C. Young

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.J. Res. 72. I want to point out a few critical points of this resolution and how it will ease the stress on the Department of Veterans Affairs as well as our men and women as well as their family members who have served our nation honorably and faithfully. First, I would like to bring your attention to how important it is to continue to provide funding for disability claims processing-- ``disability claims need to go out--surely we can all agree on that? I have seen first-hand what these men and women must go through to get back on their feet and we should be making sure that all of the resources they need aren't delayed a single day.'' We have worked together over the last few years to reduce the disability backlog and we could lose this momentum by not funding H.J. Res. 72. This resolution contains an anomaly--a $294M increase for the administrative costs of claims processing. Without sufficient funding, VA won't be able to continue its efforts to reduce the significant backlog that each Member office hears far too much about. Secondly I would like to emphasize the importance of making funds available for the post-9/11 GI bill benefits. Without the funding in H.J. Res. 72, more than 760,000 veterans won't receive their post-9/11 benefits. This is an investment in the future of America which we must preserve. Thirdly, I have attended far too many funerals; the mandatory funding provided in the bill will provide 49,221 burial allowances and 25,538 burial plot allowances, 26,091 service-connected death awards, 500,002 burial flags, 344,826 headstones or markers, and 63,508 grave-liners or reimbursement for privately purchased outer burial receptacles at VA and private cemeteries. We as a nation owe the men and women who have defended America the entitlements which they earned. H.J. Res. 72 will provide funding to ensure we continue to care for our Veterans. My friends on the other side of the aisle have been emphasizing that this bill doesn't provide as much money to the VA as the bill the House passed back in June. That's because this bill is a more targeted approach. It provides all the mandatory funding and the money for claims processing administration in the near-term. But when you add the advance medical services funding that has already been provided to the money in this bill, it totals $141.4 billion--96 percent of the total the House approved last June. There are several smaller discretionary accounts that are not funded in this bill, but they tend to be accounts with a slower spend out rate, like construction and State homes, and these accounts will more than likely have carryover funds to cover the short-term. The Democrats are making too much of the $6.2B this bill doesn't provide for, when $141.4 billion will be available.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I move to lay the appeal on the table.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. This motion is not germane and as such is a violation of rule XVI, clause 7, which states: No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment. This motion deals with the proposition unrelated to the matter addressed by the joint resolution and brings in a matter under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules, which fails the committee of jurisdiction test and, therefore, is a violation of rule XVI, clause 7. I ask for a ruling from the chair.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I make a point of order against the motion to recommit.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's motion.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, this is not a political bill. This is a correction bill. It has been held pretty much to a legislative process rather than a political process. I want to say how much I have enjoyed the many years of serving on the same subcommittees with Mrs. Lowey, and then she advanced to the high rank as the ranking member on the Appropriations Committee. To my friend, Mr. Visclosky, we have worked together for so long on the Defense Appropriations Committee to bring to this House and to this Congress legislation that had no sign of politics. H.R. 3230, I believe, will be supported by everybody in the House. It doesn't solve the overall problem, but it does solve one problem for the Guard and Reserve. I am satisfied that there will be other legislation, maybe not following this particular bill, but following in the course of events that will come later. Today, we are dealing with H.R. 3230, and I hope that everybody in the Chamber and in the House will support H.R. 3230 and at least take care of one of the problems. With that very important thought, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Bridenstine).

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, at this point, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I agree that the regular order is to pass individual appropriations bills and to go to conference with the Senate if they will conference. I agree with my friend from Indiana on that issue. At this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), my colleague and my friend.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Coffman).

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack), another member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 370, I call up the bill (H.R. 3230) making continuing appropriations during a Government shutdown to provide pay and allowances to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who perform inactive-duty training during such period, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3230, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Speaker, the Pay Our Guard and Reserve Act would fix a simple drafting error that existed in H.R. 3210, the Pay Our Military Act. This bill was intended to appropriate funding so that all of our servicemembers, Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve, will receive their paychecks on time and without interruption during the government shutdown. As most of you know, our Guard and Reserve members perform two kinds of training throughout the year: annual training, which occurs for 2 weeks a year; and Inactive Duty for Training, which is commonly referred to as weekend drill. While H.R. 3210 appropriated funding for pay and allowances for servicemembers who perform active service during the shutdown, it mistakenly omitted pay and allowances for performing inactive duty training or weekend drill. This was a simple technical drafting error in the legislation. I have heard from many concerned Members requesting that we address this issue as quickly as possible to prevent any lapse in pay for our Guard and Reserve members during this shutdown. This bill would correct that and ensure that all of our servicemembers receive their paychecks on time, including for time served on weekend drill. The Pay Our Military Act passed the House unanimously, and I believe this bill should have broad bipartisan support as well. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am happy now to yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), an important member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this continuing resolution, but I would much rather be rising today in support of the Fiscal Year 2014 Defense Appropriations Bill. Unfortunately, the Senate failed to do their job, and we're left again with no option but to pass a CR. However, as much as a CR is a painful and inefficient way to govern, the threat of shutting down the government is far worse. Let me give you some examples of impacts of a government shutdown on the Department of Defense: all military personnel will continue to serve and accrue pay, but will not actually be paid until appropriations are available; most civilians, having recently been furloughed for six days, will be furloughed again until appropriations are available; military medical treatment facilities will scale back operations, impacting routine medical and dental procedures; death benefits to families of military members killed in the line of duty would be delayed; almost all weapon and facility maintenance activities would stop; any new contracts, including renewals, extensions, or exercising of options, may not be executed; almost all travel or permanent change of station (PCS) moves would be delayed or canceled; and almost all professional training and educational activities would stop. Those are just a few examples, but I think they point to how the readiness and morale of our Armed Forces would suffer if we do not pass this CR. The impact of a shutdown on the Department and the military and civilian families--many of whom live paycheck to paycheck--is simply catastrophic. Therefore, it is imperative we pass this bill, and that the Senate act quickly to ensure appropriations are available on October 1st. But that is just the first step. This must be followed--and followed quickly--by a comprehensive budget deal so we can conference and enact true fiscal year 2014 appropriations bills. The Department, and more specifically, the men and women serving this Nation, need and deserve some fiscal certainty which will only come with a 2014 Defense Appropriations Bill and a long-term comprehensive budget deal.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Congressional Medal of Honor Society, comprised solely of Medal of Honor recipients. During this week, the recipients will assemble to honor and remember all who have served our country and to further the brotherhood among one another. This year, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania has been chosen as the site for the convention and Sergeant First Class Litterell of the United States Army and his valiant efforts will be recognized and he will be the featured hero of this year's convention. Sergeant First Class Littrell was awarded the Medal of Honor for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty in Kontum province, Republic of Vietnam, on 4-8 April 1970. Sergeant First Class Littrell was assigned to the United States Military Assistance Command, Vietnam, and Advisory Team 21. He distinguished himself while serving as a Light Weapons Infantry Advisor with the 23d Battalion, 2d Ranger Group, Republic of Vietnam Army, near Dak Seang. After establishing a defensive perimeter on a hill on April 4, the battalion he was assigned was subjected to an intense enemy mortar attack which killed the Vietnamese commander, one advisor, and seriously wounded all the advisors except Sergeant First Class Littrell. During the ensuing four days, Sergeant First Class Littrell exhibited near superhuman endurance as he single-handedly bolstered the besieged battalion. Repeatedly abandoning positions of relative safety, he directed artillery and air support by day and marked the