H6096 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 19, 2012 

The committee will continue to be 

vigorous in our oversight. But in the 

meantime, we cannot allow the American taxpayer or the veterans of south 

Florida to suffer because of a bureaucratic failing or lack of leadership. 

The Department has proposed using 

approximately $12.1 million in prioryear major construction advance planning funds to complete the remainder 

of the Miami project; and I’ve been assured repeatedly by VA officials that 

the use of this money will in no way 

negatively impact the planning or design of any other project. 

I’ve also been assured by the Department that once congressional authorization is received, the project can be 

completed in 120 days. I’m hopeful that 

the Department is correct in its assessment of the work that remains and 

that this provision will allow for the 

completion of this project to better 

serve the veterans in the Miami area. 

Section 103 of this bill would authorize the appropriation of $377.2 million 

for VA major construction projects. 

Title II of this bill would extend expiring authorities for several programs 

within VA, including programs designed to help veterans keep their 

homes, gain greater access to compensation and pension examinations, 

better serve veterans living in the Philippines, and provide supportive services to those who are homeless. 

This legislation represents a bipartisan effort; and I’d like to express my 

thanks to the ranking member, Mr. 

FILNER, and Mr. MICHAUD for his hard 

work and leadership in quickly advancing this important legislation to the 

floor. 

And before I yield, I’d like to point 

out that the bill before us today does 

not include major medical facility 

lease authorizations, as it normally 

would, due to concerns raised late last 

week by the Congressional Budget Office about how to properly account for 

the total cost of VA’s lease authorization. 

Mr. Speaker, I want to assure our 

veterans and stakeholders that I am 

committed to working closely with my 

colleagues in the Senate, the administration’s Office of Management and 

Budget, and the Congressional Budget 

Office to find a way forward on those 

important authorizations in the very 

near future. 

I urge all of my colleagues to join me 

in support of H.R. 6375, as amended. 

I reserve the balance of my time. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

myself such time as I may consume. 

I’d like to thank my colleagues for 

the hard work and effort on this very 

important bill as well. 

Each year, as we assess the construction needs of the Department of Veterans Affairs, we do so with the safety 

and health of our veterans in mind, as 

well as fulfilling our statutory requirements to authorize major medical facility projects. This is a responsibility 

that we do not take lightly. 

b 1600 

H.R. 6375, the VA Major Construction 

Authorization and Expiring Authorities Extension Act of 2012, would authorize approximately over $377 million 

for major medical facility projects. 

Specifically included is the authorization for a mental health building at the 

VA Medical Center in Seattle, Washington, and for a spinal cord injury facility at the VA Medical Center in Dallas, Texas. Mr. Speaker, these authorizations provide the Department of 

Veterans Affairs the ability to provide 

state-of-the-art health care and services to our Nation’s veterans wherever 

they choose to live. 

I would like to take a few moments 

to comment on section 102, which provides the authority for the renovation 

of the surgical suite and the operating 

rooms at the VA Medical Center in 

Miami, Florida. 

Earlier this year, it was brought to 

the committee’s attention that VA was 

going to need additional authorization 

to finish the renovation of the operating suites in Miami. It is my understanding that, during the design phase 

of the original projects, an assessment 

was conducted, and the recommendation was to completely close down the 

surgical suite because of infection control and safety issues related to construction. Because of these, two smaller Miami projects were combined, and 

the cost exceeded the monetary threshold of $10 million that governs the need 

to seek congressional authority. Working in a bipartisan manner, with the 

concerns for the safe continuation of 

surgery in the Miami VA Medical Center always first and foremost in our 

minds, we have included this project so 

that VA can move forward without 

delay. 

In addition to major facility projects, 

H.R. 6375 provides for the extension of 

certain expiring authorities. I am 

pleased to strongly support the extensions of the programs that directly affect some of our most vulnerable veterans—the serious mentally ill and 

homeless. Finally, Mr. Speaker, we 

have also included an extension of VA’s 

contract authority with private providers of compensation and pension 

exams. 

I support these provisions, but I also 

want to ensure that we remain vigilant 

in our oversight of this authority. As 

such, I am pleased to see 1-year extensions of these authorities, and I urge 

my colleagues to support H.R. 6375. 

I reserve the balance of my time. 

Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, 

we have no more speakers on this particular piece of legislation. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would encourage my colleagues 

on both sides of the aisle to support 

this particular piece of legislation, 

which is very important for our veterans. 

