Summary:

All articles in Senate section

DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999
(Senate - July 16, 1998)

Text of this article available as: TXT PDF [Pages S8330-S8374] DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999 Mr. LOTT. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now resume the HUD- VA appropriations bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 2168) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes. The Senate resumed consideration of the bill. Pending: Daschle amendment No. 3063, to amend the Public Health Service Act and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to protect consumers in managed care plans and other health coverage. Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that with respect to the HUD-VA appropriations bill, all first-degree amendments must be offered and debated tonight, and if votes are ordered with respect to those amendments, they occur, in a stacked sequence, beginning at 9 o'clock in the morning--I want to emphasize to our colleagues, we are beginning a little earlier than normal; it will be 9 o'clock; and we will go right to the stacked sequence, with 2 minutes of debate prior to each vote for explanation, as has been requested and is the normal practice--and that all succeeding votes be limited to 10 minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LOTT. Now, Mr. President, I know that there are several amendments that need to be worked through. I see that Senator Wellstone is here on the floor ready to go. And I believe we can get some time agreements on other issues. Does the manager, Senator Bond, wish to comment? Mr. BOND. Thank you. Mr. President, I believe Senator Nickles was prepared to go, and I know that Senator Wellstone wants to go right after that. But I believe before we move forward, I need to yield to the distinguished minority leader who has to deal with this. It was our understanding from the discussions that Senator Nickles would move forward on a major amendment he has, and then I would hope we would be able to turn to Senator Wellstone. With that, let me yield to the minority leader. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader. Amendment No. 3063 Withdrawn Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the majority leader and I have been talking throughout the day. And I believe we are making progress in setting up a procedure by which at some point in the not too distant future--I think the prospects are greater tonight than they have been in some time--we might have a good debate on the Patients' Bill of Rights. Because I believe that these negotiations are proceeding successfully, I withdraw the pending amendment on HUD-VA with an expectation that we will come to some successful conclusion at a later date. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is withdrawn. The amendment (No. 3063) was withdrawn. Mr. WELLSTONE addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota. Mr. WELLSTONE. Might I make a request for 1 second? I ask unanimous consent that I be able to follow the Nickles amendment, so I can go back to the office and come back. Mr. BOND. No objection. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BOND addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader and the minority leader for allowing us to get back to this VA-HUD bill. We have had good discussions on it. We have had a very important amendment debated at length on [[Page S8331]] the space station. This is always one of the important points that we have to debate on the VA-HUD bill. We have had great cooperation from Senators on both sides. I think we have narrowed the list of amendments. And we hope to be able to accept and include in the managers' amendment many of the things that have been raised by our colleagues. We are now waiting for Senator Nickles to come forward to debate an amendment on the FHA limits. But we do have a number of amendments we can accept while we are waiting. Amendment No. 3195 (Purpose: To increase funds for VA homeless grant and per diem program) Mr. BOND. First, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator Cleland, and Senator Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], for himself, Mr. Cleland, and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3195. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 18, add the following new provisos prior to the period: ``: Provided further, That of the funds made available under this heading, $14,000,000 shall be for the homeless grant program and $6,000,000 shall be for the homeless per diem program: Provided further, That such funds may be used for vocational training, rehabilitation, and outreach activities in addition to other authorized homeless assistance activities''. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment would provide, within the $17.2 billion medical care appropriation, $20 million for VA's homeless grant and per diem program. The amendment would make these funds available for vocational training, outreach, shelter, and other important activities to aid homeless veterans in a comprehensive manner. This should help meet the needs of the 275,000 veterans who are estimated to be homeless on any given night of the year. Together with funds already included in the bill, we will have provided $100 million in VA homeless assistance. This is a critical need. I commend the other Senators who worked on supporting this. I urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for their outstanding leadership on this important piece of legislation. Given the hard work that went into this bill, I wanted to first express my appreciation for what they have done. I am reminded of the old phrase ``too many cooks spoil the broth.'' Sometimes the legislative branch might be thought of in that way. As I offer this amendment, I have attempted to be mindful not to ``spoil the broth.'' As the former head of the Veterans Administration, the veterans portion of this bill continues to be near and dear to my heart. I am extremely pleased to see that the Appropriations Committee under the leadership of Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski has increased funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs by over $1.5 billion when compared to last year's budget. This represents a real increase in funding even when inflation is factored in. Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski are true friends of America's veterans, and we thank them. The amendment I have offered attempts to fill a void that exists with respect to services for veterans. When I was head of the Veterans Administration, it was clear to me that the VA could not be everywhere at all times. We relied heavily on other government agencies and private entities in our attempt to assure that all veterans could obtain the benefits they were entitled to and the assistance they needed. Today, in an era of balanced budgets, we cannot depend solely on federal dollars to solve every problem. The era of balanced budgets brings with it the era of partnership. The VA must continue to partner with other entities to fulfill its mission. For instance, in this year's Defense Authorization bill, I have authored language which would strongly encourage the VA to partner with the Department of Defense to provide health care for our nation's military personnel, their dependents, military retirees, and veterans. Today, I am advocating much stronger partnering between the VA and the private sector to fill the basic needs of our nation's veterans. The Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program was established in 1992 to fund the development and operation of transitional housing for homeless veterans who are free of alcohol and drugs. Over 2,000 beds have been made available under this program. Over $21 million has been appropriated for this purpose. Unfortunately, the current program is completely inadequate in the face of the overwhelming need which exists for housing for homeless veterans. The VA estimates that over 275,000 veterans are currently homeless on any given night. In a given year, over 500,000 veterans find themselves homeless at some point. In Atlanta, Georgia, nearly 10,000 veterans are in need of homeless assistance. This is clearly unacceptable. A mere 2,000 beds, while important, would not meet the needs of one state, let alone the entire nation. The program does not come close to fulfilling the entire need. Currently at approximately $7 million, it represents less than two-hundredths of a percent of the entire VA budget. The amendment I have offered would set aside $20 million for the Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem program. This would nearly triple the amount available for this program. It would also insure that funds are available for rehabilitation, vocational training, and outreach. These are critical elements because the list of successful programs have demonstrated that helping veterans become drug and alcohol free and employable is the best way to insure that they not find themselves homeless again. Furthermore, it is important to provide for successful outreach to veterans in need to insure that veterans are able to take advantage of the services, both public and private, that are available to them. Several groups have contacted me since I was elected to the Senate to seek support for the veterans assistance projects they are trying to establish or expand. I would like to take a few moments to describe two such programs. Last year, the Georgia Military College conducted a pilot program in which veterans voluntarily undergoing drug rehabilitation were offered a college course. The program was paid for through the proceeds of a golf tournament sponsored by the Atlanta Veterans Administration Medical Center. Eighteen veterans participated in the original program. In light of the initial success, the Georgia Military College seized on the idea of expanding the program not only to provide for education but to offer additional counseling and to provide shelter for the participants. The College is in the process of establishing a 5-year program aimed at improving the lives of Georgia's homeless veterans. This is the type of program that can truly make a difference. Instead of a ``band-aid'' approach, it offers true skills training, and the transitional housing these veterans need to be able to continue with the program. The National Veterans Foundation offers perhaps one of the most important services a nation can provide to our veterans in need--a human voice. The Foundation was founded by Floyd ``Shad'' Meshad in 1985 to help veterans recover from the pain of war. It has aided over a quarter of a million veterans, funding housing, legal services, job training, counseling, and rehabilitative programs. A major focus of the Foundation is its toll-free Information and Referral Line. Shad Meshad refers to it as a ``Clearing House'' to direct veterans and their families to the assistance they need. It is a real human voice on the other end of the line, not a recording. Over the years, the National Veterans Foundation has logged thousands of calls. Unfortunately, this critical outreach program is only available during business hours, Monday through Friday. Our veterans deserve the kind of service provided by the National Veterans Foundation--but they deserve it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. These are just two of the types of programs that deserve the support of the VA. In my view, it is only lack of resources which currently limits that support. It should be made clear that what we are talking about is not the old give-away of federal funds. This is not new ``corporate welfare.'' I was introduced to the Homeless Providers [[Page S8332]] Grant and Per Diem program fairly recently. I was surprised to learn that the Veterans Administration does not currently have a comprehensive grant program that could fund meritorious projects, but it does have this program. I believe the Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program combined with a future comprehensive grant program will leverage federal dollars with private, state, and local money to create a multiplier effect that will aid our nation's veterans for years to come. It is my intent to introduce legislation in the future to provide the necessary statutory authority to establish a comprehensive grant program that goes beyond the current homeless assistance program. Mr. President, I would like to thank Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski for their cooperation and support for this amendment. Without their leadership, this amendment would not be possible. I look forward to working closely with them in the future to further assist our nation's veterans. I yield the floor. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am proud to concur with Senators Cleland and Bond on this amendment. It will increase by $13 million the amount for the homeless grants for the VA. Nobody who fought to save our country should be out on the street. These men have borne the permanent wounds of war, some of which have caused deep-seated emotional problems--unable to find a job. What I like about the VA homeless program is, it not only provides a shelter but tries to get them focused on starting a new way of life. We have an outstanding one in Maryland. I am proud of it. And I look forward to accepting this amendment and say hats off to try to give the vets a new lease on life. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment (No. 3195) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3196 (Purpose: To require entities that operate homeless shelters to identify and provide certain counseling to homeless veterans) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator McCain, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], for Mr. McCain, proposes an amendment numbered 3196. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 93, between lines 18 and 19, insert the following: Sec. 423. (a) Each entity that receives a grant from the Federal Government for purposes of providing emergency shelter for homeless individuals shall-- (1) ascertain, to the extent practicable, whether or not each adult individual seeking such shelter from such entity is a veteran; and (2) provide each such individual who is a veteran such counseling relating to the availability of veterans benefits (including employment assistance, health care benefits, and other benefits) as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs considers appropriate. (b) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall jointly coordinate the activities required by subsection (a). (c) Entities referred to in subsection (a) shall notify the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of the number and identity of veterans ascertained under paragraph (1) of that subsection. Such entities shall make such notification with such frequency and in such form as the Secretary shall specify. (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an entity referred to subsection (a) that fails to meet the requirements specified in that subsection shall not be eligible for additional grants or other Federal funds for purposes of carrying out activities relating to emergency shelter for homeless individuals. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment will assist homeless veterans by requiring the federally funded homeless shelters report to the Veterans' Administration the number of homeless veterans they serve, and it seeks to ensure that these homeless veterans be provide information regarding the availability of veterans benefits. The amendment will improve the Federal Government's database on homeless veterans and will help homeless veterans know about programs which can help them address critical needs. It has been cleared on both sides. I urge its adoption, and yield the floor. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 1999. The amendment will assist homeless veterans and seek to eliminate some of the suffering of those less fortunate Americans who served their country in the military. This amendment will develop better methods for identifying veterans who utilize federally funded homeless shelters so that they can be educated about veteran benefits to which they are entitled, including Department of Veterans Affairs health care. A homeless shelter which receives federal funding would be required to inquire if a person, man or woman, entering the shelter is a veteran. This information would be used solely to assist in tracking the number of homeless veterans and providing counseling to the veteran regarding all available benefits, including job search, veterans preference rights, and medical benefits. Additionally, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development will coordinate these activities and specify a schedule for notifying the Department of Veteran Affairs of the status of these homeless veterans. It is the intent of this amendment to require homeless shelters to follow this procedures if they are to be eligible for additional Federal grants. Today, there is no easy or accurate way to track the number of homeless veterans in the United States. I find this astonishing. We just celebrated Independence Day, and this country owes a great deal to the men and women who bore arms to keep America free. It is astonishing to me that there would be no mechanism or process set up to accurately track or keep national records on homeless veterans. The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates the number of homeless veterans to be between 275,000 and 500,000 over the course of a year. Conservatively, one out of every three individuals who is sleeping in a doorway, alley, or box in our cities and rural communities has worn a uniform and served our country. Mr. President, the time is right, right now, to give a helping hand. Of the figures the Department of Veterans Affairs does acknowledge, homeless veterans are mostly male; about three percent are women. The vast majority are single; most come from poor, disadvantaged communities; forty percent suffer from mental illness; and half have substance abuse problems. More than seventy-five percent served our country for at least four years and Vietnam veterans account for more than forty percent of the total number estimated. Mr. President, there are many complex factors affecting all homelessness: extreme shortage of affordable housing, poverty, high unemployment in big cities, and disability. A large number of displaced and at-risk veterans live with lingering effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and substance abuse, compounded by a lack of family and social support networks. I do not mean to be critical of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs or the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in offering this amendment. To a certain degree the Department of Veterans Affairs is responsive in taking care of some homeless veterans. But the ones that are receiving critical medical treatment and veterans benefits are those who know that such programs exist. It is incumbent on our government to reach out to all homeless veterans. However, to do that, there must be a process in place. Homeless veterans need a coordinated effort, between the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, that provides secure housing and nutritional meals, essential physical health care, substance abuse aftercare and mental health counseling. They may need job assessment, training and placement assistance. To those that may argue that this is a new entitlement program, I [[Page S8333]] would say that these rights and benefits currently exist for veterans today. Why would we as a nation not do everything in our power to provide this help for those less fortunate veterans. Mr. President, our veterans deserve no less. I hope my colleagues will support this amendment and support our veterans. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, no one can speak for the veterans the way a former POW can. I wish to be associated with the remarks of Senator McCain and move the adoption of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to. The amendment (No. 3196) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3197 (Purpose: To provide funds for the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, once authorized) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator Mikulski, and Senator Rockefeller and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for himself, Mr. Rockefeller and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3197. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 18, add the following new provisos prior to the period: ``: Provided further, That of the funds made available under this heading, $10,000,000 shall be for implementation of the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, contingent upon enactment of authorizing legislation''. Mr. BOND. This amendment has been cleared on both sides and would provide $10 million within the VA medical appropriation for the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act contingent upon authorization. Senators Mikulski and Rockefeller have been working to create a program to facilitate the employment of primary care personnel at the VA, including an education debt reduction program which Senator Mikulski has long been interested in establishing. This program is intended to improve the recruitment and retention of primary care providers, a very important element in the service to the VA. The Primary Care Providers Incentive Act seeks to update VA's educational assistance programs for prospective employees, particularly in areas where recruitment has been difficult. I urge the authorizing committees to act expeditiously on this important program. I urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. BOND. I yield to my distinguished colleague from Maryland. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, this does attempt to recruit the very best and brightest in the field of primary care to the VA. I proposed the debt reduction program, a student debt reduction program, back in 1992. Now, why do I approach this as debt reduction rather than scholarships? The scholarship program is very worthwhile, but there are many very talented people who have already graduated. They have a substantial student debt from studying either nursing or other primary care practices. What the $5 million would do would go towards reducing their student debt if they would enter VA services; they would get a year's worth of debt reduction for a year's worth of service. This way, we know they have completed their training, they have passed their licensing requirement, they are as fit for duty as the veterans they will serve. That is why we approached it from that policy standpoint. It also joins with the outstanding efforts being made by Senator Rockefeller to also develop other tools. I concur in the amendment, and I urge its adoption and ask it be accepted unanimously. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am delighted that $10 million to fund S. 2115, the Department of Veterans Affairs Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, has been provided through a managers' amendment to the VA/HUD appropriations bill. I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member of the VA/HUD Subcommittee, Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski, for their cooperation in making this possible. The new scholarship and educational debt reduction programs that are contained in S. 2115 are designed to revitalize the Health Professionals Education Assistance Program at VA. This program was originally intended to help VA to recruit and retain health professionals, but it has atrophied in recent years, despite an ongoing demand for educational financial aid by health professionals employed by or interested in working at VA. This funding will help breathe new life into the educational assistance programs, and provide much needed incentives to improve recruitment and retention of primary care providers. The VA health care system is in the midst of a major reorganization that is simultaneously reducing the current workforce and creating the need for more primary care health professionals. VHA's five-year strategic plan includes the activation and/or planning of nearly 400 community-based outpatient clinics, to be staffed by primary care health professionals. Yet hiring of these professionals and retraining of current employees, to prepare for these changes, has lagged behind the planning process. The Primary Care Providers Incentive Programs that will be funded through this amendment will motivate current employees to get training in new areas of need by providing scholarships, and assist in the recruitment of new primary care providers by helping to pay off student loans. VA needs educational assistance programs such as these to effectively recruit and retain trained primary care health professionals. In VA hospitals and clinics, some of the most difficult positions to fill are those of nurse practitioners, physical therapists, and occupational therapists. In my own state of West Virginia, for example, at one of the VA hospitals, there has been a vacancy for an occupational therapist for over 12 years! Two of the VA hospitals have no physical therapists at all. This is simply unacceptable. The plain fact is that starting salaries in the VA are not competitive with those in private practice. The Education Debt Reduction Program gives the VA a financial recruitment tool that will be an enormous help in making the VAMCs more competitive for these much-needed and highly skilled individuals. In fact, one of the most frequently asked questions by prospective new employees is whether or not VA has a debt reduction program. Clearly, this program will answer a critical need. But improving recruitment is only half of the story. Retention of trained people is equally important. Funding the employee incentive scholarship program can help solve this very real problem. Eligibility is limited to current VA employees, providing a way for vulnerable individuals to protect themselves against future RIFs by acquiring training in the new areas of need. This will go a long way toward improving staff morale at the VA, which has been severely undermined in the last few years due to the necessary streamlining that resulted from significant budget cuts. The educational assistance programs in S. 2115 are a valuable investment, enhancing morale of the VA health care providers in the short term, while building a workforce that matches VA's needs and improves veterans' health care in the long run. In the coming months, I will be working with my colleagues on the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs to authorize these worthwhile programs. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (No. 3197) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. [[Page S8334]] Amendment No. 3198 (Purpose: To provide for the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senators Sarbanes and Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for Mr. Sarbanes, for himself and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3198. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: At the appropriate place, insert the following: SEC. ____. NATIONAL FALLEN FIREFIGHTERS FOUNDATION. (a) Establishment and Purposes.--Section 202 of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5201) is amended-- (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following: ``(1) primarily-- ``(A) to encourage, accept, and administer private gifts of property for the benefit of the National Fallen Firefighters' Memorial and the annual memorial service associated with the memorial; and ``(B) to, in coordination with the Federal Government and fire services (as that term is defined in section 4 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2203)), plan, direct, and manage the memorial service referred to in subparagraph (A)''; (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``and Federal'' after ``non-Federal''; (3) in paragraph (3)-- (A) by striking ``State and local'' and inserting ``Federal, State, and local''; and (B) by striking ``and'' at the end; (4) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and (5) by adding at the end the following: ``(5) to provide for a national program to assist families of fallen firefighters and fire departments in dealing with line-of-duty deaths of those firefighters; and ``(6) to promote national, State, and local initiatives to increase public awareness of fire and life safety in coordination with the United States Fire Administration.'' (b) Board of Directors of Foundation.--Section 203(g)(1) of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5202(g)(1)) is amended by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following: ``(A) appointing officers or employees;''. (c) Administrative Services and Support.--Section 205 of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5204) is amended to read as follows: ``SEC. 205. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AND SUPPORT. ``(a) In General.