stoic.

H.R. 2818, as amended, I believe it improves VA's research, but as we look at this, the research activities consume high amounts of energy, and these activities include using CT scans, MRIs, other medical imaging technology. We use medical testing and other laboratory devices. Research laboratories require high amounts of security to protect personal medical information on research subjects. Laboratory data may examine heating and cooling systems to control specimen temperatures to ensure viability in our research activities. All that requires energy and in fact energy prices will impact the delivery of care that we do at our epileptic centers.

Facility energy consumption also involves power to run computers, printers, scanners, copiers, shredders. Some of these research, medical research projects require specialized lighting and may occur after hours when VA physicians have time to work in their labs and analyze data when these systems would then be shut down.

From 2005 to 2007, the Department of Veterans Affairs' energy costs have increased by 20 percent. The VA's energy costs have increased 65 percent since the 2003 baseline set by Federal mandates in the OMB energy scorecard.

May I ask the Speaker how much time I have remaining.

The increasing cost of energy is affecting every sector of American life, including the services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs, which we are not immune to the effects of high fuel prices. Yet, our colleagues, it appears the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs committee, that is so upset now that I am talking about the increase in energy and its impact on the quality of care we can deliver in health care, are not providing the relief on energy costs. We should be looking at ways to reduce the energy burden on the VA.

So when I look at the energy baseline in 2003 in the VA on energy costs and its impact on how we can provide quality health care to our veterans, that baseline was $287.7 million. Today, that energy baseline--actually, my numbers are of 2007--was $475.5 billion. That is a 65 percent increase in VA utility expenses.

So with regard to the Speaker's counsel to me that I can talk about energy prices in the VA so long as there is a proper nexus, well, I think if we are talking about a 65 percent increase in fuel prices and its impact upon the VA and how we will be able to deliver not only quality research but also quality health care at our epileptic centers, I think is a pretty important issue.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

The gentlelady knows quite well, having been here a very long time, that the best way to utilize the floor time, which is extremely important on the important issues facing the country, is that we could have taken these eight veterans bills and consolidated them and brought them to the floor. That is not what we have done.

Half of the bills that we are talking about here today, Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentlelady, is that they are naming bills. They are naming bills. We could have managed the time of the floor much better.

So the gentlelady was absolutely correct. No one here should try to attempt to spin my remarks about filling time as if somehow veterans substantive legislation is not important. The fact that the time on the floor is what is extremely important.

We have 35 legislative days, approximately, to go. I know you're praising leadership, Ms. Brown, but this Congress, we have not done one appropriations bill to run this country. Mr. Speaker, I think that is correct. I think there are 12 legislative bills. We haven't done any of them. None of them have come to the House floor.

I yield to the gentlelady.

I reclaim my time. When the gentlelady brought up with regard to what you did when you were in charge--I will just share this with the gentlelady--the bills that have been brought to the floor here under suspension, in the past, for years now you and I have work together and served on the Veterans' Affairs Committee. Any time the bill would actually come to the floor, it was always by agreement between the ranking and the chairman and other members of interest, always by consensus and by agreement.

That is not what happened here today. That is not. We did that with regard to seven bills. At the last moment, another bill gets added. We had some general concerns with regard to the language in the bill. But, no, the chairman is going to have his way.

So I just share with the gentlelady that he wanted to roll the minority, no differently than how the Speaker has rolled the committee with regard to the GI Bill and others.

I wanted the gentlelady to know when you brought up the issue about, Well, here's what occurred when you were in charge, we had great deference to the Speaker and the access to the floor.

My point is that because this Congress has now chosen not to work on these very important issues facing the country, whether it's decreasing the energy prices, on immigration, solvency of Social Security, Medicare, all of these list of issues, we are not doing right now. So we need to be able to say, Okay, what are we going to do with our time. So we take the eight veterans bills that we have and split them each up individually, with 40 minutes on each bill.

I yield to the gentlelady.

I reclaim my time. If you want to honor the veteran, then help me help this Congress and the American people reduce energy prices that impact upon the VA and other departments of government, but in particular, our veterans today, this bill before us deals with the epilepsy centers. And in order for these patients to gain access to these epileptic centers, they are either going to have to fly or they have got to drive great distances to get there, and there is going to be a cost increase to do that.

