Congressional Budget for the United States Government for the Fiscal Year 2006
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2006 -- (Senate - March 15, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, at this very hour, veterans in my home State of Washington and throughout the country are waiting for the health care they were promised. They are facing understaffed and overcrowded VA hospitals and clinics. They are dealing with paperwork. They are dealing with redtape. They are not getting the service they were promised.
At this hour, veterans from World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and other conflicts are waiting for appointments to see a doctor, waiting for prescription drugs, and waiting for help with post-traumatic stress disorder. While they are waiting, new veterans are coming home from Iraq, from Afghanistan, and they need health care, too.
Every day the system is getting more and more crowded. The waiting lists are growing longer. We have to do something about it. These brave men and women were there for us. We have now got to be there for them. They answered our country's call, and now we have to do our part. That is why I am on the floor tonight with Senator Akaka, offering an amendment to increase funding for veterans health care by $2.85 billion.
I am here today with a simple message, which is displayed right here on this chart: Congress needs to keep its promise to America's veterans. We need to honor their service and their sacrifice, and we need to fund health care now. I received many letters from veterans throughout my State with this simple plea: Keep our promise to America's veterans. Fund health care now.
Let me say, we have a lot of work to do. If we follow the budget President Bush proposed last month, we will force veterans out of the VA system, we will force veterans out of nursing homes, we will force veterans to pay more in fees and copayments, and we will force veterans to wait even longer for the care they have earned.
As the daughter of a disabled World War II veteran, as the first woman in history to serve on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, and as the voice of more than 700,000 brave veterans in the State of Washington, I cannot let that happen.
I have been fighting for veterans for many years. In fact, just last week in the Budget Committee I offered an amendment to boost funding for VA health care. Do you know what some Senators told me? They said: We have already increased funding for veterans plenty, so we don't need another dime for veterans health care.
They are wrong. That is not what the veterans in my home State are telling me.
I want every Senator to know that how you vote on this amendment is a test of how committed you are to helping America's veterans. With this vote, we are going to find out who is serious about helping our veterans and who is just talking.
With this vote, every Senator will have to announce publicly whether they are making life better for our veterans or whether they are making excuses. I am here to say let's do the right thing. Let us support this amendment and keep the promise to those who have served.
For those veterans who are following this debate tonight, let me recap where it stands.
This month, Congress is deciding how much money to spend on priorities such as veterans health care. So far, we have only had two choices, and one is to follow President Bush's approach. He offered a budget that will impose higher fees and copayments on many veterans. It will lock the doors of VA to thousands of veterans. It is no wonder that veterans organizations from coast to coast have denounced that budget proposal.
Last week, the Senate Budget Committee organized its own budget proposal. I serve on that committee. I was part of that debate.
The Republican proposal got rid of some of the onerous fees in President Bush's budget, but they refused to increase funding for veterans to meet their needs.
I tried to improve that bill in committee with the Murray veterans health care amendment, but the Republicans blocked my funding and passed an inaccurate budget on a party-line vote. Now that flawed budget is here on the Senate floor, and we have one more chance to make it right.
That is why I am here tonight offering this amendment with Senator Akaka. Our amendment says let's fund veterans health care based on real needs.
We know what the needs are because over the past few weeks, the Nation's largest veterans service organizations came before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, the committee on which I serve. Leaders from AMVETS, the Disabled Veterans of America, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, and Veterans of Foreign Wars, all told us what they need. They are not asking for special treatment--just what they were promised in exchange for serving our country. They told us that veterans are not getting the help they need. They told us what would happen if we adopted the President's budget.
For me, veterans health care is a very personal issue. My father served in World War II, and he returned as a disabled veteran. During the Vietnam war, I interned in the Seattle VA hospital. I know firsthand the scars and the wounds that burden our veterans when they come home.
During the gulf war, when our soldiers were coming home with gulf war syndrome, I brought the VA Secretary out to Washington State so he could hear from veterans what I was hearing.
Over the past 2 years when President Bush tried to close the doors at three VA hospitals in Washington State, I worked with veterans and community leaders from across our State to keep those facilities open. I continue to press the VA to open new community clinics in north-central Washington and in Whatcom County to help our veterans who today have little access to VA services.