--During the 10-year period beginning on the date of enactment of the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, the Administrator may-- ``(1) provide personnel, facilities, and other required services for the operation of the Foundation; and ``(2) request and accept reimbursement for the assistance provided under paragraph (1). ``(b) Reimbursement.--Any amounts received under subsection (a)(2) as reimbursement for assistance shall be deposited in the Treasury to the credit of the appropriations then current and chargeable for the cost of providing that assistance. ``(c) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal personnel or stationery may be used to solicit funding for the Foundation.''. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment by Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski affects the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation, which is a federally chartered corporation dedicated to helping families of fallen firefighters in assisting State and local efforts to recognize firefighters who die in the line of duty. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Fire Administration, is a member of the foundation's board. Senator Sarbanes sponsored the original legislation creating this foundation. His amendment, along with Senator Mikulski, makes some technical changes to the law and eliminates the cap on staff. We understand it has been approved by FEMA. It has been cleared by the Commerce Committee. It would have no impact on spending and will ensure that the foundation is able to employ the staff it needs to operate. I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield to the sponsors. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his support for this amendment. The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation has done an absolutely outstanding job. I think it bears out the wisdom of the Congress in establishing it. The services they are now providing to the families of deceased firefighters are really exemplary. We have had many communications from spouses, from children, from parents, of how much the activities of the Fallen Firefighters Foundation mean to them. They have enlisted very significant support from the private sector for their activities. These changes are technical in nature in order to enable the foundation to carry out its responsibilities with greater efficacy and greater efficiency. I didn't want to let this opportunity pass without underscoring the tremendously fine work that is being done by the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I concur with the remarks of my distinguished Senator. He has really done the heavy lifting on this policy issue. I want to thank him for doing this. I absolutely concur with the direction in which we are going. I think it will be an important memorial and a way to staff it properly. I urge this amendment be agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (No. 3198) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3199 (Purpose: To restore veterans tobacco-related benefits as in effect before the enactment of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century) Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will get started on this amendment. Mr. BOND. Might I ask for clarification? I ask the Senator which amendment he has that he wants to discuss. Mr. WELLSTONE. This is the amendment that will restore benefits to veterans for smoking-related diseases. Mr. President, this amendment which I now send to the desk is on behalf of myself, Senator Murray and Senator McCain. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Wellstone] for himself, Mrs. Murray, and Mr. McCain, proposes an amendment numbered 3199. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allard). Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 16, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following: Sec. 110. (a)(1) Section 1103 of title 38, United States Code, is repealed. (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 11 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 1103. (b) Upon the enactment of this Act-- (1) the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall not make any estimate of changes in direct spending outlays under section 252(d) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 for any fiscal year resulting from the enactment of this section; and (2) the Chairmen of the Committees on the Budget shall not make any adjustments in direct spending outlays for purposes of the allocations, functional levels, and aggregates under title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for any fiscal year resulting from the enactment of this section. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, my amendment would restore benefits to veterans with smoking-related diseases. How would we do that? It is simple. The TEA 21 highway program canceled the disability benefits that veterans would have received under existing rules and procedures, and it used that money instead to pay for more highway projects. My amendment would simply return the favor. It would repeal that offset from the highway bill. Let me go through the procedural history of this to review how we got to where we are today. This offset first appeared in the President's 1999 budget request. The administration, I think, wildly overestimated the cost of benefits for smoking-related disabilities. But this money was then taken from veterans and it was used elsewhere. There is a tremendous amount of indignation in the veterans community over this, and there should be. Congress decided to play the same game. In the budget resolution they agreed to deny benefits to veterans and use the money [[Page S8335]] elsewhere just like it had been done by the administration. But the budget priorities were a little different. The savings were used for highway projects. That didn't happen on the Senate side, but by the time it came back from the House, that is what happened. That was the major reason I voted against that bill. The appropriate place to repeal this offset and restore veterans' benefits would have been in the technical corrections to the TEA 21 highway bill. Senator Rockefeller and I intended to offer an amendment which would have done just that, but we never got a chance because that amendment was folded into another conference report so we could never get an up-or-down vote. We all know that conference reports, as I just said, cannot be amended. As I have said before on the floor, it is only right that we should have a clean vote on this issue. This is not only a question of veterans, it is a question of accountability. There is simply no excuse for hiding behind procedural gimmicks to avoid responsibility. Some have said we have already voted on this bill, or we have already voted on this question, but I don't think that is true. Let me explain. The two votes we had on the budget resolution did not deal directly with this question. Senators got a chance to pretend they were for veterans and against the offset, knowing that 5 minutes later we could cast a vote in the opposite direction. We had some camouflage about doing a study sometime in the future. But I think we all recognize it was only a study. And the vote on the IRS reform bill was not a clean up-or-down vote; it was only a procedural vote, a point of order. We need to have a clean vote up or down, no subterfuge, no trickery. It is not enough to take these benefits away from veterans. Congress will add insult to injury by not having a clean up-or-down vote on this question. I think veterans should take a clear position on this issue, and that should go on the Record. Now, some may object to this amendment because it is legislation on an appropriations bill, or they may think that this appropriations bill is the wrong place to remedy this particular problem. Let me remind my colleagues that this offset was a jurisdictional raid to begin with. Transportation conferees stole the money without ever going through the Veterans' Affairs Committee. This was originally the Veterans' Affairs Committee. If we now repeal this offset through the Veterans' Affairs Committee, we will have to pay for it by taking even more money away from veterans. The highway bill took that money away. It was not taken away by the Veterans' Committee. Nobody wants to do that. Nobody wants to take more funding away from veterans. There are a few misconceptions that I would like to clear up. First and foremost, compensation for veterans with smoking-related illnesses was not a new program. It was not an expansion of a program. It was a benefit to which disabled veterans were entitled to under existing law. Veterans who had become addicted to tobacco because of their service in the military had the right to apply for disability. The highway bill took that right away. It is a very tough test that the veterans have to meet. Only 300 have passed it. These were not special rules, either. Those veterans had to meet the same legal and evidentiary requirements as for any other service-connected disability. They had to prove that their addiction began in the military service. They had to prove that their addiction continued without interruption. They had to prove that their addiction resulted in an illness. They had to prove that their addiction resulted in a disability. There is another thing that ought to be pointed out tonight. We are not really talking about $17 billion here. Let's be clear about it. OMB first came up with that figure based on an estimate of 500,000 claims granted every year. But over the past 6 years, a grand total of only 8,000 veterans have applied, and only 300 of those claims have been granted. CBO came in with a lower, but still high, estimate of $10.5 billion. But the TEA 21 conferees needed more money, so they took advantage of the higher OMB number to pay for a huge increase in funding for highways. The administration's cost projections are based on many, many unknowns. More importantly, OMB is assuming VA will grant 100 percent of all claims but, to date--listen to this, colleagues--VA has granted only 5 percent of the claims. The test veterans have to meet is simply much harder than OMB seems to think. There are a number of other unknowns with the administration's methodology. On the percentage of veterans who currently smoke or are heavy smokers, VA experts made what we consider to be a questionable assumption that veterans who smoke more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime would have the same disease rates as smokers; the percentage of veterans who may file claims for tobacco-related illnesses that are already receiving compensation for those or other conditions; the rate at which the VA can adjudicate these claims. There are lots of assumptions I would question. Let me get right down to the very nitty-gritty of what this amendment is about. My first choice would be to keep the old rules for deciding disability claims--the ones we had before the TEA 21 highway bill. I don't see why Congress should go out of its way to deny disability benefits to veterans. Don't we have better places to look for spending offsets? Back in World War II, these veterans had free and discounted cigarettes included in their rations, and those packs didn't even have warning labels on them. Soldiers were encouraged to smoke to relieve the stress of military strain. And now some of them are suffering the consequences and they are not getting the compensation. That is what is so outrageous about what we have done, and that is what this amendment intends to correct. The second choice--even if Congress does decide to deny these benefits, I find it hard to understand why this money should be taken away from veterans' programs. I believe, at the very least, it should stay with veterans. It is quite one thing to argue, look, though they deserve this compensation, they have to meet strict criteria to get this compensation. We handed cigarettes out like candy and we know veterans became addicted. They should have been entitled to this benefit. It is quite one thing to take away the compensation benefit, which we have done; it is adding insult to injury to not at least have to put that money, scored by OMB and CBO, back into veterans' health care. That is why I come to the floor and I speak with so much indignation about this. That is why Senator Murray from Washington and Senator McCain from Arizona join me in this amendment. If this offset proposal had been considered in the Veterans' Affairs Committee, as it should have been, I doubt that it would have seen the light of day. But if it had passed the committee, those savings would have remained within the committee's jurisdiction. Those savings would have been plowed right back into veterans' programs. That would have been my second choice. So let me be clear again. The first choice: This compensation should have gone to the veterans. This is an injustice; it really is. Secondly, if we weren't going to do that, it should have stayed in the Veterans' Committee. I can tell you that committee would have at least made sure that this money would have been invested in veterans' health care. Only because it is late at night and because there are other colleagues who have amendments--trust me, I think I can talk, without notes, for 2 hours about the holes right now--gaping holes--in veterans' health care, in the financing and delivery of veterans' health care. After all, we are running out of excuses for underfunding veterans' programs. Remember, for many years, Congress used deficit reduction as an excuse. That was the justification for flat-lining the VA budget in the 1997 budget deal. By the way, the flat-line budget is not going to work. It doesn't take into account inflation. It doesn't take into account all of the veterans now living to be 85--an ever-aging veterans population. It won't work. But now the deficit is gone and we can no longer claim that there are no offsets available. The first time an offset comes down the pike, and it is a real whopper, Congress immediately whisks it away to pay for other programs-- [[Page S8336]] programs that obviously have a much higher priority. I can't imagine how Congress can make its budget priorities any clearer. I have to tell you that if our priority is to live up to our commitment to veterans, then I believe we should have 100 votes for this amendment. The VA-HUD appropriations bill does include a significant $222 million increase over the President's request in funding for veterans' health care. I thank my colleagues, the Senators from Missouri and Maryland, for their very fine leadership. Let me bring something to my colleagues' attention. As the Veterans Affairs' Committee wrote in its letter to Appropriations, an increase of over $500 million is necessary to maintain the current level of services. My argument is that not only did we not give the veterans the compensation they would have gotten if we hadn't raided--really, what was their funding for their addiction, for their illness--but to add insult to injury, if we didn't do that, we should have at least put it into veterans' health care because we are not properly funding health care for veterans in this country. Before the budget deal, we just simply did not take into account the inflation that is taking place. The budget is not enough. Finally, let me be clear about what this amendment will do and what it will not do. First of all, this amendment does not cancel or deny any transportation projects. Those projects are already in law. This amendment would not affect them in any way. Second, this amendment that I have introduced with Senator Murray and Senator McCain would not trigger a budget sequester. It includes the same protection against sequestration, the same budget gimmickry that was included in the TEA 21 bill. It may be argued that this amendment would be using the surplus to pay for veterans' benefits. I would argue that the highway bill was spending the surplus because it was using an unreasonably high estimate for this offset. That is going to happen whether or not we repeal that offset. But to the extent we do restore previous law on veterans' disability benefits and waive the Budget Act--I am asking colleagues to waive the Budget Act--the cost is not going to be anywhere near $17 billion. I want to be clear about that. In the summer of 1997, the VA said it wouldn't be able to process more than a couple billion dollars worth of claims over 5 years. Mr. President, and colleagues, let me just summarize. I have decided to really try to be brief. There is a lot that I feel strongly about, and there is a lot that I would like to talk about. But I think my colleagues from Missouri and Maryland were gracious enough to let me come to the floor with this amendment and get to work on it. I summarize this way. This amendment would restore benefits to veterans with smoking-related diseases. This amendment that I introduce on behalf of myself and Senator Murray and Senator McCain does what we should have done--to have provided this funding for compensation to go to veterans for smoking-related disease. We did not do that through a whole lot of gimmickry and a whole lot of zigs and zags. We took that funding away from veterans. My second choice would have been to have at least invested this funding into veterans' health care. We have got so many needs for those that are 85, and elderly veterans; so many needs for veterans that are walking around and struggling with PTSD; so many needs for more drop-in centers; so many needs to fill the gaps in our current VA health care system. And we didn't put the money into the veterans' health care. Then, finally, I want to make real clear what this will do and what it will not do. I don't want anybody to be able to say that we are now going to cancel any transportation projects. That is not what this amendment does. I don't want anybody to say it is going to trigger a budget sequester. It has the same protection that we had against sequestration. I don't want anybody to argue that we will waive a budget order, that we will have to go into a surplus. We have a huge surplus. We put the surplus into the highways. Now, I am just saying take it back, even though you don't take it from the highways, because you have already funded that. You should at least take that money that belongs to the veterans that should have gone to them directly for compensation. I don't think we can avoid an up-or-down vote on this any longer. We should have a clear up-or-down vote. We should all be accountable. I feel very strongly about this, and I hope that I will receive very strong support for this amendment. Several Senators addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Alaska has another amendment. I was going to say that I believe the Senator from New Mexico, the chairman of the Budget Committee, will raise a point of order tomorrow. As the Senator from Minnesota knows, the Senator from Maryland and I have supported his position. There will be a Budget Act point of order. But I ask for the yeas and nays on Senator Wellstone's amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays were ordered. Ms. MIKULSKI addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, first of all, I would like to thank Senator Wellstone for his cooperation in this debate, and for his willingness to stay on the floor. I also appreciate his remarks. I know the passion that the Senator from Minnesota has on behalf of veterans. He spoke in behalf of atomic veterans, and in behalf of a group of veterans in his own State that have been ignored. He has spoken for the homeless, for the mentally ill veterans, and also for the need for long-term care for the veterans. I thank him for that. Mr. President, when we debated both the highway bill and the budget bill, I supported the sense-of-the-Senate resolution that we not raid the veterans' medical care. Thence, when we voted on the highway bill, I voted for final passage, but was very clear saying we should not fix America's potholes on the backs of America's veterans and their needs for health care, many of whom bear the permanent wounds of war. I thank the Senator for raising this issue again. I want the Senator from Minnesota to know that I support his policy position on this. I, too, believe that promises made should be promises kept to the veterans, and we should find other ways of funding that highway bill. I look forward to further work with him on this topic. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer my strong support, as an original cosponsor of the amendment offered by Mr. Wellstone to the VA/ HUD Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1999 which will rightfully transfer approximately $10.5 billion back to the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans programs. I understand from the managers of the bill that the vote on this critical amendment will not occur until tomorrow. I would have voted for this provision if I was not called out of town on a prior commitment. Furthermore, I urge my colleagues to show their support for veterans and vote for this measure. On July 8, 1998, I submitted for the Record a statement regarding veterans' health care activities for tobacco-related illnesses and disabilities. At that time, I had every intention to offer an amendment to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill that would restore the $10.5 billion in funding that was so egregiously and eagerly taken from our nation's veterans to fund pork-laden highway programs in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998 (ISTEA). Unfortunately, there was simply no possibility that this amendment would be adopted, simply because of the inflexibility of the Appropriations Committee's allocation of funds between the Transportation and VA/HUD Committees. Because of the arcane rules of the Senate, I and my cosponsors are precluded from righting this profound wrong that has been perpetrated against those who have served and sacrificed for our country. I am not sure that our efforts will be more successful this evening, but I do know, that it is [[Page S8337]] the right thing to do. This issue is far from dead. It is important, I believe, that my colleagues fully understand the facts regarding the funding shortfall for veterans health care and compensation for tobacco related diseases. First, the Department of Veterans Affairs critical funding shortfall is a result of President Clinton's legislative proposal to Congress to disallow service-connected disability or death benefits based on tobacco-related diseases arising after discharge from the military. Congress, eager to fund pork-laden highway programs, then transferred nearly $10.5 billion to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998 (ISTEA), H.R. 2400, earlier this year. This egregious act was fully supported by President Clinton. Second, on April 2, 1998 the Senate voted for an amendment sponsored by Senators Domenici, Lott, and Craig on the Balanced Budget Act which transferred approximately $10.5 billion over five years from the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans' tobacco-related diseases to the ISTEA bill for transportation related projects. I voted for this amendment, in part, because I believed that the tobacco companies, rather than the taxpayers, should bear the burden for tobacco-related diseases caused partially by smoking and using other tobacco products while they were in military service. Military service did not force servicemembers to smoke, but I acknowledge that for morale reasons, the services made cigarettes available for free or at inexpensive prices. The services also give servicemembers condoms and birth control pills at no cost to military personnel, but that does not mean that they want our men and women in uniform to be promiscuous. Third, on the tobacco bill, I sponsored legislation that would provide not less than $600 million per year to the Department of Veterans' Affairs for veterans' health care activities for tobacco- related illnesses and disability and directed the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs to assist such veterans as is appropriate. The amendment would have provided a minimum of $3 billion over five years for those veterans that are afflicted with tobacco-related illnesses and disability. Additionally, the amendment would have provided smoking cessation care to veterans from various programs established under the tobacco bill. Now that the tobacco bill has been returned to the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, I feel more compelled to rectify this situation. As a conferee on the ISTEA bill, I refused to support and sign the ISTEA Conference Report. I opposed the ISTEA Conference Report for a number of reasons, particularly because of my objections to shifting critical veterans funding to support pork barrel spending in this massive highway bill. It seems that the Congress has no hesitation in breaking budget agreements, when it suits their own purposes to do so, to spend far more on transportation than agreed to in the balanced budget plan. What's worse, it seems that the Congress has no problem with robbing from veterans, whose programs have been seriously under funded for years, to pay for this luxury. Furthermore, Mr. President, the facts are clear with respect to tobacco related health care costs and the impact on veterans: Tobacco-related diseases, for example, include cancers of the lip, oral cavity, and pharynx; esophagus; pancreas; larynx; lung; bladder; kidney; coronary heart disease; cerebrovascular disease (stroke); various circulatory diseases; and chronic bronchitis. The Department of Veteran Affairs' (VA) fiscal year 1997 expenditures for health care for veterans with tobacco-related illnesses are estimated to be $2.6-$3.6 billion. In fiscal year 1997, the VA treated 405,000 patients with at least one tobacco-related illness. In fiscal year 1997, the VAs' average cost per patient with at least one tobacco-related illness was $8,800. In fiscal year 1997, patients with tobacco-related illnesses accounted for over 6.5 million visits to the VAs' health care facilities. The projected additional health care costs for tobacco related- illnesses for the VA are estimated to be $2.9 billion over the next five years. The projected additional health care costs for tobacco related- illnesses for the VA are estimated to be negligible for fiscal year 1999. The projected cost for tobacco claims in fiscal year 1999 is about $500 million based on the number of claims that could be processed. Processing time for claims is expected to increase with an influx of tobacco claims. Our nation's veterans should not be excluded from payments by tobacco companies for health care costs associated with tobacco-related diseases. The failure to address the tobacco-related health care needs of our men and women who faithfully served their country in uniform would be wrong. Congress cannot continue to rob from veterans, whose programs have been seriously under funded for years, to pay for these and other special interest projects. Mr. President, our veterans deserve no less. I hope my colleagues will support this amendment and support our veterans. Thank you. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, if there is more comment on this amendment, I will wait. I ask my colleague from Alaska whether he intends to move on to another amendment, or comment on this amendment. Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, in response to my friend, it would be my intent to ask unanimous consent that the amendment be set aside so I can offer mine. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, other colleagues may want to speak to that. I will take 2 minutes, I say to all of my colleagues. I would like to thank the Senator from Maryland for her very kind remarks. I have to say that I will not go now through the technical part of what happened. I am telling you that this was a real injustice. We sort of went on record saying we wouldn't do this, and we have done it. We shouldn't have. This amendment restores that funding to where it should go. I wish to say to my colleagues that we have a huge surplus. We really essentially took some of that money and put it in the highways. We shouldn't have. We got the highways. But we left the veterans out in the cold. They know that. All of these veterans organizations know that. I will say this tomorrow again. All these veterans know that. Senator Murray, Senator McCain, and many of my colleagues know it as well. I hope that there will be very strong support for this, Democrats and Republicans alike, because, again, the money should have gone to deal with the problem, to deal with veterans who really are struggling with illness based upon addiction to tobacco, and, if not, it should have gone into the veterans' health care. It should not have gone, as my colleague from Maryland said, to pay for additional highways, which is what happened. So let's correct a wrong. Please. Let's have a very strong vote on this tomorrow morning. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska. Amendment No. 3200 Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is set aside, and the clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Alaska (Mr. Murkowski) proposes an amendment numbered 3200. Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the

Major Actions:

All articles in Senate section

DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999
(Senate - July 16, 1998)

