Apr112013
Hearing Transcript on Legislative Hearing on H.R. 3257, H.R. 3484, H.R. 3579, H.R. 3813, H.R. 3948, H.R. 3976, H.R. 4079, H.R. 4203, H.R. 4359, H.R. 4469, and H.R. 4592
|
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 3257, H.R. 3484, H.R. 3579, H.R. 3813, H.R. 3948, H.R. 3976, H.R. 4079, H.R. 4203, H.R. 4359, H.R. 4469, AND H.R. 4592
HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION FEBRUARY 25, 2010 SERIAL No. 111-64 Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
|
|
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS |
|||||
|
|
CORRINE BROWN, Florida |
STEVE BUYER, Indiana, Ranking |
|
||
|
|
|||||
|
|
Malcom A. Shorter, Staff Director SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of converting between various electronic formats may introduce unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the current publication process and should diminish as the process is further refined. |
|
|||
C O N T E N T S
February 25, 2010
Legislative Hearing on H.R. 3257, H.R. 3484, H.R. 3579, H.R. 3813, H.R. 3948, H.R. 3976, H.R. 4079, H.R. 4203, H.R. 4359, H.R. 4469, and H.R. 4592
OPENING STATEMENTS
Chairwoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Prepared statement of Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin
Hon. John Boozman, Ranking Republican Member
Prepared statement of Congressman Boozman
Hon. Harry Teague
Prepared statement of Congressman Teague
Hon. Thomas S.P. Perriello
WITNESSES
U.S. Department of Defense, Colonel Shawn Shumake, USA, Director, Office of Legal Policy, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), Program Integration and Legal Policy
Prepared statement of Colonel Shumake
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Keith M. Wilson, Director of Education Service, Veterans Benefits Administration
Prepared statement of Mr. Wilson
American Legion, Robert W. Madden, Assistant Director, National Economic Commission
Prepared statement of Mr. Madden
Hall, Hon. John J., a Representative in Congress from the State of New York
Prepared statement of Congressman Hall
Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Timothy S. Embree, Legislative Associate
Prepared statement of Mr. Embree
National Association of State Approving Agencies, James Bombard, Legislative Director, and Chief, New York Bureau of Veterans Education
Prepared statement of Mr. Bombard
Putnam, Hon. Adam H., a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida
Prepared statement of Mr. Putnam
Sestak, Hon. Joe, a Representative in Congress from the State of Pennsylvania
Prepared statement of Mr. Sestak
Smith, Hon. Adam, a Representative in Congress from the State of Washington
Prepared statement of Congressman Smith
Sullivan, Colonel Mark E., USA (Ret.), Law Offices of Mark E. Sullivan, P.A., Raleigh, NC
Prepared statement of Mr. Sullivan
Turner, Hon. Michael R., a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio
Prepared statement of Congressman Turner
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, Justin Brown, Legislative Associate, National Legislative Service
Prepared statement of Mr. Brown
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
American Bar Association, Patricia E. Apy, statement
Bannerman, Stacy, Medford, OR, statement
Filner, Hon. Bob, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and a Representative in Congress from the State of California, statement
Klein, Hon. Ron, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida, statement
National Association for Veterans' Program Administrators, Faith DesLauriers, Legislative Director statement
National Military Family Association, statement
Pennsylvania Association of Private School Administrators, statement
Student Veterans of America, Brian Hawthorne, Legislative Director, letter
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 3257, H.R. 3484, H.R. 3579, H.R. 3813, H.R. 3948, H.R. 3976, H.R. 4079, H.R. 4203, H.R. 4359, H.R. 4469, AND H.R. 4592
Thursday, February 25, 2010
U. S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:07 p.m., in Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Herseth Sandlin, Perriello, Adler, Teague, Boozman.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRWOMAN HERSETH SANDLIN
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity hearing on pending legislation will come to order.
I would like to call attention to the fact that the Honorable Ron Klein of Florida, the National Military Family Association, the Pennsylvania Association of Private School Administrators, Student Veterans of America, the American Bar Association (ABA), and Ms. Stacy Bannerman, a citizen from the State of Oregon, have asked to submit written statements for the hearing record.
If there is no objection, I ask for unanimous consent that their statements be entered for the record. Hearing no objection, so entered.
[The statements appear in the Submissions for the Record, which appear in the Appendix.]
I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and that written statements be made part of the record. Hearing no objection, so ordered.
Today we have a full schedule that includes 11 bills before us that would address the unique needs of our veterans population. The bills before us today seek to expand existing laws to provide certain family members with a leave of absence from work when a servicemember is called up for active-duty service, to modernize fees payable to institutions of higher learning for certifying student veterans, to expand education entitlements under title 38, reauthorize existing law to prevent the foreclosure of a veteran’s home, amend on-the-job training (OJT) requirements to encourage businesses to hire military veterans in a tough economy, make available housing loans to construct or modify energy-efficient homes, to provide protections under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) to servicemembers with child custody arrangements, and to create energy-related job opportunities for military veterans.