When it comes to VA's health care budget, it has been a battle every year to get the funding we need. Every year, the President has proposed a small number for veterans health care, and every year we in Congress have stepped in to protect our veterans.
I have been convinced for a long time that we need to move VA health care out of the annual budget process. That is why I have sponsored legislation to make VA health care funding mandatory, so it is always there no matter what type of budget games are going on.
Unfortunately, the Republican majority has blocked that commonsense proposal every year.
So the fight goes on. That is why we are here tonight. This year's debate started on February 2 when the President unveiled his budget proposal.
Veterans of Foreign Wars looked at his proposal, and they said:
If the President's budget were approved, waiting time for basic health care appointments would again skyrocket, returning us to the era of the six-month waiting period.
That is what the commander in chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars said about the President's budget.
The President's budget would force more than 2 million veterans to pay a $250 annual fee just to get VA health care. In my book, if you served our country, if you have already paid your dues, it is insulting to nickel and dime America's veterans.
The President's plan would also double the copayment for prescription drugs for thousands of our veterans. It would slash prosthetics research by $9 million.
The President's budget would eliminate thousands of State-run nursing home beds. In my home State alone, 300 veterans who honorably served this country would lose their place in a State nursing home. That is 300 Washington State families being asked to shoulder a new burden, and that is just wrong.
The President's budget would cut the VA workforce by more than 3,000 people while there is a backlog of more than 700,000 claims. That just does not make any sense.
We have a huge backlog of claims, with new claims coming in every day, and now there will be fewer staff to process. That is wrong.
The President's budget would also continue to ban some veterans from coming to the VA for care. So far, under this flawed policy, nearly 200,000 veterans have been turned away, including more than 3,100 veterans in Washington State.
That is what the President proposed. I have been working with others to fix that.
I have to tell you that it has been very frustrating. No one in this administration is willing to say how we are going to take care of our newest veterans, when they have waiting lists for existing veterans.
I asked the President's budget director on February 9: Where is the money in your budget to take care of our newest veterans and our existing veterans? I didn't get an answer. So on February 15, I asked the Veterans Secretary. I didn't get an answer from him. So the next day, I asked the Defense Secretary, but I didn't get an answer from him either.
So I offered an amendment in the Senate Budget Committee last week. My veterans amendment was defeated on a party-line vote of 10 to 12.
So tonight I am here on the Senate floor with Senator Akaka with a similar amendment. And now every Senator is going to have to go on the record either for or against our veterans.
During this debate, you are going to hear Senators say that we have raised funding for veterans plenty. Other Senators are going to suggest that we are meeting the needs today. I am going to refute those claims line by line. But let me say this first: When veterans tell me they are being left behind and politicians tell me everything is fine, I will believe the veterans every time.
With that said, I want to look at some of the claims the other side will make.
One of the arguments you are going to hear from the opponents is that appropriations for veterans medical care grew by 63 percent from fiscal year 1995 to fiscal year 2004. That claim is inaccurate because it leaves out three critical facts.
First of all, the number of veterans who have served has gone up dramatically over that same period of time, as this chart shows. During the same year, the number of unique veterans getting care from the VA has increased by 88 percent.
It is nice that the funding has gone up, but it is nowhere close to meeting the number of veterans who are getting care at the VA.
Second, the Republican claim is inaccurate because it ignores the impact of medical inflation.
As this chart shows, over the same timeframe they are talking, medical inflation has shot up 92 percent, so the increases we have had so far have not even kept up with medical inflation. It is great that veterans funding has increased over the years, but it has not even kept up with inflation.
There is another problem with this excuse that we do not need this amendment, because every day, as each of us knows, new veterans are coming back home and seeking care at the VA. If the number of veterans was going to be stable in the coming years, it would be one thing, but we all know the number of veterans will keep growing as soldiers come home from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
Washington State alone has sent thousands of brave men and women to Iraq and Afghanistan over the past several years. Now a large group is returning home, including 4,000 members of the National Guard. This is the next generation of veterans.
Congress needs to provide more funding if we are going to keep up with the growing needs. So we are going to hear some of the opponents claim that veterans funding has gone up 63 percent so veterans do not need any more. But when we hear that claim, we need to remember the number of veterans in the VA system has gone up 88 percent. Medical inflation has gone up 92 percent. And we are creating new veterans every single day who need a strong, stable VA to take care of them.