Text of this article available as: TXT PDF [Pages S8330-S8374] DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999 Mr. LOTT. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now resume the HUD- VA appropriations bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 2168) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes. The Senate resumed consideration of the bill. Pending: Daschle amendment No. 3063, to amend the Public Health Service Act and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to protect consumers in managed care plans and other health coverage. Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that with respect to the HUD-VA appropriations bill, all first-degree amendments must be offered and debated tonight, and if votes are ordered with respect to those amendments, they occur, in a stacked sequence, beginning at 9 o'clock in the morning--I want to emphasize to our colleagues, we are beginning a little earlier than normal; it will be 9 o'clock; and we will go right to the stacked sequence, with 2 minutes of debate prior to each vote for explanation, as has been requested and is the normal practice--and that all succeeding votes be limited to 10 minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LOTT. Now, Mr. President, I know that there are several amendments that need to be worked through. I see that Senator Wellstone is here on the floor ready to go. And I believe we can get some time agreements on other issues. Does the manager, Senator Bond, wish to comment? Mr. BOND. Thank you. Mr. President, I believe Senator Nickles was prepared to go, and I know that Senator Wellstone wants to go right after that. But I believe before we move forward, I need to yield to the distinguished minority leader who has to deal with this. It was our understanding from the discussions that Senator Nickles would move forward on a major amendment he has, and then I would hope we would be able to turn to Senator Wellstone. With that, let me yield to the minority leader. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader. Amendment No. 3063 Withdrawn Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the majority leader and I have been talking throughout the day. And I believe we are making progress in setting up a procedure by which at some point in the not too distant future--I think the prospects are greater tonight than they have been in some time--we might have a good debate on the Patients' Bill of Rights. Because I believe that these negotiations are proceeding successfully, I withdraw the pending amendment on HUD-VA with an expectation that we will come to some successful conclusion at a later date. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is withdrawn. The amendment (No. 3063) was withdrawn. Mr. WELLSTONE addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota. Mr. WELLSTONE. Might I make a request for 1 second? I ask unanimous consent that I be able to follow the Nickles amendment, so I can go back to the office and come back. Mr. BOND. No objection. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BOND addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader and the minority leader for allowing us to get back to this VA-HUD bill. We have had good discussions on it. We have had a very important amendment debated at length on [[Page S8331]] the space station. This is always one of the important points that we have to debate on the VA-HUD bill. We have had great cooperation from Senators on both sides. I think we have narrowed the list of amendments. And we hope to be able to accept and include in the managers' amendment many of the things that have been raised by our colleagues. We are now waiting for Senator Nickles to come forward to debate an amendment on the FHA limits. But we do have a number of amendments we can accept while we are waiting. Amendment No. 3195 (Purpose: To increase funds for VA homeless grant and per diem program) Mr. BOND. First, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator Cleland, and Senator Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], for himself, Mr. Cleland, and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3195. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 18, add the following new provisos prior to the period: ``: Provided further, That of the funds made available under this heading, $14,000,000 shall be for the homeless grant program and $6,000,000 shall be for the homeless per diem program: Provided further, That such funds may be used for vocational training, rehabilitation, and outreach activities in addition to other authorized homeless assistance activities''. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment would provide, within the $17.2 billion medical care appropriation, $20 million for VA's homeless grant and per diem program. The amendment would make these funds available for vocational training, outreach, shelter, and other important activities to aid homeless veterans in a comprehensive manner. This should help meet the needs of the 275,000 veterans who are estimated to be homeless on any given night of the year. Together with funds already included in the bill, we will have provided $100 million in VA homeless assistance. This is a critical need. I commend the other Senators who worked on supporting this. I urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for their outstanding leadership on this important piece of legislation. Given the hard work that went into this bill, I wanted to first express my appreciation for what they have done. I am reminded of the old phrase ``too many cooks spoil the broth.'' Sometimes the legislative branch might be thought of in that way. As I offer this amendment, I have attempted to be mindful not to ``spoil the broth.'' As the former head of the Veterans Administration, the veterans portion of this bill continues to be near and dear to my heart. I am extremely pleased to see that the Appropriations Committee under the leadership of Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski has increased funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs by over $1.5 billion when compared to last year's budget. This represents a real increase in funding even when inflation is factored in. Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski are true friends of America's veterans, and we thank them. The amendment I have offered attempts to fill a void that exists with respect to services for veterans. When I was head of the Veterans Administration, it was clear to me that the VA could not be everywhere at all times. We relied heavily on other government agencies and private entities in our attempt to assure that all veterans could obtain the benefits they were entitled to and the assistance they needed. Today, in an era of balanced budgets, we cannot depend solely on federal dollars to solve every problem. The era of balanced budgets brings with it the era of partnership. The VA must continue to partner with other entities to fulfill its mission. For instance, in this year's Defense Authorization bill, I have authored language which would strongly encourage the VA to partner with the Department of Defense to provide health care for our nation's military personnel, their dependents, military retirees, and veterans. Today, I am advocating much stronger partnering between the VA and the private sector to fill the basic needs of our nation's veterans. The Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program was established in 1992 to fund the development and operation of transitional housing for homeless veterans who are free of alcohol and drugs. Over 2,000 beds have been made available under this program. Over $21 million has been appropriated for this purpose. Unfortunately, the current program is completely inadequate in the face of the overwhelming need which exists for housing for homeless veterans. The VA estimates that over 275,000 veterans are currently homeless on any given night. In a given year, over 500,000 veterans find themselves homeless at some point. In Atlanta, Georgia, nearly 10,000 veterans are in need of homeless assistance. This is clearly unacceptable. A mere 2,000 beds, while important, would not meet the needs of one state, let alone the entire nation. The program does not come close to fulfilling the entire need. Currently at approximately $7 million, it represents less than two-hundredths of a percent of the entire VA budget. The amendment I have offered would set aside $20 million for the Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem program. This would nearly triple the amount available for this program. It would also insure that funds are available for rehabilitation, vocational training, and outreach. These are critical elements because the list of successful programs have demonstrated that helping veterans become drug and alcohol free and employable is the best way to insure that they not find themselves homeless again. Furthermore, it is important to provide for successful outreach to veterans in need to insure that veterans are able to take advantage of the services, both public and private, that are available to them. Several groups have contacted me since I was elected to the Senate to seek support for the veterans assistance projects they are trying to establish or expand. I would like to take a few moments to describe two such programs. Last year, the Georgia Military College conducted a pilot program in which veterans voluntarily undergoing drug rehabilitation were offered a college course. The program was paid for through the proceeds of a golf tournament sponsored by the Atlanta Veterans Administration Medical Center. Eighteen veterans participated in the original program. In light of the initial success, the Georgia Military College seized on the idea of expanding the program not only to provide for education but to offer additional counseling and to provide shelter for the participants. The College is in the process of establishing a 5-year program aimed at improving the lives of Georgia's homeless veterans. This is the type of program that can truly make a difference. Instead of a ``band-aid'' approach, it offers true skills training, and the transitional housing these veterans need to be able to continue with the program. The National Veterans Foundation offers perhaps one of the most important services a nation can provide to our veterans in need--a human voice. The Foundation was founded by Floyd ``Shad'' Meshad in 1985 to help veterans recover from the pain of war. It has aided over a quarter of a million veterans, funding housing, legal services, job training, counseling, and rehabilitative programs. A major focus of the Foundation is its toll-free Information and Referral Line. Shad Meshad refers to it as a ``Clearing House'' to direct veterans and their families to the assistance they need. It is a real human voice on the other end of the line, not a recording. Over the years, the National Veterans Foundation has logged thousands of calls. Unfortunately, this critical outreach program is only available during business hours, Monday through Friday. Our veterans deserve the kind of service provided by the National Veterans Foundation--but they deserve it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. These are just two of the types of programs that deserve the support of the VA. In my view, it is only lack of resources which currently limits that support. It should be made clear that what we are talking about is not the old give-away of federal funds. This is not new ``corporate welfare.'' I was introduced to the Homeless Providers [[Page S8332]] Grant and Per Diem program fairly recently. I was surprised to learn that the Veterans Administration does not currently have a comprehensive grant program that could fund meritorious projects, but it does have this program. I believe the Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program combined with a future comprehensive grant program will leverage federal dollars with private, state, and local money to create a multiplier effect that will aid our nation's veterans for years to come. It is my intent to introduce legislation in the future to provide the necessary statutory authority to establish a comprehensive grant program that goes beyond the current homeless assistance program. Mr. President, I would like to thank Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski for their cooperation and support for this amendment. Without their leadership, this amendment would not be possible. I look forward to working closely with them in the future to further assist our nation's veterans. I yield the floor. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am proud to concur with Senators Cleland and Bond on this amendment. It will increase by $13 million the amount for the homeless grants for the VA. Nobody who fought to save our country should be out on the street. These men have borne the permanent wounds of war, some of which have caused deep-seated emotional problems--unable to find a job. What I like about the VA homeless program is, it not only provides a shelter but tries to get them focused on starting a new way of life. We have an outstanding one in Maryland. I am proud of it. And I look forward to accepting this amendment and say hats off to try to give the vets a new lease on life. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment (No. 3195) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3196 (Purpose: To require entities that operate homeless shelters to identify and provide certain counseling to homeless veterans) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator McCain, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], for Mr. McCain, proposes an amendment numbered 3196. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 93, between lines 18 and 19, insert the following: Sec. 423. (a) Each entity that receives a grant from the Federal Government for purposes of providing emergency shelter for homeless individuals shall-- (1) ascertain, to the extent practicable, whether or not each adult individual seeking such shelter from such entity is a veteran; and (2) provide each such individual who is a veteran such counseling relating to the availability of veterans benefits (including employment assistance, health care benefits, and other benefits) as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs considers appropriate. (b) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall jointly coordinate the activities required by subsection (a). (c) Entities referred to in subsection (a) shall notify the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of the number and identity of veterans ascertained under paragraph (1) of that subsection. Such entities shall make such notification with such frequency and in such form as the Secretary shall specify. (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an entity referred to subsection (a) that fails to meet the requirements specified in that subsection shall not be eligible for additional grants or other Federal funds for purposes of carrying out activities relating to emergency shelter for homeless individuals. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment will assist homeless veterans by requiring the federally funded homeless shelters report to the Veterans' Administration the number of homeless veterans they serve, and it seeks to ensure that these homeless veterans be provide information regarding the availability of veterans benefits. The amendment will improve the Federal Government's database on homeless veterans and will help homeless veterans know about programs which can help them address critical needs. It has been cleared on both sides. I urge its adoption, and yield the floor. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 1999. The amendment will assist homeless veterans and seek to eliminate some of the suffering of those less fortunate Americans who served their country in the military. This amendment will develop better methods for identifying veterans who utilize federally funded homeless shelters so that they can be educated about veteran benefits to which they are entitled, including Department of Veterans Affairs health care. A homeless shelter which receives federal funding would be required to inquire if a person, man or woman, entering the shelter is a veteran. This information would be used solely to assist in tracking the number of homeless veterans and providing counseling to the veteran regarding all available benefits, including job search, veterans preference rights, and medical benefits. Additionally, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development will coordinate these activities and specify a schedule for notifying the Department of Veteran Affairs of the status of these homeless veterans. It is the intent of this amendment to require homeless shelters to follow this procedures if they are to be eligible for additional Federal grants. Today, there is no easy or accurate way to track the number of homeless veterans in the United States. I find this astonishing. We just celebrated Independence Day, and this country owes a great deal to the men and women who bore arms to keep America free. It is astonishing to me that there would be no mechanism or process set up to accurately track or keep national records on homeless veterans. The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates the number of homeless veterans to be between 275,000 and 500,000 over the course of a year. Conservatively, one out of every three individuals who is sleeping in a doorway, alley, or box in our cities and rural communities has worn a uniform and served our country. Mr. President, the time is right, right now, to give a helping hand. Of the figures the Department of Veterans Affairs does acknowledge, homeless veterans are mostly male; about three percent are women. The vast majority are single; most come from poor, disadvantaged communities; forty percent suffer from mental illness; and half have substance abuse problems. More than seventy-five percent served our country for at least four years and Vietnam veterans account for more than forty percent of the total number estimated. Mr. President, there are many complex factors affecting all homelessness: extreme shortage of affordable housing, poverty, high unemployment in big cities, and disability. A large number of displaced and at-risk veterans live with lingering effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and substance abuse, compounded by a lack of family and social support networks. I do not mean to be critical of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs or the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in offering this amendment. To a certain degree the Department of Veterans Affairs is responsive in taking care of some homeless veterans. But the ones that are receiving critical medical treatment and veterans benefits are those who know that such programs exist. It is incumbent on our government to reach out to all homeless veterans. However, to do that, there must be a process in place. Homeless veterans need a coordinated effort, between the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, that provides secure housing and nutritional meals, essential physical health care, substance abuse aftercare and mental health counseling. They may need job assessment, training and placement assistance. To those that may argue that this is a new entitlement program, I [[Page S8333]] would say that these rights and benefits currently exist for veterans today. Why would we as a nation not do everything in our power to provide this help for those less fortunate veterans. Mr. President, our veterans deserve no less. I hope my colleagues will support this amendment and support our veterans. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, no one can speak for the veterans the way a former POW can. I wish to be associated with the remarks of Senator McCain and move the adoption of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to. The amendment (No. 3196) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3197 (Purpose: To provide funds for the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, once authorized) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator Mikulski, and Senator Rockefeller and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for himself, Mr. Rockefeller and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3197. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 18, add the following new provisos prior to the period: ``: Provided further, That of the funds made available under this heading, $10,000,000 shall be for implementation of the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, contingent upon enactment of authorizing legislation''. Mr. BOND. This amendment has been cleared on both sides and would provide $10 million within the VA medical appropriation for the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act contingent upon authorization. Senators Mikulski and Rockefeller have been working to create a program to facilitate the employment of primary care personnel at the VA, including an education debt reduction program which Senator Mikulski has long been interested in establishing. This program is intended to improve the recruitment and retention of primary care providers, a very important element in the service to the VA. The Primary Care Providers Incentive Act seeks to update VA's educational assistance programs for prospective employees, particularly in areas where recruitment has been difficult. I urge the authorizing committees to act expeditiously on this important program. I urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. BOND. I yield to my distinguished colleague from Maryland. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, this does attempt to recruit the very best and brightest in the field of primary care to the VA. I proposed the debt reduction program, a student debt reduction program, back in 1992. Now, why do I approach this as debt reduction rather than scholarships? The scholarship program is very worthwhile, but there are many very talented people who have already graduated. They have a substantial student debt from studying either nursing or other primary care practices. What the $5 million would do would go towards reducing their student debt if they would enter VA services; they would get a year's worth of debt reduction for a year's worth of service. This way, we know they have completed their training, they have passed their licensing requirement, they are as fit for duty as the veterans they will serve. That is why we approached it from that policy standpoint. It also joins with the outstanding efforts being made by Senator Rockefeller to also develop other tools. I concur in the amendment, and I urge its adoption and ask it be accepted unanimously. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am delighted that $10 million to fund S. 2115, the Department of Veterans Affairs Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, has been provided through a managers' amendment to the VA/HUD appropriations bill. I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member of the VA/HUD Subcommittee, Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski, for their cooperation in making this possible. The new scholarship and educational debt reduction programs that are contained in S. 2115 are designed to revitalize the Health Professionals Education Assistance Program at VA. This program was originally intended to help VA to recruit and retain health professionals, but it has atrophied in recent years, despite an ongoing demand for educational financial aid by health professionals employed by or interested in working at VA. This funding will help breathe new life into the educational assistance programs, and provide much needed incentives to improve recruitment and retention of primary care providers. The VA health care system is in the midst of a major reorganization that is simultaneously reducing the current workforce and creating the need for more primary care health professionals. VHA's five-year strategic plan includes the activation and/or planning of nearly 400 community-based outpatient clinics, to be staffed by primary care health professionals. Yet hiring of these professionals and retraining of current employees, to prepare for these changes, has lagged behind the planning process. The Primary Care Providers Incentive Programs that will be funded through this amendment will motivate current employees to get training in new areas of need by providing scholarships, and assist in the recruitment of new primary care providers by helping to pay off student loans. VA needs educational assistance programs such as these to effectively recruit and retain trained primary care health professionals. In VA hospitals and clinics, some of the most difficult positions to fill are those of nurse practitioners, physical therapists, and occupational therapists. In my own state of West Virginia, for example, at one of the VA hospitals, there has been a vacancy for an occupational therapist for over 12 years! Two of the VA hospitals have no physical therapists at all. This is simply unacceptable. The plain fact is that starting salaries in the VA are not competitive with those in private practice. The Education Debt Reduction Program gives the VA a financial recruitment tool that will be an enormous help in making the VAMCs more competitive for these much-needed and highly skilled individuals. In fact, one of the most frequently asked questions by prospective new employees is whether or not VA has a debt reduction program. Clearly, this program will answer a critical need. But improving recruitment is only half of the story. Retention of trained people is equally important. Funding the employee incentive scholarship program can help solve this very real problem. Eligibility is limited to current VA employees, providing a way for vulnerable individuals to protect themselves against future RIFs by acquiring training in the new areas of need. This will go a long way toward improving staff morale at the VA, which has been severely undermined in the last few years due to the necessary streamlining that resulted from significant budget cuts. The educational assistance programs in S. 2115 are a valuable investment, enhancing morale of the VA health care providers in the short term, while building a workforce that matches VA's needs and improves veterans' health care in the long run. In the coming months, I will be working with my colleagues on the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs to authorize these worthwhile programs. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (No. 3197) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. [[Page S8334]] Amendment No. 3198 (Purpose: To provide for the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senators Sarbanes and Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for Mr. Sarbanes, for himself and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3198. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: At the appropriate place, insert the following: SEC. ____. NATIONAL FALLEN FIREFIGHTERS FOUNDATION. (a) Establishment and Purposes.--Section 202 of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5201) is amended-- (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following: ``(1) primarily-- ``(A) to encourage, accept, and administer private gifts of property for the benefit of the National Fallen Firefighters' Memorial and the annual memorial service associated with the memorial; and ``(B) to, in coordination with the Federal Government and fire services (as that term is defined in section 4 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2203)), plan, direct, and manage the memorial service referred to in subparagraph (A)''; (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``and Federal'' after ``non-Federal''; (3) in paragraph (3)-- (A) by striking ``State and local'' and inserting ``Federal, State, and local''; and (B) by striking ``and'' at the end; (4) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and (5) by adding at the end the following: ``(5) to provide for a national program to assist families of fallen firefighters and fire departments in dealing with line-of-duty deaths of those firefighters; and ``(6) to promote national, State, and local initiatives to increase public awareness of fire and life safety in coordination with the United States Fire Administration.'' (b) Board of Directors of Foundation.--Section 203(g)(1) of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5202(g)(1)) is amended by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following: ``(A) appointing officers or employees;''. (c) Administrative Services and Support.--Section 205 of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5204) is amended to read as follows: ``SEC. 205. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AND SUPPORT. ``(a) In General.