So if we are facing now from 2003 to today a 65 percent increase in energy baseline at the Department of Veterans Affairs, carry that across all government. So, today we are going to honor the veterans? We can't do things in a vacuum, I would say, Mr. Speaker. We have to be holistic with regard to how we apply our policies that we do here in Congress.

So with regard to caring for the Nation's veterans, for which we all embrace, we can only do that if we can increase the quality of our health care; at the same time, increasing the access. If we don't work on the increase in energy prices, then it has a depression then upon the access to quality health care.

So we can invest all the moneys we like on improving the quality of care, but if we can't also get them access, then have we achieved the goal for which we desire?

I yield to the gentlelady.

Reclaiming my time, I appreciate that your own chairman did not object to your words. I voted for your Amtrak bill and I support the increase in our transportation, and I appreciate the deference of the chairman for not objecting to your words being outside of the nexus of the bill. I think they were inclusive of the nexus of the bill, Mr. Speaker, because it is about transportation and how our veterans gain access to the health care system. So I also appreciate the indulgence of the Chair by permitting the gentlewoman to speak and not silencing an individual Member's words on the House floor.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I want to thank the gentleman from Colorado. He is a very valuable member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee. He and I have traveled part of the world together and I have tremendous respect for him. He also knows the Veterans' Affairs Committee works best when it works in a bipartisan fashion. So I turn to my good friend and ask for that help and assistance and best counsel that he can give to the chairman to stop the divisiveness that occurs on the committee by the actions he has been taking.

With that, I embrace the gentleman from Colorado. The gentleman should also know if the House is not going to address the big energy issues that also face America, and in particular your State with regard to oil shale and being able to access important sources of oil for this country, then I have to be able to create the nexus, Mr. Chairman, where I can, to talk about the impact of energy on this country and the impact upon veterans in this country.

With that, I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2818, as amended, and, with that, I yield back.

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

Mr. Speaker, my name is pronounced BOO-yer, B-u-y-e-r. It looks like ``buyer.'' The descent is from Alsace-Lorraine, pronounced de BOO-yea, and you just Americanized it. But we refer to it as BOO-yer. Thank you.

In the previous debate, Mr. Speaker, I would like the Record to properly reflect that the chairman had made a comment with regard to four naming bills that was not accurate at all. I support consideration of this naming bill and three other veterans' naming bills on the schedule today. I do wish to correct the record regarding the statement I understand Chairman Filner to have made during early consideration of H.R. 2818 that I, quote, ``objected to the consideration of the veterans' naming bills today, all four of them.''

While I do not think Chairman Filner intended to dissemble about the matter, I thought I detected his impish grin for which he is so well- known. In any event, Mr. Speaker, I want to make clear that I support the consideration of veterans' naming bills.

I did ask Chairman Filner by way of my staff director to his to address specific drafting concerns I have about H. Res. 1291 before scheduling the resolution for the suspension calendar today; but that was not done so I will try to clarify the matter on the resolution with the author of the bill when it is considered.

I also need to clarify for the Record in the last debate that in response to Mr. Salazar's remarks, my dear friend from Colorado, that ``all of these bills were passed through committee.''

The only bill which we are considering right now, Mr. Speaker, that was passed through the committee is H. Res. 1098. It was marked up and reported out of the Veterans' Affairs Committee. The other seven bills are being brought straight to the floor without committee report or action.

As the ranking member of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I have an obligation to help ensure that veterans and their families have access to the benefits and services they so richly deserve. More importantly, I have been an advocate for military members and veterans almost my entire life. I have been in uniform with the United States Army Reserves both on and off active duty now for 28 years. For the last 16 years, I have simultaneously served in Congress as I have also been in the Army Reserves. It is a great part of who I am. It is for this reason that I am proud to support H. Res. 1098 which supports the goals and ideals of the Year of the American Veteran.

