Floor Statements

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res 278, and I want to thank Deborah Halvorson, a member of the committee, for introducing the legislation. It expresses a sense of the Congress that a grateful Nation supports and salutes the Sons and Daughters in Touch on its 20th anniversary that is being held on Father's Day, 2010 at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial here in Washington, D.C., the District of Columbia.

During the conflict in Vietnam, more than 20,000 children lost a parent. These children suffered a profound loss and deserve the gratitude and appreciation of the Nation for the sacrifice made by their families. Founded in 1990 to join together the children of those who lost their fathers during this conflict, the Sons and Daughters in Touch work to locate, unite, and provide support to other sons and daughters and other family members with regard to

those who died and remain missing as a result of the Vietnam War.

The organization works to promote healing through networking and special projects, and it regularly addresses high schools and college classes in the hopes of providing education on the historical and emotional legacies of war. Today, through local chapters' events, this organization has reunions and partnerships with the veterans' community.

These sons and daughters have become examples of America's resilience. It is fitting that we remember the contributions and the legacies left behind by those who served and who made the ultimate sacrifice for their Nation. These young men and women left their homelands to fight on foreign soil, answering their Nation's call to duty. They served honorably and often with merit and honor.

This Father's Day, the Sons and Daughters in Touch will be honoring their fathers on their 20th-year reunion. With a new generation of children who recently suffered the loss of parents in current conflicts, the members of the Sons and Daughters in Touch will be able to provide them with support and encouragement for years to come. In honoring the children of those lost during the Vietnam War, we honor the men and women who served during that conflict, and we remember their sacrifices to a grateful Nation.

It is always very, very important to tell the story, not only by those who served in war but also with regard to those who kept the watch fires burning and remained home--not only by the wives but also by the widows and by the children. It is important to tell their stories, to actually convey their stories.

At times, those of us who have served this Nation in war have come back home and have gotten upset with individuals who may not share the same dimension of our experience, and we can get upset with them just as easily as they can get upset with regard to whatever conflict we participated in. Sometimes we judge the world through our own prism and our own dimensions, and we have our own value systems. Yet, unless we are able to convey the stories, how can we even hope that someone would be able to understand? So, when the widows and, in fact, the orphans of those who lost their lives in service to this country tell their stories, it helps others to understand the sacrifice.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res 278, and I want to thank Deborah Halvorson, a member of the committee, for introducing the legislation. It expresses a sense of the Congress that a grateful Nation supports and salutes the Sons and Daughters in Touch on its 20th anniversary that is being held on Father's Day, 2010 at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial here in Washington, D.C., the District of Columbia.

During the conflict in Vietnam, more than 20,000 children lost a parent. These children suffered a profound loss and deserve the gratitude and appreciation of the Nation for the sacrifice made by their families. Founded in 1990 to join together the children of those who lost their fathers during this conflict, the Sons and Daughters in Touch work to locate, unite, and provide support to other sons and daughters and other family members with regard to

those who died and remain missing as a result of the Vietnam War.

The organization works to promote healing through networking and special projects, and it regularly addresses high schools and college classes in the hopes of providing education on the historical and emotional legacies of war. Today, through local chapters' events, this organization has reunions and partnerships with the veterans' community.

These sons and daughters have become examples of America's resilience. It is fitting that we remember the contributions and the legacies left behind by those who served and who made the ultimate sacrifice for their Nation. These young men and women left their homelands to fight on foreign soil, answering their Nation's call to duty. They served honorably and often with merit and honor.

This Father's Day, the Sons and Daughters in Touch will be honoring their fathers on their 20th-year reunion. With a new generation of children who recently suffered the loss of parents in current conflicts, the members of the Sons and Daughters in Touch will be able to provide them with support and encouragement for years to come. In honoring the children of those lost during the Vietnam War, we honor the men and women who served during that conflict, and we remember their sacrifices to a grateful Nation.

It is always very, very important to tell the story, not only by those who served in war but also with regard to those who kept the watch fires burning and remained home--not only by the wives but also by the widows and by the children. It is important to tell their stories, to actually convey their stories.

At times, those of us who have served this Nation in war have come back home and have gotten upset with individuals who may not share the same dimension of our experience, and we can get upset with them just as easily as they can get upset with regard to whatever conflict we participated in. Sometimes we judge the world through our own prism and our own dimensions, and we have our own value systems. Yet, unless we are able to convey the stories, how can we even hope that someone would be able to understand? So, when the widows and, in fact, the orphans of those who lost their lives in service to this country tell their stories, it helps others to understand the sacrifice.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3885, to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out a pilot program on dog training therapy.

This bill would require the Department of Veterans Affairs to establish a 5-year pilot program in at least three medical centers for assessing the effectiveness of treating postdeployment mental illness, such as PTSD, through assistance dog training.

The pilot would allow veterans battling these invisible wounds to assist certified dog trainers in training assistance animals. The veterans will work with their dogs in their care, the trainers who are guiding the curriculum and with other wounded warriors to train dogs to become valuable therapy animals, with the animals having learned some 90 different commands. At the same time, the veterans learn valuable lessons about themselves and their world, which they need to learn so they can recover and reintegrate into society.

Once trained, the therapy dogs will be provided to other disabled veterans to aid them in daily activities, like opening doors, retrieving fallen items, et cetera. As an added benefit, the veteran dog trainers are provided vocational experience should they choose to pursue service dog training as a career path.

Just as Chairman Filner said, there are similar programs that are very successful at Palo Alto and at Walter Reed, and trying to replicate this, I think, is extremely important. These veterans who are participating are seeing great improvements, not only in their sleep but in their social interaction, in their emotional regulation, patience, trust, sense of purpose, and personal meaning. All of these things are extremely important for veterans to be able to reintegrate into society. Some of them have even been able to reduce their medications as a result of lowering their anxiety levels, which, I think, is extremely important. As we continue to hear these stories of healing and hope, I think this bill goes a long way toward giving the necessary assurances to these veterans.

Madam Speaker, I know there are few things we take as seriously as our commitment to serving those who have served us in combat, especially when they return home with physical and mental scars. So, if there is anything that we can do to be helpful to them, we would like to do that. You know, sometimes the obvious can be right in front of us. We all know that cherished feeling of having a pet--we learned it as children--and if there is anything that we can do to touch the heart of a veteran which can help him in the healing process, it is a good thing.

So I want to thank my colleague, former Chairman and now Ranking Member Brown, for bringing this bill. This pilot will provide much- needed scientific grounding into these dynamics and into the efficacy of a therapeutic model that will help these veterans. I think this is a wonderful bill.

I want to thank Chairman Filner and subcommittee Chairman Mike Michaud for their leadership and for their assistance in moving this bill forward.

Once again, I know Henry Brown is going to be retiring, and we are going to miss his leadership on the Veterans' Affairs Committee. It is only fitting that Henry would bring a bill such as this. His own daughter was diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus, so he knows the need of having not only compassion for people but also compassion for animals. He knows how it can touch people and promote their healing. Henry's deep commitment to helping others in need and, in particular, our veterans is unparalleled, so I want to thank Henry Brown for bringing this bill to the floor for consideration today.

