Official Congressional Record
Madam President, reserving the right to object, it saddens me that we are here because I wish we were here with a vote on the Senate floor to pass the Major Richard Star Act and other pieces of legislation that are so important to veterans, their families, and their caregivers across the country. The Senator from Connecticut outlined all the things that he says his amendment to this legislation would do and be supported by, but the reality is, the Senator from Connecticut has tried time and time again to pass legislation similar to that, never to succeed. Earlier this year, I was on the Senate floor at my seat here, standing here telling folks that maybe for once we will quit sponsoring pieces of legislation that benefit veterans but never get to the point in which they are actually passed. And I committed myself to finding a way in which passage of the legislation could occur, not just remarks on the Senate floor or in committee or in gatherings of veterans or speaking to our constituents at home of our support. In most instances, this would be the Major Richard Star Act, which has nearly every Member of the Senate as a cosponsor and many Members of the House of Representatives as cosponsors. But that has been the case for 6 years. I was looking for a path that would result in a result. At the heart of the debate today are those tens of millions of servicemembers, veterans and caregivers, survivors and family members, and VA employees who would benefit by the legislation that I have introduced--the legislation that the Senator from Connecticut is offering to accept with some amendments. These men and women have been waiting years--years--for the lifesaving benefits this bill would provide. What we will decide today will determine whether they can access the mental health treatments they desperately need, whether they can put food on the table and pay their bills on time, whether they are able to remarry after the loss of their servicemember or veteran spouse without sacrificing benefits they need to support their families, and much more. The point of that sentence or few sentences is that this is a comprehensive piece of legislation that begins with the Richard Star Act--the one that I said was sponsored by most Members of Congress but never sees the outcome those veterans and military retirees deserve. The stakes in this debate are high. I think the legislation we are talking about--perhaps debating about--is one of the most consequential pieces of legislation that will affect veterans, their family members, caregivers, and others certainly in my time as chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs and perhaps my time in the U.S. Senate. I have been a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee 14 years in the House and now 15 years in the Senate. I have devoted effort, time, and attention to making sure we do right by those who serve our country. I appreciate my colleague Senator Blumenthal--in fact, our shared determination, our dedication to the Richard Star Act. He has tried, as I understand by his words, eight times offering a unanimous consent, and each time, that effort has been unsuccessful. Occasionally, I get complimented for effort. I appreciate compliments at any stage of what we are doing here, but what we really ought to be interested in is getting results--not results for a compliment but results because it makes such a difference in so many veterans' lives. Today, the Senator from Connecticut--it is another example of his attempt to pass legislation--usually without an offset but today using an alternative offset. I respect his goal, but once again, as of July 22, the Congressional Budget Office has again confirmed to the committee that a rescission of unobligated funds to the Department of Defense in H.R. 1 does not offset mandatory spending and therefore does not qualify under the requirements of law to the Senate--excuse me--the requirements of law as the Senate does its work but as the House and Congress are obligated to abide by. This plan does not meet the needs of the moment, and it will result in the failure by Congress once again to deliver to America's heroes. There is a simple choice before us: We can either keep repeating failed efforts that result in no progress delivering for veterans and military families or we can step up and provide leadership needed to finally get them the help they need and deserve--action and results. We want action that has results. This is why shortly after this conversation, this discussion between the Senator from Connecticut and I, I will be asking for a unanimous consent agreement myself to pass the legislation with an offset that the Congressional Budget Office has determined to be a viable offset. The Take Care of America's Veterans Act would expand benefits and healthcare to millions of veterans and their families, caregivers, and survivors across our Nation. It combines 60--I think our committee, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, deservedly has the reputation of working in a bipartisan way to get results. We combined, in our efforts to get the Richard Star Act, other pieces of legislation that are hugely important to the veteran community--60 pieces of bipartisan legislation chosen in this process of putting this package together for their sponsorship and support by Democrats and Republicans. This is not a partisan effort; this is a desire, an effort to accomplish something that would benefit all of us who have made efforts to support our veterans and to make certain that we do it in a way that gets 60 votes in the U.S. Senate. That includes the Major Richard Star Act, of which the Senator from Connecticut has been a longtime advocate. That is to address a longstanding injustice--something that is totally wrong--by allowing medically retired, combat-disabled veterans--they are not allowed to receive both benefits. This would allow medically retired, combat- disabled veterans to receive both disability compensation from the VA and their earned retirement pay from the DOD. The Senator from Connecticut talks about our committee and the committee that he serves on as well, the Armed Services Committee. The Armed Services Committee has jurisdiction, but there are so many veterans that have consequences from the current law that we decided--I decided it was time for us to step forward and find a path forward. This legislation, in addition to the underlying Richard Star Act, includes the Love Lives on Act. That allows surviving spouses of fallen servicemembers and veterans to remarry without losing the benefits they need to support their families. It includes the Veterans' ACCESS Act to make it easier for veterans to get lifesaving treatment--and particularly mental health capabilities--and expands access to high-quality care in VA medical facilities and in the community as well. Those of us from rural places understand the value of that community care, and in today's time of challenges with our veterans' mental health and suicide prevention efforts, that community care becomes even more important. Quick access is critical. It also includes the Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act to increase compensation benefits for veterans with severe service-connected disabilities and their families. There are dozens of other bills--bipartisan bills sponsored and led by Republicans and led by Democratic Members of the Senate--that are included in the Take Care of America's Veterans Act to make certain the VA is equipped with the right resources, staff, facilities, and authorities to provide the support servicemembers, veterans, and their families need. The question we generally are arguing about is the pay-for. Again, the law requires that. To pay for these improvements, this bill would codify elements of a rule that the VA proposed 4 years ago in the Biden administration, in 2022. The VA indicated then and now that it plans to change how the Department evaluates claims for service-connected disability ratings for sleep apnea and tinnitus. VA officials testified before the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs in January that the Department is moving forward, and VA officials confirmed that again just several weeks ago. The reason this is important is that that means there are going to be changes that the VA is authorized to make in these two arenas in providing benefits to veterans. The VA in the Biden administration--and apparently agreed to in the Trump administration--found there were ways to improve--they are required by law to evaluate the benefits they provide veterans, and if changes are appropriate because of medicine or science or changes in treatment, the VA can modify those benefits to reflect current science and medicine. The VA is going to do that. The offset is the fact that when the VA does that, it saves money. When the VA does that, however, it will be considered paying down the debt. I don't know how it can be a radical idea or an unfair idea that if we are going to take the money out of the VA for those two circumstances--the VA is going to do that--why don't we capture a significant portion of that and actually use that money to provide benefits to veterans? It is not like we are taking something away. The VA is going to alter the formula in their normal course of business, and we are capturing the savings in part--we are capturing part of the savings to actually use it to help other veterans, their families, and their caregivers. Once the Department finalizes the rule, the savings associated from that change in the rule will be lost. It will no longer serve as an offset for anything; it will just go into the General Treasury. It will be a lost opportunity for us to reinvest those funds in the long overdue improvements included in the Take Care of America's Veterans Act. My colleague has stated that ``the costs of war include caring for our veterans.'' I share that sentiment. Military service is a family service. The cost of war also includes caring for spouses and children and caregivers and survivors. The Take Care of America's Veterans Act would do that and more. So we had the opportunity to use something that is going to happen. We had the opportunity--we have the opportunity to make sure it is used to benefit veterans. The idea that we are taking a benefit away from someone is also false. This is prospective. After the rule changes, that is when we have the opportunity to make certain that we are still caring for our veterans. We are not taking anything away from any veteran that receives benefits today. In fact, there is a grace period in which veterans can continue to apply for these benefits after this legislation becomes law. We are not taking anything away; we are using money that the VA says is no longer going to be spent and spending that money in a different way for veterans, often including the same veterans that receive those disability payments. This legislation is strongly supported by many military and veterans organizations, including the Wounded Warrior Project, the Military Officers Association of America, Vietnam Veterans of America, AMVETS, the Tragedy Assistance Program--or TAPS--for Survivors, the Elizabeth Dole Foundation, the Veterans Justice Alliance, the National Defense Committee, the Military Coalition, and Mission Roll Call. It is also supported by the American Legion--the largest veteran service organization in the country--and by Medal of Honor recipients Britt Slabinski and Earl Plumlee, the president and vice president of the Medal of Honor Society. It is also supported by Richard Star's brother, who has been an advocate for the Richard Star legislation since the beginning of this issue's arrival and certainly since the passing of his brother and his interest in making sure that his brother is honored. These organizations know the challenges facing the military and veteran community. They know firsthand the high cost of continued inaction by Congress, the cycle of delaying veterans, caregivers, and survivors from receiving earned benefits. It is not a perfect analogy, but I remember my own mother lobbying me because she was a ``Notch Baby'' in the Social Security system. If you were born in a certain set of years, your benefits were less than the people before you and the people after you. My mom accused me of--Congress--maybe she wasn't accusing me personally--but accused Congress of just waiting until she died before making the change. I want to make sure that we do not lose another veteran, another servicemember. I want to make sure we get a result and we get a result fast. When I introduced this legislation, my assumption was that we could accomplish this--even in the Senate and the House in this difficult world we work in--that this legislation could be passed by Congress and signed by the President, this legislation that is supported by the White House. We could get this legislation done in the miracle of a month. I didn't anticipate the opposition that has arisen. I have indicated to the Senator--the ranking member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs--an interest in working together to resolve differences, and we will work to do that. But doing what we have done--what has been done time and time again-- of a UC request that has no result is unsatisfactory to me and unsatisfactory to the veterans and the veterans organizations I just listed. I am tired of waiting. Don't wait until our veterans are no longer living before you do something to protect their benefits and resolve an injustice that has gone on far too long. The cycle of delaying veterans, caregivers, and survivors from receiving their earned benefits must end and must end now. And with that, I object. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno). The objection is heard. The Senator from Connecticut.
View on ourcommons.ca ↗