As the chairman stated earlier today, there are over 25 million veterans in the United States who sacrificed by defending the freedoms we enjoy as Americans, and supporting the ideals of liberty all over the world.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution recognizes those sacrifices and commemorates the service of veterans in times of peace and war. This resolution also encourages the people of the United States to join the Commission of the Future of America's Veterans in celebrating the year 2008 as the ``Year of the American Veteran.''

Before we pass this resolution, I believe that my colleagues should also pause for a moment and say why is this Congress bringing this resolution to the floor at this time. I view bringing this resolution to the floor at this time as a continued matter of the chairman attempting to inoculate the majority, inoculate because the Democrats who control this Congress, they want to bring a bill to the floor that would cut a monthly pension to wartime elderly, disabled and indigent veterans in the amount of nearly a billion dollars. So before the Democrats take nearly a billion dollars away from war-time disabled, indigent, homebound veterans, they want to stand and put their arms around veterans and say, We are going to name 2008 the Year of the American Veteran so it makes them look good just before they take a billion dollars from the most vulnerable veterans.

I need to inform not only the Members but the country so they know what this Congress is about to do. I believe it is a matter of principle that the Nation should not be taking money from one group of deserving veterans to fund someone else. In this case, the attempt is to take this series of dollars and if we adopt what the chairman had done in the full committee, it would be to take nearly this $1 billion and make these payments that would then go to Filipinos who fought with the United States during World War II. If we pick up what the Senate had done, they take nearly the billion dollars and they spread it out among a number of veterans programs of which a smaller portion then would be with regard to the Filipinos.

I bring that to everyone's attention because the President of the Philippines is in the United States and is here to deliver a resolution that passed through their legislature wanting our country to know that if Mr. Filner and this Congress is successful, they will not offset any moneys the United States will be sending to the Philippines.

So this matter before the House is very serious. The American people, Mr. Speaker, should know and all Members should clearly know that before we say that 2008 is the Year of the Veteran, we better make sure that is exactly what we mean. That we embrace those ideals before we take nearly a billion dollars and cut that from the very same soldiers that fought right next to those World War II Philippine veterans.

You think about this, we make it a law and say if someone is about to die, well actually, let me rephrase that.

We believe it is shameful and therefore make it against the law to actually go up and put your hand in the pocket of someone who is dead and steal from that person, take money away from them. Well, I think that is right. We should do that.

But then what are we about to do here with regard to these wartime elderly and indigent, homebound veterans whom are the most vulnerable. Many are lying in a bed. They are homebound. They are 60 percent or greater disabled, and now we are saying Congress, we are going to deny that monthly pension that goes to you. We are going to stop it, take it away from you. And oh, by the way, we are going to give it to the living because you are about to die, so we are going to spread it among other veterans, which will be the nonresident alien Filipinos that served valiantly in World War II.

Now, if in fact that's what Congress wants to do, fund it with some other source, don't take it from this vulnerable population. When I talked about what the Senate bill approved--actually, when I referred to it as almost $1 billion, it's $912 million in pension benefits for these wartime elderly, indigent, severely disabled, or homebound American veterans. A portion of the funding saved by this unprecedented cut in veterans' benefits would be used to fund, if we followed Chairman Filner's view, which would be a very oversized pension for World War II Filipino veterans; or if we followed the Senate's

version, we would take those moneys, reduce the size of the pensions and spread it among other veterans. We would be doing this in the very same year in which the chairman is asking we make the Year of the American Veteran.

Now, I suspect that most Americans would be shocked and dismayed that any Member of Congress, regardless of what party they are in, would propose such a drastic cut. But that is exactly what the chairman intends to do very soon.

What is more ironic is that today we are here on the floor to consider this worthy resolution that will recognize this year as the Year of the American Veteran while in the same stroke, this very Congress wants to cut veterans' benefits from the very same people from which we are honoring with this resolution.

The bill that I am referring to is Senate 1315 as amended which passed out of the Senate in April, and a similar bill that I earlier had mentioned is H.R. 760 as amended, which passed the House Committee on Veterans Affairs last July. Both of these bills contain this cut of nearly $1 billion.