Included in today’s hearing is H.R. 3484, which I introduced to reauthorize existing law that affords certain student veterans with a work study allowance while they are enrolled in school.
Under the current Work Study Program, veterans who qualify for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Work Study Program are limited to working on VA-related work such as processing VA paperwork, performing outreach services, and assisting staff at VA medical facilities or the Offices of the National Cemetery Administration.
The current Work Study Program is scheduled to expire on June 30th, 2010. My legislation would simply reauthorize this important program to June 30th, 2014, allowing our student veterans to gain valuable skills in an approved work environment while completing their studies.
Providing our student veterans with work study opportunities is an issue that I take seriously.
Earlier this year, the House successfully passed H.R. 1037, a "Pilot College Work Study Programs for Veterans Act of 2009." This legislation includes language to direct the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to conduct a 5-year pilot project on expanding existing work study activities for veterans.
Rest assured, I will continue to push for enactment of this important legislation for the remainder of the 111th Congress.
I look forward to receiving feedback on all of the other bills before us today, and I now recognize the distinguished Ranking Member, Mr. Boozman, for his opening remarks.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin appears in the Appendix.]
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN
Mr. BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair.
First of all, I want to thank you for including H.R. 4259, the "Warriors Adapting Residences with Mortgages for Energy Renovations Act," or for short, the WARMER Act, which I introduced with Congressman Walz as an original co-sponsor.
I introduced the WARMER Act as a result of concerns that were expressed by the building industry who pointed out several shortcomings in the way VA appraised properties with regards to energy-efficient improvements.
Besides some concerns with PAYGO issues, we really have a very good collection of bills to consider today. And I do appreciate the Members that have worked so hard again coming up with ideas, coming up with solutions to some of the problems that we have in regard to veterans' issues.
I do have a little bit of concern with a couple of the bills. First, H.R. 4079, which would waive the requirements that an employer increases the wages of veterans who are employed as apprentices under the title 38 Apprenticeship Program, there is a little bit of concern that H.R. 4079 is written without the unintended consequences such as lowering the apprentice's total wages over the period of training because of the statutory reduction in the VA payment.
But against that concern, we must balance whether some jobs, even one with a declining wage, is better than no job at all. So, again, those are the things that we need to discuss today. I appreciate the bill's intent and hopefully, working to resolve that problem.
I also have a little bit of concern about H.R. 4592. I agree with the intent to put veterans in good-paying jobs. And I know Mr. Teague is willing to work. And, again, hopefully we can work out a few concerns with that bill.
Finally, we are also interested in hearing the testimony on H.R. 4469. It sounds to me like perhaps there are some technical, legal issues that are involved and we are going to hear a good collection of witnesses in that regard, including our colleague, Mr. Turner. So, again, I appreciate the fact that we have so many members who are willing to step forward and come up with some good ideas.
And, again, I very much support your work study endeavor. I was a work study guy and know how important that is.
And so with that, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Congressman Boozman appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Boozman.
Before we begin with our first panel, I would like to recognize the Subcommittee Members with legislation before us today. Mr. Teague from New Mexico is one of those Members. So I would like to recognize you now, Mr. Teague, to speak on the bill that we are considering today.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HARRY TEAGUE
Mr. TEAGUE. Thank you.
Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member, and fellow Subcommittee Members, thank you for allowing me to have the opportunity to speak on behalf on H.R. 4592.
This bill addresses three different issues that are vitally important to my district and to our country, energy, veterans, and jobs.
The latest survey of unemployed veterans by the U.S. Department of Labor show that the number of unemployed Iraq and Afghanistan veterans is now almost the same as the number of servicemembers currently deployed in support of those two wars.
When the unemployment rate hit 9.7 percent last fall, the veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan were unemployed at the rate of 11.3 percent. To combat the problem of unemployment among those who served our Nation in uniform, I drafted legislation to get energy jobs for veterans.
Under my bill, those who fought for us abroad would be able to continue their work for the security of our country when they return home by getting a job, producing our energy right here in America.
Energy independence is one of our Nation’s foremost security imperatives and there is no one more suitable for or capable of filling every energy job in America than our veterans.
The national security and economic security of our Nation has been secured in large part by our veterans and it can only be maintained by freeing us from foreign energy sources and putting our citizens back to work.
The Energy Jobs For Veterans Act would direct the Secretary of Labor to award competitive grants to two States to establish the program to provide marketable energy job skills and employment experiences and lasting employment and well-paying energy jobs to veterans.