I encourage all of my colleagues to support the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3885, to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out a pilot program on dog training therapy.

This bill would require the Department of Veterans Affairs to establish a 5-year pilot program in at least three medical centers for assessing the effectiveness of treating postdeployment mental illness, such as PTSD, through assistance dog training.

The pilot would allow veterans battling these invisible wounds to assist certified dog trainers in training assistance animals. The veterans will work with their dogs in their care, the trainers who are guiding the curriculum and with other wounded warriors to train dogs to become valuable therapy animals, with the animals having learned some 90 different commands. At the same time, the veterans learn valuable lessons about themselves and their world, which they need to learn so they can recover and reintegrate into society.

Once trained, the therapy dogs will be provided to other disabled veterans to aid them in daily activities, like opening doors, retrieving fallen items, et cetera. As an added benefit, the veteran dog trainers are provided vocational experience should they choose to pursue service dog training as a career path.

Just as Chairman Filner said, there are similar programs that are very successful at Palo Alto and at Walter Reed, and trying to replicate this, I think, is extremely important. These veterans who are participating are seeing great improvements, not only in their sleep but in their social interaction, in their emotional regulation, patience, trust, sense of purpose, and personal meaning. All of these things are extremely important for veterans to be able to reintegrate into society. Some of them have even been able to reduce their medications as a result of lowering their anxiety levels, which, I think, is extremely important. As we continue to hear these stories of healing and hope, I think this bill goes a long way toward giving the necessary assurances to these veterans.

Madam Speaker, I know there are few things we take as seriously as our commitment to serving those who have served us in combat, especially when they return home with physical and mental scars. So, if there is anything that we can do to be helpful to them, we would like to do that. You know, sometimes the obvious can be right in front of us. We all know that cherished feeling of having a pet--we learned it as children--and if there is anything that we can do to touch the heart of a veteran which can help him in the healing process, it is a good thing.

So I want to thank my colleague, former Chairman and now Ranking Member Brown, for bringing this bill. This pilot will provide much- needed scientific grounding into these dynamics and into the efficacy of a therapeutic model that will help these veterans. I think this is a wonderful bill.

I want to thank Chairman Filner and subcommittee Chairman Mike Michaud for their leadership and for their assistance in moving this bill forward.

Once again, I know Henry Brown is going to be retiring, and we are going to miss his leadership on the Veterans' Affairs Committee. It is only fitting that Henry would bring a bill such as this. His own daughter was diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus, so he knows the need of having not only compassion for people but also compassion for animals. He knows how it can touch people and promote their healing. Henry's deep commitment to helping others in need and, in particular, our veterans is unparalleled, so I want to thank Henry Brown for bringing this bill to the floor for consideration today.

I encourage all of my colleagues to support the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 5145, as amended, the Assuring Quality Care for Veterans Act.

It would amend title 38 of the United States Code to improve continuing professional education reimbursements provided to health care professionals employed at the Department of Veterans Affairs. This legislation increases by $600 the continuing professional education reimbursement for VA's health professionals. It would also expand those eligible to receive such reimbursements to include health professionals from a wide range of medical specialties, and it would clarify that reimbursements may only be provided for such continuing education expenses that the VA does not offer, itself.

While we can all be proud of the quality of care provided to veterans at VA facilities, we should always be looking for ways to improve the VA's provision of medical services, ensuring that the VA's health professionals are continually kept on the cutting edge of modern medical advances. It is important to ensure high-quality medical care continues to thrive at the VA. H.R. 5145, as amended, would provide VA employees with more opportunities to improve their knowledge base and skill sets, and it would provide veterans with superiority when it comes to care that they, I believe, deserve.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

I want to thank the gentleman for coming to the floor today. The issue before us deals with increasing the reimbursement on professional

education with regard to VA's health professionals.

I understand the gentleman has every reason to be upset with regard to what is occurring in the Gulf with regard to the oil spill. This oil should almost be treated as an invasion of our country. I understand why he is upset.

The legislation before us deals with veterans issues. It deals with making sure that the professionals that work in the VA are able to be reimbursed for their continuing professional education.

I want to thank Chairman Filner right now for his patience. I want to thank you for that. I think we can feel for Mr. Scalise as he just returned from Louisiana, how upset and how high the emotions are in New Orleans and Louisiana, not only from Katrina but also the oil spill, and I can understand where he is coming from. But I want to bring us back to the issue of the bill itself. So I want to thank Mr. Filner for being very patient with our colleague from Louisiana.

One point that we probably haven't talked about with regard to this is the challenge, Chairman Filner, that we have in front of us with regard to nursing and the nursing shortage. So many of the nurses are going to be retiring now over the next 12 years, and as we look at the ability for us to replenish that hole that is going to be created, there is going to be a dynamic shift within our health professions. So a lot of jobs and responsibilities that the nurse corps would be providing today, they are not going to be providing 10 years from now.

Actually, there will be a dynamic shift within health care itself and their profession. Their skill sets are actually going to get higher and even better and more improved, and jobs which they are doing today are going to have to be back-filled by nursing assistants. So for us to step forward and do this type of reimbursement to increase the quality of what they are about to provide, this is extremely important.

I want to thank the majority for bringing this type of bill, because we are going to have to help them increase the standards. It is the only way we are going to be able to actually deal with this hole that we are going to have in our health system and the increased demand that it is going to be placing upon the health system itself, because we don't have all the nursing slots in the education system to be able to do this.

I want to thank you for stepping into the breach. This is the right thing for us to do, especially when I look back at the years in which I served as a legal advisor for a hospital with regard to quality assurance and risk management. These are always extremely important issues. So I want to thank the chairman.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 5145, as amended, the Assuring Quality Care for Veterans Act.

It would amend title 38 of the United States Code to improve continuing professional education reimbursements provided to health care professionals employed at the Department of Veterans Affairs. This legislation increases by $600 the continuing professional education reimbursement for VA's health professionals. It would also expand those eligible to receive such reimbursements to include health professionals from a wide range of medical specialties, and it would clarify that reimbursements may only be provided for such continuing education expenses that the VA does not offer, itself.

While we can all be proud of the quality of care provided to veterans at VA facilities, we should always be looking for ways to improve the VA's provision of medical services, ensuring that the VA's health professionals are continually kept on the cutting edge of modern medical advances. It is important to ensure high-quality medical care continues to thrive at the VA. H.R. 5145, as amended, would provide VA employees with more opportunities to improve their knowledge base and skill sets, and it would provide veterans with superiority when it comes to care that they, I believe, deserve.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

I want to thank the gentleman for coming to the floor today. The issue before us deals with increasing the reimbursement on professional

education with regard to VA's health professionals.

I understand the gentleman has every reason to be upset with regard to what is occurring in the Gulf with regard to the oil spill. This oil should almost be treated as an invasion of our country. I understand why he is upset.

The legislation before us deals with veterans issues. It deals with making sure that the professionals that work in the VA are able to be reimbursed for their continuing professional education.

I want to thank Chairman Filner right now for his patience. I want to thank you for that. I think we can feel for Mr. Scalise as he just returned from Louisiana, how upset and how high the emotions are in New Orleans and Louisiana, not only from Katrina but also the oil spill, and I can understand where he is coming from. But I want to bring us back to the issue of the bill itself. So I want to thank Mr. Filner for being very patient with our colleague from Louisiana.