--During the 10-year period beginning on the date of enactment of the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, the Administrator may-- ``(1) provide personnel, facilities, and other required services for the operation of the Foundation; and ``(2) request and accept reimbursement for the assistance provided under paragraph (1). ``(b) Reimbursement.--Any amounts received under subsection (a)(2) as reimbursement for assistance shall be deposited in the Treasury to the credit of the appropriations then current and chargeable for the cost of providing that assistance. ``(c) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal personnel or stationery may be used to solicit funding for the Foundation.''. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment by Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski affects the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation, which is a federally chartered corporation dedicated to helping families of fallen firefighters in assisting State and local efforts to recognize firefighters who die in the line of duty. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Fire Administration, is a member of the foundation's board. Senator Sarbanes sponsored the original legislation creating this foundation. His amendment, along with Senator Mikulski, makes some technical changes to the law and eliminates the cap on staff. We understand it has been approved by FEMA. It has been cleared by the Commerce Committee. It would have no impact on spending and will ensure that the foundation is able to employ the staff it needs to operate. I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield to the sponsors. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his support for this amendment. The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation has done an absolutely outstanding job. I think it bears out the wisdom of the Congress in establishing it. The services they are now providing to the families of deceased firefighters are really exemplary. We have had many communications from spouses, from children, from parents, of how much the activities of the Fallen Firefighters Foundation mean to them. They have enlisted very significant support from the private sector for their activities. These changes are technical in nature in order to enable the foundation to carry out its responsibilities with greater efficacy and greater efficiency. I didn't want to let this opportunity pass without underscoring the tremendously fine work that is being done by the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I concur with the remarks of my distinguished Senator. He has really done the heavy lifting on this policy issue. I want to thank him for doing this. I absolutely concur with the direction in which we are going. I think it will be an important memorial and a way to staff it properly. I urge this amendment be agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (No. 3198) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3199 (Purpose: To restore veterans tobacco-related benefits as in effect before the enactment of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century) Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will get started on this amendment. Mr. BOND. Might I ask for clarification? I ask the Senator which amendment he has that he wants to discuss. Mr. WELLSTONE. This is the amendment that will restore benefits to veterans for smoking-related diseases. Mr. President, this amendment which I now send to the desk is on behalf of myself, Senator Murray and Senator McCain. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Wellstone] for himself, Mrs. Murray, and Mr. McCain, proposes an amendment numbered 3199. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allard). Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 16, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following: Sec. 110. (a)(1) Section 1103 of title 38, United States Code, is repealed. (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 11 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 1103. (b) Upon the enactment of this Act-- (1) the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall not make any estimate of changes in direct spending outlays under section 252(d) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 for any fiscal year resulting from the enactment of this section; and (2) the Chairmen of the Committees on the Budget shall not make any adjustments in direct spending outlays for purposes of the allocations, functional levels, and aggregates under title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for any fiscal year resulting from the enactment of this section. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, my amendment would restore benefits to veterans with smoking-related diseases. How would we do that? It is simple. The TEA 21 highway program canceled the disability benefits that veterans would have received under existing rules and procedures, and it used that money instead to pay for more highway projects. My amendment would simply return the favor. It would repeal that offset from the highway bill. Let me go through the procedural history of this to review how we got to where we are today. This offset first appeared in the President's 1999 budget request. The administration, I think, wildly overestimated the cost of benefits for smoking-related disabilities. But this money was then taken from veterans and it was used elsewhere. There is a tremendous amount of indignation in the veterans community over this, and there should be. Congress decided to play the same game. In the budget resolution they agreed to deny benefits to veterans and use the money [[Page S8335]] elsewhere just like it had been done by the administration. But the budget priorities were a little different. The savings were used for highway projects. That didn't happen on the Senate side, but by the time it came back from the House, that is what happened. That was the major reason I voted against that bill. The appropriate place to repeal this offset and restore veterans' benefits would have been in the technical corrections to the TEA 21 highway bill. Senator Rockefeller and I intended to offer an amendment which would have done just that, but we never got a chance because that amendment was folded into another conference report so we could never get an up-or-down vote. We all know that conference reports, as I just said, cannot be amended. As I have said before on the floor, it is only right that we should have a clean vote on this issue. This is not only a question of veterans, it is a question of accountability. There is simply no excuse for hiding behind procedural gimmicks to avoid responsibility. Some have said we have already voted on this bill, or we have already voted on this question, but I don't think that is true. Let me explain. The two votes we had on the budget resolution did not deal directly with this question. Senators got a chance to pretend they were for veterans and against the offset, knowing that 5 minutes later we could cast a vote in the opposite direction. We had some camouflage about doing a study sometime in the future. But I think we all recognize it was only a study. And the vote on the IRS reform bill was not a clean up-or-down vote; it was only a procedural vote, a point of order. We need to have a clean vote up or down, no subterfuge, no trickery. It is not enough to take these benefits away from veterans. Congress will add insult to injury by not having a clean up-or-down vote on this question. I think veterans should take a clear position on this issue, and that should go on the Record. Now, some may object to this amendment because it is legislation on an appropriations bill, or they may think that this appropriations bill is the wrong place to remedy this particular problem. Let me remind my colleagues that this offset was a jurisdictional raid to begin with. Transportation conferees stole the money without ever going through the Veterans' Affairs Committee. This was originally the Veterans' Affairs Committee. If we now repeal this offset through the Veterans' Affairs Committee, we will have to pay for it by taking even more money away from veterans. The highway bill took that money away. It was not taken away by the Veterans' Committee. Nobody wants to do that. Nobody wants to take more funding away from veterans. There are a few misconceptions that I would like to clear up. First and foremost, compensation for veterans with smoking-related illnesses was not a new program. It was not an expansion of a program. It was a benefit to which disabled veterans were entitled to under existing law. Veterans who had become addicted to tobacco because of their service in the military had the right to apply for disability. The highway bill took that right away. It is a very tough test that the veterans have to meet. Only 300 have passed it. These were not special rules, either. Those veterans had to meet the same legal and evidentiary requirements as for any other service-connected disability. They had to prove that their addiction began in the military service. They had to prove that their addiction continued without interruption. They had to prove that their addiction resulted in an illness. They had to prove that their addiction resulted in a disability. There is another thing that ought to be pointed out tonight. We are not really talking about $17 billion here. Let's be clear about it. OMB first came up with that figure based on an estimate of 500,000 claims granted every year. But over the past 6 years, a grand total of only 8,000 veterans have applied, and only 300 of those claims have been granted. CBO came in with a lower, but still high, estimate of $10.5 billion. But the TEA 21 conferees needed more money, so they took advantage of the higher OMB number to pay for a huge increase in funding for highways. The administration's cost projections are based on many, many unknowns. More importantly, OMB is assuming VA will grant 100 percent of all claims but, to date--listen to this, colleagues--VA has granted only 5 percent of the claims. The test veterans have to meet is simply much harder than OMB seems to think. There are a number of other unknowns with the administration's methodology. On the percentage of veterans who currently smoke or are heavy smokers, VA experts made what we consider to be a questionable assumption that veterans who smoke more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime would have the same disease rates as smokers; the percentage of veterans who may file claims for tobacco-related illnesses that are already receiving compensation for those or other conditions; the rate at which the VA can adjudicate these claims. There are lots of assumptions I would question. Let me get right down to the very nitty-gritty of what this amendment is about. My first choice would be to keep the old rules for deciding disability claims--the ones we had before the TEA 21 highway bill. I don't see why Congress should go out of its way to deny disability benefits to veterans. Don't we have better places to look for spending offsets? Back in World War II, these veterans had free and discounted cigarettes included in their rations, and those packs didn't even have warning labels on them. Soldiers were encouraged to smoke to relieve the stress of military strain. And now some of them are suffering the consequences and they are not getting the compensation. That is what is so outrageous about what we have done, and that is what this amendment intends to correct. The second choice--even if Congress does decide to deny these benefits, I find it hard to understand why this money should be taken away from veterans' programs. I believe, at the very least, it should stay with veterans. It is quite one thing to argue, look, though they deserve this compensation, they have to meet strict criteria to get this compensation. We handed cigarettes out like candy and we know veterans became addicted. They should have been entitled to this benefit. It is quite one thing to take away the compensation benefit, which we have done; it is adding insult to injury to not at least have to put that money, scored by OMB and CBO, back into veterans' health care. That is why I come to the floor and I speak with so much indignation about this. That is why Senator Murray from Washington and Senator McCain from Arizona join me in this amendment. If this offset proposal had been considered in the Veterans' Affairs Committee, as it should have been, I doubt that it would have seen the light of day. But if it had passed the committee, those savings would have remained within the committee's jurisdiction. Those savings would have been plowed right back into veterans' programs. That would have been my second choice. So let me be clear again. The first choice: This compensation should have gone to the veterans. This is an injustice; it really is. Secondly, if we weren't going to do that, it should have stayed in the Veterans' Committee. I can tell you that committee would have at least made sure that this money would have been invested in veterans' health care. Only because it is late at night and because there are other colleagues who have amendments--trust me, I think I can talk, without notes, for 2 hours about the holes right now--gaping holes--in veterans' health care, in the financing and delivery of veterans' health care. After all, we are running out of excuses for underfunding veterans' programs. Remember, for many years, Congress used deficit reduction as an excuse. That was the justification for flat-lining the VA budget in the 1997 budget deal. By the way, the flat-line budget is not going to work. It doesn't take into account inflation. It doesn't take into account all of the veterans now living to be 85--an ever-aging veterans population. It won't work. But now the deficit is gone and we can no longer claim that there are no offsets available. The first time an offset comes down the pike, and it is a real whopper, Congress immediately whisks it away to pay for other programs-- [[Page S8336]] programs that obviously have a much higher priority. I can't imagine how Congress can make its budget priorities any clearer. I have to tell you that if our priority is to live up to our commitment to veterans, then I believe we should have 100 votes for this amendment. The VA-HUD appropriations bill does include a significant $222 million increase over the President's request in funding for veterans' health care. I thank my colleagues, the Senators from Missouri and Maryland, for their very fine leadership. Let me bring something to my colleagues' attention. As the Veterans Affairs' Committee wrote in its letter to Appropriations, an increase of over $500 million is necessary to maintain the current level of services. My argument is that not only did we not give the veterans the compensation they would have gotten if we hadn't raided--really, what was their funding for their addiction, for their illness--but to add insult to injury, if we didn't do that, we should have at least put it into veterans' health care because we are not properly funding health care for veterans in this country. Before the budget deal, we just simply did not take into account the inflation that is taking place. The budget is not enough. Finally, let me be clear about what this amendment will do and what it will not do. First of all, this amendment does not cancel or deny any transportation projects. Those projects are already in law. This amendment would not affect them in any way. Second, this amendment that I have introduced with Senator Murray and Senator McCain would not trigger a budget sequester. It includes the same protection against sequestration, the same budget gimmickry that was included in the TEA 21 bill. It may be argued that this amendment would be using the surplus to pay for veterans' benefits. I would argue that the highway bill was spending the surplus because it was using an unreasonably high estimate for this offset. That is going to happen whether or not we repeal that offset. But to the extent we do restore previous law on veterans' disability benefits and waive the Budget Act--I am asking colleagues to waive the Budget Act--the cost is not going to be anywhere near $17 billion. I want to be clear about that. In the summer of 1997, the VA said it wouldn't be able to process more than a couple billion dollars worth of claims over 5 years. Mr. President, and colleagues, let me just summarize. I have decided to really try to be brief. There is a lot that I feel strongly about, and there is a lot that I would like to talk about. But I think my colleagues from Missouri and Maryland were gracious enough to let me come to the floor with this amendment and get to work on it. I summarize this way. This amendment would restore benefits to veterans with smoking-related diseases. This amendment that I introduce on behalf of myself and Senator Murray and Senator McCain does what we should have done--to have provided this funding for compensation to go to veterans for smoking-related disease. We did not do that through a whole lot of gimmickry and a whole lot of zigs and zags. We took that funding away from veterans. My second choice would have been to have at least invested this funding into veterans' health care. We have got so many needs for those that are 85, and elderly veterans; so many needs for veterans that are walking around and struggling with PTSD; so many needs for more drop-in centers; so many needs to fill the gaps in our current VA health care system. And we didn't put the money into the veterans' health care. Then, finally, I want to make real clear what this will do and what it will not do. I don't want anybody to be able to say that we are now going to cancel any transportation projects. That is not what this amendment does. I don't want anybody to say it is going to trigger a budget sequester. It has the same protection that we had against sequestration. I don't want anybody to argue that we will waive a budget order, that we will have to go into a surplus. We have a huge surplus. We put the surplus into the highways. Now, I am just saying take it back, even though you don't take it from the highways, because you have already funded that. You should at least take that money that belongs to the veterans that should have gone to them directly for compensation. I don't think we can avoid an up-or-down vote on this any longer. We should have a clear up-or-down vote. We should all be accountable. I feel very strongly about this, and I hope that I will receive very strong support for this amendment. Several Senators addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Alaska has another amendment. I was going to say that I believe the Senator from New Mexico, the chairman of the Budget Committee, will raise a point of order tomorrow. As the Senator from Minnesota knows, the Senator from Maryland and I have supported his position. There will be a Budget Act point of order. But I ask for the yeas and nays on Senator Wellstone's amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays were ordered. Ms. MIKULSKI addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, first of all, I would like to thank Senator Wellstone for his cooperation in this debate, and for his willingness to stay on the floor. I also appreciate his remarks. I know the passion that the Senator from Minnesota has on behalf of veterans. He spoke in behalf of atomic veterans, and in behalf of a group of veterans in his own State that have been ignored. He has spoken for the homeless, for the mentally ill veterans, and also for the need for long-term care for the veterans. I thank him for that. Mr. President, when we debated both the highway bill and the budget bill, I supported the sense-of-the-Senate resolution that we not raid the veterans' medical care. Thence, when we voted on the highway bill, I voted for final passage, but was very clear saying we should not fix America's potholes on the backs of America's veterans and their needs for health care, many of whom bear the permanent wounds of war. I thank the Senator for raising this issue again. I want the Senator from Minnesota to know that I support his policy position on this. I, too, believe that promises made should be promises kept to the veterans, and we should find other ways of funding that highway bill. I look forward to further work with him on this topic. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer my strong support, as an original cosponsor of the amendment offered by Mr. Wellstone to the VA/ HUD Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1999 which will rightfully transfer approximately $10.5 billion back to the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans programs. I understand from the managers of the bill that the vote on this critical amendment will not occur until tomorrow. I would have voted for this provision if I was not called out of town on a prior commitment. Furthermore, I urge my colleagues to show their support for veterans and vote for this measure. On July 8, 1998, I submitted for the Record a statement regarding veterans' health care activities for tobacco-related illnesses and disabilities. At that time, I had every intention to offer an amendment to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill that would restore the $10.5 billion in funding that was so egregiously and eagerly taken from our nation's veterans to fund pork-laden highway programs in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998 (ISTEA). Unfortunately, there was simply no possibility that this amendment would be adopted, simply because of the inflexibility of the Appropriations Committee's allocation of funds between the Transportation and VA/HUD Committees. Because of the arcane rules of the Senate, I and my cosponsors are precluded from righting this profound wrong that has been perpetrated against those who have served and sacrificed for our country. I am not sure that our efforts will be more successful this evening, but I do know, that it is [[Page S8337]] the right thing to do. This issue is far from dead. It is important, I believe, that my colleagues fully understand the facts regarding the funding shortfall for veterans health care and compensation for tobacco related diseases. First, the Department of Veterans Affairs critical funding shortfall is a result of President Clinton's legislative proposal to Congress to disallow service-connected disability or death benefits based on tobacco-related diseases arising after discharge from the military. Congress, eager to fund pork-laden highway programs, then transferred nearly $10.5 billion to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998 (ISTEA), H.R. 2400, earlier this year. This egregious act was fully supported by President Clinton. Second, on April 2, 1998 the Senate voted for an amendment sponsored by Senators Domenici, Lott, and Craig on the Balanced Budget Act which transferred approximately $10.5 billion over five years from the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans' tobacco-related diseases to the ISTEA bill for transportation related projects. I voted for this amendment, in part, because I believed that the tobacco companies, rather than the taxpayers, should bear the burden for tobacco-related diseases caused partially by smoking and using other tobacco products while they were in military service. Military service did not force servicemembers to smoke, but I acknowledge that for morale reasons, the services made cigarettes available for free or at inexpensive prices. The services also give servicemembers condoms and birth control pills at no cost to military personnel, but that does not mean that they want our men and women in uniform to be promiscuous. Third, on the tobacco bill, I sponsored legislation that would provide not less than $600 million per year to the Department of Veterans' Affairs for veterans' health care activities for tobacco- related illnesses and disability and directed the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs to assist such veterans as is appropriate. The amendment would have provided a minimum of $3 billion over five years for those veterans that are afflicted with tobacco-related illnesses and disability. Additionally, the amendment would have provided smoking cessation care to veterans from various programs established under the tobacco bill. Now that the tobacco bill has been returned to the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, I feel more compelled to rectify this situation. As a conferee on the ISTEA bill, I refused to support and sign the ISTEA Conference Report. I opposed the ISTEA Conference Report for a number of reasons, particularly because of my objections to shifting critical veterans funding to support pork barrel spending in this massive highway bill. It seems that the Congress has no hesitation in breaking budget agreements, when it suits their own purposes to do so, to spend far more on transportation than agreed to in the balanced budget plan. What's worse, it seems that the Congress has no problem with robbing from veterans, whose programs have been seriously under funded for years, to pay for this luxury. Furthermore, Mr. President, the facts are clear with respect to tobacco related health care costs and the impact on veterans: Tobacco-related diseases, for example, include cancers of the lip, oral cavity, and pharynx; esophagus; pancreas; larynx; lung; bladder; kidney; coronary heart disease; cerebrovascular disease (stroke); various circulatory diseases; and chronic bronchitis. The Department of Veteran Affairs' (VA) fiscal year 1997 expenditures for health care for veterans with tobacco-related illnesses are estimated to be $2.6-$3.6 billion. In fiscal year 1997, the VA treated 405,000 patients with at least one tobacco-related illness. In fiscal year 1997, the VAs' average cost per patient with at least one tobacco-related illness was $8,800. In fiscal year 1997, patients with tobacco-related illnesses accounted for over 6.5 million visits to the VAs' health care facilities. The projected additional health care costs for tobacco related- illnesses for the VA are estimated to be $2.9 billion over the next five years. The projected additional health care costs for tobacco related- illnesses for the VA are estimated to be negligible for fiscal year 1999. The projected cost for tobacco claims in fiscal year 1999 is about $500 million based on the number of claims that could be processed. Processing time for claims is expected to increase with an influx of tobacco claims. Our nation's veterans should not be excluded from payments by tobacco companies for health care costs associated with tobacco-related diseases. The failure to address the tobacco-related health care needs of our men and women who faithfully served their country in uniform would be wrong. Congress cannot continue to rob from veterans, whose programs have been seriously under funded for years, to pay for these and other special interest projects. Mr. President, our veterans deserve no less. I hope my colleagues will support this amendment and support our veterans. Thank you. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, if there is more comment on this amendment, I will wait. I ask my colleague from Alaska whether he intends to move on to another amendment, or comment on this amendment. Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, in response to my friend, it would be my intent to ask unanimous consent that the amendment be set aside so I can offer mine. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, other colleagues may want to speak to that. I will take 2 minutes, I say to all of my colleagues. I would like to thank the Senator from Maryland for her very kind remarks. I have to say that I will not go now through the technical part of what happened. I am telling you that this was a real injustice. We sort of went on record saying we wouldn't do this, and we have done it. We shouldn't have. This amendment restores that funding to where it should go. I wish to say to my colleagues that we have a huge surplus. We really essentially took some of that money and put it in the highways. We shouldn't have. We got the highways. But we left the veterans out in the cold. They know that. All of these veterans organizations know that. I will say this tomorrow again. All these veterans know that. Senator Murray, Senator McCain, and many of my colleagues know it as well. I hope that there will be very strong support for this, Democrats and Republicans alike, because, again, the money should have gone to deal with the problem, to deal with veterans who really are struggling with illness based upon addiction to tobacco, and, if not, it should have gone into the veterans' health care. It should not have gone, as my colleague from Maryland said, to pay for additional highways, which is what happened. So let's correct a wrong. Please. Let's have a very strong vote on this tomorrow morning. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska. Amendment No. 3200 Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is set aside, and the clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Alaska (Mr. Murkowski) proposes an amendment numbered 3200. Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that readi

Summary:

All articles in Senate section

DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999
(Senate - July 16, 1998)

Text of this article available as: TXT PDF [Pages S8330-S8374] DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999 Mr. LOTT. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now resume the HUD- VA appropriations bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 2168) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes. The Senate resumed consideration of the bill. Pending: Daschle amendment No. 3063, to amend the Public Health Service Act and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to protect consumers in managed care plans and other health coverage. Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that with respect to the HUD-VA appropriations bill, all first-degree amendments must be offered and debated tonight, and if votes are ordered with respect to those amendments, they occur, in a stacked sequence, beginning at 9 o'clock in the morning--I want to emphasize to our colleagues, we are beginning a little earlier than normal; it will be 9 o'clock; and we will go right to the stacked sequence, with 2 minutes of debate prior to each vote for explanation, as has been requested and is the normal practice--and that all succeeding votes be limited to 10 minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LOTT. Now, Mr. President, I know that there are several amendments that need to be worked through. I see that Senator Wellstone is here on the floor ready to go. And I believe we can get some time agreements on other issues. Does the manager, Senator Bond, wish to comment? Mr. BOND. Thank you. Mr. President, I believe Senator Nickles was prepared to go, and I know that Senator Wellstone wants to go right after that. But I believe before we move forward, I need to yield to the distinguished minority leader who has to deal with this. It was our understanding from the discussions that Senator Nickles would move forward on a major amendment he has, and then I would hope we would be able to turn to Senator Wellstone. With that, let me yield to the minority leader. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader. Amendment No. 3063 Withdrawn Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the majority leader and I have been talking throughout the day. And I believe we are making progress in setting up a procedure by which at some point in the not too distant future--I think the prospects are greater tonight than they have been in some time--we might have a good debate on the Patients' Bill of Rights. Because I believe that these negotiations are proceeding successfully, I withdraw the pending amendment on HUD-VA with an expectation that we will come to some successful conclusion at a later date. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is withdrawn. The amendment (No. 3063) was withdrawn. Mr. WELLSTONE addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota. Mr. WELLSTONE. Might I make a request for 1 second? I ask unanimous consent that I be able to follow the Nickles amendment, so I can go back to the office and come back. Mr. BOND. No objection. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BOND addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader and the minority leader for allowing us to get back to this VA-HUD bill. We have had good discussions on it. We have had a very important amendment debated at length on [[Page S8331]] the space station. This is always one of the important points that we have to debate on the VA-HUD bill. We have had great cooperation from Senators on both sides. I think we have narrowed the list of amendments. And we hope to be able to accept and include in the managers' amendment many of the things that have been raised by our colleagues. We are now waiting for Senator Nickles to come forward to debate an amendment on the FHA limits. But we do have a number of amendments we can accept while we are waiting. Amendment No. 3195 (Purpose: To increase funds for VA homeless grant and per diem program) Mr. BOND. First, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator Cleland, and Senator Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], for himself, Mr. Cleland, and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3195. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 18, add the following new provisos prior to the period: ``: Provided further, That of the funds made available under this heading, $14,000,000 shall be for the homeless grant program and $6,000,000 shall be for the homeless per diem program: Provided further, That such funds may be used for vocational training, rehabilitation, and outreach activities in addition to other authorized homeless assistance activities''. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment would provide, within the $17.2 billion medical care appropriation, $20 million for VA's homeless grant and per diem program. The amendment would make these funds available for vocational training, outreach, shelter, and other important activities to aid homeless veterans in a comprehensive manner. This should help meet the needs of the 275,000 veterans who are estimated to be homeless on any given night of the year. Together with funds already included in the bill, we will have provided $100 million in VA homeless assistance. This is a critical need. I commend the other Senators who worked on supporting this. I urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for their outstanding leadership on this important piece of legislation. Given the hard work that went into this bill, I wanted to first express my appreciation for what they have done. I am reminded of the old phrase ``too many cooks spoil the broth.'' Sometimes the legislative branch might be thought of in that way. As I offer this amendment, I have attempted to be mindful not to ``spoil the broth.'' As the former head of the Veterans Administration, the veterans portion of this bill continues to be near and dear to my heart. I am extremely pleased to see that the Appropriations Committee under the leadership of Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski has increased funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs by over $1.5 billion when compared to last year's budget. This represents a real increase in funding even when inflation is factored in. Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski are true friends of America's veterans, and we thank them. The amendment I have offered attempts to fill a void that exists with respect to services for veterans. When I was head of the Veterans Administration, it was clear to me that the VA could not be everywhere at all times. We relied heavily on other government agencies and private entities in our attempt to assure that all veterans could obtain the benefits they were entitled to and the assistance they needed. Today, in an era of balanced budgets, we cannot depend solely on federal dollars to solve every problem. The era of balanced budgets brings with it the era of partnership. The VA must continue to partner with other entities to fulfill its mission. For instance, in this year's Defense Authorization bill, I have authored language which would strongly encourage the VA to partner with the Department of Defense to provide health care for our nation's military personnel, their dependents, military retirees, and veterans. Today, I am advocating much stronger partnering between the VA and the private sector to fill the basic needs of our nation's veterans. The Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program was established in 1992 to fund the development and operation of transitional housing for homeless veterans who are free of alcohol and drugs. Over 2,000 beds have been made available under this program. Over $21 million has been appropriated for this purpose. Unfortunately, the current program is completely inadequate in the face of the overwhelming need which exists for housing for homeless veterans. The VA estimates that over 275,000 veterans are currently homeless on any given night. In a given year, over 500,000 veterans find themselves homeless at some point. In Atlanta, Georgia, nearly 10,000 veterans are in need of homeless assistance. This is clearly unacceptable. A mere 2,000 beds, while important, would not meet the needs of one state, let alone the entire nation. The program does not come close to fulfilling the entire need. Currently at approximately $7 million, it represents less than two-hundredths of a percent of the entire VA budget. The amendment I have offered would set aside $20 million for the Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem program. This would nearly triple the amount available for this program. It would also insure that funds are available for rehabilitation, vocational training, and outreach. These are critical elements because the list of successful programs have demonstrated that helping veterans become drug and alcohol free and employable is the best way to insure that they not find themselves homeless again. Furthermore, it is important to provide for successful outreach to veterans in need to insure that veterans are able to take advantage of the services, both public and private, that are available to them. Several groups have contacted me since I was elected to the Senate to seek support for the veterans assistance projects they are trying to establish or expand. I would like to take a few moments to describe two such programs. Last year, the Georgia Military College conducted a pilot program in which veterans voluntarily undergoing drug rehabilitation were offered a college course. The program was paid for through the proceeds of a golf tournament sponsored by the Atlanta Veterans Administration Medical Center. Eighteen veterans participated in the original program. In light of the initial success, the Georgia Military College seized on the idea of expanding the program not only to provide for education but to offer additional counseling and to provide shelter for the participants. The College is in the process of establishing a 5-year program aimed at improving the lives of Georgia's homeless veterans. This is the type of program that can truly make a difference. Instead of a ``band-aid'' approach, it offers true skills training, and the transitional housing these veterans need to be able to continue with the program. The National Veterans Foundation offers perhaps one of the most important services a nation can provide to our veterans in need--a human voice. The Foundation was founded by Floyd ``Shad'' Meshad in 1985 to help veterans recover from the pain of war. It has aided over a quarter of a million veterans, funding housing, legal services, job training, counseling, and rehabilitative programs. A major focus of the Foundation is its toll-free Information and Referral Line. Shad Meshad refers to it as a ``Clearing House'' to direct veterans and their families to the assistance they need. It is a real human voice on the other end of the line, not a recording. Over the years, the National Veterans Foundation has logged thousands of calls. Unfortunately, this critical outreach program is only available during business hours, Monday through Friday. Our veterans deserve the kind of service provided by the National Veterans Foundation--but they deserve it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. These are just two of the types of programs that deserve the support of the VA. In my view, it is only lack of resources which currently limits that support. It should be made clear that what we are talking about is not the old give-away of federal funds. This is not new ``corporate welfare.'' I was introduced to the Homeless Providers [[Page S8332]] Grant and Per Diem program fairly recently. I was surprised to learn that the Veterans Administration does not currently have a comprehensive grant program that could fund meritorious projects, but it does have this program. I believe the Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program combined with a future comprehensive grant program will leverage federal dollars with private, state, and local money to create a multiplier effect that will aid our nation's veterans for years to come. It is my intent to introduce legislation in the future to provide the necessary statutory authority to establish a comprehensive grant program that goes beyond the current homeless assistance program. Mr. President, I would like to thank Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski for their cooperation and support for this amendment. Without their leadership, this amendment would not be possible. I look forward to working closely with them in the future to further assist our nation's veterans. I yield the floor. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am proud to concur with Senators Cleland and Bond on this amendment. It will increase by $13 million the amount for the homeless grants for the VA. Nobody who fought to save our country should be out on the street. These men have borne the permanent wounds of war, some of which have caused deep-seated emotional problems--unable to find a job. What I like about the VA homeless program is, it not only provides a shelter but tries to get them focused on starting a new way of life. We have an outstanding one in Maryland. I am proud of it. And I look forward to accepting this amendment and say hats off to try to give the vets a new lease on life. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment (No. 3195) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3196 (Purpose: To require entities that operate homeless shelters to identify and provide certain counseling to homeless veterans) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator McCain, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], for Mr. McCain, proposes an amendment numbered 3196. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 93, between lines 18 and 19, insert the following: Sec. 423. (a) Each entity that receives a grant from the Federal Government for purposes of providing emergency shelter for homeless individuals shall-- (1) ascertain, to the extent practicable, whether or not each adult individual seeking such shelter from such entity is a veteran; and (2) provide each such individual who is a veteran such counseling relating to the availability of veterans benefits (including employment assistance, health care benefits, and other benefits) as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs considers appropriate. (b) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall jointly coordinate the activities required by subsection (a). (c) Entities referred to in subsection (a) shall notify the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of the number and identity of veterans ascertained under paragraph (1) of that subsection. Such entities shall make such notification with such frequency and in such form as the Secretary shall specify. (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an entity referred to subsection (a) that fails to meet the requirements specified in that subsection shall not be eligible for additional grants or other Federal funds for purposes of carrying out activities relating to emergency shelter for homeless individuals. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment will assist homeless veterans by requiring the federally funded homeless shelters report to the Veterans' Administration the number of homeless veterans they serve, and it seeks to ensure that these homeless veterans be provide information regarding the availability of veterans benefits. The amendment will improve the Federal Government's database on homeless veterans and will help homeless veterans know about programs which can help them address critical needs. It has been cleared on both sides. I urge its adoption, and yield the floor. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 1999. The amendment will assist homeless veterans and seek to eliminate some of the suffering of those less fortunate Americans who served their country in the military. This amendment will develop better methods for identifying veterans who utilize federally funded homeless shelters so that they can be educated about veteran benefits to which they are entitled, including Department of Veterans Affairs health care. A homeless shelter which receives federal funding would be required to inquire if a person, man or woman, entering the shelter is a veteran. This information would be used solely to assist in tracking the number of homeless veterans and providing counseling to the veteran regarding all available benefits, including job search, veterans preference rights, and medical benefits. Additionally, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development will coordinate these activities and specify a schedule for notifying the Department of Veteran Affairs of the status of these homeless veterans. It is the intent of this amendment to require homeless shelters to follow this procedures if they are to be eligible for additional Federal grants. Today, there is no easy or accurate way to track the number of homeless veterans in the United States. I find this astonishing. We just celebrated Independence Day, and this country owes a great deal to the men and women who bore arms to keep America free. It is astonishing to me that there would be no mechanism or process set up to accurately track or keep national records on homeless veterans. The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates the number of homeless veterans to be between 275,000 and 500,000 over the course of a year. Conservatively, one out of every three individuals who is sleeping in a doorway, alley, or box in our cities and rural communities has worn a uniform and served our country. Mr. President, the time is right, right now, to give a helping hand. Of the figures the Department of Veterans Affairs does acknowledge, homeless veterans are mostly male; about three percent are women. The vast majority are single; most come from poor, disadvantaged communities; forty percent suffer from mental illness; and half have substance abuse problems. More than seventy-five percent served our country for at least four years and Vietnam veterans account for more than forty percent of the total number estimated. Mr. President, there are many complex factors affecting all homelessness: extreme shortage of affordable housing, poverty, high unemployment in big cities, and disability. A large number of displaced and at-risk veterans live with lingering effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and substance abuse, compounded by a lack of family and social support networks. I do not mean to be critical of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs or the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in offering this amendment. To a certain degree the Department of Veterans Affairs is responsive in taking care of some homeless veterans. But the ones that are receiving critical medical treatment and veterans benefits are those who know that such programs exist. It is incumbent on our government to reach out to all homeless veterans. However, to do that, there must be a process in place. Homeless veterans need a coordinated effort, between the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, that provides secure housing and nutritional meals, essential physical health care, substance abuse aftercare and mental health counseling. They may need job assessment, training and placement assistance. To those that may argue that this is a new entitlement program, I [[Page S8333]] would say that these rights and benefits currently exist for veterans today. Why would we as a nation not do everything in our power to provide this help for those less fortunate veterans. Mr. President, our veterans deserve no less. I hope my colleagues will support this amendment and support our veterans. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, no one can speak for the veterans the way a former POW can. I wish to be associated with the remarks of Senator McCain and move the adoption of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to. The amendment (No. 3196) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3197 (Purpose: To provide funds for the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, once authorized) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator Mikulski, and Senator Rockefeller and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for himself, Mr. Rockefeller and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3197. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 18, add the following new provisos prior to the period: ``: Provided further, That of the funds made available under this heading, $10,000,000 shall be for implementation of the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, contingent upon enactment of authorizing legislation''. Mr. BOND. This amendment has been cleared on both sides and would provide $10 million within the VA medical appropriation for the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act contingent upon authorization. Senators Mikulski and Rockefeller have been working to create a program to facilitate the employment of primary care personnel at the VA, including an education debt reduction program which Senator Mikulski has long been interested in establishing. This program is intended to improve the recruitment and retention of primary care providers, a very important element in the service to the VA. The Primary Care Providers Incentive Act seeks to update VA's educational assistance programs for prospective employees, particularly in areas where recruitment has been difficult. I urge the authorizing committees to act expeditiously on this important program. I urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. BOND. I yield to my distinguished colleague from Maryland. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, this does attempt to recruit the very best and brightest in the field of primary care to the VA. I proposed the debt reduction program, a student debt reduction program, back in 1992. Now, why do I approach this as debt reduction rather than scholarships? The scholarship program is very worthwhile, but there are many very talented people who have already graduated. They have a substantial student debt from studying either nursing or other primary care practices. What the $5 million would do would go towards reducing their student debt if they would enter VA services; they would get a year's worth of debt reduction for a year's worth of service. This way, we know they have completed their training, they have passed their licensing requirement, they are as fit for duty as the veterans they will serve. That is why we approached it from that policy standpoint. It also joins with the outstanding efforts being made by Senator Rockefeller to also develop other tools. I concur in the amendment, and I urge its adoption and ask it be accepted unanimously. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am delighted that $10 million to fund S. 2115, the Department of Veterans Affairs Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, has been provided through a managers' amendment to the VA/HUD appropriations bill. I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member of the VA/HUD Subcommittee, Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski, for their cooperation in making this possible. The new scholarship and educational debt reduction programs that are contained in S. 2115 are designed to revitalize the Health Professionals Education Assistance Program at VA. This program was originally intended to help VA to recruit and retain health professionals, but it has atrophied in recent years, despite an ongoing demand for educational financial aid by health professionals employed by or interested in working at VA. This funding will help breathe new life into the educational assistance programs, and provide much needed incentives to improve recruitment and retention of primary care providers. The VA health care system is in the midst of a major reorganization that is simultaneously reducing the current workforce and creating the need for more primary care health professionals. VHA's five-year strategic plan includes the activation and/or planning of nearly 400 community-based outpatient clinics, to be staffed by primary care health professionals. Yet hiring of these professionals and retraining of current employees, to prepare for these changes, has lagged behind the planning process. The Primary Care Providers Incentive Programs that will be funded through this amendment will motivate current employees to get training in new areas of need by providing scholarships, and assist in the recruitment of new primary care providers by helping to pay off student loans. VA needs educational assistance programs such as these to effectively recruit and retain trained primary care health professionals. In VA hospitals and clinics, some of the most difficult positions to fill are those of nurse practitioners, physical therapists, and occupational therapists. In my own state of West Virginia, for example, at one of the VA hospitals, there has been a vacancy for an occupational therapist for over 12 years! Two of the VA hospitals have no physical therapists at all. This is simply unacceptable. The plain fact is that starting salaries in the VA are not competitive with those in private practice. The Education Debt Reduction Program gives the VA a financial recruitment tool that will be an enormous help in making the VAMCs more competitive for these much-needed and highly skilled individuals. In fact, one of the most frequently asked questions by prospective new employees is whether or not VA has a debt reduction program. Clearly, this program will answer a critical need. But improving recruitment is only half of the story. Retention of trained people is equally important. Funding the employee incentive scholarship program can help solve this very real problem. Eligibility is limited to current VA employees, providing a way for vulnerable individuals to protect themselves against future RIFs by acquiring training in the new areas of need. This will go a long way toward improving staff morale at the VA, which has been severely undermined in the last few years due to the necessary streamlining that resulted from significant budget cuts. The educational assistance programs in S. 2115 are a valuable investment, enhancing morale of the VA health care providers in the short term, while building a workforce that matches VA's needs and improves veterans' health care in the long run. In the coming months, I will be working with my colleagues on the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs to authorize these worthwhile programs. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (No. 3197) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. [[Page S8334]] Amendment No. 3198 (Purpose: To provide for the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senators Sarbanes and Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for Mr. Sarbanes, for himself and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3198. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: At the appropriate place, insert the following: SEC. ____. NATIONAL FALLEN FIREFIGHTERS FOUNDATION. (a) Establishment and Purposes.--Section 202 of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5201) is amended-- (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following: ``(1) primarily-- ``(A) to encourage, accept, and administer private gifts of property for the benefit of the National Fallen Firefighters' Memorial and the annual memorial service associated with the memorial; and ``(B) to, in coordination with the Federal Government and fire services (as that term is defined in section 4 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2203)), plan, direct, and manage the memorial service referred to in subparagraph (A)''; (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``and Federal'' after ``non-Federal''; (3) in paragraph (3)-- (A) by striking ``State and local'' and inserting ``Federal, State, and local''; and (B) by striking ``and'' at the end; (4) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and (5) by adding at the end the following: ``(5) to provide for a national program to assist families of fallen firefighters and fire departments in dealing with line-of-duty deaths of those firefighters; and ``(6) to promote national, State, and local initiatives to increase public awareness of fire and life safety in coordination with the United States Fire Administration.'' (b) Board of Directors of Foundation.--Section 203(g)(1) of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5202(g)(1)) is amended by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following: ``(A) appointing officers or employees;''. (c) Administrative Services and Support.--Section 205 of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5204) is amended to read as follows: ``SEC. 205. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AND SUPPORT. ``(a) In General.--During the 10-year period beginning on the date of enactment of the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, the Administrator may-- ``(1) provide personnel, facilities, and other required services for the operation of the Foundation; and ``(2) request and accept reimbursement for the assistance provided under paragraph (1). ``(b) Reimbursement.--Any amounts received under subsection (a)(2) as reimbursement for assistance shall be deposited in the Treasury to the credit of the appropriations then current and chargeable for the cost of providing that assistance. ``(c) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal personnel or stationery may be used to solicit funding for the Foundation.''. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment by Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski affects the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation, which is a federally chartered corporation dedicated to helping families of fallen firefighters in assisting State and local efforts to recognize firefighters who die in the line of duty. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Fire Administration, is a member of the foundation's board. Senator Sarbanes sponsored the original legislation creating this foundation. His amendment, along with Senator Mikulski, makes some technical changes to the law and eliminates the cap on staff. We understand it has been approved by FEMA. It has been cleared by the Commerce Committee. It would have no impact on spending and will ensure that the foundation is able to employ the staff it needs to operate. I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield to the sponsors. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his support for this amendment. The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation has done an absolutely outstanding job. I think it bears out the wisdom of the Congress in establishing it. The services they are now providing to the families of deceased firefighters are really exemplary. We have had many communications from spouses, from children, from parents, of how much the activities of the Fallen Firefighters Foundation mean to them. They have enlisted very significant support from the private sector for their activities. These changes are technical in nature in order to enable the foundation to carry out its responsibilities with greater efficacy and greater efficiency. I didn't want to let this opportunity pass without underscoring the tremendously fine work that is being done by the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I concur with the remarks of my distinguished Senator. He has really done the heavy lifting on this policy issue. I want to thank him for doing this. I absolutely concur with the direction in which we are going. I think it will be an important memorial and a way to staff it properly. I urge this amendment be agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (No. 3198) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3199 (Purpose: To restore veterans tobacco-related benefits as in effect before the enactment of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century) Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will get started on this amendment. Mr. BOND. Might I ask for clarification? I ask the Senator which amendment he has that he wants to discuss. Mr. WELLSTONE. This is the amendment that will restore benefits to veterans for smoking-related diseases. Mr. President, this amendment which I now send to the desk is on behalf of myself, Senator Murray and Senator McCain. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Wellstone] for himself, Mrs. Murray, and Mr. McCain, proposes an amendment numbered 3199. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allard). Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 16, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following: Sec. 110. (a)(1) Section 1103 of title 38, United States Code, is repealed. (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 11 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 1103. (b) Upon the enactment of this Act-- (1) the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall not make any estimate of changes in direct spending outlays under section 252(d) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 for any fiscal year resulting from the enactment of this section; and (2) the Chairmen of the Committees on the Budget shall not make any adjustments in direct spending outlays for purposes of the allocations, functional levels, and aggregates under title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for any fiscal year resulting from the enactment of this section. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, my amendment would restore benefits to veterans with smoking-related diseases. How would we do that? It is simple. The TEA 21 highway program canceled the disability benefits that veterans would have received under existing rules and procedures, and it used that money instead to pay for more highway projects. My amendment would simply return the favor. It would repeal that offset from the highway bill. Let me go through the procedural history of this to review how we got to where we are today. This offset first appeared in the President's 1999 budget request. The administration, I think, wildly overestimated the cost of benefits for smoking-related disabilities. But this money was then taken from veterans and it was used elsewhere. There is a tremendous amount of indignation in the veterans community over this, and there should be. Congress decided to play the same game. In the budget resolution they agreed to deny benefits to veterans and use the money [[Page S8335]] elsewhere just like it had been done by the administration. But the budget priorities were a little different. The savings were used for highway projects. That didn't happen on the Senate side, but by the time it came back from the House, that is what happened. That was the major reason I voted against that bill. The appropriate place to repeal this offset and restore veterans' benefits would have been in the technical corrections to the TEA 21 highway bill. Senator Rockefeller and I intended to offer an amendment which would have done just that, but we never got a chance because that amendment was folded into another conference report so we could never get an up-or-down vote. We all know that conference reports, as I just said, cannot be amended. As I have said before on the floor, it is only right that we should have a clean vote on this issue. This is not only a question of veterans, it is a question of accountability. There is simply no excuse for hiding behind procedural gimmicks to avoid responsibility. Some have said we have already voted on this bill, or we have already voted on this question, but I don't think that is true. Let me explain. The two votes we had on the budget resolution did not deal directly with this question. Senators got a chance to pretend they were for veterans and against the offset, knowing that 5 minutes later we could cast a vote in the opposite direction. We had some camouflage about doing a study sometime in the future. But I think we all recognize it was only a study. And the vote on the IRS reform bill was not a clean up-or-down vote; it was only a procedural vote, a point of order. We need to have a clean vote up or down, no subterfuge, no trickery. It is not enough to take these benefits away from veterans. Congress will add insult to injury by not having a clean up-or-down vote on this question. I think veterans should take a clear position on this issue, and that should go on the Record. Now, some may object to this amendment because it is legislation on an appropriations bill, or they may think that this appropriations bill is the wrong place to remedy this particular problem. Let me remind my colleagues that this offset was a jurisdictional raid to begin with. Transportation conferees stole the money without ever going through the Veterans' Affairs Committee. This was originally the Veterans' Affairs Committee. If we now repeal this offset through the Veterans' Affairs Committee, we will have to pay for it by taking even more money away from veterans. The highway bill took that money away. It was not taken away by the Veterans' Committee. Nobody wants to do that. Nobody wants to take more funding away from veterans. There are a few misconceptions that I would like to clear up. First and foremost, compensation for veterans with smoking-related illnesses was not a new program. It was not an expansion of a program. It was a benefit to which disabled veterans were entitled to under existing law. Veterans who had become addicted to tobacco because of their service in the military had the right to apply for disability. The highway bill took that right away. It is a very tough test that the veterans have to meet. Only 300 have passed it. These were not special rules, either. Those veterans had to meet the same legal and evidentiary requirements as for any other service-connected disability. They had to prove that their addiction began in the military service. They had to prove that their addiction continued without interruption. They had to prove that their addiction resulted in an illness. They had to prove that their addiction resulted in a disability. There is another thing that ought to be pointed out tonight. We are not really talking about $17 billion here. Let's be clear about it. OMB first came up with that figure based on an estimate of 500,000 claims granted every year. But over the past 6 years, a grand total of only 8,000 veterans have applied, and only 300 of those claims have been granted. CBO came in with a lower, but still high, estimate of $10.5 billion. But the TEA 21 conferees needed more money, so they took advantage of the higher OMB number to pay for a huge increase in funding for highways. The administration's cost projections are based on many, many unknowns. More importantly, OMB is assuming VA will grant 100 percent of all claims but, to date--listen to this, colleagues--VA has granted only 5 percent of the claims. The test veterans have to meet is simply much harder than OMB seems to think. There are a number of other unknowns with the administration's methodology. On the percentage of veterans who currently smoke or are heavy smokers, VA experts made what we consider to be a questionable assumption that veterans who smoke more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime would have the same disease rates as smokers; the percentage of veterans who may file claims for tobacco-related illnesses that are already receiving compensation for those or other conditions; the rate at which the VA can adjudicate these claims. There are lots of assumptions I would question. Let me get right down to the very nitty-gritty of what this amendment is about. My first choice would be to keep the old rules for deciding disability claims--the ones we had before the TEA 21 highway bill. I don't see why Congress should go out of its way to deny disability benefits to veterans. Don't we have better places to look for spending offsets? Back in World War II, these veterans had free and discounted cigarettes included in their rations, and those packs didn't even have warning labels on them. Soldiers were encouraged to smoke to relieve the stress of military strain. And now some of them are suffering the consequences and they are not getting the compensation. That is what is so outrageous about what we have done, and that is what this amendment intends to correct. The second choice--even if Congress does decide to deny these benefits, I find it hard to understand why this money should be taken away from veterans' programs. I believe, at the very least, it should stay with veterans. It is quite one thing to argue, look, though they deserve this compensation, they have to meet strict criteria to get this compensation. We handed cigarettes out like candy and we know veterans became addicted. They should have been entitled to this benefit. It is quite one thing to take away the compensation benefit, which we have done; it is adding insult to injury to not at least have to put that money, scored by OMB and CBO, back into veterans' health care. That is why I come to the floor and I speak with so much indignation about this. That is why Senator Murray from Washington and Senator McCain from Arizona join me in this amendment. If this offset proposal had been considered in the Veterans' Affairs Committee, as it should have been, I doubt that it would have seen the light of day. But if it had passed the committee, those savings would have remained within the committee's jurisdiction. Those savings would have been plowed right back into veterans' programs. That would have been my second choice. So let me be clear again. The first choice: This compensation should have gone to the veterans. This is an injustice; it really is. Secondly, if we weren't going to do that, it should have stayed in the Veterans' Committee. I can tell you that committee would have at least made sure that this money would have been invested in veterans' health care. Only because it is late at night and because there are other colleagues who have amendments--trust me, I think I can talk, without notes, for 2 hours about the holes right now--gaping holes--in veterans' health care, in the financing and delivery of veterans' health care. After all, we are running out of excuses for underfunding veterans' programs. Remember, for many years, Congress used deficit reduction as an excuse. That was the justification for flat-lining the VA budget in the 1997 budget deal. By the way, the flat-line budget is not going to work. It doesn't take into account inflation. It doesn't take into account all of the veterans now living to be 85--an ever-aging veterans population. It won't work. But now the deficit is gone and we can no longer claim that there are no offsets available. The first time an offset comes down the pike, and it is a real whopper, Congress immediately whisks it away to pay for other programs-- [[Page S8336]] programs that obviously have a much higher priority. I can't imagine how Congress can make its budget priorities any clearer. I have to tell you that if our priority is to live up to our commitment to veterans, then I believe we should have 100 votes for this amendment. The VA-HUD appropriations bill does include a significant $222 million increase over the President's request in funding for veterans' health care. I thank my colleagues, the Senators from Missouri and Maryland, for their very fine leadership. Let me bring something to my colleagues' attention. As the Veterans Affairs' Committee wrote in its letter to Appropriations, an increase of over $500 million is necessary to maintain the current level of services. My argument is that not only did we not give the veterans the compensation they would have gotten if we hadn't raided--really, what was their funding for their addiction, for their illness--but to add insult to injury, if we didn't do that, we should have at least put it into veterans' health care because we are not properly funding health care for veterans in this country. Before the budget deal, we just simply did not take into account the inflation that is taking place. The budget is not enough. Finally, let me be clear about what this amendment will do and what it will not do. First of all, this amendment does not cancel or deny any transportation projects. Those projects are already in law. This amendment would not affect them in any way. Second, this amendment that I have introduced with Senator Murray and Senator McCain would not trigger a budget sequester. It includes the same protection against sequestration, the same budget gimmickry that was included in the TEA 21 bill. It may be argued that this amendment would be using the surplus to pay for veterans' benefits. I would argue that the highway bill was spending the surplus because it was using an unreasonably high estimate for this offset. That is going to happen whether or not we repeal that offset. But to the extent we do restore previous law on veterans' disability benefits and waive the Budget Act--I am asking colleagues to waive the Budget Act--the cost is not going to be anywhere near $17 billion. I want to be clear about that. In the summer of 1997, the VA said it wouldn't be able to process more than a couple billion dollars worth of claims over 5 years. Mr. President, and colleagues, let me just summarize. I have decided to really try to be brief. There is a lot that I feel strongly about, and there is a lot that I would like to talk about. But I think my colleagues from Missouri and Maryland were gracious enough to let me come to the floor with this amendment and get to work on it. I summarize this way. This amendment would restore benefits to veterans with smoking-related diseases. This amendment that I introduce on behalf of myself and Senator Murray and Senator McCain does what we should have done--to have provided this funding for compensation to go to veterans for smoking-related disease. We did not do that through a whole lot of gimmickry and a whole lot of zigs and zags. We took that funding away from veterans. My second choice would have been to have at least invested this funding into veterans' health care. We have got so many needs for those that are 85, and elderly veterans; so many needs for veterans that are walking around and struggling with PTSD; so many needs for more drop-in centers; so many needs to fill the gaps in our current VA health care system. And we didn't put the money into the veterans' health care. Then, finally, I want to make real clear what this will do and what it will not do. I don't want anybody to be able to say that we are now going to cancel any transportation projects. That is not what this amendment does. I don't want anybody to say it is going to trigger a budget sequester. It has the same protection that we had against sequestration. I don't want anybody to argue that we will waive a budget order, that we will have to go into a surplus. We have a huge surplus. We put the surplus into the highways. Now, I am just saying take it back, even though you don't take it from the highways, because you have already funded that. You should at least take that money that belongs to the veterans that should have gone to them directly for compensation. I don't think we can avoid an up-or-down vote on this any longer. We should have a clear up-or-down vote. We should all be accountable. I feel very strongly about this, and I hope that I will receive very strong support for this amendment. Several Senators addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Alaska has another amendment. I was going to say that I believe the Senator from New Mexico, the chairman of the Budget Committee, will raise a point of order tomorrow. As the Senator from Minnesota knows, the Senator from Maryland and I have supported his position. There will be a Budget Act point of order. But I ask for the yeas and nays on Senator Wellstone's amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays were ordered. Ms. MIKULSKI addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, first of all, I would like to thank Senator Wellstone for his cooperation in this debate, and for his willingness to stay on the floor. I also appreciate his remarks. I know the passion that the Senator from Minnesota has on behalf of veterans. He spoke in behalf of atomic veterans, and in behalf of a group of veterans in his own State that have been ignored. He has spoken for the homeless, for the mentally ill veterans, and also for the need for long-term care for the veterans. I thank him for that. Mr. President, when we debated both the highway bill and the budget bill, I supported the sense-of-the-Senate resolution that we not raid the veterans' medical care. Thence, when we voted on the highway bill, I voted for final passage, but was very clear saying we should not fix America's potholes on the backs of America's veterans and their needs for health care, many of whom bear the permanent wounds of war. I thank the Senator for raising this issue again. I want the Senator from Minnesota to know that I support his policy position on this. I, too, believe that promises made should be promises kept to the veterans, and we should find other ways of funding that highway bill. I look forward to further work with him on this topic. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer my strong support, as an original cosponsor of the amendment offered by Mr. Wellstone to the VA/ HUD Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1999 which will rightfully transfer approximately $10.5 billion back to the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans programs. I understand from the managers of the bill that the vote on this critical amendment will not occur until tomorrow. I would have voted for this provision if I was not called out of town on a prior commitment. Furthermore, I urge my colleagues to show their support for veterans and vote for this measure. On July 8, 1998, I submitted for the Record a statement regarding veterans' health care activities for tobacco-related illnesses and disabilities. At that time, I had every intention to offer an amendment to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill that would restore the $10.5 billion in funding that was so egregiously and eagerly taken from our nation's veterans to fund pork-laden highway programs in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998 (ISTEA). Unfortunately, there was simply no possibility that this amendment would be adopted, simply because of the inflexibility of the Appropriations Committee's allocation of funds between the Transportation and VA/HUD Committees. Because of the arcane rules of the Senate, I and my cosponsors are precluded from righting this profound wrong that has been perpetrated against those who have served and sacrificed for our country. I am not sure that our efforts will be more successful this evening, but I do know, that it is [[Page S8337]] the right thing to do. This issue is far from dead. It is important, I believe, that my colleagues fully understand the facts regarding the funding shortfall for veterans health care and compensation for tobacco related diseases. First, the Department of Veterans Affairs critical funding shortfall is a result of President Clinton's legislative proposal to Congress to disallow service-connected disability or death benefits based on tobacco-related diseases arising after discharge from the military. Congress, eager to fund pork-laden highway programs, then transferred nearly $10.5 billion to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998 (ISTEA), H.R. 2400, earlier this year. This egregious act was fully supported by President Clinton. Second, on April 2, 1998 the Senate voted for an amendment sponsored by Senators Domenici, Lott, and Craig on the Balanced Budget Act which transferred approximately $10.5 billion over five years from the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans' tobacco-related diseases to the ISTEA bill for transportation related projects. I voted for this amendment, in part, because I believed that the tobacco companies, rather than the taxpayers, should bear the burden for tobacco-related diseases caused partially by smoking and using other tobacco products while they were in military service. Military service did not force servicemembers to smoke, but I acknowledge that for morale reasons, the services made cigarettes available for free or at inexpensive prices. The services also give servicemembers condoms and birth control pills at no cost to military personnel, but that does not mean that they want our men and women in uniform to be promiscuous. Third, on the tobacco bill, I sponsored legislation that would provide not less than $600 million per year to the Department of Veterans' Affairs for veterans' health care activities for tobacco- related illnesses and disability and directed the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs to assist such veterans as is appropriate. The amendment would have provided a minimum of $3 billion over five years for those veterans that are afflicted with tobacco-related illnesses and disability. Additionally, the amendment would have provided smoking cessation care to veterans from various programs established under the tobacco bill. Now that the tobacco bill has been returned to the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, I feel more compelled to rectify this situation. As a conferee on the ISTEA bill, I refused to support and sign the ISTEA Conference Report. I opposed the ISTEA Conference Report for a number of reasons, particularly because of my objections to shifting critical veterans funding to support pork barrel spending in this massive highway bill. It seems that the Congress has no hesitation in breaking budget agreements, when it suits their own purposes to do so, to spend far more on transportation than agreed to in the balanced budget plan. What's worse, it seems that the Congress has no problem with robbing from veterans, whose programs have been seriously under funded for years, to pay for this luxury. Furthermore, Mr. President, the facts are clear with respect to tobacco related health care costs and the impact on veterans: Tobacco-related diseases, for example, include cancers of the lip, oral cavity, and pharynx; esophagus; pancreas; larynx; lung; bladder; kidney; coronary heart disease; cerebrovascular disease (stroke); various circulatory diseases; and chronic bronchitis. The Department of Veteran Affairs' (VA) fiscal year 1997 expenditures for health care for veterans with tobacco-related illnesses are estimated to be $2.6-$3.6 billion. In fiscal year 1997, the VA treated 405,000 patients with at least one tobacco-related illness. In fiscal year 1997, the VAs' average cost per patient with at least one tobacco-related illness was $8,800. In fiscal year 1997, patients with tobacco-related illnesses accounted for over 6.5 million visits to the VAs' health care facilities. The projected additional health care costs for tobacco related- illnesses for the VA are estimated to be $2.9 billion over the next five years. The projected additional health care costs for tobacco related- illnesses for the VA are estimated to be negligible for fiscal year 1999. The projected cost for tobacco claims in fiscal year 1999 is about $500 million based on the number of claims that could be processed. Processing time for claims is expected to increase with an influx of tobacco claims. Our nation's veterans should not be excluded from payments by tobacco companies for health care costs associated with tobacco-related diseases. The failure to address the tobacco-related health care needs of our men and women who faithfully served their country in uniform would be wrong. Congress cannot continue to rob from veterans, whose programs have been seriously under funded for years, to pay for these and other special interest projects. Mr. President, our veterans deserve no less. I hope my colleagues will support this amendment and support our veterans. Thank you. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, if there is more comment on this amendment, I will wait. I ask my colleague from Alaska whether he intends to move on to another amendment, or comment on this amendment. Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, in response to my friend, it would be my intent to ask unanimous consent that the amendment be set aside so I can offer mine. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, other colleagues may want to speak to that. I will take 2 minutes, I say to all of my colleagues. I would like to thank the Senator from Maryland for her very kind remarks. I have to say that I will not go now through the technical part of what happened. I am telling you that this was a real injustice. We sort of went on record saying we wouldn't do this, and we have done it. We shouldn't have. This amendment restores that funding to where it should go. I wish to say to my colleagues that we have a huge surplus. We really essentially took some of that money and put it in the highways. We shouldn't have. We got the highways. But we left the veterans out in the cold. They know that. All of these veterans organizations know that. I will say this tomorrow again. All these veterans know that. Senator Murray, Senator McCain, and many of my colleagues know it as well. I hope that there will be very strong support for this, Democrats and Republicans alike, because, again, the money should have gone to deal with the problem, to deal with veterans who really are struggling with illness based upon addiction to tobacco, and, if not, it should have gone into the veterans' health care. It should not have gone, as my colleague from Maryland said, to pay for additional highways, which is what happened. So let's correct a wrong. Please. Let's have a very strong vote on this tomorrow morning. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska. Amendment No. 3200 Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is set aside, and the clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Alaska (Mr. Murkowski) proposes an amendment numbered 3200. Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the

