Providing for Consideration of H.R. Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act; Providing for Consideration of H.R. Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act of and Providing for Consideration of H.R. Smithsonian American Women's Xiii with Respect to Consideratoin of Certain Resolutions Reported From the Committee on Rules

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New Mexico for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to reiterate that if we move forward with this bill without my amendment, 100 percent of the very much-needed money, the $1 billion to help our catastrophically disabled veterans who deserve our help--it is long overdue, but we are paying for it 100 percent with other veterans' money. Let me say it again: 100 percent of this bill is being paid for off of the backs of other veterans.

Let me explain.

Veterans are experiencing record foreclosures. Unfortunately, it is not hard to explain why: the Trump administration's assault on VA loan assistance options. Just months into the Trump administration's second term, President Trump and Secretary Collins, at the urging from Chairman Bost and Chairman Van Orden, ended the Veterans Affairs Servicing Purchase program, otherwise known as VASP.

The VASP program was a lifeline offered to veterans by President Biden that served as the last-resort option for veterans before foreclosure. It is no surprise that foreclosures for veterans have doubled since that action.

Mr. Speaker, 10,000 veterans have lost their homes in the last year, and tens of thousands more are set to be foreclosed on in this Trump economy. The last option for these veterans is to refinance their loans.

This legislation puts that relief further away. Refinances will be more expensive, which makes them no longer a viable option for some veterans and servicemembers.

Veterans have fewer options than they did a year ago, and this bill will reduce those options even more. Therefore, we must find a better way to pay for this bill that doesn't raise costs on struggling veteran and Active-Duty homeowners.

As I have said before, and I will say it again, spending by Congress is a statement of our collective priorities. However, in a majority rule system like ours, the reality is that the work of Congress isn't a true reflection of shared goals, as the Founders intended. Rather, it is often simply a reflection of what the majority chooses to force on everybody else.

Case in point: I very much disagree with the majority's choice to include billions of dollars' worth of tax cuts for millionaires in the big, ugly bill. I especially disagree with the majority's decision to triple the exemption from paying estate tax from $5 million to $15 million. That is not my priority nor is it the priority of most Americans who are struggling to get by.

I, and Americans in my estimation, would much rather see that money spent on those who are in more dire need than millionaires and billionaires. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we may consider my amendment, which would direct just a fraction of that wealth to pay for benefits for the catastrophically injured veterans, their caregivers, and the survivors we are discussing today.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Speaker, no one in this Congress can say with a straight face that there is a material difference in someone inheriting $14.5 million in property tax-free and $15 million tax-free. The change contemplated in this amendment would not appreciably affect the quality of life of a single individual and is only a temporary change, but using that money instead to achieve the benefits increases in H.R. 6047 most definitely will, in a very positive way.

Mr. Speaker, I urge the defeat of the previous question.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source