One point that we probably haven't talked about with regard to this is the challenge, Chairman Filner, that we have in front of us with regard to nursing and the nursing shortage. So many of the nurses are going to be retiring now over the next 12 years, and as we look at the ability for us to replenish that hole that is going to be created, there is going to be a dynamic shift within our health professions. So a lot of jobs and responsibilities that the nurse corps would be providing today, they are not going to be providing 10 years from now.

Actually, there will be a dynamic shift within health care itself and their profession. Their skill sets are actually going to get higher and even better and more improved, and jobs which they are doing today are going to have to be back-filled by nursing assistants. So for us to step forward and do this type of reimbursement to increase the quality of what they are about to provide, this is extremely important.

I want to thank the majority for bringing this type of bill, because we are going to have to help them increase the standards. It is the only way we are going to be able to actually deal with this hole that we are going to have in our health system and the increased demand that it is going to be placing upon the health system itself, because we don't have all the nursing slots in the education system to be able to do this.

I want to thank you for stepping into the breach. This is the right thing for us to do, especially when I look back at the years in which I served as a legal advisor for a hospital with regard to quality assurance and risk management. These are always extremely important issues. So I want to thank the chairman.

I yield back the balance of my time.

We're doing some unnecessary housecleaning today. I'm not certain whether you're cleaning out the garage or you're cleaning up the bedroom or cleaning up the mess you made in the kitchen. But one thing's clear: we're cleaning up a mess, a mess that we don't have to have done today, a mess that I tried to fix with the chairman the day before we voted on the health bill, and you wouldn't even do it then.

Yeah, we're cleaning up a mess, a mess because it was all about political expediency. Well, we've got to get a bill. The President's got political capital out there. We've got to get a bill.

Eighteen years I've been in this town. Whenever this town gives into a do-something mentality built on the emotion of the moment, people are going to get hurt, and that's exactly what's happened. People get hurt.

The health bill was never intended to have been signed into law by the President. It was a political document that was passed in the United States Senate to achieve 60 votes, to get to the conference table.

Oh, no. We'll just take that document that was drafted, not even vetted, and just bring it over to the House with all of its errors and just pass it, even when those of us with earnestness and sincerity to correct your bill, a Republican conservative to correct your mistakes, and you wouldn't even take it.

I go to the Rules Committee, to the Rules Committee, and lay out the mistakes in your bill. The stench that comes from the Rules Committee, with their pride, is that we stop all those amendments.

Are you kidding me? You stopped all those amendments. Oh, what pride.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

All right.

Mr. Speaker, there was a stench that came out of the Rules Committee. The stench was pride. They wouldn't swallow their pride to correct a bill when they had the opportunity to do it, so they came to the floor saying that, geez, we're not going to take any of those amendments.

So, now, Mr. Speaker, we're having to take up your time and this precious time on the floor to correct a bill that we shouldn't have to do. That's what we're doing here today, Mr. Speaker. And we're doing it with veterans.

Now let's talk about political corruption. Oh, Steve, you're dancing on the edge here; you mean there could have actually been political corruption on the night of the health bill? You bet.

What is the difference between politics and the super bowl of politics in the arena and corruption? Where do you cross the line? Is it really crossed? When do you end up in the nebulous?

Let me tell you about the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan referee of the Congressional Budget Office, okay?

What was supposed to have happened? Let's do a little flashback here. Sunday, we're going to vote on the health bill. What happens? At midnight on Friday night, that bill that came over from the Senate, we finally get to see it. What's wrong? There are problems in the bill.

The drafting of the bill only mentioned TRICARE For Life, not the protection of TRICARE. So Ike Skelton immediately, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, files a bill to be brought to the floor for which Chairman Levin, you were here, and it was the Ike Skelton bill to protect TRICARE, a correction that had to be made. But it was made outside of the bill. I sought to make it a correction inside the bill.

We also had the problem with the drafting on the protection of veterans programs of title 38 under chapter 17, veterans programs. Well, there are other veterans programs under chapter 17 that were left out, including chapter 18, which is the spina bifida program, a serious problem. Oh, no, no, no, Steve. We're not going to take care of that. I guess we'll do it later.

Chairman Levin, you kept your word. You kept your word to me, so you are a gentleman. We tried to get it done on that day, and it didn't get done. And you kept your word to me, and we are back here today. But we shouldn't have to have been back here today I guess is my point.

Now, let me go back to the corruption. The corruption was I was still in earnest to have this corrected in the bill. The VFW was also very upset. So was the American Legion. So was DAV. So was the uniformed services. A couple other VSOs went ahead and rolled over like a political dog and let you scratch their belly. But I will tell you what, these other ones stood firm because they knew the bill was flawed.

Here is a quote from the commander of the VFW: The President and the Democrat leadership are betraying America's veterans, and what makes matters worse is the leadership and the President know the bill is flawed, yet are pushing for passage today like it's a do-or-die situation. This Nation deserves the best from their elected officials, and the rush to pass legislation of this magnitude is not it.

He's right. That's what happened on that day. That's why we are having to come back and clean up the mess.

Now we go to the day of the bill itself. What are we going to do? We are going to have the motion to recommit the bill. So what's Mr. Buyer going to do? We are going to put in the motion to recommit the bill to correct these mistakes with regard to the TRICARE program to cover our military and their dependents and protect their jurisdiction, also make sure that the other veterans programs, the CHAMPVA and the spina bifida program are protected. And what happened?

I get a ring, ring, ring, ring, ring, a phone call from CBO. CBO says, We believe that your bill may score at $4.4 billion. Are you kidding me, $4.4 billion? We just did Ike Skelton's bill on Saturday, and it did not score. But my bill is now going to score on Sunday and Ike's didn't score on Saturday? Are you kidding me?

Now the stench is coming from somewhere else, Mr. Speaker. CBO, the Congressional Budget Office. What happened to fair dealing? What happened to being a referee and nonpartisanship? So I say to CBO in that phone conference--some of the individuals who were in that conference are sitting right here; correct me if I am inaccurate--Go back and look at your numbers and call me back because there is no way this can score. They then call back and they come back and said, We have concerns; your bill may score at $4.4 billion.

Okay, I tell you what. This is what I told CBO: do not send me a letter tomorrow that says the bill doesn't score. In my heart, I know what you are doing. You are blocking to prevent me from bringing a motion to recommit the health bill on the House floor so the Democratic leadership and Democrats do not have to take a tough vote and actually admit that the VFW and the American Legion and DAV were right that the bill is flawed and doesn't protect veterans.

Now, because all this is boiling, what does the White House do? The White House does not want to recreate another Joe Wilson moment where someone stands up and challenges the President's veracity. So what do they do? The White House press shop goes and contacts the Secretary of the Veterans Affairs, and they get the Secretary of the VA to say what Buyer has brought out is unfounded. They get the Secretary of the VA to do the dirty work. The individuals who are serving the Secretary of the VA are not serving that man well at all, because whatever that he said was unfounded has been founded. It's been founded because we are correcting what I said the mistakes were made.

