Bob Filner

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the San Ysidro Health Center and the 30 years it has been contributing to the health of my community. From humble beginnings as a volunteer grassroots program run out of a house on the property where the present 50,000-square foot medical center now operates, the center has grown with satellite clinics in Chula Vista and National City. It serves 37,000 people now and has a budget of $17 million. Mr. Speaker, today is a day for looking back and honoring the pioneers who started this amazing caring center and the visionaries who use this firm foundation to provide even greater services to the people of the South Bay area of San Diego County. Thirty years ago, Elena Savala and 10 other members of the Club de las Madres decided they needed more than one doctor to serve the 700 residents of San Ysidro at that time. Although they spoke little English and had little formal education, they approached the University of California at San Diego for assistance. In a little house that the City of San Diego donated, volunteer health care professionals began to offer services for the nominal fee of $1. The eleven women formed the center's first Board of Directors. In 1972 they hired another forward-thinking and committed health care warrior, Gabriel Arce, to direct the center. Under his leadership, the health center moved from a small trailer to the original clinic, a modern building with six examining rooms. The center continued to grow and in 1980 made an historic leap--it created the Community Health Group, the only health maintenance organization (HMO) in the State of California with an all MediCal (Medicaid) caseload. Today, the San Ysidro Health Center provides primary care, dental care, social services, nutrition counseling, laboratory services and a pharmacy. Beyond its three primary health care clinics in San Ysidro, Chula Vista and National City, its mental health component, the Behavioral Health Group, operates an extensive countywide mental health network that treats children, adolescents and adults in the communities of San Ysidro, Chula Vista, San Diego, Santee and San Marcos. Of the center's 37,000 patients, 70 percent live at or below the poverty level, 77 percent are women, 30 percent are children under the age of 12 and 60 percent are on MediCal, Medicare or receive County Medical Services. The grassroots flavor of the center remains alive--many patients later come to work for the center, inspired to pursue health-related careers by the care they see offered there. That inspiration promises to continue. The current forward-looking Board of Directors, lead by President Macario Gutierrez, has involved the center in a partnership with Scripps Family Practice Residency Program. The residency program will be offered at the Chula Vista Family Clinic, one of the two satellite clinics. It is all of our hope that some of the San Ysidro Health Center's patients of today will become the doctors of tomorrow, inspired by the access to and commitment of this unique residency program. This partnership is born out of the California Area Health Education Center Program. This program was established in 1972 to form partnerships between California's schools of medicine and local organizations throughout the state. The program established a special border outreach unit. The partnership with the San Ysidro Health Center allows the program to continue and expand its opportunities to emphasize care for our Latino population and the special demands of health care along the border. The program trains doctors to work in areas which do not have adequate health care coverage. Mr. Speaker, I ask you join with me in honoring the vision, and quality health care that San Ysidro Health Center has offered over the past 30 years and that I am sure they will offer for the next 30 years with their special partners. The center's unique blend of commitment to our community and involvement of residents in providing the highest quality health care deserves to be emulated nationwide.

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, I want to pick up on the comments of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey). I agree with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green) with regard to the case that the gentleman has made for Iron Mountain, and certainly the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) have made strong cases as members of the gentleman's delegation. But as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) said, it is more than illogical. It could border on hypocrisy I could say, that the folks on this side of the aisle get up and argue for their medical centers and their clinics to stay open, for their services to go unimpeded, and then, when the chance is offered, as it was yesterday on at least eight occasions, for Members to vote to allow the funding of the VA, which is vastly underfunded, when my colleague had the chance to vote on that, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green) voted no. So to come here and argue for a VA center in a particular district, to come up and argue for that, but to vote no on additional funding for the VA and then go back home and say how much you fought for your VA, borders a little bit, I will say on the illogical to keep the same frame of reference of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey). The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly), in earlier debate I think, said very eloquently if we move funds to do what different individuals want to do with their particular VA hospitals means that we will cut quality here, that we will cut services there, because we do not have enough money in the VA budget. We are underfunded in VA health care by at least $1.5 billion in spite of the plus-up that the subcommittee gave. So unless the gentleman is willing on his side of the aisle to join us in raising the budget to the $3 billion that the veterans of this Nation came up with, then I think that the other side has some soul searching to do with these kinds of amendments.