When the Democrat majority passed these bills out of the Senate and out of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, they voted to eliminate, as I said, a special monthly pension for severely disabled veterans over 65 who were receiving pensions for wartime service. This special monthly pension provides an additional payment of up to $2,200 per year to the most severely disabled veterans.

In 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims overturned the Department of Veterans Affairs decision that denied the special monthly pension to an 86-year-old legally blind World War II veteran named Robert A. Hartness, who was also receiving a VA pension granted to poor, disabled veterans. The court reversed the VA's denial of benefits to Mr. Hartness and required them to begin paying this monthly pension. The court held that the United States Code requires an award of a special monthly pension to an eligible veteran for VA nonservice-connected disability pension if, in addition to being at least 65 years old, the veteran has a disability rating of at least 60 percent or is permanently housebound.

This, in the Year of the American Veteran, Senate 1315 and H.R. 760 would override the court's decision.

According to the VA, more than 20,200 veterans could be affected by this unprecedented cut in veterans' benefits. This cut in veterans' benefits is opposed by the American Legion, AMVETS, the National Association of Uniform Services, the Gold Star Wives of Americans, and other veterans' service organizations.

The following excerpt is from an April 25, 2008, letter to all Members of Congress: ``The American Legion believes the sacrifice of these heroes warrants relief. Balancing the books on the backs of the very patriots that protected and defended this Nation is unconscionable. Don't make a grave mistake in the name of fairness, equality, or even fiscal responsibility. Do what is right.''

Well, I wholeheartedly agree. Congress has an obligation to protect these vulnerable veterans, and it's because I believe they have no voice, and indeed many of them are so severely disabled, they are housebound, and require aid and attendance.

While I recognize the service of the Filipino veterans of World War II, those who advocate for their compensation should do so from other funding sources. It should not be at the expense of our needy veterans.

I believe that we should not cut benefits from aging veterans who need us most to fund new entitlements. To do so would violate the principle of honor that defined their service and our obligation to both them and the Nation they served.

Mr. Speaker one of the provisions of the resolutions states, ``Resolved, that the House of Representatives (1) encourages the American people to recognize and acknowledge the sacrifices the American veteran demonstrates in the name of freedom.''

How can the House of Representatives encourage the American people to acknowledge the sacrifices of American veterans when very soon afterwards, this very same Congress that is supposed to represent the people wants to vote to cut nearly $1 billion from these wartime elderly, indigent, disabled veterans who need it most? We are sending veterans, servicemembers, and the American people the wrong message if we do this.

So I would remind my colleagues who vote in support of this resolution to please recognize that when this legislation may come soon to the floor. Because if my colleagues join me in embracing our Nation's veterans, particularly those who are disabled by sacrifice for the ideals and the heritage of this Nation and truly want to thank them by naming 2008 the Year of the American Veteran, then I ask you do not cut their veterans' benefits if this bill is brought to the floor.

I urge my colleagues to support the resolution, but I do not support the rationale of continued inoculation and a mixed message that will result in this cut of nearly $1 billion from these wartime elderly, disabled, and indigent veterans.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members to support the chairman's resolution.

I yield back all my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, it looks like ``buyer'' but it's pronounced BOO-yer. It comes from Alsace-Lorraine, along the Rhine, and it was pronounced de BOO-yea. You just Americanized my name by calling me ``Buyer.'' We sort of Americanized de Buyer as referring to it as BOO- yer. You are now the second Speaker pro tem who has taken the well who has done so.

Perhaps I need to introduce myself to you. So for that, I apologize.

I rise in support of House Resolution 1231, a bill which would support the goals and ideals of Vietnam Veterans Day and calls upon the American people to recognize such a day. I thank my colleague, Mr. Shuler of North Carolina, for his efforts in bringing the bill to the House floor.

The American participation in the conflict of Vietnam began in March 1959 and continued until March 29, 1973, when the last remaining members of the United States Armed Forces were withdrawn from Vietnam. The conflict itself continued until April 30, 1975. During this conflict, considered the longest military conflict in U.S. history, over 3 million veterans answered their Nation's call to duty. More than 58,000 servicemembers lost their lives, and over 300,000 were wounded. This bill would designate for the first time a national day to recognize Vietnam veterans and commend them for their service to a grateful Nation.