Major Actions:

All articles in Senate section

DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999
(Senate - July 16, 1998)

Text of this article available as: TXT PDF [Pages S8330-S8374] DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999 Mr. LOTT. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now resume the HUD- VA appropriations bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 2168) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes. The Senate resumed consideration of the bill. Pending: Daschle amendment No. 3063, to amend the Public Health Service Act and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to protect consumers in managed care plans and other health coverage. Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that with respect to the HUD-VA appropriations bill, all first-degree amendments must be offered and debated tonight, and if votes are ordered with respect to those amendments, they occur, in a stacked sequence, beginning at 9 o'clock in the morning--I want to emphasize to our colleagues, we are beginning a little earlier than normal; it will be 9 o'clock; and we will go right to the stacked sequence, with 2 minutes of debate prior to each vote for explanation, as has been requested and is the normal practice--and that all succeeding votes be limited to 10 minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LOTT. Now, Mr. President, I know that there are several amendments that need to be worked through. I see that Senator Wellstone is here on the floor ready to go. And I believe we can get some time agreements on other issues. Does the manager, Senator Bond, wish to comment? Mr. BOND. Thank you. Mr. President, I believe Senator Nickles was prepared to go, and I know that Senator Wellstone wants to go right after that. But I believe before we move forward, I need to yield to the distinguished minority leader who has to deal with this. It was our understanding from the discussions that Senator Nickles would move forward on a major amendment he has, and then I would hope we would be able to turn to Senator Wellstone. With that, let me yield to the minority leader. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader. Amendment No. 3063 Withdrawn Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the majority leader and I have been talking throughout the day. And I believe we are making progress in setting up a procedure by which at some point in the not too distant future--I think the prospects are greater tonight than they have been in some time--we might have a good debate on the Patients' Bill of Rights. Because I believe that these negotiations are proceeding successfully, I withdraw the pending amendment on HUD-VA with an expectation that we will come to some successful conclusion at a later date. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is withdrawn. The amendment (No. 3063) was withdrawn. Mr. WELLSTONE addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota. Mr. WELLSTONE. Might I make a request for 1 second? I ask unanimous consent that I be able to follow the Nickles amendment, so I can go back to the office and come back. Mr. BOND. No objection. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BOND addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader and the minority leader for allowing us to get back to this VA-HUD bill. We have had good discussions on it. We have had a very important amendment debated at length on [[Page S8331]] the space station. This is always one of the important points that we have to debate on the VA-HUD bill. We have had great cooperation from Senators on both sides. I think we have narrowed the list of amendments. And we hope to be able to accept and include in the managers' amendment many of the things that have been raised by our colleagues. We are now waiting for Senator Nickles to come forward to debate an amendment on the FHA limits. But we do have a number of amendments we can accept while we are waiting. Amendment No. 3195 (Purpose: To increase funds for VA homeless grant and per diem program) Mr. BOND. First, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator Cleland, and Senator Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], for himself, Mr. Cleland, and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3195. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 18, add the following new provisos prior to the period: ``: Provided further, That of the funds made available under this heading, $14,000,000 shall be for the homeless grant program and $6,000,000 shall be for the homeless per diem program: Provided further, That such funds may be used for vocational training, rehabilitation, and outreach activities in addition to other authorized homeless assistance activities''. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment would provide, within the $17.2 billion medical care appropriation, $20 million for VA's homeless grant and per diem program. The amendment would make these funds available for vocational training, outreach, shelter, and other important activities to aid homeless veterans in a comprehensive manner. This should help meet the needs of the 275,000 veterans who are estimated to be homeless on any given night of the year. Together with funds already included in the bill, we will have provided $100 million in VA homeless assistance. This is a critical need. I commend the other Senators who worked on supporting this. I urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for their outstanding leadership on this important piece of legislation. Given the hard work that went into this bill, I wanted to first express my appreciation for what they have done. I am reminded of the old phrase ``too many cooks spoil the broth.'' Sometimes the legislative branch might be thought of in that way. As I offer this amendment, I have attempted to be mindful not to ``spoil the broth.'' As the former head of the Veterans Administration, the veterans portion of this bill continues to be near and dear to my heart. I am extremely pleased to see that the Appropriations Committee under the leadership of Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski has increased funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs by over $1.5 billion when compared to last year's budget. This represents a real increase in funding even when inflation is factored in. Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski are true friends of America's veterans, and we thank them. The amendment I have offered attempts to fill a void that exists with respect to services for veterans. When I was head of the Veterans Administration, it was clear to me that the VA could not be everywhere at all times. We relied heavily on other government agencies and private entities in our attempt to assure that all veterans could obtain the benefits they were entitled to and the assistance they needed. Today, in an era of balanced budgets, we cannot depend solely on federal dollars to solve every problem. The era of balanced budgets brings with it the era of partnership. The VA must continue to partner with other entities to fulfill its mission. For instance, in this year's Defense Authorization bill, I have authored language which would strongly encourage the VA to partner with the Department of Defense to provide health care for our nation's military personnel, their dependents, military retirees, and veterans. Today, I am advocating much stronger partnering between the VA and the private sector to fill the basic needs of our nation's veterans. The Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program was established in 1992 to fund the development and operation of transitional housing for homeless veterans who are free of alcohol and drugs. Over 2,000 beds have been made available under this program. Over $21 million has been appropriated for this purpose. Unfortunately, the current program is completely inadequate in the face of the overwhelming need which exists for housing for homeless veterans. The VA estimates that over 275,000 veterans are currently homeless on any given night. In a given year, over 500,000 veterans find themselves homeless at some point. In Atlanta, Georgia, nearly 10,000 veterans are in need of homeless assistance. This is clearly unacceptable. A mere 2,000 beds, while important, would not meet the needs of one state, let alone the entire nation. The program does not come close to fulfilling the entire need. Currently at approximately $7 million, it represents less than two-hundredths of a percent of the entire VA budget. The amendment I have offered would set aside $20 million for the Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem program. This would nearly triple the amount available for this program. It would also insure that funds are available for rehabilitation, vocational training, and outreach. These are critical elements because the list of successful programs have demonstrated that helping veterans become drug and alcohol free and employable is the best way to insure that they not find themselves homeless again. Furthermore, it is important to provide for successful outreach to veterans in need to insure that veterans are able to take advantage of the services, both public and private, that are available to them. Several groups have contacted me since I was elected to the Senate to seek support for the veterans assistance projects they are trying to establish or expand. I would like to take a few moments to describe two such programs. Last year, the Georgia Military College conducted a pilot program in which veterans voluntarily undergoing drug rehabilitation were offered a college course. The program was paid for through the proceeds of a golf tournament sponsored by the Atlanta Veterans Administration Medical Center. Eighteen veterans participated in the original program. In light of the initial success, the Georgia Military College seized on the idea of expanding the program not only to provide for education but to offer additional counseling and to provide shelter for the participants. The College is in the process of establishing a 5-year program aimed at improving the lives of Georgia's homeless veterans. This is the type of program that can truly make a difference. Instead of a ``band-aid'' approach, it offers true skills training, and the transitional housing these veterans need to be able to continue with the program. The National Veterans Foundation offers perhaps one of the most important services a nation can provide to our veterans in need--a human voice. The Foundation was founded by Floyd ``Shad'' Meshad in 1985 to help veterans recover from the pain of war. It has aided over a quarter of a million veterans, funding housing, legal services, job training, counseling, and rehabilitative programs. A major focus of the Foundation is its toll-free Information and Referral Line. Shad Meshad refers to it as a ``Clearing House'' to direct veterans and their families to the assistance they need. It is a real human voice on the other end of the line, not a recording. Over the years, the National Veterans Foundation has logged thousands of calls. Unfortunately, this critical outreach program is only available during business hours, Monday through Friday. Our veterans deserve the kind of service provided by the National Veterans Foundation--but they deserve it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. These are just two of the types of programs that deserve the support of the VA. In my view, it is only lack of resources which currently limits that support. It should be made clear that what we are talking about is not the old give-away of federal funds. This is not new ``corporate welfare.'' I was introduced to the Homeless Providers [[Page S8332]] Grant and Per Diem program fairly recently. I was surprised to learn that the Veterans Administration does not currently have a comprehensive grant program that could fund meritorious projects, but it does have this program. I believe the Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program combined with a future comprehensive grant program will leverage federal dollars with private, state, and local money to create a multiplier effect that will aid our nation's veterans for years to come. It is my intent to introduce legislation in the future to provide the necessary statutory authority to establish a comprehensive grant program that goes beyond the current homeless assistance program. Mr. President, I would like to thank Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski for their cooperation and support for this amendment. Without their leadership, this amendment would not be possible. I look forward to working closely with them in the future to further assist our nation's veterans. I yield the floor. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am proud to concur with Senators Cleland and Bond on this amendment. It will increase by $13 million the amount for the homeless grants for the VA. Nobody who fought to save our country should be out on the street. These men have borne the permanent wounds of war, some of which have caused deep-seated emotional problems--unable to find a job. What I like about the VA homeless program is, it not only provides a shelter but tries to get them focused on starting a new way of life. We have an outstanding one in Maryland. I am proud of it. And I look forward to accepting this amendment and say hats off to try to give the vets a new lease on life. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment (No. 3195) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3196 (Purpose: To require entities that operate homeless shelters to identify and provide certain counseling to homeless veterans) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator McCain, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], for Mr. McCain, proposes an amendment numbered 3196. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 93, between lines 18 and 19, insert the following: Sec. 423. (a) Each entity that receives a grant from the Federal Government for purposes of providing emergency shelter for homeless individuals shall-- (1) ascertain, to the extent practicable, whether or not each adult individual seeking such shelter from such entity is a veteran; and (2) provide each such individual who is a veteran such counseling relating to the availability of veterans benefits (including employment assistance, health care benefits, and other benefits) as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs considers appropriate. (b) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall jointly coordinate the activities required by subsection (a). (c) Entities referred to in subsection (a) shall notify the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of the number and identity of veterans ascertained under paragraph (1) of that subsection. Such entities shall make such notification with such frequency and in such form as the Secretary shall specify. (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an entity referred to subsection (a) that fails to meet the requirements specified in that subsection shall not be eligible for additional grants or other Federal funds for purposes of carrying out activities relating to emergency shelter for homeless individuals. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment will assist homeless veterans by requiring the federally funded homeless shelters report to the Veterans' Administration the number of homeless veterans they serve, and it seeks to ensure that these homeless veterans be provide information regarding the availability of veterans benefits. The amendment will improve the Federal Government's database on homeless veterans and will help homeless veterans know about programs which can help them address critical needs. It has been cleared on both sides. I urge its adoption, and yield the floor. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 1999. The amendment will assist homeless veterans and seek to eliminate some of the suffering of those less fortunate Americans who served their country in the military. This amendment will develop better methods for identifying veterans who utilize federally funded homeless shelters so that they can be educated about veteran benefits to which they are entitled, including Department of Veterans Affairs health care. A homeless shelter which receives federal funding would be required to inquire if a person, man or woman, entering the shelter is a veteran. This information would be used solely to assist in tracking the number of homeless veterans and providing counseling to the veteran regarding all available benefits, including job search, veterans preference rights, and medical benefits. Additionally, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development will coordinate these activities and specify a schedule for notifying the Department of Veteran Affairs of the status of these homeless veterans. It is the intent of this amendment to require homeless shelters to follow this procedures if they are to be eligible for additional Federal grants. Today, there is no easy or accurate way to track the number of homeless veterans in the United States. I find this astonishing. We just celebrated Independence Day, and this country owes a great deal to the men and women who bore arms to keep America free. It is astonishing to me that there would be no mechanism or process set up to accurately track or keep national records on homeless veterans. The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates the number of homeless veterans to be between 275,000 and 500,000 over the course of a year. Conservatively, one out of every three individuals who is sleeping in a doorway, alley, or box in our cities and rural communities has worn a uniform and served our country. Mr. President, the time is right, right now, to give a helping hand. Of the figures the Department of Veterans Affairs does acknowledge, homeless veterans are mostly male; about three percent are women. The vast majority are single; most come from poor, disadvantaged communities; forty percent suffer from mental illness; and half have substance abuse problems. More than seventy-five percent served our country for at least four years and Vietnam veterans account for more than forty percent of the total number estimated. Mr. President, there are many complex factors affecting all homelessness: extreme shortage of affordable housing, poverty, high unemployment in big cities, and disability. A large number of displaced and at-risk veterans live with lingering effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and substance abuse, compounded by a lack of family and social support networks. I do not mean to be critical of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs or the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in offering this amendment. To a certain degree the Department of Veterans Affairs is responsive in taking care of some homeless veterans. But the ones that are receiving critical medical treatment and veterans benefits are those who know that such programs exist. It is incumbent on our government to reach out to all homeless veterans. However, to do that, there must be a process in place. Homeless veterans need a coordinated effort, between the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, that provides secure housing and nutritional meals, essential physical health care, substance abuse aftercare and mental health counseling. They may need job assessment, training and placement assistance. To those that may argue that this is a new entitlement program, I [[Page S8333]] would say that these rights and benefits currently exist for veterans today. Why would we as a nation not do everything in our power to provide this help for those less fortunate veterans. Mr. President, our veterans deserve no less. I hope my colleagues will support this amendment and support our veterans. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, no one can speak for the veterans the way a former POW can. I wish to be associated with the remarks of Senator McCain and move the adoption of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to. The amendment (No. 3196) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3197 (Purpose: To provide funds for the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, once authorized) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator Mikulski, and Senator Rockefeller and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for himself, Mr. Rockefeller and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3197. Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 18, add the following new provisos prior to the period: ``: Provided further, That of the funds made available under this heading, $10,000,000 shall be for implementation of the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, contingent upon enactment of authorizing legislation''. Mr. BOND. This amendment has been cleared on both sides and would provide $10 million within the VA medical appropriation for the Primary Care Providers Incentive Act contingent upon authorization. Senators Mikulski and Rockefeller have been working to create a program to facilitate the employment of primary care personnel at the VA, including an education debt reduction program which Senator Mikulski has long been interested in establishing. This program is intended to improve the recruitment and retention of primary care providers, a very important element in the service to the VA. The Primary Care Providers Incentive Act seeks to update VA's educational assistance programs for prospective employees, particularly in areas where recruitment has been difficult. I urge the authorizing committees to act expeditiously on this important program. I urge adoption of the amendment. Mr. BOND. I yield to my distinguished colleague from Maryland. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, this does attempt to recruit the very best and brightest in the field of primary care to the VA. I proposed the debt reduction program, a student debt reduction program, back in 1992. Now, why do I approach this as debt reduction rather than scholarships? The scholarship program is very worthwhile, but there are many very talented people who have already graduated. They have a substantial student debt from studying either nursing or other primary care practices. What the $5 million would do would go towards reducing their student debt if they would enter VA services; they would get a year's worth of debt reduction for a year's worth of service. This way, we know they have completed their training, they have passed their licensing requirement, they are as fit for duty as the veterans they will serve. That is why we approached it from that policy standpoint. It also joins with the outstanding efforts being made by Senator Rockefeller to also develop other tools. I concur in the amendment, and I urge its adoption and ask it be accepted unanimously. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am delighted that $10 million to fund S. 2115, the Department of Veterans Affairs Primary Care Providers Incentive Act, has been provided through a managers' amendment to the VA/HUD appropriations bill. I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member of the VA/HUD Subcommittee, Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski, for their cooperation in making this possible. The new scholarship and educational debt reduction programs that are contained in S. 2115 are designed to revitalize the Health Professionals Education Assistance Program at VA. This program was originally intended to help VA to recruit and retain health professionals, but it has atrophied in recent years, despite an ongoing demand for educational financial aid by health professionals employed by or interested in working at VA. This funding will help breathe new life into the educational assistance programs, and provide much needed incentives to improve recruitment and retention of primary care providers. The VA health care system is in the midst of a major reorganization that is simultaneously reducing the current workforce and creating the need for more primary care health professionals. VHA's five-year strategic plan includes the activation and/or planning of nearly 400 community-based outpatient clinics, to be staffed by primary care health professionals. Yet hiring of these professionals and retraining of current employees, to prepare for these changes, has lagged behind the planning process. The Primary Care Providers Incentive Programs that will be funded through this amendment will motivate current employees to get training in new areas of need by providing scholarships, and assist in the recruitment of new primary care providers by helping to pay off student loans. VA needs educational assistance programs such as these to effectively recruit and retain trained primary care health professionals. In VA hospitals and clinics, some of the most difficult positions to fill are those of nurse practitioners, physical therapists, and occupational therapists. In my own state of West Virginia, for example, at one of the VA hospitals, there has been a vacancy for an occupational therapist for over 12 years! Two of the VA hospitals have no physical therapists at all. This is simply unacceptable. The plain fact is that starting salaries in the VA are not competitive with those in private practice. The Education Debt Reduction Program gives the VA a financial recruitment tool that will be an enormous help in making the VAMCs more competitive for these much-needed and highly skilled individuals. In fact, one of the most frequently asked questions by prospective new employees is whether or not VA has a debt reduction program. Clearly, this program will answer a critical need. But improving recruitment is only half of the story. Retention of trained people is equally important. Funding the employee incentive scholarship program can help solve this very real problem. Eligibility is limited to current VA employees, providing a way for vulnerable individuals to protect themselves against future RIFs by acquiring training in the new areas of need. This will go a long way toward improving staff morale at the VA, which has been severely undermined in the last few years due to the necessary streamlining that resulted from significant budget cuts. The educational assistance programs in S. 2115 are a valuable investment, enhancing morale of the VA health care providers in the short term, while building a workforce that matches VA's needs and improves veterans' health care in the long run. In the coming months, I will be working with my colleagues on the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs to authorize these worthwhile programs. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (No. 3197) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. [[Page S8334]] Amendment No. 3198 (Purpose: To provide for the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation) Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senators Sarbanes and Mikulski and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond] for Mr. Sarbanes, for himself and Ms. Mikulski, proposes an amendment numbered 3198. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: At the appropriate place, insert the following: SEC. ____. NATIONAL FALLEN FIREFIGHTERS FOUNDATION. (a) Establishment and Purposes.--Section 202 of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5201) is amended-- (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following: ``(1) primarily-- ``(A) to encourage, accept, and administer private gifts of property for the benefit of the National Fallen Firefighters' Memorial and the annual memorial service associated with the memorial; and ``(B) to, in coordination with the Federal Government and fire services (as that term is defined in section 4 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2203)), plan, direct, and manage the memorial service referred to in subparagraph (A)''; (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``and Federal'' after ``non-Federal''; (3) in paragraph (3)-- (A) by striking ``State and local'' and inserting ``Federal, State, and local''; and (B) by striking ``and'' at the end; (4) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and (5) by adding at the end the following: ``(5) to provide for a national program to assist families of fallen firefighters and fire departments in dealing with line-of-duty deaths of those firefighters; and ``(6) to promote national, State, and local initiatives to increase public awareness of fire and life safety in coordination with the United States Fire Administration.'' (b) Board of Directors of Foundation.--Section 203(g)(1) of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5202(g)(1)) is amended by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following: ``(A) appointing officers or employees;''. (c) Administrative Services and Support.--Section 205 of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation Act (36 U.S.C. 5204) is amended to read as follows: ``SEC. 205. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AND SUPPORT. ``(a) In General.