The program would provide to an energy employer up to 50 percent, not to exceed $20,000, of the salary paid to a veteran for a year of apprenticeship and on-the-job training.
Eligible energy employers are those involved in the energy-efficient building, construction, and retrofit industries, the renewable electric power industry, the biofuels industry, the energy efficiency assessment industry, the oil and gas industry, and the nuclear industry.
I hope that my colleagues in this Committee and the House would agree that this bill brings together three different issues in a way that creates a winning opportunity for our country.
I would like to thank the Chairwoman and Ranking Member again for allowing this bill to come forward.
Also, I would like to thank the staff of the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee for their assistance, specifically Juan Lara, Javier Martinez, and Orfa Torres.
I would also like to thank Congressman Perriello for co-sponsoring this legislation with me.
Thank you once again, Madam Chair. This concludes my statement and I would be happy to answer any questions that my fellow Committee Members may have.
[The prepared statement of Congressman Teague appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Teague.
Mr. Perriello, before we bring up our colleagues on the first panel, I wanted to give you and other Subcommittee Members who had bills for the Subcommittee an opportunity to speak on your respective bills. So I will now recognize you for 5 minutes.
Yes, Mr. Boozman?
Mr. BOOZMAN. I am sorry. Can I interject? I have got to run out in the hall for a second. But in regard to Mr. Teague, I just want to note that he is certainly one of our most active Members on the Subcommittee and does a tremendous job.
And we do appreciate you bringing forward your legislation. And I know that we on our side are going to look at that and work with you to try and see how we can again best put veterans to work.
Mr. TEAGUE. Very good. Thank you. I will be more than glad to work with you at any time and explain the particulars. Thank you.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Boozman.
Mr. Perriello?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS S.P. PERRIELLO
Mr. PERRIELLO. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member Boozman, for holding this important hearing. I appreciate the opportunity to offer testimony in support of my two bills, H.R. 4079 and H.R. 3976.
Today unemployment amongst the Nation’s 2.5 million veterans is at 15.8 percent or three times that of the general population. And for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, the rate of unemployment is a staggering 11.2 percent.
These numbers are unacceptable. After fighting on the front lines of freedom, this Nation’s veterans should not have to return home only to bear the heavy burden of unemployment.
To that end, I am committed to introducing and supporting legislation aimed at creating, sustaining, and enhancing employment opportunities for our veterans.
H.R. 4079 would temporarily remove the statutory requirement that employers provide a mandatory wage increase for veterans enrolled in the Department of Veterans Affairs' On-The-Job Training Program.
Let me be clear. This legislation has only one purpose, to put veterans to work.
A survey recently completed by the National Association of State Approving Agencies (NASAA) found that 22 of 30 States that are active in the very important OJT Program have identified lost approval opportunities for veterans due to the wage increase requirement.
When applying for a job or OJT Program, our veterans should stand on equal, if not greater footing with those in the civilian workforce. But in today's economic climate, well-qualified veterans who seek employment with private employers through the VA's OJT Program find themselves at a competitive disadvantage due to the requirement that employers commit to providing a mandatory wage increase as a condition of program participation.
It is important to note that H.R. 4079 is only temporary and is scheduled to sunset. Moreover, existing law prevents employers from paying veteran employees a lesser wage than similarly qualified civilian employees.
H.R. 4079 is supported by the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Ike Skelton, the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), and the National Association of State Approving Agencies.
And while I have given strong consideration to concerns raised by the American Legion and the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), I am not convinced that these concerns are sufficient to overcome the immediate concerns raised by the unprecedented level of unemployment experienced by this Nation's veterans.
The OJT Program provides an invaluable source of employment and training and I am committed to ensuring that the program remains a viable option for all eligible veterans.
I am also open to the idea that with the return of stronger economic times, we should certainly restore the core meaning of the bill, which is not only to provide great economic opportunities for our veterans but make sure that those employers are treating and compensating those veterans in the maximum way possible.
H.R. 3976, the "Helping Heroes Keep Their Homes Act," would amend the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 to extend through December 21, 2015, protections for servicemembers relating to mortgage and mortgage foreclosure. This common-sense bill will continue to ensure that our men and women in uniform receive a fair deal on home loans and provide them adequate time to deal responsibly with possible foreclosure.
I strongly support the bill and I thank the veterans service organizations (VSOs) assembled for their support. And, again, I thank the Chairwoman for her leadership and her support on these efforts.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, both Mr. Perriello, and Mr. Teague, for the bills that you have introduced, other bills that we have been able to move through our Subcommittee which both of you have been original sponsors or co-sponsors. We appreciate your hard work, that of your offices and your level of activity on our Subcommittee on a variety of different issues related to veterans' education and employment issues.