Here is another excuse we will hear from the opponents. They will say the VA is sitting on nearly $500 million. VA officials in Washington, DC, may well be holding back money to see what next year may bring, but that does not mean the funds are not needed at VA hospitals and clinics. Veterans health networks are already experiencing shortfalls. As a result, the committee has heard that outpatient clinics have stopped seeing even the poorest of patients, sending them hundreds of miles away to other facilities.
I am hearing from veteran leaders in my region that the VA is not moving forward with new clinics in Whatcom County and north central Washington because all those dollars are needed for medical care for existing veterans.
If the VA is sitting on funds we have appropriated, I want those dollars moved out to help veterans as we intended. It is not an excuse to block this amendment.
We may also hear opponents claim this budget increases veterans funding by about $900 million. But when you look at the numbers, the increase in medical care is less than $80 million.
I have a chart that was produced not by us but by majority staff on the Committee on Veterans Affairs. I ask unanimous consent to have it printed in the RECORD after my remarks.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we have heard some opponents say we should not provide another dime in the budget for veterans health care because we do not know how the Appropriations Committee will spend that money. I serve on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and I serve on the Veterans Appropriations Subcommittee. If the Senate passes our amendment, then the Appropriations subcommittee will have explicit instructions that this money is to be spent on veterans health care. Because I serve on all the committees involved--Appropriations, Veterans' Affairs--I will be there at every turn to remind my colleagues of the promise we made.
This amendment is also about making sure our military is strong today. How we treat our veterans affects our ability to recruit the men and women we need to serve in our Armed Forces. That is nothing new. It has actually been true since the founding of our country. On the chart behind me I have a quote from George Washington in 1789. Washington said:
The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional as to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their country.
That was President George Washington in 1789.
We have an opportunity tonight with this amendment to do right by our veterans and to keep our country strong. This amendment will help meet the growing needs and will ensure that we keep the promise to those who have answered this country's call. They were there for us when we needed them, and we need to be there for them.
With this amendment offered by Senator Akaka and myself and many others, every Senator will have to decide if they are voting for veterans or against them. I urge every Senator to do the right thing and vote for our amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the Senator from Idaho, who has assumed this year the task of chairing the Veterans' Committee, does have a true compassion for veterans. I appreciate his work and his diligence on this and all the work he is attempting to do to take care of our veterans because he shares with all of us a concern of making sure we take care of those who have served us.
We just have a difference of opinion on the amendment that we have offered on this side. There are $70 billion worth of tax cuts that are assumed in this budget. All we are saying with our amendment is let's assume over $67 billion instead of $70 billion and use that amount for our veterans.
I am one who believes that when we ask our men and women to serve, we have to keep a commitment to them that we will be there to take care of them when they come home. It is part of the cost of war. I agree with the Senator from Idaho, the chairman of the Veterans' Committee, that we have increased veterans care. We had to. We have more veterans. We have increased it 43 percent over the past 4 years. But I remind my colleagues that the number of veterans needing veterans health care has increased 88 percent. Medical inflation has increased 92 percent. Even with the amendment that Republicans have offered, we will not be meeting the needs of the veterans, the men and women who have served this country.
I believe we have a responsibility to do that. I believe we cannot tell the next generation we are asking to serve that we are only going to take care of 43 percent or 60 percent. We have an obligation to take care of their health care when they come home.
The amendment offered on this side by Senator Akaka and myself will assure us we can go home and our tell veterans they have been there for us and they will not be turned away. They have served us and we should serve them.
I am one who believes the cost of taking care of veterans is a cost war. It is not a cost we should pass on to the next generation. It is not a cost we should ignore. It is a cost that we have a responsibility to take care of.
I commend the Senator from Idaho for his amendment. I appreciate his attempt to raise it. But I say we have to make sure that all veterans are cared for. I believe that is a cost of war and it is a cost we should assume. I urge my colleagues to vote for the amendment that was offered on this side so we can make sure when we go home and face our veterans, the men and women who are coming home today from Iraq and Afghanistan will have the services they need. It is the least we can do.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov