---

Hon. Rush D. Holt
Of New Jersey
In The House Of Representatives
Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Mr. Holt: Madam Speaker, I'm pleased the House has acted on this important legislation.

I want to compliment my colleague, the chairman of this subcommittee, Mr. Edwards of Texas, for the work he and his colleagues put into this bill. The priorities in this bill send a strong message to our military servicemembers and our veterans that we are serious about honoring our obligations to them.

To help deal with the constant problem of medical inflation and the rising costs of health care, this bill provides $37,122,000,000 for the Veterans' Health Administration--an increase of $4,442,265,000 or 13.6 percent over the FY 2007 level and $2,509,329,000 more than the President requested. This increase is long overdue and vitally needed.

Since the attacks on 9/11, more than 1.5 million American military personnel have been deployed in support of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. When those men and women eventually separate from the service, a large number of them will require ongoing medical care for the wounds and injuries they've suffered in service to our country, particularly for mental health needs and traumatic brain injuries, TBI. This bill provides $604,325,858 to increase funding for treatment in these areas.

We all know that TBI has, tragically, become the signature injury of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to providing an overall higher level of funding for medical care for all veterans, this bill directs that all future budget requests include TBI as a Select Program--in other words, as a dedicated line item. That designation will help ensure that TBI treatment and rehabilitation programs receive the funding and focus required to meet the needs of veterans who are living with this life-altering injury.

This bill also recognizes that substance abuse and post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, are plaguing record numbers of veterans. The National Center for PTSD has reported that 58 percent of veterans who have substance abuse problems also have lifetime PTSD and are three times more likely to have PTSD than veterans who do not suffer from substance abuse disorders. To deal with this challenge, the bill provides $428,873,754 for the Substance Abuse Program, an increase of $70,880,754 over the President's request.

Finally, this bill contains an important accountability provision that the Bush administration opposed.

Specifically, the committee mandates in this bill that the Department of Veterans Affairs provide quarterly reports on the financial status and service level status of the VHA and each of its Veterans Integrated Service Networks, VISNs. The reports must contain the time required for new patients to get their first appointment, the time required for established patients to get their next appointment, the number of patients on wait lists for inpatient services or any mental health or substance abuse program, the number of staff shortages for mental health services, the planned and actual expenditure rates for contracted mental health care, and the number of unique veterans and patients being served. Specific reports on the blind rehabilitation service, OIF/OEF veterans, prosthetics, and substance abuse programs are also mandated in this bill.

I am pleased that Chairman Edwards and his colleagues are taking this approach to auditing the VA's programs. We all know that veterans are waiting longer to get their first or follow up appointments with their primary care providers. These provisions will help us establish just how serious the problem is and whether inadequate resources, poor management, or both are contributing to these delays in the delivery of vital health care services to our veterans. For these and the other reasons I've cited, I look forward to this bill's final passage by the Congress.

---

Speech Of
Hon. David Dreier
Of California
In The House Of Representatives
Monday, June 25, 2007

Mr. Dreier: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend and colleague Mr. Peter King for introducing this important resolution, which I was proud to cosponsor. I can think of no one more deserving of being honored by this body than Prime Minister Blair. For over a decade, he has proven to be a tremendous friend and ally of the United States, and we simply cannot say anything today that would adequately honor the contribution he has made to his country, to our country and to the cause of freedom throughout the globe.

And we know he has not made this great contribution without significant sacrifice. We have watched him at times endure an enormous amount of criticism and personal attack for the principled positions he has taken. But Tony Blair has steadfastly demonstrated what true leadership is. It does not always entail easy or popular choices. It does not always elicit cheers of support. Leadership in the 21st century, as we have come to realize, will often mean taking a very difficult stand against the enemies of freedom.

I believe that history will regard this principled leadership very highly. And as Mr. King's resolution highlights, this leadership has been exemplified throughout Tony Blair's entire tenure as Prime Minister. By brokering the Good Friday Agreement, he has ushered in a new, peaceful era in Northern Ireland, bringing together all parties and giving them a critical role in their own government. He has been our close ally in every major conflict that we have faced together-- Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq.

He was the first foreign leader to visit Ground Zero after September 11, 2001, and attended President Bush's address to the joint session of Congress 9 days after those tragic attacks. And no other ally has contributed more forces to the global war on terror. The United States owes a great debt of gratitude to Prime Minister Blair and to the great people of his nation. We honor their sacrifices and their deep friendship.

---

(Mr. Cohen asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Cohen: Madam Speaker, conditions on the ground in Iraq are not getting any better. In fact, things are getting worse.

During a 48-hour period last week, 14 of our soldiers were killed, and then over the weekend another eight were killed in one day. April and May were two of the most violent months for our troops since the beginning of the war. It is clear the President's troop surge or escalation plan is not working. In fact, last week General David Petraeus acknowledged there would not be any significant improvements in Iraq by September.

Why is that significant? Because that's when President Bush said we would be able to see if the plan was working. The fact is we won't know in September because it's not working, according to the President's own general.

Then this week, two respected Republican Senators, Senator Lugar and Senator Voinovich, said the current policy is not working and a significant change is needed. The comments of these Senators, coupled with those of General Petraeus, should serve as a wake-up call to congressional Republicans. Join us in ending this war, bringing our troops home, and saving America's face.

---

(Mr. John Lewis (D-GA) of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Lewis of Georgia: Madam Speaker, I rise today to add my voice to others who are calling for an end to the war in Iraq. We must end this war and we must end it now. We cannot wait, and we must not wait.

Every month, every week, every day, every hour, every minute, every second, every moment that another young man OR another young woman is killed, their innocent blood is on all of our hands. We have a moral obligation, a mission and a mandate to bring this madness to an end.

Nothing, but nothing good can come out of this war. It is destroying Iraq and destroying the very soul of our Nation.

As Members of Congress, we must find a way to stop it and stop it now.

---

(Mr. DeFAZIO asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

Mr. DeFazio: Vice President Cheney, in his usual arrogant way, refused to disclose the deliberations of his secret energy task force that gave billions to big oil and increased our dependence on OPEC. He claimed executive privilege.

Then his office illegally disclosed the identity of a secret undercover CIA officer, Valerie Plame. They claimed executive privilege.

Now, we find that the Vice President is mishandling classified information in volumes in violation of Executive Branch regulations. And we have the astonishing assertion that the Vice President is not part of the executive branch. Rip up those civics text books kids. Dick Cheney is above the law and the Constitution of the United States, according to his attorney. Or perhaps he's just that higher power that George Bush refers to every time he has to make a difficult decision like launching an unneeded war in Iraq.

---

The Speaker pro tempore: Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sestak) is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. Sestak: Madam Speaker, I rise to speak for a few minutes about Iraq. Every Member of the House brings their experience with them. Mine happens to be 31 years in the military, including leading men and women in war. I have operated with the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, entered the DMZ in North Korea, dealt with the Iranians at sea in the Persian Gulf.

When I saw us about to go into Iraq, I was concerned. I felt it was a tragic misadventure, not because of Iraq solely by itself, but because of what it would do to our strategic security around this globe.

I flew with my battle group over Iraq just prior to the war, after having left the war in Afghanistan. I have always been taken in the military by the power of our diplomacy, the power of our diplomats, because they are the ones who often have prevented us from having to use our military. I honestly believe there is a way to redeploy from Iraq that does not mean just getting out nor just bringing the troops home. Those are the wrong words.

Iraq is a set piece in a strategic environment around this world that the United States has interest in. And there is a way to end this tragic misadventure, to redeploy out of Iraq so we might place our men and women where they need to be in Afghanistan, the western Pacific, and here at home to improve the readiness of our Army that has not one, not one active Guard or Reserve unit that is in a state of readiness to deploy anywhere to any other contingency in this world.

And that strategy is really brought about by changing the behavior, in particular, of Iran, who I have operated with at sea, and Iraq and Syria, and the other nations in that region. We will not do that by doubling down once again on a bad bet with a surge of military forces. I know. I have watched it happen before.

This can only be resolved by a strategy that sets a date, a date within a year by which we will redeploy out of Iraq, because that date is not just for ending this war, it has the value of a different strategy to leave an unfailed state, as Iran, recognizing that we will no longer be in that state, but we will remain in the region at our bases that we do have in Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates; and our carrier battle group and our amphibious ready group in that region because we have interests there.

But by that date we change the behavior of Iran who does not want to deal by itself with the 2 million Iraqis who have been dislocated from their homes and have yet to overflow their borders, as 2 million others have.

And Syria, that is Sunni, does not want as it fuels, after we leave there, a civil war, would be fueling the Sunnis against the Shia that the Iranians might be supporting. Neither nation wants a proxy war.

If we work diplomatically with a date certain, because they don't want us to remain in that nation, we have the ability to bring to the table the interested parties who can work on the extreme elements in that nation, Iran and Syria; and we deal with the center, the government of Baghdad, with a date certain that makes them recognize they must also step up to the plate and assume responsibility for the country which they have done and presently have to do as we keep a lid politically and militarily on a simmering pot.

There is a strategy which I believe we need to pursue, Republican and Democrat together, that sets a date of approximately a year, which gives us time to safely redeploy. Because, remember, it took us 6 months to redeploy out of Somalia with only about 8,000 troops, when we have 160,000 in Iraq with over 100,000 U.S. contractors. We need time to safely redeploy with a strategy that works to bring Iran and Syria to the table because they have interests in accommodating stability as we remain in that region because of our interests, providing air cover if necessary from above, from bases outside or Special Forces from outside, as we begin to address our other security interests around the world and here at home.

---