Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2025

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Madam Chair, I represent a district that over 90,000 Active-Duty military members and their families call home. As a former Navy helicopter pilot, military spouse, and now mom to children who serve, I am proud to be a voice for our military community here in Congress.

One of the aspects I am most passionate about advocating for is improving their quality of life, particularly their living conditions. To put it plainly, housing for our single, unaccompanied servicemembers is abysmal, and it is completely unacceptable.

In September 2023, the United States Government Accountability Office found a variety of living conditions were negatively affecting servicemembers' quality of life, such as sewage overflow, mold and mildew, broken windows and locks. I have seen it for myself and so has my staff.

The week I was sworn into office, I took my entire team to Virginia Beach and drove them around Naval Air Station Oceana to show them the conditions we ask our unaccompanied sailors to live in. We visited condemned barracks and other barracks that were decades old and had very little maintenance and upkeep. We saw rusted bathrooms, moldy ceilings, and dirty carpets.

To think of the conditions that we ask these often young, unaccompanied sailors to live in, I think of college dorms. I am also a mom to four children who are college aged, and we have done many college tours recently and visiting dormitories on campuses. Seeing the differences in where we are housing college-aged students and knowing what those kids do a lot of nights a week, and looking at where we are housing our unaccompanied servicemembers, knowing what we ask of those young people, it was a stark contrast and stark difference.

Our young men and women in uniform put their lives on the line for our country. It is only right to provide them with the quality of life deserving of their service and sacrifice. It is infuriating to me that we have not provided better for them.

Given the overall success of the military housing privatization initiative for military family housing and our current budgetary constraints, we need to think outside the box about housing solutions for our unaccompanied servicemembers.

That is why I am offering this amendment to encourage the approval and development of privatized housing for unaccompanied servicemembers, like the ones we have right now in Hampton Roads and San Diego. We cannot allow bureaucratic delays and fragmented approaches by the different services to hamper our efforts to fix problems plaguing our barracks on bases across the country.

We can and must work together to create better living conditions and housing options for those who serve. I want my children and their peers to be proud of their Navy just like I was when I served.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the gentlewoman's amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Madam Chair, I disagree with my colleague. Privatization is one solution, and privatization of family housing has come a long way.

Is it perfect, no, but it is a step in the right direction, and it is certainly a lot better than what we used to have, which was simply the defense budget and the government running all of family housing.

Family housing has come a long way since we have privatized it. There is a lot of oversight needed, and Congress needs to continue to provide the oversight so that we have the best family housing available for our military families who serve right along with our Active-Duty servicemen and -women.

Privatization is one way that we can think outside the box. The defense budget is always inadequate. We just don't have the amount of money that it takes to refurbish and redo all of the unaccompanied housing, all of the barracks that we have seen and that were listed in that scathing GAO report that came out. It is one solution.

Right now, we just have two. We have one in Norfolk and one in San Diego. We have two models of privatization.

Having visited the one in Norfolk, it is amazing to see the quality- of-life differences. They have private bedrooms. They have a communal kitchen that has actual spaces for them to make nutritious meals.

We have things like a gym. There is a pool and even a Jacuzzi and basketball courts. There is a theater room. There is a library.

There is plenty that offers the good quality of life that we know our servicemen and -women need, especially when they come home after a long deployment or after a long working day.

Those are the things that we can provide in privatized housing. Is it a perfect solution, no, but it is a way to augment what we have right now, and it is certainly a step in the right direction.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, the difference between the gentlewoman's approach and ours is that we believe that the services should continue to be able to take a measured approach to whether or not using privatized unaccompanied housing is appropriate and whether or not, as the gentlewoman's amendment would do, encourage the services to go to privatization for unaccompanied housing.

We see the track record that is unfettered. Going forward on privatizing housing has not gone well, and it has been expensive, costly, and it has also contributed to the problem that we are having with retention of our servicemembers.

We have heard testimony over the last few years from servicemembers who have been in neglected privatized family housing, and it has caused many of the servicemembers to throw the towel in and just say: You know what? I wanted to make a career out of being in the military, but obviously the services don't care about me and don't care about my family or exposing my children to lead paint, mold, and other really serious problems.

We are not at a point where we should be encouraging privatization of housing. We should allow the services to take a measured approach to pursue privatized unaccompanied housing when they think it is appropriate and make sure that there is appropriate accountability in place, which this amendment doesn't ensure.

I would urge Members to vote against it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Madam Chair, as a daughter of a veteran, the wife of a veteran, as a veteran myself, it is particularly important to me that our country keeps its promises to those who served.

Virginia's Second District is home to one of the highest populations of veterans in the country. An estimated 90,000 veterans live not within our borders but across the ocean in U.S. territories and Freely Associated States such as Puerto Rico, Guam, and other islands across the Pacific.

We are responsible for providing care to all veterans, including those that reside within U.S. territories and Freely Associated States.

However, there is evidence that VA's estimate of the number of veterans living in these areas is far too low, and the Government Accountability Office has consistently criticized the model used by the VA to make these estimates.

This prevents the VA from allocating sufficient resources to serve those veterans, leading to gaps in care.

In addition, the VA does not have community care network providers in the Freely Associated States and limited local options for medical care, and healthcare is often only available after traveling by plane.

Most veterans who live in one of the Freely Associated States do not qualify for the VA travel benefits program, even though the closest VA clinic is sometimes thousands of miles away on another island.

VA care in these areas does not live up to its promise. I urge the VA to maintain and expand services available to these veterans, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Madam Chair, just to close, again, about the privatization of housing. To look at and to compare and to enter both facilities, those that are privatized, and those that are purely funded by the Department of Defense, is it perfect, no, but it is a heck of a lot better than the current conditions that we have our unaccompanied servicemembers living in right now.

There are stark differences in those two pathways of life. I cannot speak more favorably to the privatized model. Again, is it perfect, no. Is there a lot of accountability and oversight that needs to happen, yes.

That contract process could probably be perfected and worked on. That is something that I think is in the responsibility of Congress.

We need to make sure that we have a contract with those privatized companies who also have reputations on the line so they are not just building and forgetting about those housing situations. They have reputations too, and they want to take care of our servicemembers.

In reality, what is happening in the two models we currently have in San Diego and Norfolk is a stark contrast to the DOD-funded, DOD-built, and DOD-supervised housing that we currently see on base, and I can't think of a better direction for our servicemembers.

As far as the VA carrying U.S. territories and Freely Associated States, I again encourage my colleagues to support this amendment.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I had the honor of growing up in a family with a strong history of service to our country.

My grandfather served in the Navy in World War II. My father served as a United States Army Green Beret in Vietnam and later served in the Army Reserves.

I spent some of the best years of my life in the Navy as a helicopter pilot with many members who became like family to me.

As a third-generation veteran, the wife of a veteran, and a mother of future veterans, I know how important it is to take care of our men and women in uniform after they return home from service.

Unfortunately, these issues surrounding mental health are a complex and unfortunate challenge for many of our Nation's heroes.

Since 9/11, it is estimated that over 30,000 Active-Duty servicemembers and veterans have died by suicide. Most statistics average approximately 20 a day.

This is four times more than the number of servicemembers killed in combat during the global war on terror.

We have the responsibility to provide those who have served our country with the medical care, including the mental health care and support that they deserve.

While the VA has expanded their suicide outreach and mental health initiatives, there is more work to be done. We cannot allow the men and women who have served our country to slip through the cracks. We can and we must do better.

That is why I have offered this amendment, to ensure the VA fully funds and effectively executes mental health care programs with a special emphasis on suicide prevention and outreach.

Returning home from combat and transitioning to civilian life is often extremely difficult for our servicemembers.

Access to programs and resources for suicide prevention can help those who are struggling and ultimately save lives. We must protect our veterans, just as they have protected us. I urge my colleagues to stand up for veterans and vote in favor of my amendment.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, just to clarify, there is a stark difference between family privatized housing and unaccompanied privatized housing for our single servicemembers.

I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I represent a military-heavy district with five bases, and all of those installations have buildings that are in disrepair or condemned. I am shocked at some of the conditions I see on the military bases in my district. I drive around, and it is disheartening to see the buildings that are in disrepair, that are falling apart, and that are eyesores.

I have driven in family housing where right across the street will be an empty, old BOQ building that will have the doors swinging open and the curtains blowing in the breeze from windows that are broken and refrigerators sitting with their doors ajar out in the hallways. These are buildings that are awaiting demolition that sit literally for years and are eyesores. We haven't prioritized demolition projects on these bases.

When I think about recruitment and retention for our all-volunteer force, I worry about those impressions that we are leaving with other families, with our military families and Active-Duty servicemen and - women that are driving through bases.

Not prioritizing military demolition projects has created safety issues directly affecting the quality of life and quality of service of our military personnel, their families, and surrounding communities. Poor conditions on military bases can hamper operational efficiency and readiness. Condemned buildings may restrict space for training, maintenance, and equipment storage. Lack of suitable facilities can delay operations, hinder training exercises, and impact the overall effectiveness of military units stationed on the base.

My amendment would ensure the Department of Defense allocates additional funding specifically for the demolition of condemned buildings on military installations. If we recognize the importance of maintaining and improving our installation infrastructure, we can ensure that we don't deter potential recruits and impact retention rates.

Servicemembers and their families may be reluctant to stay in such environments, affecting the overall strength and morale of the military community. My amendment would ensure the necessary resources are available to carry out the demolition projects efficiently and safely by reducing bureaucratic red tape and expediting the review and approval of demolition plans. It is crucial to address and improve these poor conditions to ensure the well-being of military personnel.

I can't overstate that when we are so focused on recruitment, retention, and quality of life, when I get in my minivan and I drive around bases and see buildings that are falling apart, that are dilapidated, that have broken glass, broken doors, those are eyesores. I think of what kind of impression that leaves on a person who is a new recruit right out of boot camp who shows up on a base and drives through a series of these buildings that are due to be demolished, but we can't get that done. When we call, when we pick up the phone and ask base leadership, they say it is going to be several years from now. I have to look at that building or other members of the service and their families have to look at those buildings on their drive to and from work, on their drives to and from commissaries or to and from their jobs. We have to do better for our servicemen and -women.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to help make our military installations more appealing and safer for members of our armed services and to vote in favor of my amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source