Mr. FILNER. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. FILNER. Reclaiming my time under my reservation, Mr. Chairman, I would respond to the chairman that I am very aware, and I would ask in return, is the gentleman aware that the independent budget of 300 veterans' organizations around this country said that the minimum, the absolute minimum, to keep our VA health system going and not to have closures like the gentleman wants to protest about in his district, like I would not want in my own district, that that budget asks for $3.2 billion for veterans' health care? So the gentleman gave one-half of what was needed. And we are going to have these issues all through the next year based on the budget. I agree with the chairman when he called the budget the President's budget plus 1.7. I think it might be called the Walsh budget minus 1.5. That is, it is higher than the President's; but it is lower than what it should be. And the gentleman's Members are going to come up every day in the coming session and say please do not close my hospital.

Mr. FILNER. No, I am supporting the independent budget of 3.2. I am going to vote against the bill on the floor because it is insufficient. And everybody in this House ought to vote against it so we do not have the problems that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green) raises, and that the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) is about to raise, and that we had raised earlier by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr). We are going to have colloquies from 435 districts about closing VA facilities unless we pass a reasonable bill. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, the arguments the gentlewoman just made were extremely good. I support the gentlewoman's amendment. And I need to be nice to her, since she represents my daughter up in Bedford, New York. So I thank her for her representation. But, once again, I cannot fail to point out that the logic of the budget that the majority party is pushing and that the gentlewoman voted for and refused to amend is pushing toward exactly the situation that she wants to prevent. I am with the gentlewoman. I think we should do exactly what the gentlewoman said. And she has laid out a rational, objective policy for the VA to follow. Unfortunately, we are putting them in the position, by underfunding them, that they are going to have to take positions that none of us will like when it comes to health care. And as the gentlewoman said earlier in regard to the debate on another matter, if they do not do this, they are going to cut quality or cut services. Something has got to give if they do not have enough money, and assuming they are using the money efficiently and assuming they are using the money to the best degree. And we all have to question that, and the gentlewoman's amendment asks for that. But I will tell my colleague that, again, I find it highly illogical, bordering on hypocrisy, that the majority party puts forward these amendments to stop the closure of Iron Mountain, to put a clinic in the district of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr), to stop the closing of VA hospitals anywhere; and yet when they are given the opportunity to vote additional funds, not to break the budget, not to be doing something irresponsible, but to put in what the veterans of this Nation have said is absolutely essential to keep the quality of our VA system going, they vote no. And then my colleagues are on TV and they are back home saying that they are fighting for their veterans. Yet on all the procedural motions, not to mention the substantive motions, that will allow the majority to really back up what they are saying with the money to cover it, they vote no. So I am going to continue to point out this illogic. I am going to continue to point out that the dynamics of my colleague's own budget undercuts what she is trying to do. If the gentlewoman's amendment passes, which I hope it does, then, as she said earlier in her comments, they are going to give way somewhere else. So the gentlewoman's constituents are going to face a lack of quality of services or a lack of some specialist or other service. And until the majority party votes to increase this funding, we are going to have the positions that the gentlewoman is arguing for.

Mr. FILNER. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.

Mr. FILNER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, we have heard that. We stipulated yesterday and for the last 2 months that the President's budget was irresponsible and not good policy. We are not passing here the President's budget. Throw that out. My colleagues cannot keep answering my criticisms and the country's criticisms that they do better than the President. The President did lousy. This is our budget and this budget is lousy. This budget underfunds VA health care by $1.5 billion, and until we correct that, the amendments that the gentlewoman is offering is going to be of little help.

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, let me first say to the gentleman from Florida and the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, the $3 billion figure is not my figure. It comes from a process that was initiated and sustained by the major veterans organizations in this Nation. They came up with a professional budget that was designed to accommodate the basic needs of the health care system, needs that had been left unmet for the last 5 years. When the gentleman from Florida says that he doubts that they would be able to use the funds, I would refer him to the Alzheimer's patients who are being released from hospitals because there are not the funds to keep them. I will refer the gentleman to hepatitis C victims, almost 2 million of them, who are suffering from a potentially fatal disease with no money to meet their health care needs. I would refer the gentleman to the Persian Gulf War illness victims who cannot get either their treatment or the explanation for their illness in any respectful fashion because there are no funds to do that. Every veteran in this Nation will tell us that there are needs that can be met, and I suspect that the veterans organizations think that the $1.7 billion that the chairman should be commended for achieving, and I do not understate that achievement, I say to the chairman, given the numbers they have to work with. And please take my criticism as of the process and not of my colleague, because I think he and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) did an incredibly good job in plussing that up. But I would argue that it is still insufficient given the needs and given the aging population and given the new areas that we have discovered that need to be dealt with. I would remind the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), who is the chairman of the subcommittee, this $1.7 billion plus-up which comes out of the Republican budget resolution rests on a down-minus, if I can use that word, over the next 10 years. That is, the VA budget will start decreasing based on their numbers and for the biggest decrease in our history. So we have not sufficiently funded this budget, and I would say to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), I suspect that if he gave those organizations a vote between this budget and my budget, mine would win. We would have letters supporting that. So once again, I say to the veterans of this Nation, this Congress is poised to pass a bill that does not meet the health care needs, does not meet the commitment and benefits that we have promised; and we should vote it down and say to the veterans, we can do better. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection to the unanimous consent request.

