Cloture Motion

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 299, the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act, and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, the House of Representatives has already passed this bill unanimously, 382 to 0. The bill is fully paid for, and it is long past time that we do the right thing. We have to right this wrong and help these veterans.

The only thing standing in the way of this bill to help the Vietnam veterans is the U.S. Senate, and that is shameful. We have just days before the Congress is finished. Our blue water veterans are waiting for us, their families are waiting for us, and some of them are dying waiting for us.

These patriotic Americans went to Vietnam. They risked their lives. They were exposed to the chemical, Agent Orange, which we now know is highly toxic. Some of them were exposed on the ground, some while patrolling the rivers, and some were exposed while stationed on ships off the Vietnamese coast. These are called our blue water Navy vets.

Now, all these years later, Agent Orange has made many of them sick and they are severely ill. There have been four different health studies by the CDC about the detrimental effects of Agent Orange exposure, and the blue water Navy veterans have been shown to suffer those exact diseases at the same rate as the other exposed veterans, but some of my colleagues are wrongly insisting on a fifth study.

We do not have another year to wait. Some of our veterans will not last that long. Many blue water veterans have already passed away from the disease associated with Agent Orange exposure.

The 1991 bill to provide coverage for veterans exposed to Agent Orange didn't discriminate between those who served offshore and those who served on rivers or on the ground. Yet due to a decision by a VA bureaucrat in 2002, the coverage for those who served offshore was wiped out. It doesn't make any sense, and we must help all of our veterans.

It would be tragic; it would be an absolute failure of this institution if we did not respond to this call for help from our veterans community. I urge my colleagues to reconsider their choice to block this legislation. The bill has had multiple hearings. It has gone through multiple drafts over the years. It has been subject to numerous studies.

I have a letter right here to the CBO from the Military-Veterans Advocacy association, literally going through each of the arguments that Senator Enzi just made to explain why those aren't true.

Re CBO Revision to the cost for H.R. 299. Hon. Keith Hall, Director, Congressional Budget Office, Washington, DC.

Dear Director Hall: I have reviewed the CBO letter of November 29, 2018 to Senator Enzi concerning the score for H.R. 299. By way of introduction I am a retired Navy Commander familiar with manning policies and surface ship operations during and immediately following the Vietnam War. I am currently the Executive Director of Military-Veterans Advocacy (MVA). MVA has been advocating for this bill since 2011. In January of 2015 we met with CBO analysts to provide relevant information.

I personally worked with the House Veterans Affairs Committee to define the geographic points for the current version of the bill. The geographic points are mirrored by the red line on the enclosed chart. The dashed line represents the boundary of the territorial sea which is 12 nautical miles seaward. In other words, the current language in H.R. 299 exactly mirrors the boundaries of the territorial sea. The bold line encompasses the entire theater of operations which, as you can see, is much larger than the area covered by H.R. 299. This same chart was provided to the CBO in January of 2015 and was used as the basis for all subsequent scoring. Accordingly, paragraph 2 of the CBO letter is in error. There was no change in the nautical area.

Additionally, it must be remembered that most ships operated close to shore usually within the 10 fathom curve. This was to maximize the field of fire for operations ashore. Logistics ships conducting underway replenishment would try to approach the gun line to reduce the time the gun ships were offline. Consequently any minor changes in the nautical area would have little or no effect.

In preparation for the CBO meeting, MVA conducted a manpower analysis of the ships that deployed. Records showed that 713 ships deployed to the Vietnam theater of operations. Congressional Research Service placed the number of personnel in entire theater at 229,000. The same CRS publication pegged the number of Navy personnel serving in Vietnam at 174,000. American War and Military Operations Casualties: Lists and Statistics (Feb. 2010) p. 11. Liaison with the Naval Historical and Heritage Command by MVA and the offices of then Congressman Chris Gibson confirmed that the 174,000 number represented just those in the territorial sea, internal rivers and on land. A analysis by MVA showed 173,500 personnel deployed on ships within the territorial sea. This information was provided to CBO during the January 2015 meeting.

Significant numbers of personnel deployed into the theater are not included in H.R. 299. This includes ships, mostly carriers, assigned to Yankee Station throughout the war. Yankee Station was located at 17 deg. 30' N, 108 deg. 30' E which is 30 nautical miles north of the Demilitarized Zone. Multiple carrier battle groups were kept on station in this area and seldom, if ever, transited south. A corresponding station off South Vietnam, Dixie Station, was the site of one carrier battle group designated for close air support missions in South Vietnam. It was abandoned in the summer of 1966 as more warplanes became available for use in land based airfields in South Vietnam. Dixie Station was located at 11 deg. N and 110 deg. E which is also outside the scope of the bill. Admittedly, some ships from Dixie Station may have entered the territorial sea but they should have been included in 174,000 number.

Navy ships at the time were not manned to full complement. The authorized strength reflected on the Enlisted Distribution and Manning Report (EDVR) included Reserves who in time of war would be mobilized to round out the crew. Instead ships were manned in accordance with the Navy Manning Plan (NMP) that was roughly 80% of the personnel allowance for the ship. Additionally, due to the length of the war, many senior people, both officer and enlisted, made multiple deployments. On the average, about 25% of the personnel deployed into the territorial sea made multiple deployments. This number is based on the rating structure for ships at the time and the pay grade distribution as well as personal and anecdotal knowledge.

As of December 2014, MVA estimated that 80,305 personnel of the 174,000 deployed were covered under existing law. This number, along with the analysis, was presented to CBO. Since that time, additional ships have been added to the ship's list. Additionally, an accelerated death rate has claimed many lives. It should also be remembered that on the average, only one in three Vietnam era veterans seek any kind of VA benefits.

VA claims that the bill will require them to hire additional people to prevent the unacceptable backlog from expanding. This is preposterous. A significant amount of personnel in the backlog are Blue Water Navy veterans. Establishing a presumption will actually help the VA to reduce the backlog.

We believe that the VA estimates are overinflated and designed to mislead CBO as to the impact of the cost of the bill. Our current analysis supports the May 15, 2018 report and we believe that CBO, in light of the information provided herein, should revise their November 29, 2018 letter.

If you or your staff have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Additionally I will be in Washington, DC, next week and available for meetings.

Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, John B. Wells, Commander USN (Retired), Executive Director.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I hope all of us can come together to do the right thing by our veterans to make sure they get the coverage that they need and to stand by them in their greatest time of need.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source