We will now move to our first panel. Joining us to speak on their respective bills are the Chairman of the full Committee on Veterans' Affairs, the Honorable Bob Filner of California; the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, the Honorable John Hall of New York; the Honorable Adam Putnam of Florida; the Honorable Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania; the Honorable Adam Smith of Washington; and the Honorable Michael Turner of Ohio.
Gentlemen, welcome to the Subcommittee. We are pleased you are here. All of your written statements will be entered into the hearing record, we will recognize you in the order as I introduced you in the absence of Mr. Filner.
Mr. Hall, I appreciate your leadership on the Subcommittee and the bill that you have introduced that we are considering today. You are now recognized.
STATEMENTS OF HON. JOHN J. HALL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK; HON. ADAM H. PUTNAM, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA; HON. JOE SESTAK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA; HON. ADAM SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON; AND HON. MICHAEL R. TURNER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN J. HALL
Mr. HALL. Thank you, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee, Ranking Member Boozman, who I saw in the hall. I miss being on this Committee and I greatly appreciate the work that you do here.
I am here today to speak to you about my bill, H.R. 4203, which would require the Department of Veterans Affairs to pay GI benefits to student veterans by direct deposit into their bank accounts.
Recently too many student veterans have been left waiting for GI Bill educational benefits that they have applied for but have not yet received. The VA has authorized checks for those students, but they are required to travel to one of the VA's regional benefit offices with a photo ID, a course schedule, and an eligibility certificate before they can receive their benefits. In many cases, this is a time-consuming, expenses, and unnecessary burden.
In my district, for instance, in the Hudson Valley, veterans are required to travel to lower Manhattan to collect emergency education benefits. For an Orange County Community College student traveling from Middletown, the round trip cost to pick up their checks would be $35 and the trip would be more than 4.5 hours. For a Marist College student traveling from Poughkeepsie, the round trip cost would be more than $45 and the trip would be 4 hours and 15 minutes.
The New York Regional Benefit Office is only open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, school days. Getting to lower Manhattan during the hours that the VA's office is open would mean skipping work or class. Requiring veterans to travel from their homes to a Regional Office to receive their benefit is an onerous and unnecessary burden.
The fastest method, of course, would be to deliver this stipend via direct deposit the same way, by the way, that all other Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) benefits are distributed. Eligible veterans receive their benefits all the time by direct deposit, so we are only asking for the same thing to be done with educational benefits. If necessary, the VBA could require that the veteran fax in the appropriate documentation allowing their funds to be released.
The current process is an unnecessary hassle and delay. We should do everything possible to help our vets get the education they need to succeed after they have served our country so honorably.
So in closing, I appreciate your consideration of this bill and I ask for your support to ensure that our student veterans are able to receive the benefits that they have earned and deserve in a timely and painless fashion.
I look forward to answering any questions you might have and thank you again for allowing me to testify about this bill.
[The prepared statement of Congressman Hall appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Chairman Hall.
Mr. Putnam, you are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. ADAM J. PUTNAM
Mr. PUTNAM. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
I understand there may be another meeting going on in this town at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, so I appreciate you all skipping that one to be here with us as we look for new and improved ways to help our Nation's veterans.
It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to give this testimony today on behalf of our Test Prep for Heroes Act. It is a bipartisan bill that we have introduced with my colleague from Florida, Mr. Klein, and 27 other co-sponsors, including Mr. Teague, and we are grateful for your support, and Mr. Boozman.
In crafting this, we understand that it is—we certainly understand the important role that Congress has in meeting the needs of those who have so bravely served our Nation. And while we acknowledge that this is a modest proposal, I do believe that the Test Prep for Heroes Act does provide an important benefit to those men and women in uniform who return home with dreams of attending college, law school, med school, and other advanced educational objectives that inevitably end up accruing to the benefit of our economy and our Nation.
Under current law through the Post-9/11 GI Bill, they are entitled to a reimbursement of up to $2,000 for the cost of licensing and certification tests, but it does not provide reimbursement for prep classes that are often needed to help you pass those exams.
So this bill would simply allow the $2,000 that is already allowable under the law to be used for one test and one prep course. We did not change the overall funds available to each veteran, but simply allow them to be reimbursed for those preparatory classes to help cover subject matter that they may not have been exposed to for a number of years.
As we all know, a lot of these tests are geared towards someone who may have just come straight out of school and if there is a time gap, if they did serve in one of the services, a lot of the more academic subjects have gotten a little rusty to them and preparatory classes are necessary and helpful.
It is important to note that the Montgomery GI Bill does allow for the reimbursement of $2,000 for prep courses and tests, so this would help provide the veterans returning home now with the same benefit available to those who served before them.
Madam Chair, a veteran who served in Iraq or Afghanistan has the ability to be reimbursed for the cost of an SAT if he or she is wanting to attend college. As you know, the costs of those tests are minimal. It is the cost of these preparatory courses, a comprehensive approach to better understanding that material that has not been covered for a number of years that is out of reach for many of our young veterans.
So Congressman Klein and I introduced this legislation to provide our young veterans with the best possible tools to be successful. We are not asking for an additional allocation or even a substantial change in the law, just that we better equip these young men and women by providing them access to courses that will help them achieve better results in their dreams to receive a higher education.
Again, I appreciate your work and your devotion to our Nation's men and women in uniform and thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
[The prepared of Congressman Putnam appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Putnam.
Mr. Smith, you are now recognized.
Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to come and testify before this Committee.
The bill that you have before you is the Military Family Leave Act of 2009. It attempts to give the family members of our troops who are deployed some of the same benefits that are received under the Family Leave Act more broadly available to all workers.
We have made efforts to do this in the past. There was a bill passed in 2008 to attempt to expand some of the Family Medical Leave Act provisions to members of the service and their families. At that time, the bill focused on different circumstances that would give rise to being allowed to have family medical leave because in many of the circumstances that are traditionally thought of, which you are given family medical leave for, which would be having a child, adopting a child, major illness in the family.
That was not necessarily the circumstances that would apply in the case of the military families. In their case, they are being deployed. They are trying to deal with that or if they come back wounded and have to deal with that as well. That helped in some regards.
Unfortunately, that bill is limited to the already qualifying aspects of the Family Medical Leave Act. You have to work for the same employer for over a year, for instance. There are various other requirements in there that do not always fit for the members of the military. It has to be an employer with more than 50 employees.
So in many instances, the family members of our military families were not eligible for those benefits. They move frequently. They might not have been on the job for 12 months. They may work for a smaller employer than 50 minimum employees and they may not have had the sufficient number of hours. I think it is 1,200 hours that you have to put in each year.
So what this bill would do is it would give 2 weeks of family medical leave to any spouse, child, or parent of a deployed member of the military or any member of the military coming back who is injured and needs care. So it would apply across the board to any job that a member of the military's family has to give them that benefit.
This is all part of the broader effort. And I want to commend this Committee. In just listening to the legislation today, this Committee is doing a fantastic job of trying to understand and help military families with the specific and peculiar needs that will come up when you are deployed and deployed as often as so many members of the military have been since 9/11.
It is a complex problem and the needs of the families crop up in ways that surprise us as policymakers, but this Committee has been consistently responsive to update the law, to try to do everything we can to help our military families and give them the support they need. It is a supreme sacrifice that is made not just by those who serve but by their families.
Imagine if your spouse or son or daughter was just all of a sudden going away for a year and everything that would have to be done to make that work. It is very difficult. We need to be as responsive as possible to meeting those needs. I think this bill helps by giving the families of our military servicemembers the 2 weeks of leave regardless of their circumstances in addition to the other family medical leave that they might qualify for under existing law.
So I would urge the Committee to support this. And, again, I applaud all of your efforts to support those who served in the military and every little bit as importantly their families. Thank you for the chance.
[The prepared statement of Congressman Smith appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Smith. Thank you for your comments regarding the work of our Subcommittee and the variety of issues that come before our jurisdiction.
Again, I appreciate all of the bills that each of our witnesses on this panel have introduced. These are important in so many different respects, as a more holistic approach not only to our servicemembers, but their families, active-duty and veteran status.
Mr. Sestak, you are now recognized.
Mr. SESTAK. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I wanted to speak about the GI Bill and one aspect of it that used to be in the Montgomery Bill, which my fellow colleague spoke about in a different area, but it is not in the GI Bill, and that is that those who desire as they get out of the military not to pursue a 2- or 4-year college degree, post-secondary education, but rather to have a certification, perhaps a trade from an apprentice school or from a vocational tech school, that they cannot use their GI benefits for that.
I think this is an area that can readily be fixed and I think it would be quite helpful.
When I joined up in the military during the Vietnam era, my very first job was to help the electricians, the machinist's mates, the lathe operators, the interior communication men. And these were the artisans, the ones that really made a go of it on the ship.
These are the same types of individuals that sometimes get out and just want the next step up in their certification, not necessarily a whole 2-year degree, in order to have that certification to go down to the local Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, now Aker Shipyard, and get a job.
I bring that out because I spent Veterans Day, this last Veterans Day in a prison. It was, harkening back to my sailor days, it was—I wanted to visit the vets that were in prison and served our Nation, but very few members go in to visit them. And one-third of all our vets, actually 47 percent in Pennsylvania are there because of a substance abuse issue that has landed them in prison. And this is a medium-size correctional facility.
Many of these individuals will now get out, but they just need a trade, not necessarily a 2 year. And this included vets that have come home that I visited from these wars that are ongoing today.
Just down the road about 4 or 5 miles away is the former Philadelphia Naval Shipyard where they are importing from outside of Pennsylvania and have for 3 years 180 welders. When I helped welders in the Navy, you flipped your helmet, you lit the arc, and you laid the bead.
Today for those who have gone to see how welders do their job, you literally have to sit at a computer, have a higher level of science and math in order to construct the bead and the sophisticated welded needed to be done down at this shipyard. And these are the kinds of individuals that could just go 5 miles down if they were able to get that certification.
So I would ask the Committee in all the great work it is doing to think about a simple fix for these types of often young enlisted men and women that are transitioning out and really do not want to go to a 2 year. I mean, it could be our cooks in the military that just want the next baker type of certification to go into a New York City restaurant and say I have got this certification.
And so I would appreciate the consideration of this for my fellow vets. And I very much thank you for your time.
[The prepared statement of Congressman Sestak appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Sestak, for your testimony on Mr. Putnam's and Mr. Hall's bills, which focus on the Post-9/11 GI Bill, common-sense changes that many of our colleagues are proposing to make it work better for more veterans returning home. I certainly appreciate your unique perspective from your years in the military. We thank you for that.
Mr. Turner, you are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL R. TURNER
Mr. TURNER. Thank you, Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin and Chairman Boozman.
As a former Member of the Committee, I certainly am aware of your great leadership on the issue of veterans and I thank both of you for your service and dedication. And I also appreciate your consideration of this important bill, H.R. 4469.
H.R. 4469 will amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to protect the custody arrangements of servicemembers during their deployment as well as prohibit the use of deployment as a factor in determining the best interest of a child in custody cases.
Madam Chair, the stories are too clear and all too frequent. A servicemember, many times a single mom, is called to serve her country and is given a short time to wind down her personal business and deploy. She makes temporary custody arrangements for her children, usually with her ex-spouse, sometimes in the form of a nonbinding family care plan. Then upon return from deployment and she goes to pick up her child finds that the ex-spouse will not relinquish custody without a court order.
Sometimes the story is even worse. A servicemember in fighting for custody in court has their custody rights terminated by a judge simply because of deployment or even the possibility of deployment. Deployed parents serving our country in places like Afghanistan or Iraq need protections from courts disrupting these established family arrangements.
We cannot have one branch of government asking American men and women to serve while another branch of government punishes them for their service. In the absence of consistent guidance, some States have become aware of this issue and some have taken action.
In 2005, the State of Michigan passed a law to provide protection provisions to military personnel similar to the language introduced in this bill. I commend those States who have taken action on this issue.
However, almost half of all States have not passed protections for military parents and for States that have, their protections vary even if they exist at all. A national standard is required.
This is why I have introduced H.R. 4469 to amend the SCRA to provide custody protections for military parents.
Madam Chair, our men and women serve in a Federal military that is regulated by the Federal Government. Now, these men and women sometimes reside in one State but are stationed in another State, have a marriage license from one State and are divorced in another. Disputing custody arrangements should not be an opportunity to shop for the best forum to take a child away from a military parent.
H.R. 4469 has passed the House on four separate occasions, three times as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and once as a stand-alone bill.
As a stand-alone bill, this legislation was passed by virtue of a voice vote on suspension with support from the Chairman of this Committee. Additionally, every single member of the House Armed Services Committee, both Democrat and Republican, have expressed their support of this legislation.
Through the years, I have tried to resolve any concerns with the legislation and have inserted language that prohibits a Federal right of action for custody cases and expressly allow States to create an even higher standard of protection for servicemembers.
Much is asked of our servicemembers and mobilization can disrupt and strain relationships at home. The basic protection is needed to provide them peace of mind that the courts will not undermine judicial proceedings concerning their established custody rights while they are serving valiantly in contingency operations.
Every one of these stories is one too many and it is justification for taking action. A parent's service to their country should not be used as a weapon against them. This amendment protects them and protects their children.
Again, I want to thank our Chair and Ranking Member. And with your consent, I would like to introduce into the record support letters that we have when the bill has previously moved through House and also a Law Review article that goes through issues that I think most affect the subject matter of this bill.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Hearing no objection, so entered.
Mr. TURNER. Thank you.
[The prepared statement and attachments of Congressman Turner appear in the Appendix. Some of the attachments are being retained in the Committee files.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Turner.
Well, I thank each of you for your testimony.
I would recognize the Ranking Member and any of my other colleagues on the Subcommittee for any questions they may have of our colleagues on this first panel.
Mr. Boozman?
Mr. BOOZMAN. I do not have any questions. Again, I appreciate you guys. These are all very, very good ideas and something that we will take to heart and be working with you as we go forward.
