Providing for Consideration of H.R. VA Accountability First and Appeals Modernization Act of 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and the underlying bill. All of us, Democrats and Republicans, believe in the need for stronger accountability for employees at the VA to ensure that our veterans get the care they deserve. Unfortunately, this legislation will fall short of that goal and, in doing so, set accountability efforts back for at least a year, if not more.

Our Senate colleagues have a bipartisan bill that includes accountability provisions that could serve as a foundation for legislation in the House. It doesn't mean it is perfect; it doesn't mean in its current form it would be voted out of the Senate; but it is a far more bipartisan approach than the one that is before us today. We have an opportunity to advance language that both parties in both Chambers can agree to and would contribute to a more accountable and more effective VA.

H.R. 1994 and the current bill before us, H.R. 5620, both contain flawed accountability tools, tools which, if the VA used them, would likely result in adverse judgments in the courts and cost a lot of time and money pursuing with the likely result of those employees being reinstated.

Democrats are ready to work with the majority to find the right path forward. That is why 75 Democratic or bipartisan amendments were submitted to the Committee on Rules. Unfortunately, only 22 amendments were made in order to be considered by the full Chamber.

One of my amendments not made in order included a crucial fix to support and protect student veterans who have their education cut short by a school's abrupt closure. When a college or university like ITT Tech or Corinthian shutters its doors on short notice, student veterans enrolled at these institutions are routinely left with their GI Bill and Yellow Ribbon benefits severely weakened or even depleted and with no degree or job prospects to show for it. There is urgency to put a fix in place, and my amendment would do that.

There are no means in place for a student veteran enrolled at one of these institutions to get any part of their educational benefits restored, and many also lose their housing benefits, which student veterans depend on as a crucial source of housing support.

The bipartisan amendment I submitted with Representative Susan Brooks would have restored post-9/11 GI Bill benefits and training time to veterans who are negatively affected by a school's sudden closure, and it would also allow the VA to continue paying student veterans a monthly housing stipend for a short time following a permanent school closure.

There are even more important amendments that this House won't get to consider.

Congresswoman DelBene from Washington State offered an amendment to update the Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans, including LGBT representatives, and ensure that this committee better addresses the needs of all minorities.

My colleague, Congressman Walz, offered an amendment to extend the original deadline issued by the Agent Orange Act of 1991 to ensure that Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange receive just compensation and care.

Another colleague on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Congresswoman Kuster, offered an amendment to help improve access to care for veterans and strengthen the healthcare workforce by creating a pilot program to train physician assistants who agree to work at the VA in underserved communities.

She also submitted an amendment to address the opioid crisis by creating a pilot program that improves pain management for veterans suffering from opioid addiction and chronic pain. It also requires the VA to assess its ability to treat opioid dependency. It also requires increased access to opioid overdose reversal medication at VA facilities.

Access to care and reducing opioid addiction are some of the most pressing issues facing veterans today, yet neither of her amendments were made in order.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TAKANO. Instead, the majority has once again introduced a partisan bill that violates the due process rights of VA employees and includes several provisions that are likely to be overturned by our justice system, which is why the Department of Justice, Office of Personnel Management, and the VA itself have all raised serious objections.

Even though 30 percent of VA employees are veterans themselves, the majority is treating their constitutional rights as inconvenient obstacles to evade instead of fundamental civil service protections to uphold.

Finally, I believe that the majority's efforts to institute new whistleblower provisions would be overturned for the same reason that the U.S. Attorney General's office said it would not defend an unconstitutional section of the Choice Act. It violates the Appointments Clause in the Constitution by allowing lower level government employees to have the final decisionmaking authority to decide whether an employee will be fired.

These are more than minor legal concerns. They are reasons why VA employees who commit misconduct will not be held accountable when their terminations are challenged in court. We can pass H.R. 5620, but we will be right back here a year from now or 2 years from now when the law is deemed unconstitutional.

I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule and the underlying bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source