While this resolution is belated, it reflects a better perspective on those who served in an unpopular war and who came home to indifference or outright hostility. That was wrong, and today, we acknowledge that our Vietnam veterans deserved much better.

Now, we recognize also that there are some that perhaps did not honor these veterans in the way in which they should have been, but I also want to recognize there were many people in the country that did recognize their service and honor them.

My grandfather was a World War I veteran who was a Legion commander of the post in Francesville, Indiana. My father then later became that very same commander. And I remember, even as a young man, the discussions about Vietnam and the support. And I remember a young man who even baby-sat for the four kids and later went on to Vietnam, and I remember the discussions.

But I came from a small town, and I don't remember the hostilities. I remember seeing war protesters on TV, and I remember the term ``hippy.'' I didn't even know what that meant, and I remembered all these things happening as a young man in the 1960s and early 1970s. And it was challenging for me because I didn't share that perspective. I wasn't brought up in a family that had the perspective of public protest and war protesting and those of whom would spat upon someone in uniform and treat them in outward disgrace.

I never understood that. I could never get there to understand that. I understand today that those of whom may have done that in the follies of their youth are filled with guilt, and I'm glad that they are overcoming those types of feelings.

And I will embrace what the chairman had just said, when he said never confuse the war with the warrior. And I think he's absolutely right. And so the country had learned some painful lessons with regard to the Vietnam War, and so if you've got challenges, don't take them out on the warrior, and so I embrace the chairman's remarks.

I was trained as a young ROTC cadet at The Citadel by Vietnam veterans, and I hold the Vietnam veteran in pretty high self-esteem because of the challenge that they went through in a guerrilla war. You know, they never lost a battle. Our soldiers didn't lose a battle, but they ended up losing a war. And we

learned a lot, also as a military force, in guerrilla tactics. And a lot of that is coming home to roost here in the successes that General Petraeus had also used here with regard to the surge.

In the war in which I had served in, the first Gulf war, that war, the first Gulf war, its success came from the leadership of the Vietnam veteran. Those Vietnam veterans were, in fact, the senior NCOs, and they were the general officers and the senior colonels, and they knew the mistakes of Vietnam. They also knew that in Vietnam it was as soon as they hit the ground, they wanted to know when their rotation would end, when do they get to go home. And so when we went in the first Gulf war, it was nothing about rotation. It was all about we're here to do a job, we do the job and get to go home.

So that leadership, the senior leadership from Vietnam, had a great impact upon our military heritage and our legacy.

And so acknowledging the service and the honored sacrifice of the Vietnam veterans, I want to thank the chairman for doing that. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

I yield back my time.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

I rise in support of H.R. 2245, a bill to designate the Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Wenatchee, Washington, as the Elwood ``Bud'' Link Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clinic. I commend my colleague from Washington, Doc Hastings, for introducing this bill.

Bud was a very outspoken Navy veteran of World War II. Along with his friend and fellow veteran Bill Forte, he worked tirelessly with local veteran service organizations and elected officials to establish this outpatient clinic in Wenatchee, Washington, which is about 148 miles from Seattle. Bud is recognized as the catalyst behind this outpatient clinic, but unfortunately, he passed away before seeing its opening.

This selfless example of service to veterans is an inspiration to us all and certainly should be recognized. Memorializing Bud by renaming the clinic will recognize his service as both a seaman and as a veteran advocate.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I urge my colleagues to adopt this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4264, a bill to name the Department of Veterans Affairs Spinal Cord Injury Center in Tampa, Florida, as the ``Michael Bilirakis Department of Veterans Affairs Spinal Cord Injury Center.''

Mr. Michael Bilirakis served in the United States Air Force from 1951 to 1955 and served Florida's Ninth District as Congressman for 24 years, from 1983 to 2007. As a veteran, Mike wanted to be a strong veterans' advocate in Congress, and specifically requested to be appointed to a seat on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Those of us who served with Mike on the committee well remember his hard work on what the chairman just spoke about, the issue of concurrent receipt. Since his first introduction of the legislation in the 99th Congress to eliminate the offset of the military pension

in order to receive the VA disability compensation, Mike consistently worked each Congress to have this legislation passed, including reintroducing the bill each consecutive Congress in which he had served.