I want to thank you, Congressman Sestak. You helped me with the sub vets thing earlier in the year where we honored the World War II submarine vets. And I cannot tell you what that—well, you know what it meant to them. It was the first time it had ever been done.
And the way it came about, I had a group in Arkansas that were decommissioning a group because they literally were getting too old to attend the meetings anymore. And so it was a very, very nice thing and we do appreciate your help in that regard.
But thanks to all of you for your hard work for veterans.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Any other questions for our colleagues?
[No response.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you for the commitment each of you have demonstrated not only in your testimony on the bills that you have introduced today but time and again during your service in Congress.
Mr. Putnam, we will miss you as you seek to head back to the State of Florida full time. Thank you again for being here, for your work during your time here in the Congress, and to each of you for your dedication on behalf of our Nation's veterans and, again, your recognition of the work of the Subcommittee.
We are very proud of the work of this Subcommittee and it is always nice to have these legislative hearings where we can hear directly from our colleagues who have introduced such important bills. We look forward to working with each of you based on the recommendations we hear from subsequent panels to move the bills forward. Thank you.
We would now like to invite panel two to the witness table. Joining us on our second panel of witnesses is Mr. Robert Madden, Assistant Director of the National Economic Commission for the American Legion; Mr. Justin Brown, Legislative Associate for Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW); Mr. Timothy Embree, Legislative Associate for the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA); Mr. James Bombard, Legislative Director for the National Association of State Approving Agencies; and Mr. Mark Sullivan of the Law Offices of Mark Sullivan.
In the interest of time and courtesy to all of our panelists here today, we ask that you limit your testimony to 5 minutes focusing on your comments and recommendations. Your entire written statement has been entered into the Committee record.
I also ask for unanimous consent that Congressman Turner, a former Member of the Committee as you all know, be permitted to participate in this hearing. Hearing no objection, so ordered.
Mr. Madden, we will begin with you. Welcome back to the Subcommittee and you are now recognized.
STATEMENTS OF ROBERT W. MADDEN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COMMISSION, AMERICAN LEGION; JUSTIN BROWN, LEGISLATIVE ASSOCIATE, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SERVICE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES; TIMOTHY S. EMBREE, LEGISLATIVE ASSOCIATE, IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN VETERANS OF AMERICA; JAMES BOMBARD, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE APPROVING AGENCIES, AND CHIEF, NEW YORK BUREAU OF VETERANS EDUCATION; ACCOMPANIED BY CHAD C. SCHATZ, VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE APPROVING AGENCIES, AND DIRECTOR, VETERANS' EDUCATION AND TRAINING SECTION, MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION; AND COLONEL MARK E. SULLIVAN, USA (RET.), LAW OFFICES OF MARK E. SULLIVAN, P.A., RALEIGH, NC
Mr. MADDEN. Thank you very much.
Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee. The American Legion appreciates the opportunity to present our views on the bills being considered by the Subcommittee today. We have provided written testimony addressing all ten bills, but my oral remarks this afternoon will be limited to H.R. 3948, H.R. 3813, and H.R. 3976.
The American Legion believes that all aspects of education should be included under the Post-9/11 GI Bill to include preparatory classes for higher education. In other words, if a student has completed their undergraduate education and has considered getting their MBA, then the Post-9/11 GI Bill should assist in paying for a preparatory class for the graduate management admission test or GMAT.
The American Legion understands that these classes are expensive, but they are part of student education and should, therefore, be covered under the Post-9/11 GI Bill. Getting prepared for higher education or graduate school is a very important part of the educational process and this bill seeks to remedy and defer the cost of the classes from the student to educational costs covered by the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
Staying competitive in the education arena is very important and these classes have proven to increase the chances of a student veteran being accepted into a certain educational program due to their hard work and diligence in taking a preparatory class. These classes are expensive and as a student, most veterans cannot afford the initial cost of these classes. By adding this benefit, veterans are more likely to be successful in the preparatory test and, therefore, have a better chance of being a success in life.
The American Legion has also been a vocal proponent for making changes to the Post-9/11 GI Bill. The American Legion has recommended that the current law be amended to allow nondegree-granting institutions to receive Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits. This would include vocational, correspondence, on-the-job training, and flight training courses that are not given at an institute of higher learning.
Although the Post-9/11 GI Bill has given a new generation of military members a new way to succeed in life with education and employment, it has left some disparities in the educational and employment path that veterans may choose. Nondegree-granting institutions such as vocational schools provide job placement upon graduation as the graduate has a specific skill set is readily employed.
This bill would reestablish the definition of an education path and allow those veterans who attend institutions such as vocational schools to receive the highest in-State tuition, the housing allowance and book stipend as well.