--During the 10-year period beginning on the date of enactment of the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, the Administrator may-- ``(1) provide personnel, facilities, and other required services for the operation of the Foundation; and ``(2) request and accept reimbursement for the assistance provided under paragraph (1). ``(b) Reimbursement.--Any amounts received under subsection (a)(2) as reimbursement for assistance shall be deposited in the Treasury to the credit of the appropriations then current and chargeable for the cost of providing that assistance. ``(c) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal personnel or stationery may be used to solicit funding for the Foundation.''. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment by Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski affects the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation, which is a federally chartered corporation dedicated to helping families of fallen firefighters in assisting State and local efforts to recognize firefighters who die in the line of duty. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Fire Administration, is a member of the foundation's board. Senator Sarbanes sponsored the original legislation creating this foundation. His amendment, along with Senator Mikulski, makes some technical changes to the law and eliminates the cap on staff. We understand it has been approved by FEMA. It has been cleared by the Commerce Committee. It would have no impact on spending and will ensure that the foundation is able to employ the staff it needs to operate. I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield to the sponsors. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his support for this amendment. The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation has done an absolutely outstanding job. I think it bears out the wisdom of the Congress in establishing it. The services they are now providing to the families of deceased firefighters are really exemplary. We have had many communications from spouses, from children, from parents, of how much the activities of the Fallen Firefighters Foundation mean to them. They have enlisted very significant support from the private sector for their activities. These changes are technical in nature in order to enable the foundation to carry out its responsibilities with greater efficacy and greater efficiency. I didn't want to let this opportunity pass without underscoring the tremendously fine work that is being done by the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I concur with the remarks of my distinguished Senator. He has really done the heavy lifting on this policy issue. I want to thank him for doing this. I absolutely concur with the direction in which we are going. I think it will be an important memorial and a way to staff it properly. I urge this amendment be agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (No. 3198) was agreed to. Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote. Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3199 (Purpose: To restore veterans tobacco-related benefits as in effect before the enactment of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century) Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will get started on this amendment. Mr. BOND. Might I ask for clarification? I ask the Senator which amendment he has that he wants to discuss. Mr. WELLSTONE. This is the amendment that will restore benefits to veterans for smoking-related diseases. Mr. President, this amendment which I now send to the desk is on behalf of myself, Senator Murray and Senator McCain. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Wellstone] for himself, Mrs. Murray, and Mr. McCain, proposes an amendment numbered 3199. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allard). Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: On page 16, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following: Sec. 110. (a)(1) Section 1103 of title 38, United States Code, is repealed. (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 11 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to section 1103. (b) Upon the enactment of this Act-- (1) the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall not make any estimate of changes in direct spending outlays under section 252(d) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 for any fiscal year resulting from the enactment of this section; and (2) the Chairmen of the Committees on the Budget shall not make any adjustments in direct spending outlays for purposes of the allocations, functional levels, and aggregates under title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for any fiscal year resulting from the enactment of this section. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, my amendment would restore benefits to veterans with smoking-related diseases. How would we do that? It is simple. The TEA 21 highway program canceled the disability benefits that veterans would have received under existing rules and procedures, and it used that money instead to pay for more highway projects. My amendment would simply return the favor. It would repeal that offset from the highway bill. Let me go through the procedural history of this to review how we got to where we are today. This offset first appeared in the President's 1999 budget request. The administration, I think, wildly overestimated the cost of benefits for smoking-related disabilities. But this money was then taken from veterans and it was used elsewhere. There is a tremendous amount of indignation in the veterans community over this, and there should be. Congress decided to play the same game. In the budget resolution they agreed to deny benefits to veterans and use the money [[Page S8335]] elsewhere just like it had been done by the administration. But the budget priorities were a little different. The savings were used for highway projects. That didn't happen on the Senate side, but by the time it came back from the House, that is what happened. That was the major reason I voted against that bill. The appropriate place to repeal this offset and restore veterans' benefits would have been in the technical corrections to the TEA 21 highway bill. Senator Rockefeller and I intended to offer an amendment which would have done just that, but we never got a chance because that amendment was folded into another conference report so we could never get an up-or-down vote. We all know that conference reports, as I just said, cannot be amended. As I have said before on the floor, it is only right that we should have a clean vote on this issue. This is not only a question of veterans, it is a question of accountability. There is simply no excuse for hiding behind procedural gimmicks to avoid responsibility. Some have said we have already voted on this bill, or we have already voted on this question, but I don't think that is true. Let me explain. The two votes we had on the budget resolution did not deal directly with this question. Senators got a chance to pretend they were for veterans and against the offset, knowing that 5 minutes later we could cast a vote in the opposite direction. We had some camouflage about doing a study sometime in the future. But I think we all recognize it was only a study. And the vote on the IRS reform bill was not a clean up-or-down vote; it was only a procedural vote, a point of order. We need to have a clean vote up or down, no subterfuge, no trickery. It is not enough to take these benefits away from veterans. Congress will add insult to injury by not having a clean up-or-down vote on this question. I think veterans should take a clear position on this issue, and that should go on the Record. Now, some may object to this amendment because it is legislation on an appropriations bill, or they may think that this appropriations bill is the wrong place to remedy this particular problem. Let me remind my colleagues that this offset was a jurisdictional raid to begin with. Transportation conferees stole the money without ever going through the Veterans' Affairs Committee. This was originally the Veterans' Affairs Committee. If we now repeal this offset through the Veterans' Affairs Committee, we will have to pay for it by taking even more money away from veterans. The highway bill took that money away. It was not taken away by the Veterans' Committee. Nobody wants to do that. Nobody wants to take more funding away from veterans. There are a few misconceptions that I would like to clear up. First and foremost, compensation for veterans with smoking-related illnesses was not a new program. It was not an expansion of a program. It was a benefit to which disabled veterans were entitled to under existing law. Veterans who had become addicted to tobacco because of their service in the military had the right to apply for disability. The highway bill took that right away. It is a very tough test that the veterans have to meet. Only 300 have passed it. These were not special rules, either. Those veterans had to meet the same legal and evidentiary requirements as for any other service-connected disability. They had to prove that their addiction began in the military service. They had to prove that their addiction continued without interruption. They had to prove that their addiction resulted in an illness. They had to prove that their addiction resulted in a disability. There is another thing that ought to be pointed out tonight. We are not really talking about $17 billion here. Let's be clear about it. OMB first came up with that figure based on an estimate of 500,000 claims granted every year. But over the past 6 years, a grand total of only 8,000 veterans have applied, and only 300 of those claims have been granted. CBO came in with a lower, but still high, estimate of $10.5 billion. But the TEA 21 conferees needed more money, so they took advantage of the higher OMB number to pay for a huge increase in funding for highways. The administration's cost projections are based on many, many unknowns. More importantly, OMB is assuming VA will grant 100 percent of all claims but, to date--listen to this, colleagues--VA has granted only 5 percent of the claims. The test veterans have to meet is simply much harder than OMB seems to think. There are a number of other unknowns with the administration's methodology. On the percentage of veterans who currently smoke or are heavy smokers, VA experts made what we consider to be a questionable assumption that veterans who smoke more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime would have the same disease rates as smokers; the percentage of veterans who may file claims for tobacco-related illnesses that are already receiving compensation for those or other conditions; the rate at which the VA can adjudicate these claims. There are lots of assumptions I would question. Let me get right down to the very nitty-gritty of what this amendment is about. My first choice would be to keep the old rules for deciding disability claims--the ones we had before the TEA 21 highway bill. I don't see why Congress should go out of its way to deny disability benefits to veterans. Don't we have better places to look for spending offsets? Back in World War II, these veterans had free and discounted cigarettes included in their rations, and those packs didn't even have warning labels on them. Soldiers were encouraged to smoke to relieve the stress of military strain. And now some of them are suffering the consequences and they are not getting the compensation. That is what is so outrageous about what we have done, and that is what this amendment intends to correct. The second choice--even if Congress does decide to deny these benefits, I find it hard to understand why this money should be taken away from veterans' programs. I believe, at the very least, it should stay with veterans. It is quite one thing to argue, look, though they deserve this compensation, they have to meet strict criteria to get this compensation. We handed cigarettes out like candy and we know veterans became addicted. They should have been entitled to this benefit. It is quite one thing to take away the compensation benefit, which we have done; it is adding insult to injury to not at least have to put that money, scored by OMB and CBO, back into veterans' health care. That is why I come to the floor and I speak with so much indignation about this. That is why Senator Murray from Washington and Senator McCain from Arizona join me in this amendment. If this offset proposal had been considered in the Veterans' Affairs Committee, as it should have been, I doubt that it would have seen the light of day. But if it had passed the committee, those savings would have remained within the committee's jurisdiction. Those savings would have been plowed right back into veterans' programs. That would have been my second choice. So let me be clear again. The first choice: This compensation should have gone to the veterans. This is an injustice; it really is. Secondly, if we weren't going to do that, it should have stayed in the Veterans' Committee. I can tell you that committee would have at least made sure that this money would have been invested in veterans' health care. Only because it is late at night and because there are other colleagues who have amendments--trust me, I think I can talk, without notes, for 2 hours about the holes right now--gaping holes--in veterans' health care, in the financing and delivery of veterans' health care. After all, we are running out of excuses for underfunding veterans' programs. Remember, for many years, Congress used deficit reduction as an excuse. That was the justification for flat-lining the VA budget in the 1997 budget deal. By the way, the flat-line budget is not going to work. It doesn't take into account inflation. It doesn't take into account all of the veterans now living to be 85--an ever-aging veterans population. It won't work. But now the deficit is gone and we can no longer claim that there are no offsets available. The first time an offset comes down the pike, and it is a real whopper, Congress immediately whisks it away to pay for other programs-- [[Page S8336]] programs that obviously have a much higher priority. I can't imagine how Congress can make its budget priorities any clearer. I have to tell you that if our priority is to live up to our commitment to veterans, then I believe we should have 100 votes for this amendment. The VA-HUD appropriations bill does include a significant $222 million increase over the President's request in funding for veterans' health care. I thank my colleagues, the Senators from Missouri and Maryland, for their very fine leadership. Let me bring something to my colleagues' attention. As the Veterans Affairs' Committee wrote in its letter to Appropriations, an increase of over $500 million is necessary to maintain the current level of services. My argument is that not only did we not give the veterans the compensation they would have gotten if we hadn't raided--really, what was their funding for their addiction, for their illness--but to add insult to injury, if we didn't do that, we should have at least put it into veterans' health care because we are not properly funding health care for veterans in this country. Before the budget deal, we just simply did not take into account the inflation that is taking place. The budget is not enough. Finally, let me be clear about what this amendment will do and what it will not do. First of all, this amendment does not cancel or deny any transportation projects. Those projects are already in law. This amendment would not affect them in any way. Second, this amendment that I have introduced with Senator Murray and Senator McCain would not trigger a budget sequester. It includes the same protection against sequestration, the same budget gimmickry that was included in the TEA 21 bill. It may be argued that this amendment would be using the surplus to pay for veterans' benefits. I would argue that the highway bill was spending the surplus because it was using an unreasonably high estimate for this offset. That is going to happen whether or not we repeal that offset. But to the extent we do restore previous law on veterans' disability benefits and waive the Budget Act--I am asking colleagues to waive the Budget Act--the cost is not going to be anywhere near $17 billion. I want to be clear about that. In the summer of 1997, the VA said it wouldn't be able to process more than a couple billion dollars worth of claims over 5 years. Mr. President, and colleagues, let me just summarize. I have decided to really try to be brief. There is a lot that I feel strongly about, and there is a lot that I would like to talk about. But I think my colleagues from Missouri and Maryland were gracious enough to let me come to the floor with this amendment and get to work on it. I summarize this way. This amendment would restore benefits to veterans with smoking-related diseases. This amendment that I introduce on behalf of myself and Senator Murray and Senator McCain does what we should have done--to have provided this funding for compensation to go to veterans for smoking-related disease. We did not do that through a whole lot of gimmickry and a whole lot of zigs and zags. We took that funding away from veterans. My second choice would have been to have at least invested this funding into veterans' health care. We have got so many needs for those that are 85, and elderly veterans; so many needs for veterans that are walking around and struggling with PTSD; so many needs for more drop-in centers; so many needs to fill the gaps in our current VA health care system. And we didn't put the money into the veterans' health care. Then, finally, I want to make real clear what this will do and what it will not do. I don't want anybody to be able to say that we are now going to cancel any transportation projects. That is not what this amendment does. I don't want anybody to say it is going to trigger a budget sequester. It has the same protection that we had against sequestration. I don't want anybody to argue that we will waive a budget order, that we will have to go into a surplus. We have a huge surplus. We put the surplus into the highways. Now, I am just saying take it back, even though you don't take it from the highways, because you have already funded that. You should at least take that money that belongs to the veterans that should have gone to them directly for compensation. I don't think we can avoid an up-or-down vote on this any longer. We should have a clear up-or-down vote. We should all be accountable. I feel very strongly about this, and I hope that I will receive very strong support for this amendment. Several Senators addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Alaska has another amendment. I was going to say that I believe the Senator from New Mexico, the chairman of the Budget Committee, will raise a point of order tomorrow. As the Senator from Minnesota knows, the Senator from Maryland and I have supported his position. There will be a Budget Act point of order. But I ask for the yeas and nays on Senator Wellstone's amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays were ordered. Ms. MIKULSKI addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, first of all, I would like to thank Senator Wellstone for his cooperation in this debate, and for his willingness to stay on the floor. I also appreciate his remarks. I know the passion that the Senator from Minnesota has on behalf of veterans. He spoke in behalf of atomic veterans, and in behalf of a group of veterans in his own State that have been ignored. He has spoken for the homeless, for the mentally ill veterans, and also for the need for long-term care for the veterans. I thank him for that. Mr. President, when we debated both the highway bill and the budget bill, I supported the sense-of-the-Senate resolution that we not raid the veterans' medical care. Thence, when we voted on the highway bill, I voted for final passage, but was very clear saying we should not fix America's potholes on the backs of America's veterans and their needs for health care, many of whom bear the permanent wounds of war. I thank the Senator for raising this issue again. I want the Senator from Minnesota to know that I support his policy position on this. I, too, believe that promises made should be promises kept to the veterans, and we should find other ways of funding that highway bill. I look forward to further work with him on this topic. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to offer my strong support, as an original cosponsor of the amendment offered by Mr. Wellstone to the VA/ HUD Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1999 which will rightfully transfer approximately $10.5 billion back to the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans programs. I understand from the managers of the bill that the vote on this critical amendment will not occur until tomorrow. I would have voted for this provision if I was not called out of town on a prior commitment. Furthermore, I urge my colleagues to show their support for veterans and vote for this measure. On July 8, 1998, I submitted for the Record a statement regarding veterans' health care activities for tobacco-related illnesses and disabilities. At that time, I had every intention to offer an amendment to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill that would restore the $10.5 billion in funding that was so egregiously and eagerly taken from our nation's veterans to fund pork-laden highway programs in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998 (ISTEA). Unfortunately, there was simply no possibility that this amendment would be adopted, simply because of the inflexibility of the Appropriations Committee's allocation of funds between the Transportation and VA/HUD Committees. Because of the arcane rules of the Senate, I and my cosponsors are precluded from righting this profound wrong that has been perpetrated against those who have served and sacrificed for our country. I am not sure that our efforts will be more successful this evening, but I do know, that it is [[Page S8337]] the right thing to do. This issue is far from dead. It is important, I believe, that my colleagues fully understand the facts regarding the funding shortfall for veterans health care and compensation for tobacco related diseases. First, the Department of Veterans Affairs critical funding shortfall is a result of President Clinton's legislative proposal to Congress to disallow service-connected disability or death benefits based on tobacco-related diseases arising after discharge from the military. Congress, eager to fund pork-laden highway programs, then transferred nearly $10.5 billion to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998 (ISTEA), H.R. 2400, earlier this year. This egregious act was fully supported by President Clinton. Second, on April 2, 1998 the Senate voted for an amendment sponsored by Senators Domenici, Lott, and Craig on the Balanced Budget Act which transferred approximately $10.5 billion over five years from the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans' tobacco-related diseases to the ISTEA bill for transportation related projects. I voted for this amendment, in part, because I believed that the tobacco companies, rather than the taxpayers, should bear the burden for tobacco-related diseases caused partially by smoking and using other tobacco products while they were in military service. Military service did not force servicemembers to smoke, but I acknowledge that for morale reasons, the services made cigarettes available for free or at inexpensive prices. The services also give servicemembers condoms and birth control pills at no cost to military personnel, but that does not mean that they want our men and women in uniform to be promiscuous. Third, on the tobacco bill, I sponsored legislation that would provide not less than $600 million per year to the Department of Veterans' Affairs for veterans' health care activities for tobacco- related illnesses and disability and directed the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs to assist such veterans as is appropriate. The amendment would have provided a minimum of $3 billion over five years for those veterans that are afflicted with tobacco-related illnesses and disability. Additionally, the amendment would have provided smoking cessation care to veterans from various programs established under the tobacco bill. Now that the tobacco bill has been returned to the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, I feel more compelled to rectify this situation. As a conferee on the ISTEA bill, I refused to support and sign the ISTEA Conference Report. I opposed the ISTEA Conference Report for a number of reasons, particularly because of my objections to shifting critical veterans funding to support pork barrel spending in this massive highway bill. It seems that the Congress has no hesitation in breaking budget agreements, when it suits their own purposes to do so, to spend far more on transportation than agreed to in the balanced budget plan. What's worse, it seems that the Congress has no problem with robbing from veterans, whose programs have been seriously under funded for years, to pay for this luxury. Furthermore, Mr. President, the facts are clear with respect to tobacco related health care costs and the impact on veterans: Tobacco-related diseases, for example, include cancers of the lip, oral cavity, and pharynx; esophagus; pancreas; larynx; lung; bladder; kidney; coronary heart disease; cerebrovascular disease (stroke); various circulatory diseases; and chronic bronchitis. The Department of Veteran Affairs' (VA) fiscal year 1997 expenditures for health care for veterans with tobacco-related illnesses are estimated to be $2.6-$3.6 billion. In fiscal year 1997, the VA treated 405,000 patients with at least one tobacco-related illness. In fiscal year 1997, the VAs' average cost per patient with at least one tobacco-related illness was $8,800. In fiscal year 1997, patients with tobacco-related illnesses accounted for over 6.5 million visits to the VAs' health care facilities. The projected additional health care costs for tobacco related- illnesses for the VA are estimated to be $2.9 billion over the next five years. The projected additional health care costs for tobacco related- illnesses for the VA are estimated to be negligible for fiscal year 1999. The projected cost for tobacco claims in fiscal year 1999 is about $500 million based on the number of claims that could be processed. Processing time for claims is expected to increase with an influx of tobacco claims. Our nation's veterans should not be excluded from payments by tobacco companies for health care costs associated with tobacco-related diseases. The failure to address the tobacco-related health care needs of our men and women who faithfully served their country in uniform would be wrong. Congress cannot continue to rob from veterans, whose programs have been seriously under funded for years, to pay for these and other special interest projects. Mr. President, our veterans deserve no less. I hope my colleagues will support this amendment and support our veterans. Thank you. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, if there is more comment on this amendment, I will wait. I ask my colleague from Alaska whether he intends to move on to another amendment, or comment on this amendment. Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, in response to my friend, it would be my intent to ask unanimous consent that the amendment be set aside so I can offer mine. Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, other colleagues may want to speak to that. I will take 2 minutes, I say to all of my colleagues. I would like to thank the Senator from Maryland for her very kind remarks. I have to say that I will not go now through the technical part of what happened. I am telling you that this was a real injustice. We sort of went on record saying we wouldn't do this, and we have done it. We shouldn't have. This amendment restores that funding to where it should go. I wish to say to my colleagues that we have a huge surplus. We really essentially took some of that money and put it in the highways. We shouldn't have. We got the highways. But we left the veterans out in the cold. They know that. All of these veterans organizations know that. I will say this tomorrow again. All these veterans know that. Senator Murray, Senator McCain, and many of my colleagues know it as well. I hope that there will be very strong support for this, Democrats and Republicans alike, because, again, the money should have gone to deal with the problem, to deal with veterans who really are struggling with illness based upon addiction to tobacco, and, if not, it should have gone into the veterans' health care. It should not have gone, as my colleague from Maryland said, to pay for additional highways, which is what happened. So let's correct a wrong. Please. Let's have a very strong vote on this tomorrow morning. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska. Amendment No. 3200 Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is set aside, and the clerk will report. The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Alaska (Mr. Murkowski) proposes an amendment numbered 3200. Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that readi