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I have heard stories like the gentleman's all over the country, I say to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr), about the needs of various districts and our veterans. They are real. I am glad that the gentleman is fighting for them. We had a series of amendments yesterday that would have put the money in that would have allowed us to take care of that. The illogic of the position that is being argued by folks on the gentleman's side is that we have these needs but we are not going to put the money in to meet them. So I sympathize with the gentleman and I voted to get the gentleman the money to have that outpatient clinic, but nobody on the gentleman's side voted for the amendments that would have allowed that. So I do not understand how the gentleman can ask the chairman to take care of his needs and then not vote for the positions that would give the money to do that.

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay respect and recognition to Reverend George Walker Smith, who tonight will be honored at the San Diego Urban League's Annual Equal Opportunity Awards Dinner. Reverend Smith is the 1999 recipient of the League's Equity Opportunity Award. Reverend Smith is a man who has distinguished himself throughout the years by his unselfish service. During his 42 years as a pastor in San Diego, he has been active not only in his parish, but in the greater community. His influence is felt not only in the religious sphere, but in education policy and political activity. He was one of KNSD Channel 39's ``List of 39'', a series featuring prominent and effective San Diegans. In 1998, San Diego Magazine profiled Reverend Smith as one of the 50 San Diegans who have had a major impact in shaping the city over the past 50 years. The third of eleven children of the late Amanda and Will Smith, he early on faced a situation in his home town where schooling was not provided beyond junior high school for African-Americans. This segregated education forced him to attend a boarding school supported by missions of the Presbyterian Church. An outstanding academic record as class valedictorian and his participation in extra-curricular activities and sports earned him a scholarship to Knoxville College. Upon graduation, he entered Pittsburgh Theological Seminary to pursue his goal of becoming a minister. He received his Master of Divinity degree in 1956 and set out to eradicate the economic and educational injustice he had experienced. His motivation to provide a quality education to all children stems from his own early experiences, which made it difficult for him to receive the education that he deserved. He determined that should not happen to another child! Coming to San Diego shortly after receiving his Divinity degree, he became the founder of the Golden Hills United Presbyterian Church. This congregation merged with the Brooklyn Heights Church in 1981 and became the Christ United Presbyterian Church of San Diego, one of the most respected congregations in the San Diego Presbytery. Almost immediately, he also became involved in the educational system in San Diego. His accomplishments include his election in 1963 to the San Diego Board of Education--San Diego's first African-American public official, his service as President of the Council of Great City Schools, and as President of the National School Boards Association. During his 16 years on the School Board, he literally changed the color of the administrative and teaching staffs--bringing the advantage of diversity to the nation's 6th largest school district. He also served on many state and national commissions and on the National Advisory Commission for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and the White House Conference on Children and Youth. He has received many honors and awards, attesting to his contributions and the high regard in which he is held, including San Diego's Outstanding Young Clergyman, Phi Delta Kappa Lay Citizen Award, Gentleman of Distinction of the Women's Guild, Temple Emanuel, and Distinguished Alumni of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. He was endorsed by the Presbytery of San Diego for the moderator of the General Assembly, the first time a San Diego Presbyterian had been so honored. He is married to Irene Hightower Smith, and they are the parents of three children, Anthony, Carolyn and Joyce and the grandparents of five grandchildren, Taj, D'maj, Shani, Wayman, and Noni. I am pleased to take this opportunity to sincerely thank Reverend George Walker Smith on the occasion of his recognition by the San Diego Urban League and to acknowledge his idealism and dedication to providing a quality education for all children and to making his community a better place for all of its citizens.

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Amy Isaacs on her 30th anniversary with Americans for Democratic Action--the nation's oldest independent liberal organization that has worked tirelessly to improve American society. Her contribution to ADA has been enormous! She began her career as an intern in 1969 and moved through the ranks as Director of Organization, Executive Assistant to the Director, Deputy National Director--and she has served as the National Director for the past ten years. Her fellow staff members at ADA, unanimously agree on Army's most admirable quality: humility. In spite of all she has done and all she has accomplished, she would never admit to her critical role in setting and pursuing the ideals and agenda of ADA. She is a dedicated servant to these ideals and, thus, to ADA. She has seen the organization through both good times and bad, and she has never thought of giving up the fight. Amy and her fellow ADA members are dedicated to a better world with rising standards of living for all, to basic human rights at home and abroad, to the end of all forms of discrimination, and to a more equitable distribution of our resources. These values are just as relevant today as when ADA was founded over 50 years ago. And such policy goals as the increase in the minimum wage, preservation of Medicare, universal and quality health care, comprehensive campaign finance reform, a safe and healthy environment, full access to a quality education owe much to Amy Isaacs and her fellow members of ADA. Amy's commitment equals that of ADA's founders: Eleanor Roosevelt, John Kenneth Galbraith, Walter Reuther, David Dubinsky, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., Reinhold Niebuhr, and Hubert Humphrey. Because I had the opportunity to work for Senator Humphrey as a Congressional Fellow in the 1970s, I learned from him, first-hand, about the importance of the role of ADA and the importance of the work of its members and of Amy Isaacs. In addition to her work at ADA, Amy has worked at Planned Parenthood Federation of America and in political campaigns. She has spent time abroad, as a student at the University of Cologne in Germany, as a delegate to the Young Leaders Conference for the American Council on Germany, and as a member of a bi-partisan observer delegation to the Liberal International Party Congress in Stockholm, Sweden. A graduate of American University in Washington, D.C., Amy also earned an M.A. certificate in International Administration from the School for International Training in Brattlesboro, Vermont. I am pleased to take this opportunity to recognize and sincerely thank Amy Isaacs on the 30th anniversary of her service to ADA. What keeps her going is her idealism and dedication to the basic principle that government has a positive role to play in promoting individual liberty and economic justice.

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize my friend Jerry Butkiewicz as he is honored at the September 11, 1999, John S. Lyons Memorial Banquet as the 1999 Labor Leader of the Year Award. As the Secretary-Treasurer of the San Diego-Imperial Counties Labor Council, Jerry Butkiewicz has achieved an outstanding record of contributions on behalf of working women and men. Mr. Butkiewicz began his involvement in the labor movement while working for the United States Postal Service in Arizona where he was elected Shop Steward and then President of the local American Postal Workers Union (APWU). He continued his involvement when he relocated to California and was promptly elected President of the Oceanside, California APWU Local. Soon after, he was appointed the Labor Liaison to the United Way of San Diego County. In 1996, he was the unanimous choice to serve as the Secretary-Treasurer of the San Diego-Imperial Counties Labor Council. In this role, he has worked hard for the cause of working families and has given union members reasons to be proud of their union membership. Mr. Butkiewicz has also been very active in his community and has served on the Boards of the United Way, the Neighborhood House Association, the Economic Development Board of San Diego County and the Labor Advisory Committee of Kaiser Permanente. He has also committed his time and energies to the San Diego Food Bank, Youth Baseball, and Pop Warner Football. His leadership exemplifies the high values, standards, and principles exemplified by the late John S. Lyons. My congratulations go to Jerry Butkiewicz for these significant contributions. I can personally attest to Jerry's dedication and commitment and believe him to be highly deserving of the 1999 Johns Labor Leader of the Year Award.

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Timothy Galloway as he is honored at the September 11, 1999 John S. Lyons Memorial Banquet for his contributions to the labor movement, his community and his State. Timothy Galloway's role in the labor movement began in 1976 when he began his second career working for the United States Postal Service repairing optical scanners and computers. He joined the American Postal Workers Union (APWU) and quickly became involved in union operations becoming an Alternate Steward. Eventually, Mr. Galloway was elected Secretary of the Local's Executive Board and then Executive Vice President. His efforts in video work for the Postal Service prompted his promotion to a Regional position and the creation of a Video Department for the Western Region of the Postal Service. In 1985, Mr. Galloway became Assistant Director of the United Way's Department of Labor Participation. He has continued to give his time, talent and expertise to help working men and women in times of hardship. His commitment extends to the non-labor community as well, and he is involved with numerous organizations. He was a Member of the San Diego Food Bank Operating Board and serves as a Member of the Neighborhood House Association, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Emergency Resource Group. Additionally, Mr. Galloway has dedicated eleven years coaching Little League and Bobby Sox Baseball. Timothy Galloway exemplifies the high values, standards and principles of the late John S. Lyons and is truly deserving of the 1999 Johns Distinguished Service Award.

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Stanley Grabara as he is honored at the September 11, 1999 John S. Lyons Memorial Banquet for his contributions to the labor movement, his community and to the nation. Unlike previous awardees, Stanley Grabara professional career is not within the labor movement. However, his hard work and respectful cooperation with labor has earned him a special place in San Diego's Labor Community. Mr. Grabara came to San Diego to operate a new terminal facility in National City for the Pasha Group. He was wisely aware that for Pasha to succeed in this new facility, a skilled and dedicated work force would be required. He promptly formed a working partnership with Teamster Local 36 to hire the necessary workers. This is a relationship that has blossomed as a result of Mr. Grabara's efforts. Mr. Grabara is also involved in the larger San Diego Community. He has served as the chairman of the Port of San Diego Maritime Trade Development Committee and serves now as a member of the Port Tenants Association, the Greater San Diego Chamber of Commerce, and the National City Chamber of Commerce. He is also a member of the Board of Christmas in April and is involved in the Toys for Tots program and the Boys and Girls Club of National City. He also serves as a Trustee of the San Diego Teamsters and Employers Trust Fund and he was recently elected to the Board of Directors of the World Trade Center of San Diego. Stanley Grabara exemplifies the high values, standards and principles of the late John S. Lyons, and is truly deserving of the 1999 Johns Fellowship Award.

Mr. FILNER

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for his courtesy in making a unanimous consent request earlier in the day for another amendment which I will offer later, under our rules. Mr. Chairman, I will be offering a series of amendments to increase funding under Title I for the Veterans Administration. I do this because I believe this budget is drastically underfunded. From my personal relationships with the chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), the ranking member, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), I know these gentlemen are strongly in support of our veterans throughout the Nation. They were given certain rules under which they had to operate. They, as the chairman points out, many times added a significant amount of money to the baseline budget. They wish they could add more. I wish I could add more. I have a series of amendments to make that wish come true. Mr. Chairman, we all know that the veterans of this Nation got together early in our budget process and put together what they called an independent budget, a budget that called for about $3 billion more than the baseline for this year. That was a budget created by veterans for veterans. It was a very responsible, professional job. The Democrats on the Committee on Veterans Affairs tried to offer that budget in our authorizing committee as instructions to the Committee on the Budget. We were not allowed by the majority in this Congress, the majority in that committee, to offer that amendment. They made the case that $3 billion must be added to this budget. The chairman said that this budget offers the greatest increase in history to the veterans budget. That may be true, but that increase, number one, follows years and years of a real decline in our budget for veterans, so it follows probably the greatest decrease ever in the history of our veterans budget, and even their increase of $1.5 billion or so is only half of what responsible veterans organizations think is the minimum to keep our system going. Even with this largest increase, as the chairman states, it presupposes, as I think the gentleman knows, and as stated in the Republican budget resolution that was passed by this Congress, that that $1.7 billion increase this year presupposes decreases over the next 10 years adding up to almost $3 billion. If he is right in saying this is the largest increase in history, this is 1 year, and we will have larger decreases over the next decade. So my amendments, Mr. Chairman, are intended to redress this balance. I took the idea for this amendment, that is, to declare this situation an emergency and therefore not requiring an offset, I took this idea from the subcommittee that has their report before us. They brought to their full committee a report that said we must declare the veterans programs an emergency and ask for about $3 billion. I think they were right. I think their full committee was wrong in overruling that. My amendment declares the situation an emergency and asks for an addition of various amounts, according to the amendment I have before us. Veterans in my district in San Diego and across the country cannot understand what my colleague, the gentleman from San Diego, said earlier, that we should be meeting our needs of our veterans but we cannot because we have this Balanced Budget Act of 1997. We should not allow something that Congress passed to prevent us from doing the right thing now, when the situation has changed. They see a surplus of, depending on how we look at it, $1 trillion, $3 trillion. They say, why can we not have the $3 billion necessary to increase our health care and our benefit situation? So, Mr. Chairman, this amendment under consideration at the present time asks for $881 million to enhance the Montgomery G.I. bill. This program was named after one of our most legendary Members who retired a couple of years ago, Sonny Montgomery, from Mississippi. He suggested this program. It is time that we made it clear that the modern member of the Armed Services needs an increased benefit if he is going to take advantage of this benefit. Point of Order

