Warrior Project, Elizabeth Dole Foundation, Tragedy
     Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS), American Veterans
     (AMVETS), Air Force Sergeants Association, American
     Optometric Association, Avalon Action Alliance, Commissioned
     Officers Association of the USPHS (COA).
       Gold Star Spouses of America, K9s For Warriors, Korean War
     Veterans Association, Military Chaplains Association,
     Military Order of the Purple Heart (MOPH), Mission Roll Call,
     National Defense Committee, National Military Family
     Association (NMFA), USCG Chief Petty Officers Association
     (CPOA), Vietnam Veterans of America.

  Mr. BOST. Mr. Speaker, veterans groups from The American Legion to
the Wounded Warrior Project support this bill. Survivor groups like the
Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors support this bill. Caregiver
organizations, like the Elizabeth Dole Foundation, support this bill.
They all want this bill to pass.
  Chairman Moran and I have worked for months to try to enact a law
that will help the greatest number of veterans. I believe we have
offered that kind of package today.
  I want to take a moment to share what we have heard directly from
veterans. Mission Roll Call, a national nonpartisan organization
dedicated to serving veterans and their families, recently conducted a
survey on my bill. They found 71 percent of veterans support the bill.
I think that is a clear choice.
  Mr. Speaker, as our Nation observes its 250th birthday, H.R. 9237
asks a simple question: Do we have veterans' backs? Do we have the
backs of fellow Americans who raise their right hand to serve in
defense of this great country, the Gold Star families who carry the
cost of their loved one's sacrifice, or caregivers who every single day
care for a disabled veteran family member? For me, the answer will
always be ``yes,'' both during service and after.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support the Take Care of
America's Veterans Act, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 9237. It is a
beautiful day here in Washington, D.C., but Republicans are casting a
dark cloud over all of us and especially over America's veterans.
  We have before us today a bill that, despite its name, does the exact
opposite of taking care of veterans. It enshrines into law the largest
cut to veterans' benefits ever in the history of this Nation.
  The premise of this bill is that some veterans must be made worse off
in order to make others better off. Mr. Speaker, I reject that premise,
I reject this bill, and I encourage others to do the same.
  Here is the core issue: The majority treats veterans as a zero-sum
game: cut disability pay for some to find benefits for others. That is
not governing. That is rationing suffering among our Nation's heroes.
  With this bill, the majority would, for the first time ever, have
Congress interfere in the scientific process that the determines
veterans' disability ratings, overriding the expertise of medical
professionals at the Department of Veterans Affairs. I respect that
Chairman Bost is a military veteran, but he is not a medical
professional.
  The majority, for the first time ever, would have us cut tens of
billions of dollars from veteran disability compensation to pay for the
Department of Defense obligations. This is absolutely unconscionable.
  Consider the math. Republicans are discussing nearly $70 billion in
new Pentagon spending without offsets. They vote enthusiastically for
$1.5 trillion in annual defense budgets. Yet, they insist on paying for
veterans' priorities by cutting benefits with the two most common
service-connected conditions. Apparently, there is no problem sending
veterans the bill for the wars that Congress funds.
  This is a massive 600-page bill--crafted behind closed doors and
brought to the floor without careful consideration--packed with harmful
provisions designed to boost a few vulnerable Members' electoral
prospects.
  Mr. Speaker, for those reasons and many, many more, I cannot in good
conscience support this legislation.
  More important than my opposition is the opposition of the very
people whom the majority claims to help, the veterans themselves. Over
30 Veteran Service Organizations and advocates oppose this legislation,
including many of the largest, like the Veterans of Foreign Wars,
Disabled American Veterans, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America,
and numerous others. They know that reaching into the pockets of one
set of veterans to provide for another is morally wrong. Creating tiers
of veterans based on their period of service and treating tomorrow's
veterans worse than today's is morally wrong. They will not stand for
it, and neither should we.
  In addition to the numerous VSOs and over two dozen labor unions
opposed to this bill, including the Union of Veterans Council, American
Federation of Government Employees, and AFL-CIO, so do professional
associations like the American Psychological Association and the Nurses
Organization of VA. They all recognize the devastating effect this
legislation will have on VA's workforce and their ability to deliver
high-quality care.
  Even the Mortgage Bankers Association has expressed opposition to
this bill. The majority has decided that, during a housing
affordability crisis, it makes sense to raise costs on struggling
veteran homeowners who are desperately trying to avoid foreclosure.
  This package contains multiple harmful provisions. It would
accelerate the privatization of veteran healthcare--creating new grant
programs for private providers that divert resources from VA mental
health and PTSD programs--and steer veterans into more expensive
community-based care, even where VA services remain available, and
strip VA psychologists of their collective bargaining rights.
  This bill also contains numerous sections opposed by key
stakeholders, like Student Veterans of America, Veterans Education
Success, and the American Federation of Teachers, that would direct GI
Bill funding toward low-quality, for-profit, unaccredited online
programs.
  This bill contains provisions that would allow GI benefits to be used
for online welding courses. Can you believe it? Explain to me how you
can teach someone online how to weld.
  Inexplicably, H.R. 9237 even includes a $500 million IT slush fund
that VA will use to enrich contractors and reward the President's
cronies. The list goes on and on.
  We are going to hear arguments from the majority today about all the
good things this bill attempts to do. If we exist in a vacuum, I would
say that I agree. There are parts of this bill with broad bipartisan
support: long overdue increases to dependency and indemnity
compensation and a special monthly compensation, for example.
  We do not exist in isolation here, and we must take the bill as the
total sum of its parts, especially since the majority has blocked
amendments to this bill, as they have done so often in this Congress.

                              {time}  0930

  Regrettably, we will also hear the chairman say that cutting
veterans' benefits is the only way that we can get them done. This is
patently false, and the chairman knows it. Everyone in this Chamber
knows it, and everyone in America knows it, as well. There are any
number of other places we can find money for these priorities.
  We don't lack money around here. What is in short supply, at least on
the other side of the aisle, is the political will to use some of it on
behalf of America's veterans. There is $1.5 trillion for the Department
of Defense, $70 billion for the Department of Homeland Security, and
hundreds of millions of dollars for permanent tax cuts for the wealthy,
none of it offset, and all of which the chairman voted for
enthusiastically.
  Just 10 days of President Trump's folly in Iran would pay for 10
years of benefits under the Major Richard Star Act.
  Let me say that again. Just 10 days of President Trump's folly in
Iran would pay for 10 years of benefits under the Major Richard Star
Act.
  The question we have before us today is this: Why do you insist on
offsets now? Why only now when we are trying to do work on behalf of
our Nation's veterans do you care about the deficit? Why are
Republicans holding veterans' priorities hostage, including the
overwhelming top priority of veterans, the Major Richard Star Act, in
exchange