When I served on the House Armed Services Committee as chairman of Military Personnel in the late 1990s, I went to Mr. Bilirakis and informed him that I had $25 million, and I wanted to address the issue of concurrent receipt. And what we did was we first took that $25 million and we said we're going to take care of those 100 percent combat-disabled veterans. And Mike and I felt pretty good about what we had done. We had moved incrementally, but we were going to take on this issue. Boy, did we find out that in the very next Congress we were being attacked. Here we thought we were doing great things on behalf of the veterans' community, and then Mr. Bilirakis and I then began to be attacked by all these other veterans who did not receive the benefits of concurrent receipt. Here we thought we were trying to do that which was best, open up the issue of concurrent receipt, address the 100 percent combat-disabled veterans, and then all of a sudden Michael Bilirakis and I were being attacked because we didn't do it for everyone. And Mike always took on these issues with great humor, self- deprecating humor, and for that I have great respect for him.

He also fought for the Survivor Benefit Plan and improvements for the widows of military retirees, dependency and indemnity compensation and survivors' benefits, veterans' equitable resource allocation, benefits and health care for former prisoners of war, hospice care for veterans, as well as the designation of the National Women Veterans Recognition Week.

Additionally, Congressman Michael Bilirakis sought and obtained funding for the following projects to serve veterans within his congressional district in the State of Florida. The Port Richey Outpatient Clinic, the Spinal Cord Injury Center at the James Haley VA Medical Center. We have the Florida National Cemetery, the Land O'Lakes Nursing Home, and the Sub-Regional Veterans Office in Tampa, Florida. Among his top priorities was obtaining the funding and resources for the Spinal Cord Injury Center located at the VA Medical Center in Tampa, Florida.

Mr. Speaker, for all of his outstanding work on behalf of our Nation's veterans, it is most appropriate today that we consider this legislation to name the Spinal Cord Injury Center after Michael Bilirakis.

I had the opportunity to tour this facility. And I welcome all of my colleagues, if you ever have the chance to be in Tampa, to visit the polytrauma center; go by this spinal cord facility. It is one of the most remarkable facilities that we have in the country in which we care for these veterans. And it's only fitting, since Mike worked so hard on this particular facility, that it be named in his honor.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller) may consume, the ranking member of the Health Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield such time as he may consume to Gus Bilirakis of Florida, the son of Michael Bilirakis.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as she may consume to Dr. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida.

Mr. Speaker, our good friend, Michael Bilirakis, and his wife, Evelyn, I'm sure are listening right now. And to my good friend Michael, I know this is a little uncomfortable listening to your colleagues say nice things about you while you're alive, so I thank the chairman for doing this bill.

And we recognize you, Michael Bilirakis, because your presence here was significant. You heard a very personal admission on behalf of the chairman. And I think all of us on the committee could say the very same thing that the chairman had said. Michael was very good at keeping and maintaining civility, and it's about who he was as a person.

I also had the opportunity to serve with him on the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. And we honor his work, not only on behalf of America's veterans, but I also remember his work on the Health Subcommittee. It worked out very well, his knowledge of Energy and Commerce along with his work on the Health Subcommittee on the House Veterans' Affairs Committee. And he was able to integrate his work with Health and Human Services and NIH and research and met with the VA and research. Your work is highly recognized and remembered by the House.

But I also know that, Michael, if you were still here, you would be just as concerned as I am with regard to the high cost of energy because you voted on a lot of efforts to bring down energy prices for all Americans, which include our veterans.

So with that I urge all my colleagues to support the legislation before us in naming this spinal cord facility on behalf of Michael Bilirakis.

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

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4289, a bill to name the Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Ponce, Puerto Rico, as the ``Euripides Rubio Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clinic.''

I commend my colleague Mr. Fortuno of Puerto Rico for introducing the bill.

I cannot improve upon the words of Chairman Filner. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and honor the extraordinary valor of Captain Euripides Rubio.

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

General Leave