|
Statement of Honorable Lane Evans Debate on H. Res. 405 April 1, 1998 Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment to H.R. 2400 which expresses the Sense of Congress that offsets to spending above the Congressional Budget Office baseline, as described in section 1001 of the bill, should not be taken from veterans programs. This amendment will be considered as adopted upon approval of the rule governing consideration of H.R. 2400.This important amendment makes it clear that offsets for increases in spending authorized by the Building Efficient Surface Transportation and Equity Act should not include any provision making a change in programs or benefits administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. There seems to be a widespread misconception about restricting or denying a benefit to which a qualifying veteran is entitled to receive as a means of finding "savings" to offset the costs of other legislation. This misconception is seductively simple -- if a veteran is not now in receipt of a entitlement which he or she would qualify to receive if they had applied for this benefit, then eliminating this benefit does that veteran no harm. Would the Members of the House and Senate who are eligible for, but not yet in receipt of, a retirement pension believe they would not be harmed if their anticipated retirement benefit was reduced or eliminated because they had not yet applied to receive it? There would be shrieks and howls about such an injustice. We would be told the Members had "earned" their pension. Veterans also have earned the benefits which they are entitled to receive. Let me also make it clear that I strongly support passage of H.R. 2400. We clearly need to have a modern, efficient and reliable transportation infrastructure. This has always been important and is certainly no less important today with the increasing globalization of the economy and economic competition. We can do this, however, while continuing to honor our commitments to veterans. |