Let me continue on with the corruption wave. Let me talk about those who sit up on the perch. Oh, my gosh, they are not there. Our friends in the media, they are not there. Where are they? No, they are not there because let me tell you what they did that night. They participated in the marginalization of me, the mistakes, because they said, well, we have got four Democratic chairmen say there were no mistakes. The Secretary of the VA says there are no mistakes. The bill must be okay. Buyer, you must be an alarmist.

And so Tom Philpott, a very good writer, someone who I respect in this

town, with the Baltimore Sun, actually writes an article about how I must have been an alarmist because the four leading chairmen and the Democratic leadership and the White House and the Secretary of the VA say, Steve, what you are talking about with regard to TRICARE and spina bifida and the other veterans programs was unfounded.

Then why are we here today correcting those mistakes? Because they are founded. They are real. So where is the press now to write the story that the VFW, you were right when you challenged the leadership for passing a flawed bill?

Well, let me tell you now, let me close the loop with the corruption in the CBO. I didn't bring that motion to recommit the bill, did I? I couldn't bring it because they said the bill scored at $4.4 billion. So I couldn't bring it here on the floor. So I told CBO, guess what, you win. I can't bring it. But if you tomorrow, you send me a letter that says it didn't score, I tell you what I am going to do. Because you said it scores at $4.4 billion, that means that the savings that the Democratic leadership was talking about as a pay-for for their health bill, the savings of $4.4 billion was taken out of veterans programs. That's where the savings came from.

So I said, okay, fine, if my motion to recommit scores at $4.4 billion, then the savings that they talked about over here, where you got savings in the health bill, let's vote for the health bill, it was taken out of the veterans programs. That's where it came from.

So what happens on Monday morning? I issue a press release that says $4.4 billion is taken out of the veterans savings programs. Within 2 hours what does CBO do, Mr. Speaker? They issue a statement to me that says the bill doesn't score. My amendment didn't score. Oh, my gosh.

To every Member out there who has had an experience over the years dealing with CBO, protect yourself. Right now you cannot trust CBO. You cannot trust their veracity. I stand here with a gentleman with honor, and I am sickened by what CBO had done. I was sickened by the super bowl of politics that occurred on that night, that here we had a bill that is very meaningful to the American people, we know there are errors. The gentleman whom I have complimented knew in his heart that there were problems with the bill we are going to have to come back and correct. We shouldn't have had to do this.

I felt compelled, though, to tell the story. I am a retiring Member of Congress. There are things I love and defend about this institution. But there are also things that are called the dark side of human behavior that are toxic and poisonous, and they disturb me to no end. So to Members: hold onto your honor, put your face into the cold wind, and do not accept it when individuals act with corruption. Stand and shove them back. Our country is too great.

Especially to have played politics with veterans programs is the ultimate to me. The children of Korean and Vietnam war-era veterans with spina bifida, are you kidding me? That's who we are going to play games with? The other veterans programs, who are those individuals? They are the widows, they are the war widows, and we are going to play politics with war widows.

There is a word, I guess, we don't like to use very often. It's called ``shame.'' It's because it's a very, very powerful word. That's shameful what we did. When an error is in front of you and you have got the opportunity to correct that error, you correct it. If you do not, it is shameful. And I will accept responsibility, too.

But if I am going to accept responsibility as a leader of this House that I was unable to see it through, someone else better also step forward and accept responsibility, Madam Speaker. And you turn and you then face the veterans at the conventions this summer and you tell them, Yes, the bill was flawed, but I apologize and the bill was corrected; and with the issues that were brought up by Mr. Buyer, they were founded. I apologize for challenging his veracity because what he said was right. And the Madam Speaker should say, I was wrong.

And under the President, you should also say to the Secretary of the VA, I apologize to you, Mr. Secretary; we put you in an uncomfortable position whereby you laid your honor on the line and made a statement that was not truthful. And the President should apologize then to the Secretary of the VA. That's how you clean up the mess.

So it's not just the legislative mess; there is a mess here with regard to individuals' integrity and their honor. And so if you wonder why the American people are upset and disgusted with Washington, DC, it is because they see that this is what's happening. I assure you we lost our majority, and you are about to lose yours.

Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

In its present form, I am opposed to the bill.

Last Thursday's report by the Department of Health and Human Services has now been delivered to all of our offices. In particular, a report by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has confirmed that President Obama's new health care law will increase costs for taxpayers and patients. The CMS has estimated that the new law will increase health care spending in this country by $311 billion. Now, that $311 billion figure is on page 4, but all Members should note, on page 2, that they are very up front about this.

On page 2, it reads: Because of the transition effects and the fact that most coverage provisions are going to be in effect for 6 of the 10 years of the budget period, the cost estimates that were shown in the memorandum do not represent a full 10-year cost of the legislation.

So, even though they are projecting that it is going to be $311 billion, please understand that this is really not a true 10-year time frame. This is why I want to bring this to everyone's attention.

Please, Members, look at this report. Please, look at the report. As policymakers, all of us who have responsibilities for health initiatives need to understand what the impacts will be upon our areas of responsibility. Of the Federal expenditure for only the 6-year time frame, it is going to be about $251 billion.

As you know, the Department of Defense is one of the largest procurers of health care goods and services in the country. Now, I'm not even talking about VA. We're only going to focus for the moment here on DOD because of jurisdictional matters. By caring for our wounded warriors and their families, the Pentagon strives to support our brave wounded soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines along the road to recovery. This support not only includes medical care for injured troops but also for our active duty military, their families, and the retirees as well.

In order to provide that level of care, the DOD purchases from a network of managed care support organizations, from health care professionals, manufacturers, and from information technology providers. What CMS has made clear to all of us in this report is that this network is heavily impacted by the new health care law.

Let me remind my colleagues that CMS is not a partisan group. CMS, formerly known as the Health Care Financing Administration, or HCFA, is very much part of President Obama's administration. So, if CMS estimates that there are greater costs, I am sure that these are likely to be conservative estimates, and greater costs are not something the Pentagon is prepared to absorb. As many of you are aware, the Department's overall expenditures for health care are rising rapidly. Secretary Gates testified in the fall that the increased costs are ``beginning to eat us alive.''

So, if there are direct or secondary effects of the President's health care program, the only way to cover those costs is to raise the premiums to beneficiaries, to families, and to retirees or to eat further into DOD's ability to support the needs of our men and women in uniform. This is not what we want to do. This is why we must understand the impact of the President's new health care law on DOD. We know that the health care law includes new fees on manufacturers of brand-name prescription drugs. We sell to the Federal health care programs, including the Department of Defense.

CMS stated in last Thursday's report: ``We anticipate these fees would generally be passed through to health consumers in the form of higher drug prices.'' That means a pass-through to DOD. We need to know and to understand the impact of those increased fees upon us.

Section 9011 of the President's health care law already requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to conduct a study of the impact of the increased costs on veterans' health care which are imposed by the new law. This includes reporting on the costs to the VA of any fees assessed on brand-name prescription drugs and medical device manufacturers.

