Motion to Go to Conference on H.R. 3043, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008

Floor Speech

MOTION TO GO TO CONFERENCE ON H.R. 3043, DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 -- (House of Representatives - October 31, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ISRAEL. I thank the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Madam Speaker, this bill does, in fact, combine various other appropriations measures. But those measures in their totality clearly reflect the top priorities of the American people. In fact, every one of those bills separately passed with significant Republican support by significant bipartisan majorities in this House.

The reason that this bill in its totality makes sense and should, with all due respect, attract the support of my friends from the other side of the aisle is because it does, in fact, fund the global war on terror. It funds our defense. It funds military construction. But it also funds America's other priorities. It funds our troops but it also takes care of our veterans, the largest increase in veterans health care in the 77-year history of the VA. It funds our defense with a robust military. But it also funds the war on cancer with increased investments in the NCI and the NIH.

It funds our military so that we can achieve global stability, but it also gives working families and middle-class taxpayers a little bit of a break, actually, more than a little bit of a break, a significant break on their college expenses so that our kids can compete in a globally competitive environment.

I would conclude, Madam Speaker, by suggesting that the differences between where the administration is and where we are should not be minimized. They are significant. As the chairman said, this administration is arguing over a $22 billion increased investment with one hand, and, on the other hand, telling the American people they have to come up with another $200 billion for Iraq. We are spending $12 billion a month in Iraq. The difference between where the administration is and where we are on these other priorities is 2 months in Iraq.

We want $880 million in increased investment for LIHEAP so that senior citizens don't have to shiver in the cold because their heating costs are too high. That is 2 1/2 days in Iraq, that $880 million. If we want to invest $1 billion in medical research for people with cancer, with Alzheimer's, with Parkinson's, that's 3 days in Iraq.

Our $1 billion investment covers an entire year. The administration's strategy covers 3 days in Iraq. We want $1.4 billion for the entire year for improved health care access. With this administration, the equivalent cost is 4 days in Iraq. We want $1.8 billion in increased investments to keep American streets safe with additional law enforcement and additional police. The administration says we can't afford to keep America's streets safe but is willing to spend an equivalent amount over 5 days in Iraq.

Madam Speaker, this bill reflects the priorities of the American people. Separately, the components passed with overwhelming Republican support. This should be a bipartisan effort. It should be a bipartisan effort because, number one, it supports our troops, provides for robust defense, and takes care of our priorities here at home as well.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ISRAEL. I thank the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I must say I am hearing some conflicting priorities on the floor today. We have heard that the appropriations process is not moving fast enough, despite the fact that under the leadership of Chairman Obey in the House, we passed every single one of our appropriations bills, I believe in record time. We are hearing that the appropriations process isn't moving fast enough on the one hand, and now we have a motion to instruct the conferees to actually slow it down, to take pieces out of this bill, to stop it. You can't have it both ways. We are trying to get things done. We are trying to move our priorities forward.

Now, I understand that some of my friends don't want to deal with the labor, health and human services aspects of this bill, and they are concerned with the President's argument that we have plenty of money to fund Iraq but can't afford veterans health care here at home and educational priorities here at home and low-income heating for the elderly here at home.

I understand those arguments, but let me suggest to my colleagues that they read a study that was just released yesterday by Harvard Medical School. That study shows there is, in fact, a critical connection between the VA pieces of this bill and the health and human services aspects of this bill. The two should be considered together. That study found that, today, there are 2 million veterans who have no health insurance. And they aren't eligible for VA benefits. Not eligible for VA benefits and too poor to afford health insurance. The number of uninsured veterans jumped to 1.8 million in 2004, and the population of uninsured veterans is increasing at twice the rate of the general population.

Now, the Labor-H aspects of this bill provides $1.4 billion above the President's request for programs to improve health care access. So taken in its totality, this bill, without segregating the human services components, taken in its totality, this bill protects our troops in the field and also provides access to veterans at home who may not qualify for veterans benefits. As has been stated before, our veterans are a whole. They come back from the war, the last thing they should worry about is not having health insurance. It's the labor, health and human services aspects of this bill that could provide additional access to health care, and that is why this bill ought to be considered as it is.

I would make one other point. We have already considered these bills separately. Each of these components were, in fact, debated, deliberated and passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in the Appropriations Committee and then debated again, deliberated again and passed with significant Republican support on the floor of the House.

There is no reason to move backwards. There is no reason to delay. There is no reason to stop this process. We want to get these bills to the President. We should do so.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source