unit's location by night, despite the heavy, concentrated enemy fire. His dauntless will instilled in the men of the 23rd Battalion a deep desire to resist. Assault after assault was repulsed as the battalion responded to the extraordinary leadership and personal example exhibited by Sergeant First Class Littrell as he continuously moved to those points most seriously threatened by the enemy, redistributed ammunition, strengthened faltering defenses, cared for the wounded and shouted encouragement to the Vietnamese in their own language. When the beleaguered battalion was finally ordered to withdraw, numerous ambushes were encountered. Sergeant First Class Littrell repeatedly prevented widespread disorder by directing air strikes to within 50 meters of their position. Through his indomitable courage and complete disregard for his safety, he averted excessive loss of life and injury to the members of the battalion. The sustained extraordinary courage and selflessness displayed by Sergeant First Class Littrell over an extended period of time were in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit on him and the U.S. Army. It is for his courage and unwavering devotion to duty that I am proud to honor and remind our fellow Americans of the actions of Sergeant First Class Littrell. Honoring Second Lieutenant Walter D. Ehlers

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Chair, I'd like to use my time to say thank you to the House and all of the Members who participated in some vigorous debate, for having conducted the affairs of the House in a most professional way, proving to our constituents that we can work things out and that we can work together. I just want to say thank you to my colleague from Indiana Mr. Visclosky, who is handling the minority leadership on this bill for the first time. I think he deserves a lot of credit and a lot of applause for the good job that he did in keeping this schedule on track. Peter, thank you very much. While it seems a long time ago, it was only Monday night that we finally received the 100 amendments that would be filed and considered during the debate. We had to analyze those amendments by Tuesday-- yesterday--so that we could begin the debate on this bill. Our staff did an outstanding job in working late into the night Monday night analyzing these amendments so that we could consider where we would be on those amendments. Our staff is led by Tom McLemore as staff director and Paul Juola in a similar position for Mr. Visclosky. The other members of the staff are Becky Leggieri, Brooke Boyer, Ann Reese, Megan Rosenbusch, Tim Prince, Walter Hearne, B.G. Wright, Paul Terry, Maureen Holohan, Jennifer Miller, Adrienne Ramsay, and Sherry Young. They are a most professional staff and it is hard to find any better team of staff members than those that I just mentioned. Finally, I want to thank my good friend and strong supporter, the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Frelinghuysen, for all his help during the process of managing our bill this week. His dedication to the subcommittee is invaluable, and I sincerely appreciate his friendship and his assistance in managing the bill. Similarly, I would like to thank the gentleman from California, Mr. Calvert, and the gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Womack, for their assistance in this process. I have said on more than one occasion that we have a great group of members on our subcommittee who are dedicated to providing for the needs of our national security and for the men and women who wear the uniform in defense our freedom. The special efforts this week of the members of our subcommittee, and in particular the members I mentioned are clear proof of that.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I understand the gentleman's intense interest in trying to protect these folks who would be affected by sequestration, but awarding or granting or giving a national security clearance is not a simple thing and it should not be taken lightly. If the Department of Defense or government agency decides that a person doesn't really qualify, they feel that they don't deserve a national security clearance, if the phrase ``furlough caused by sequestration'' is included in the denial, then the denial is null and void. You can't deny it if it is claimed that it's due to sequestration, and that's not fair. That's not fair to our national security. It's not fair, actually, to the Defense Department, and I just think this is not a good idea. But I know what the gentleman wants to accomplish and would like to work with him to figure out how to do this without denying the Defense Department the right to deny a security clearance to someone that they think is not a good risk for a security clearance. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, again I sympathize with what the gentleman is trying to do. It's just the problem in the denial, if they use the phrase ``furlough caused by sequestration,'' they can't deny that request for a security clearance, and there may be a lot of good reasons why that person should be denied. And so it's a question of do we protect the national security by giving the Defense Department the authority to deny regardless of what the furlough language is, or do we allow this amendment, which is probably poorly written; and we would like to work with the gentleman to write it in such a way that it doesn't cause us great distress. But I just don't want to see someone who should be denied a security clearance given one because of a technicality. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.