It seems only reasonable, if we supported that provision for the VA, as many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle did, that we should do the very same thing with DOD. That is what I am asking in this motion to recommit. The Pentagon is slated to spend $56 billion on the next procurement round of TRICARE contracts. This amendment simply asks for the DOD to identify through their acquisition process any additional costs as a result of the President's new health care law and to report that to Congress. We are asking for transparency.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the motion to recommit, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in support of S. 1963, as amended, the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010.

This bill represents a bipartisan effort on behalf of the House and Senate, and I express my thanks to Chairman Filner, Chairman Akaka, and Ranking Member Burr for their leadership. I'd also like to thank Chairman Michaud and Ranking Member Brown of the Subcommittee on Health for their efforts in bringing this legislation forward.

Reflecting the spirit of compromise and cooperation, S. 1963 is composed of a number of bills from both sides of the aisle. It would provide increased access to care, better outreach and support for wounded veterans, rural veterans, and homeless veterans, and also includes enhancements and provisions of mental health care and readjustment counseling for recent veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan.

I would like to thank my good friend and colleague from Kansas, Jerry Moran, for his bill, H.R. 3103, that was included to help VA move forward with a pilot program to enhance contract care authority for highly rural veterans. This pilot, which was enacted in the last Congress, was Mr. Moran's initiative.

I'd also like to thank my friend John Duncan from Tennessee for introducing his bill, H.R. 402, which is included in this legislation. H.R. 402 would name the Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clinic in Knoxville, Tennessee, the William C. Tallent Veterans Outpatient Clinic. This gentleman honorably served in World War II and maintained a lifelong service to veterans.

S. 1963 would also establish a new, all-encompassing system of support for family caregivers. As we all know, some veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan have been severely wounded and will require a great deal of care for the rest of their lives. In previous wars, these veterans would probably not have survived their wounds, but significant improvements in battlefield medicine, the medicine logistics chain and the follow-up treatment have improved the survival rates for the most severely wounded combatants.

Family caregivers are more often than not at the core of what sustains the treatment and recovery of a severely wounded or injured soldier. Their commitment is strong and heartfelt; yet, it can be enormously challenging in a long recovery. There are many struggles that families face when assuming this role, including job absences, lost income, travel and relocation costs, child care concerns, exhaustion, and emotional and psychological stress. Many, understandably, become overwhelmed and eventually experience burnout. So there is a real problem, and the question is how to best address it.

I am concerned, however, about a provision in this bill that would establish an unprecedented stipend for certain family caregivers. I would have preferred to build upon and expand an existing successful Department of Veterans Affairs VA program known as Aid and Attendance. The Aid and Attendance program is paid directly to veterans so they can obtain the needed service in their own homes. The extent and types of services could be expanded, and last summer I proposed to do so in H.R. 3407, the Severely Injured Veterans' Benefits Act of 2009. It would provide a 50 percent increase in compensation for catastrophically injured veterans who are in need of assistance for daily personal needs, such as bathing and eating. It gives the veteran the choice of how to obtain services tailored to their unique needs and circumstances.

It is unclear how the caregiver stipend program in this bill will operate and how it will work in conjunction with the present Aid and Attendance or whether it replaces some of the current services.

Additionally, Mr. Speaker, we lack a Congressional Budget Office estimate of this compromised agreement. It appears that the Democrat majority has not been obtaining CBO cost estimates for discretionary bills, and we still don't have the official views of the administration on the compromised legislation. I am aware of their concerns. I requested the administration to address them in writing on March 18, 2010, and they were due on April 7. Although we have not yet read them, it is my understanding they are still in the concurrence process.

Based on legislative hearing testimony from last year, I believe the VA has concerns about the caregiver stipend as well as some of the other personnel provisions included in the bill. Dr. Cross, who is the principal deputy undersecretary for health, testified before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. This is in reference to the caregiver provisions. He stated, The VA does not support section 209. Currently we are able to contract for caregiver services with home health and similar public and private agencies. The contractor trains and pays them and affords them liability protection and oversees the quality of care. This remains the preferable arrangement as it does not divert VA from its primary mission of treating veterans and training clinicians. Moreover, it does not put VA in the position of having to tell family members how, at risk of losing their caregiver compensation, they have to care for their loved ones.

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the administration's concern regarding the caregiver stipend provision in this bill was not worked out because the bill, as a whole, does many good things for veterans. I hope this issue gets resolved with the administration, and I am pleased that legislation that I had sponsored, H.R. 1293, the Disabled Veterans Home Improvement and Structural Alteration Grant Increase Act of 2009, is in this bill. This would increase the amount VA is authorized to pay under its home health services to make modifications to a veteran's home to enable the veteran to be cared for in their home rather than in a hospital or institutional setting.

We should always be reminded that while veterans may spend only a short time in uniform, the wounds they carry home with them can last a lifetime and profoundly impact their daily lives.

I reserve my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I would like to thank the Speaker for her kind remarks and her support of the bill. Also, I ask for your support, we have a problem we have to get worked out, and that deals with the widows, orphans, and the Spina Bifida Program was left out of the health care bill that we recently passed to ensure that it's defined as minimum essential benefit.

Madam Speaker, I hope for your support for this. The issue has been addressed in the Senate. The Senate passed it, the bill is at the desk, but it has to originate in the House, so I ask for your support on this.

Thank you, I appreciate that.

I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve and defer to the chairman.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, in an exchange I just had in a colloquy with Speaker Pelosi with regard to her commitment to correct an error in the President's health package, I would like to place that commitment in some context.

Since late July of last year, when the debate on the President's health care package started, I tried on multiple occasions to ensure that the care our Nation's veterans and their families received from the Department would be considered minimum essential coverage. I did that during the markup in the Subcommittee on Health, in the Energy and Commerce Committee, and in the full committee. My efforts included trying to obtain jurisdiction for the Veterans' Affairs Committee on H.R. 3200 back in August of last year.

In November, during the floor debate on H.R. 3962, I again sought to obtain protections for our Nation's veterans and their families. At that time, not only I but Chairman Filner received assurances in writing from the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, from the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and from the Energy and Labor Committee that veterans and their families would, in fact, be protected.

I think this will be helpful to us, Mr. Filner, as your bill proceeds.

Most recently, in March, I and Ranking Member Buck McKeon of the House Armed Services Committee offered an amendment to H.R. 3590, which would ensure that benefits offered under TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs programs would be considered minimum essential coverage. However, our amendment was not allowed then under the rule, and I made that appeal to the Rules Committee.

This amendment was then introduced in a form of legislation, H.R. 4894, which then was referred to the Energy and Commerce Committee.

I raised the issue again, because in that recently passed Senate health bill, it did not include some of the veterans' programs in the definition of ``minimum essential coverage.'' Unfortunately, the bill did not mention the ``other veterans' programs'' under chapter 17. It mentioned veterans' programs but not the other veterans' programs under chapter 17 of title 38, which includes widows, orphans, and dependents covered by the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the VA, known as CHAMPVA. It also did not mention chapter 18, which includes the spina bifida program for the children of Korea and Vietnam veterans who have spina bifida as a result of their parents' exposure to Agent Orange.

I brought up that issue. When Chairman Skelton recognized that the Senate health bill mentioned TRICARE for Life but did not mention TRICARE, he immediately brought a bill to the floor, and it was considered. I tried to amend that bill. I tried to get it withdrawn. At that time, I received a commitment from the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee that he would work with us to get that corrected. I even raised the issue during the markup of the President's health bill, itself, on the floor. I know the VFW was very concerned, along with the American Legion.

Yet, as I raised these concerns that this bill had a large error, I was marginalized. I was marginalized by some in the House who said, Oh, those issues are not real. Even the White House issued a press release, along with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, which read that it was unfounded. Well, it is founded. It is a problem that we have to fix. Senator Akaka passed a bill to protect the veterans. It passed on unanimous consent. It is currently at the Speaker's desk. However, the parliamentarian has ruled that it is a revenue bill. Otherwise, I would immediately call it forward.

So what has happened? A little magic dust again.

I appreciate, with regard to this issue, that the chairman has recognized that there is an error which needs to be corrected. I am deeply appreciative. So is the Speaker. She has just exercised her commitment to correct the error in the bill.

Chairman Filner has taken the language of the Akaka bill and has introduced his own bill. It has been referred now to the Ways and Means Committee. I have written a letter as a follow-up. From the colloquy I had with Chairman Levin of the House Ways and Means Committee, I have asked him to expedite Mr. Filner's bill and to have it brought to the floor so that we can correct this error in the President's health bill and so that we may cover the widows, the orphans, the spina bifida program, and CHAMPVA, all of which were excluded from the definition of ``minimum essential coverage.'' That will correct the error, and I think that needs to be done. I had hoped that Mr. Filner's bill would have been included in the bill we are presently considering. That would have cleaned this up now, but that didn't occur.

So I've taken every opportunity to try to correct this error, but for whatever reason, it just hasn't gotten done. It needs to be done. I think it was an error in the drafting. No one intended for widows, for orphans, and for the beneficiaries of the spina bifida program to be left out. I believe it was unintentional, but it is a real issue, and we need to correct it. Hopefully, we are going to do that.

I want to thank the chairman for his leadership to correct that error, and I want to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for all of their efforts in the bill.

I would ask my colleagues to pass the bill that is before us, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I rise in opposition to the rule.

Why would the VFW National Commander state that he is furious? Because Congress is moving a flawed bill that does not protect America's military, dependents, veterans, widows, nor orphans.

The VFW stated, ``The President and the Democrat leadership are betraying America's veterans.''

The VFW is asking for a ``no'' vote on this bill because it breaks the promises the President made to veterans at their national convention. This flawed bill covers neither our military and dependents under TRICARE, nor VA programs for widows and orphans, nor the program for children of Korea and Vietnam veterans with spina bifida. None of these programs are considered minimum essential coverage. And where are the protections for the Secretaries of DOD and the VA to preserve the integrity of their health care systems? Absent from the bill.

Buck McKeon and I and others tried to fix this bill, but were denied by this rule and our suspension efforts, even though Mr. Levin and I tried to have an agreement. Many veterans groups support efforts to correct these errors. Vote ``no.''

[Mar. 21, 2010]

National Healthcare Bill Betrays Veterans

Washington.--The national commander of the nation's oldest

and largest combat veterans' organization is furious that

Congress is moving ahead with a flawed healthcare bill that

does not protect the health programs provided to veterans,

servicemembers or their families.

``The president and the Democratic leadership are betraying

America's veterans,'' said Thomas J. Tradewell Sr., a combat-

wounded Vietnam veteran from Sussex, Wis., who leads the 2.1

million-member Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S. and its

Auxiliaries.

``And what makes matters worse is the leadership and the

president knows the bill is flawed, yet they are pushing for

passage today like it's a do-or-die situation. This nation

deserves the best from their elected officials, and the rush

to pass legislation of this magnitude is not it.''

At issue is H.R. 4872 does not fully protect the healthcare

programs provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs and

the military's Tricare system. Specifically, the bill covers

Tricare For Life but not the other Tricare programs that

serve millions of beneficiaries; it does not cover children

suffering from spina bifida as a result of a parent's

exposure to Agent Orange; and it does not cover dependents,

widows and orphans who are served by CHAMPVA, the Civilian

Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans

Affairs.

``The president was very clear at our VFW national

convention last year when he said he was going to protect

these programs, as did the Democratic leadership in the House

and Senate repeatedly throughout the year. Now we have this

flawed package that everyone is trying to rush through that

blatantly omits any protections of the healthcare programs

our nation provides to millions of veterans, military

personnel, military retirees, and their families or

survivors.

``This is Washington doubletalk at its very worse, and the

uproar is going to be huge in America's military and

veterans' communities,'' said Tradewell, who wants Congress

to vote against H.R. 4872 today.

The issue surfaced publicly Friday when House Armed Service

Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) introduced legislation

to explicitly protect Tricare and other Defense Department

nonappropriated fund health plans from any health reforms

currently under consideration by Congress.

Yesterday, Reps. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.) and Buck McKeon (R-

Calif.) tried to introduce an amendment to H.R. 4872 to

protect the integrity and independence of the VA and Defense

Department healthcare systems. Buyer is the ranking member of

the House Veterans Affairs Committee and McKeon is the

ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee.

``The VFW salutes the congressmen and their supporters,''

said Tradewell, ``and I hope their messages were heard loudly

and clearly throughout Congress. Healthcare is important, but

so is protecting the programs that were promised to our

nation's veterans, military and their families,'' he said.

``Those serving in Iraq and Afghanistan should not have to

worry about their dependents' healthcare programs, but they

are today, and so are millions of military retirees,

veterans, survivors and children.

``Military service is based on the fundamental principle of

trust, and once lost, it is virtually impossible to regain,''

said Tradewell. ``That is why I am urging the House to vote

`no' today, then go back and fix the bill with the language

proposed by Skelton, Buyer and McKeon, and then come back and

vote your conscience. Let's not rush to pass flawed

legislation that could tremendously impact our nation's true

heroes.''

Let me ask how much time the minority has.

First of all, I'd like to applaud Buck McKeon and Ike Skelton for their efforts, along with Mr. Levin, to permit this bill to be considered, but we haven't gone far enough. Now, it's kind of what happens when we rush or go too fast around here. We get sloppy in our drafting.

Now, in the bill that was passed here in the House, there were general authority provisions under the Secretaries of DOD and VA to ensure that those health systems would be protected--the authorities, their general provision authorities to the Secretaries would be protected. That language was not in the Senate bill.

The Senate bill, which is now coming over here, interestingly enough, to--which is about to be deemed. Pretty interesting. I don't know if you know about the word ``deem.'' It comes from the old English origin to ``dom,'' and to ``dom'' was from judges. It means to make judgment. In the 17th century, judges actually then began to make rapid judgments, and they called them ``deemers.'' The origin of to dom-- there are two words: to deem and to doom. Pretty fascinating.

So, right now, the language that was going to be deemed, the bill under consideration, will, in fact, cover the TRICARE, because right now it covers just TRICARE for Life.

There's about $30 billion a year for TRICARE for those who are active duty, or guardsmen, or reservists who are brought to active duty to include their dependents. And with this $30 billion price tag, that's a lot of money. Over 10 years, that's around $300 billion. I don't know how we can exclude them, but we're going to bring them in.