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, with deep personal respect, on behalf of our Nation's veterans, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, we have been talking all afternoon on this bill, and I think we have all agreed that veterans programs are vastly underfunded. Everybody would like to try to find a way to change that. I am offering a way to do that. In my amendment, an additional $1.1 billion is added to veterans health care by declaring an emergency with regard to the health care of our veterans. This figure was not arrived at arbitrarily. All of our Nation's veterans got together during this budget process and came up with a budget, a responsible budget and a professional budget, what they called an independent budget, which said what would be needed at the absolute minimum to keep our commitment to our Nation's veterans after almost 5 years of straightline budgeting, which resulted basically in a real cut in services; what would be needed to keep our commitment to our veterans. They decided that about a $3 billion increase would be necessary, and they pointed out the programs and the areas that would be funded with that $3 billion. The committee plussed-up that account by $1.7 billion. I would like to add the $1.1 billion that these veterans requested. We have a true emergency here, Mr. Chairman. Keeping the promise we made to our veterans is an emergency. Providing health care is an emergency. The VA health care is drastically underfunded and in danger of collapse, and we must change that. What are we going to get for that $1.1 billion that we do not get now? We get care for veterans who are involved in radiation risk activities and subsequently develop cancer. We get funding for new health care initiatives for veterans suffering from hepatitis C-related illnesses. These are often fatal, Mr. Chairman. Earlier in the debate I said something to the effect that thousands of our veterans had hepatitis C. I made a mistake. The figure is closer to 2 million of our veterans, Mr. Chairman, and we have no provision for funding to help those veterans. This billion would go to increase programs for long-term care for our aging veterans. They would restore beds in psychiatric wards and increase mental illness research education. They would allow veterans to stay in hospitals if they have Alzheimer's and would help our Persian Gulf War illness veterans who are suffering today. Now when I offered these amendments earlier in the day, I was told by my good friend, the chairman of the committee, that well, we plussed it up from the President's request. Yes, we will stipulate the President made an inadequate request. He underfunded by $3 billion, but this is our budget now, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this is a congressional budget. Let us do the right thing. When I brought this up earlier, it was said that we had the biggest increase in this bill ever for veterans health care. That may be so in the short run but that comes on top of 5 years of real cuts, real dollar cuts, and presupposes, Mr. Chairman, a $3 billion deficit over the next 10 years, which this is building on. Finally, the chairman says, well, this is legislating in an appropriations bill. Well, we legislate all the time in an appropriations bill. Let us legislate for our veterans. Let us put in this $1.1 billion, and I hope that my colleagues will allow us to take this emergency action today. Point of Order

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee and the ranking member, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), for allowing me to make the points that this process allows us to do. I sincerely believe that all of us want to do better by our veterans, that we want to see to it that our commitment is kept. I know the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) believes that personally, and would like to see that happen institutionally. We are governed, unfortunately, by certain agreements in the past. I believe those commitments were made in error and that we should in effect look at the reality at the present time. Again, this is just one last example of where we might improve our services, less than $1 million to the office of Inspector General to provide for the hotline that they have. Thousands of veterans, tens of thousands of veterans, use this hotline. It is vastly understaffed. Most of the comments received and the situations described have to be referred rather than followed up by the Office of Inspector General. I would hope that this Congress could fund additional monies to make sure that the frustration of our veterans that we have heard from both sides of the aisle be met, and that we fund this item. Once again, I do thank the chairman and the ranking member for their courtesies and indulgence. This will be the last amendment, up until the point provided for by the unanimous consent agreement that the gentleman will have to rise and make the point of order on, Mr. Chairman. Point of Order

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I would speak to the point of order as the gentleman from New York spoke to the point of order. The real needs, the real dollars of the VA have decreased over the last 5 years because of the aging population and because of the increase of needs of our population. I will repeat to the gentleman that the $1.7 billion plus-up presupposes the biggest decrease in history over the next 10 years, as there will be declines from that $19 billion over the next 10 years in the budget.

Mr. FILNER. I would speak to the point of order, Mr. Chairman.