I would be remiss, though, if I didn’t 

say that, like my colleague from New 

York earlier, I am disappointed that we 

are leaving Washington when we have a 

lot of work to do, such as the middle 

class tax cuts, the farm bill, the Violence Against Women Act, and responsible deficit reduction, as well as my 

bill that addresses the issue of our 

military, members of which are supposed to be clothed from head to toe 

with American-made clothing. The fact 

that the administration is not complying with the Berry amendment is 

very disappointing. Hopefully, we will 

be able to address these issues before 

the end of the year so that we can take 

care of a lot of the concerns that my 

constituents have brought forth. 

With that, I yield back the balance of 

my time. 

GENERAL LEAVE

Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, 

I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within 

which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 6375, as amended. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 

objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida? 

There was no objection. 

Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, 

I appreciate my colleague for helping 

to point out the fact that the Senate, 

itself, has not acted on many of the 

pieces of legislation that, in fact, this 

House has passed and sent over to it. It 

is a shame that, for the last 3 years, 

they have not taken up such good legislation. 

With that, I thank my colleagues 

once again for their support, and I 

yield back the balance of my time. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

question is on the motion offered by 

the gentleman from Florida (Mr. MILLER) that the House suspend the rules 

and pass the bill, H.R. 6375, as amended. 

The question was taken; and (twothirds being in the affirmative) the 

rules were suspended and the bill, as 

amended, was passed. 

The title was amended so as to read: 

‘‘A bill to authorize certain Department of Veterans Affairs major medical facility projects, to amend title 38, 

United States Code, to extend certain 

authorities of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.’’. 

A motion to reconsider was laid on 

the table. 

f 

CONFIRMING FULL OWNERSHIP 

RIGHTS TO ARTIFACTS FROM 

ASTRONAUTS’ SPACE MISSIONS 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the ordering of the 

yeas and nays on the motion that the 

House suspend the rules and pass the 

bill (H.R. 4158) to confirm full ownership rights for certain United States 

astronauts to artifacts from the astronauts’ space missions, be vacated, to 

the end that the Chair put the question 

de novo. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 

objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? 

There was no objection. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

question is on the motion offered by 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
September 19, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H6097 

the gentleman from Texas (Mr. HALL) 

that the House suspend the rules and 

pass the bill, H.R. 4158. 

The question was taken; and (twothirds being in the affirmative) the 

rules were suspended and the bill was 

passed. 

A motion to reconsider was laid on 

the table. 

f 

CUTTING FEDERAL UNNECESSARY 

AND EXPENSIVE LEASING ACT 

OF 2012 

Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I move 

to suspend the rules and pass the bill 

(H.R. 6324) to reduce the number of 

nonessential vehicles purchased and 

leased by the Federal Government, and 

for other purposes. 

The Clerk read the title of the bill. 

The text of the bill is as follows: 

H.R. 6324 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 

Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Cutting Federal Unnecessary and Expensive Leasing Act 

of 2012’’ or the ‘‘Cutting FUEL Act’’. 

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF THE NUMBER OF NONESSENTIAL VEHICLES PURCHASED 

AND LEASED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 

(a) REVIEW OF NONESSENTIAL VEHICLE PURCHASE.—The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with 

the head of the relevant Executive agency, 

shall complete each of the following: 

(1) Determine the total dollar amount obligated by each Executive agency to purchase 

civilian vehicles in fiscal year 2010. 

(2) Determine the total dollar amount obligated by each Executive agency to lease civilian vehicles in fiscal year 2010. 

(3) Determine the total number of civilian 

vehicles purchased by each Executive agency 

in fiscal year 2010. 

(4) Determine the total number of civilian 

vehicles leased by each Executive agency in 

fiscal year 2010. 

(5) Determine the total dollar amount that 

would be 20 percent less than the dollar 

amount determined under paragraphs (1) and 

(2) for each Executive agency. 

(b) REDUCTION OF NONESSENTIAL VEHICLE

PURCHASE.—For each of fiscal years 2013 

through 2017, each Executive agency may not 

obligate more than the dollar amount identified pursuant to subsection (a)(5) to purchase 

and lease civilian vehicles. 

(c) SHARING.—The Administrator of General Services shall ensure that an Executive 

agency may share excess or unused vehicles 

with another Executive agency that may 

need temporary or long-term use of additional vehicles through the Federal Fleet 

Management System. 

(d) NATIONAL SECURITY EXCEPTION.—The 

limits on the purchase and procurement of 

vehicles provided in this section shall not 

apply to the purchase or procurement of any 

vehicle that has been determined by the 

President to be essential for reasons of national security. 

(e) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

(1) CIVILIAN VEHICLE.—The term ‘‘civilian 

vehicle’’ means a vehicle that is not used for 

purposes of military combat, the training or 

deployment of uniformed military personnel, 

or such other uses as determined by the Director of the Office of Management and 

Budget, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services. 

(2) EXECUTIVE AGENCY.—The term ‘‘Executive agency’’ has the meaning given that 

term under section 105 of title 5, United 

States Code. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. POE

of Texas). Pursuant to the rule, the 

gentleman from Utah (Mr. CHAFFETZ) 

and the gentlewoman from New York 

(Mrs. MALONEY) each will control 20 

minutes. 

The Chair recognizes the gentleman 

from Utah. 

GENERAL LEAVE

Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask 

unanimous consent that all Members 

may have 5 legislative days within 

which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 

objection to the request of the gentleman from Utah? 

There was no objection. 

Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

myself such time as I may consume. 

H.R. 6324, the Cutting Federal Unnecessary and Expensive Leasing Act, or 

Cutting FUEL Act, of 2012 is a bipartisan piece of legislation introduced by 

Mr. HANNA of New York and Mr. BARROW of Georgia. 

With a $16 trillion debt, Congress and 

the Federal Government need to spend 

taxpayer dollars more efficiently and 

help reduce costs. Federal agencies 

currently own or lease roughly 660,000 

cars, vans, sport utility vehicles, 

trucks, buses, and ambulances; and I’m 

sure there are a host of other items as 

well. During fiscal year 2011, the Federal Government spent roughly $4.4 billion to maintain and operate these vehicles, including $1.3 billion in fuel 

costs alone. During the last 5 years, 

Federal agencies purchased an average 

of approximately 68,000 new vehicles 

annually at a cost of roughly $1.5 billion per year. 

The Bowles-Simpson National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and 

Reform recommended reducing the 

number of nonessential vehicles owned 

or leased by Federal agencies, other 

than the Department of Defense or the 

postal service, by 20 percent. According 

to some estimates, this proposal could 

save up to $500 million over the next 10 

years. 

The Cutting FUEL Act would reduce 

the government’s spending on civilian 

vehicle purchases and leases by 20 percent and would maintain that reduced 

level of spending for 5 years. This reduction would not apply to military or 

postal vehicles, and there is an exception provided for national security vehicles as well. 

Mr. Speaker, I think this is a good, 

commonsense piece of legislation, and 

we want to encourage Members to support this bill. 

I reserve the balance of my time. 

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

myself such time as I may consume. 

I rise in opposition to H.R. 6324, the 

Cutting FUEL Act. This bill is being 

rushed to the floor without any hearings or considerations by the Oversight 

and Government Reform Committee. 

The result is a poorly drafted bill that 

may have harmful, unintended consequences. This bill would require all 

Federal agencies to reduce their purchases and leases of vehicles by 20 percent, below 2010 expenditure levels. 

This reduction would not apply to military vehicles, and an exception is provided for vehicles necessary for national security purposes. 

While my colleagues’ goal is to cut 

government spending and force agencies to spend their money more efficiently, this bill is not the way to 

achieve those objectives. This bill does 

not take into account agencies that 

have already decreased their fleet sizes 

by improving fleet management procedures. According to a recent GAO report, agencies such as the Air Force 

have implemented various fleet 

downsizing policies and have made efforts to eliminate vehicles that are not 

mission critical. Instead of examining 

the needs of each individual agency, 

this bill simply makes a sweeping 20 

percent cut applicable to all agencies 

regardless of whether they have already made significant improvements. 

b 1610 

The GAO also noted that some agencies, like the Department of Veterans 

Affairs, have increased their fleet sizes 

due to expanded programs essential to 

assisting our disabled veterans. This 

bill would prevent agencies, such as the 

VA, from effectively serving our veterans when they return home from war. 

Mr. Speaker, we come to the House 

floor only to bring up legislation that 

was recently introduced in August. 

There have been no hearings in committee, no amendments, no markups, 

no substantive debate, all of which 

could have made significant improvements to the bill. 

The American people are asking their 

elected officials to be bipartisan and 

pass legislation to add more jobs to our 

economy. We should focus on extending 

the tax cuts for the middle class, or 

passing legislation to resolve the looming crisis in the postal service. But, no, 

the Republican majority and their 

leadership would rather focus on passing messaging bills before the election. 

They prefer to leave Washington and 

campaign, rather than take up the real 

issues that confront our country. 

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to 

oppose this legislation, and I ask that 

we get back to doing the work of the 

people. 

With that, I reserve the balance of 

my time. 

Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

such time as he may consume to the 

chief sponsor of this legislation, the 

gentleman from New York (Mr. 

HANNA). 

Mr. HANNA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in 

support of H.R. 6324, the Cutting Federal Unnecessary and Expensive Leasing Act. I sponsored this legislation 

with my friend and colleague from 

Georgia (Mr. BARROW). 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE