Friday, October 3, 2003

Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment to S. 1689, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan.

This amendment provides $1.3 billion in emergency funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs medical care account. I offer this amendment to address the medical care needs of returning service members from Iraq and Afghanistan that will require medical care services from the VA.

As many of my colleagues know, the VA cannot currently keep up with the demand of the current veteran population as illustrated by the tens of thousands of veterans who have been told to wait at least six months to get an appointment. Even more distressing is the fact that many of them may have to wait up to two years. Two years!!! This is unacceptable! If the VA cannot currently help those that are in the system, how will they help those veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan?

In the legislation before us today, we have provided emergency funds for the Department of Defense to fight these wars and reconstruction funds to ensure that the peace is secure and to bring our troops home. I support these funds. However, I believe that we need to ensure that when our troops do return home, that the government will be there to treat their medical care needs. If we are willing to provide emergency funding to fight the wars, we must be willing to provide emergency funding to meet the medical care needs to treat injuries and wounds suffered from the wars. In other words, we must ensure that there is a continuum of care for our service-members from basic training to deployment to discharge.

Let me illustrate the urgent and pressing needs for these emergency funds. According to a September 2, 2003 Washington Post article, the number of service-members wounded in action in Iraq totals 1,124 since the war began in March. The Post article states that the “rising number and quickening pace of soldiers being wounded on the battlefield have been overshadowed by the number of troops killed since President Bush declared an end to major combat operations May 1.” The USA Today in this past Wednesday’s edition, reported that “at least seven times as many men and women have been wounded in battle,” as those killed in battle. The wounded arrive here in Washington every week. I point out that these numbers do not include those military men and women who are returning from Afghanistan and other parts of the world fighting the war on terrorism. According to the VA, some of our returning service men and women are currently being served through VA/DoD sharing agreements and others, such as Private Jessica Lynch, are being discharged and turning to VA for specialized services. This level of demand for VA services has not been foreseen or anticipated.

Further, we know that the overall demand for VA medical care is not going to lessen. We have already seen the VA medical care system being overwhelmed by the staggering increase in demand for its medical services. Since 1996, the VA has seen a 54 percent in growth or 2 million patients in total users of the medical care system. Moreover, enrollments have increased by some 3.1 million since 1999 alone. Further, the VA projects that its enrollments to grow by another 2 million patients from a current level of 7 million to 9 million in 2009.

Again, I urge my colleagues to support these emergency funds. In a time of war with thousands of injured troops returning from battle, it is clearly an emergency to include these funds. It is our moral responsibility to ensure that we provide adequate resources to the VA to meet the vital medical needs of our veterans. If these emergency funds are not included in this bill, the VA will have enormous difficulties in treating veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan due to the current backlog of veterans waiting for medical care. Without these funds, those waiting veterans will wait longer for medical care and the VA will be forced to deny medical care to another 585,000 veterans. I cannot accept these outcomes. This is medical care they have earned through risk of life and all too often at the cost of their limbs and their long-term health.

I ask my colleagues to think about our service members who have already returned from service, about our service members who are currently serving, and about those who want to serve. If we do not provide these funds, what kind of message does this send to those currently fighting overseas and those who will be sent overseas? I hope my colleagues agree with me that we want to tell these men and women that we will not turn our backs on you and that we will keep our promises to them.

Thank you.