What I'm about to ask of Mr. Levin is, we also have this commitment, this commitment from the leadership, from the Speaker, from the leaders of the dominant committees of Ed and Labor, and Ways and Means, the Appropriations, and Energy and Commerce to protect the veterans programs. Now in that language that's coming from the Senate to here for which we're not going to get to vote on nor amend, it says that we will take care of the chapter 17 veterans programs. Veterans programs.

But this chapter 17, there are other programs to survivors and dependents which would not be covered. So their programs which presently exist would not be under the minimum essential. Who are they? That would be the widows, the survivors, and the orphaned children, to include, for example, an agent orange Vietnam veteran whose child or adult dependent has spina bifida would not be covered.

Parliamentary Inquiries

I have a parliamentary inquiry.

My parliamentary inquiry would be this: The bill that is under suspension was dropped last night. We had to immediately respond to all of this, and I have dropped a bill just in the last hour. I apologize to my Democrat friends. I know you're just getting a chance to look at this.

My parliamentary inquiry is, how would I be able to ask for an immediate consideration of this bill under a suspension?

That's correct. Yes, as a separate measure. How can I call this bill to an immediate consideration?

At the conclusion of this bill, could I ask for unanimous consent for immediate consideration of this bill to protect the survivors and orphans of our veterans?

Further parliamentary inquiry. Does that mean that at the conclusion of this vote that the Chair would not recognize me for a unanimous consent request?

So the U.C. would not be in order.

I yield to the gentleman.

Reclaiming my time on the parliamentary inquiry, would it be made in order under a unanimous consent request on a suspension that the gentleman could amend? In other words, could I offer a unanimous consent request to amend to include the general authority language that is very similar to which the House had already passed previously under the health bill?

So the gentleman--I accept your good faith. You could withdraw this bill. We are moving quickly, and you're correct that it is highly technical. We only got to see this bill a few days ago. So Mr. Skelton and Mr. McKeon, all of their staffs didn't get to fully cover it. It's immediately dropped at midnight. We immediately bring it to the floor. We then have to react.

Further parliamentary inquiry. As gentlemen, why don't we pause under the rules? We can withdraw the suspension. We can work, and then the gentleman can bring it back, in good faith. I would ask of the gentleman under the comity of the House----

All right. I would ask of the gentleman, would the gentleman consider to withdraw the suspension to allow us to include the general authority provisions and correct the errors in the bill?

All right. I'm going to reclaim my time. The gentleman's position is that you have chosen not to withdraw the bill to correct the errors, but you want to proceed.

Let me reclaim my time, because we have a really large distinction here. Because the bill that is about to be deemed--we don't even have the right to vote on it. See, this is what's blowing my mind, Mr. Levin. Those of us who have actually worn the uniform, we don't fight for any bounty of our own. We fight for liberty, we fight for freedom, the right to speak, the right to vote. And then we're going to be denied the right to vote on a Senate bill, and nor do we have the opportunity to amend? And to say that there are not errors when we move this fast, we don't even allow the deliberative process to be used. I'm pleading with you, Mr. Levin. I'm pleading with you. The bill that's before us only covers TRICARE for life. I know this.

Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore

Mr. Speaker, I apologize. Mr. Levin, I apologize. I drafted TRICARE for Life. I understand this program. This bill only covers TRICARE for Life. So individuals who are enrolled in TRICARE-- it's not considered a minimum essential health program.

Now I know you didn't mean to do that. So let's get that corrected. That's why you're going to do this bill. So then why don't we absolutely make sure we correct chapter 17 to then protect survivors and dependents? It's an error. I'm not going to stand here and say you intentionally meant to leave out widows and orphans. I don't believe that. But if you're going to correct it on TRICARE, let's take care of the veterans too. I would just plead for the gentleman to stop and pause while we're in consideration here. Let's amend this, and let's do it right. That's my plea.

I will also let you know that we do things substantively. We also do things politically. Ha. There's a response. Letters are coming in, and emails are coming in right now from all the VSOs, and the Veterans Service Organizations are pretty upset. Pretty upset. Whenever we move fast, we're sloppy, and people get hurt in the process. This is not one of our finest hours.

Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore

Mr. Speaker, in consultation with the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, a gentleman that I respect, I think the best approach is we will vote on your bill and ask the minority leader, and approach the majority leader and the Speaker, and you can do your due diligence on the policy aspects to make sure that things can get corrected and then maybe we can call for immediate consideration of the Buyer-McKeon bill. I think that is a good approach.

I yield to the gentleman.

I would like to thank both parties for recognizing the uncommon virtue and valor. It didn't occur just at Iwo Jima. It occurred in many battlefields and lonely places all over the world. These are military values and virtues which are passed from one generation to the next. They are memorialized, and we've done that here in the Nation's Capital in Arlington by that extraordinary photo that was then transformed into that statue.

The art of man is able to construct monuments and awards that are far

more significant than the narrow span of our own existence. It's the silent lapse of time that displays how frail and how fallible we are as a people. So it truly is what we do with the time that we have that matters most. So those of us with whom we've had the privilege to wear the uniform and fight our Nation's wars and to serve on foreign soil, I can tell you having done that, that it is an extraordinary feeling.

Now for the men and women, the nurses and the men who were in the dark sands of Iwo Jima, what an extraordinary campaign, and we have done everything we can to fulfill their ideal. At times, we fall short. We fall short as a people when we don't fulfill the ideal of their sacrifice; that is, the preservation of freedom and the preservation of individual liberty. And we have to be careful here in the institution of Congress if we don't respect each other with regard to our opinions, with regard to the process, because liberty also in the democratic process is pretty important.

So we have this debate on the health bill. We shouldn't try to scheme. We should be open. This should be the most open and deliberative body in the world so that Lady Liberty that sits on top of the dome can truly shine as that beacon of liberty so that the sacrifices of those marines and the sailors and others at Iwo Jima can live forever. The men and women who wear the uniform, they fight for no bounty of their own, and they leave freedom in their footsteps. They are truly extraordinary people. They also go to a land where they've never been, and they fight for a people that they've never met because they fight for extraordinary ideals. So those sacrifices that occurred on Iwo Jima have been passed on to other generations, those of whom fought in Korea or in Vietnam, in the sands of the first gulf war or even the second gulf war and Afghanistan.

So those of us who inherit the freedoms and those ideals, we are merely trustees for life, and our duty is to concentrate our lives to the greater good, beset by recurrent hopes for a more peaceful and prosperous Union. To do otherwise would be selfish as a people, and it would be wrong to turn to the next generation and say that we did not improve upon it, and we would then not be able to uphold the men, like at Iwo Jima, who did so much for so many.

Madam Speaker, I am here to honor a fellow Hoosier, Lieutenant General James F. Record, who passed away on December 22, 2009. He is being interred today at his final resting place, a short distance from here, at Arlington National Cemetery. Born and raised in Indiana, General Record's distinguished career and service to our nation makes me especially proud to recognize the accomplishments of this Hoosier patriot.

General Record graduated from Purdue University in West Lafayette in 1961 with a Bachelor's degree in Animal Science. Shortly after graduation, he was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the Air Force through Purdue's Reserve Officer Training Corps Program.

After graduating from pilot training, General Record served as an instructor pilot at Laredo Air Force Base, Texas. In 1967, he was deployed to combat in Vietnam where he served meritoriously for two years. Following his tour in Vietnam, he became commander of the 8th Tactical Fighter Wing stationed in South Korea, the 58th Tactical Training Wing, and the 388th Tactical Fighter Wing. In 1985, he was promoted to Brigadier General and took command of the 833rd Air Division.

Following his command tour with the 833rd, he served as deputy commander of the Joint Task Force Middle East in the Persian Gulf. General Record also served as the chief of staff for the United Nations Command and the Republic of Korea/United States Combined Forces Command in Seoul, South Korea. While serving as vice commander of the 12th Air Force and U.S. Southern Command Air Forces, he took command of the Joint Task Force Southwest Asia. In 1995, he was named commander of the 12th Air Force and U.S. Southern Command Air Forces and promoted to Lieutenant General. General Record retired from the Air Force in 1997.

Throughout his career, General Record accumulated over 6,000 flight hours and received numerous awards and decorations. Among his many medals for meritorious service, General Record received the Defense Distinguished Service Medal with oak leaf cluster, Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit with three oak leaf clusters, the Distinguished Flying Cross with two oak leaf clusters, the Bronze Star Medal, the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal with three oak leaf clusters, the Air medal with 27 oak leaf clusters, the Air Force Commendation Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with six service stars, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

While General Record's passing brings great sadness to our beloved country, his family, and his friends, we as Americans should be thankful that people like him dedicate their lives to the cause of liberty and make countless sacrifices so that we may enjoy the blessings of freedom. Today, I salute this honorable and distinguished warrior, a role model for Hoosiers and all Americans, as the nation bids him farewell.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2847 the, ``Jobs for Main Street Act of 2009.''

Madam Speaker, once again members are being asked to vote on a 100- page bill, which was posted in the dead of night in the name of creating jobs that unfortunately will probably never materialize. What it will do is needlessly expand the size of the Federal Government. Madam Speaker, this is not the type of open and transparent process that the American people want or deserve.

I am especially concerned that this bill spends millions of taxpayer dollars on innumerable pork barrel programs and pet projects, but it does not spend a dime to help create jobs for veterans. Recent unemployment numbers from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics show that in the month of November there were over one million unemployed veterans, and that is unacceptable.

The unemployment rate among our newest veterans, ages 18-24, remains extremely high at 20 percent. Equally disturbing is that 700,000 of the one million unemployed veterans are between the ages of 35 and 64, the years normally characterized by both highest earning power and highest financial need for important items such as paying mortgages and tuitions.

Madam Speaker, it is because of these alarming statistics that earlier this month I was joined by many members of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs in introducing H.R. 4220 the Promoting Jobs for Veterans Act of 2009. H.R. 4220 would help veterans find employment by providing funding and incentives for them to pursue employment training and education. The bill would also expand opportunities within the Federal Government for veteran-owned and service disabled veteran-owned small businesses.

It was my hope that any ``jobs package'' would have included provisions such as those from H.R. 4220 to help those who have defended freedom, and it is unfortunate that the heavy handed tactics being used today have effectively prevented anyone from offering an amendment to include these provisions.

Madam Speaker, I believe that veterans could serve as an important catalyst to economic recovery. Veterans are dedicated employees and engaged entrepreneurs, and this would expand job and entrepreneurial opportunities for these selfless individuals. It is my hope that early in the next session we can consider H.R. 4220 and examine other ways to improve employment opportunities for our veterans.

Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 4173 because it does not exempt the VA's very successful Loan Guaranty program from regulation under the provisions of this bill. The saying, ``if it ain't broke, don't fix it,'' applies. The VA guaranteed loans are not experiencing the high rates of delinquency and foreclosure like those backed by FHA. VA, to its credit, recognized the risks inherent in easing underwriting standards and stayed out of the subprime market.

According to the September 30, 2009 National Delinquency Survey conducted by Mortgage Bankers Association, VA-backed home mortgages are experiencing significantly lower delinquency and foreclosure rates than any other government-backed programs. For example, as of September 30, the delinquency rate for all subprime mortgages was over 28 percent. FHA-backed loans show about a 14.4 percent delinquency rate while only about 8.1 percent of VA loans were delinquent. More ominously, 24.7 percent of subprime loans were in foreclosure (VA quite wisely does not guarantee subprime loans), and 3.3 percent of FHA loans had reached the foreclosure stage but only about 2.3 percent of VA loans were being foreclosed. These differences due to VA's stewardship and the Veterans Affairs Committee's oversight amount to tens of millions of dollars in savings to the taxpayers.

Madam Chair, the provisions of H.R. 4173 would clearly apply to the VA's Loan Guaranty program. For example, in defining the scope and functions covered by the bill, section 4002 excludes only the ``Secretary of the Treasury and any agency or bureau under the jurisdiction of the Secretary.'' That means VA loan guaranty programs are subject to the provisions of the bill. Further in the definitions of ``Financial Activity'', it includes extending credit. VA has a small direct loan program used to sell their foreclosed properties. The bill's definitions also cover collecting consumer data. VA does that. VA also sells mortgage-based securities on the secondary market. Such activities are covered in the definitions section. The definitions also cover VA's contracts for portfolio servicing, including sales and maintenance of its foreclosed properties. Finally, VA-guaranteed loans offered by lenders would be subject to the jurisdiction of the CPRA rules and regulations.

There are a couple of reasons why VA's loan guaranty program is outperforming the non-VA sector. First, the House Veterans Affairs Committee has oversight of the program and works hard to ensure the program is conducted in a manner that does not stray into products like subprime loans. Second, VA did not reduce its underwriting standards, and the combination of its higher standards along with servicing programs to assist veterans experiencing difficulty, has allowed VA to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars.

My understanding of this mammoth 1,300 page bill is that the new bureaucracies and czars and whatever else is hidden in the bill will have the ability to affect how the VA loan guaranty programs are offered. Additionally, the broad language in the bill which allows the CFPA the discretion to define its own powers is at best short-sighted and at worst Orwellian. I am reminded that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Moreover, by placing additional tax burdens on financial institutions, many of which invest in mortgage securities offered on the secondary market, mortgage rates will go up. That is exactly what the VA's Loan Guaranty program, or the housing market at large,

does not need because the secondary market is a major source of new lending resources as well as a $200 million dollar revenue stream to the Treasury.

Madam Chair, I didn't think it was possible to concoct a bill that was even more opaque and unintelligible than the majority's healthcare bill. Well, I was wrong. The majority has succeeded in grand fashion to foist yet another financial disaster in-the-making on the American public, one designed not to ensure stability in the markets, but to make financial markets subject to political intrusion and manipulation. We have seen what political pressure to expand access to credit to those whose incomes would not normally have qualified them for a mortgage did to the housing market. Let's not make this same mistake with veterans. In summary, the VA loan guaranty program has been well- managed and does not need the regulation and supervision under H.R. 4173 would allow.

I urge all of my colleagues to oppose H.R. 4173 and I yield back.