Currently those veterans who seek education through vocational schools are denied the housing allowance and book stipend and they only receive a fraction of what their tuition costs are. This change will allow those veterans who are looking to choose a more traditional path to employment the opportunity to finish school and become gainfully employed in a quicker amount of time.
Not all veterans attend college and they are searching for other means of employment which include the above-mentioned means of education. They may have families and are looking to become employed as soon as possible in order to properly care for themselves and their families.
The American Legion believes this bill would remedy the disparities between those individuals who are attending an institute of higher learning and those who choose education through a vocational, correspondence, on-the-job training, or a flight training program through a nondegree-granting institution.
The American Legion believes it is the veteran who has the right to choose what his education and employment path should be, not limited only to attending the bricks and mortars, degree-granting college or university in order to receive the full Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits.
The American Legion supports efforts to enhance benefits received by servicemembers to retain their home during any housing crisis. Servicemembers serve multiple deployments to combat zones and should be afforded the relief in order to stay in their current homes where they and their families reside.
In order to maintain quality of life while deployed, it is imperative for servicemembers and their families to be afforded all opportunities to continue their way of life and in their current residence. Servicemembers and their families have sacrificed enough and should not be forced to undergo the additional stress of possible foreclosure to their home.
The American Legion fully supports H.R. 3976.
In closing, the American Legion has 2.5 million members. Our ardent support is to provide education benefits for individuals who are attending nondegree-granting institutions. This will grant veterans who seek other means of employment the same benefits that the Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits afford student veterans.
Secondly, veterans are also due the benefit of being properly prepared for all aspects of employment, including going back to school, apprenticeship and preparatory classes for those veterans who are seeking alternate means of employment. The American Legion supports granting these veterans the chance to gain success in the choice of education and employment paths.
Thirdly, the American Legion supports granting servicemembers and their families the choice to stay in their current home and to avoid foreclosure. In order to keep a cohesive family environment, it is important to keep a family in their home during stateside duty or during an active deployment.
This concludes my statement, Madam Chairwoman. I would be happy to answer any questions you or any Members of the Subcommittee may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Madden appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Madden.
Mr. Brown, you are now recognized.
Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Boozman, and Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the 2.1 million members of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and our auxiliaries, I would like to thank this Committee for the opportunity to testify. The issues under consideration today are of great importance to our members and to the entire veteran population.
For America's newest veterans, the likelihood of unemployment continues to rise. In January 2009, 100,000 Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) veterans were unemployed. Today there are roughly 213,000 unemployed OEF/OIF veterans in the United States with an unemployment of 12.6 percent.
Yesterday the U.S. Senate approved a jobs measure. Despite having more than 1,100,000 unemployed veterans, the 60 page package failed to mention veteran or veterans once.
The VFW finds it unconscionable that America's veterans who have left their families, risked their life and limbs, and left civilian career pursuits behind to answer the Nation's call do not have the attention of Congress for this important matter.
Unemployment impacts all Americans, but America's newest veterans face multiple disadvantages in returning to employment after their service. They are returning to an economy that offers few employment prospects while also potentially dealing with physical and mental disabilities, a lack of experience with interviews and resume writing and a lack of local networks and contacts that so many civilians enjoy. We must do more. And currently Congress has the opportunity to help alleviate the situation.
There are more unemployed Iraq and Afghanistan veterans than there are servicemembers fighting in those wars and they are being passed over in this jobs package. The VFW asks that this Committee insist that the jobs package be amended to include provisions to help America's heroes find employment and we have three suggestions for inclusion.
First, increase and expand the work opportunity tax credit. Currently the credit applies to veterans who separated within the past 5 years and pays $2,400 for hiring a nondisabled veteran and $4,800 for hiring a veteran with a disability. Double it.
Also, the majority of unemployed veterans do not fit this criterion and OEF/OIF veterans that separated before February 25th, 2005, are also excluded. We ask that you extend eligibility at minimum to September 11th, 2001.
Last, the credit requires a veteran to be unemployed for 4 weeks before becoming eligible. This arbitrary requirement should be removed.
Second, modernize the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Program. In 2009, VR&E served more than 32,000 disabled veterans by training, educating, and assisting them in finding gainful employment. Improve this program's effectiveness by providing higher education stipends on par with the Post-9/11 GI Bill, eliminate the arbitrary delimiting date for usage of the program, and provide additional family services such as child care to these veterans.
Last, increase opportunities for veteran business owners and veterans interested in starting a business. For veterans to be a vital component of America's recovery, we need small business training and education. We need access to capital and we need compliance with existing laws and statutes. To do anything less will be a missed opportunity for our veterans and, more importantly, for the well-being of our country.
Yesterday at a business roundtable, President Obama stated that the jobs bill now working through Congress is designed to be targeted and temporary. We hope to see the jobs bill temporarily target America's veterans who are at high risk of unemployment. After serving two or three deployments in many cases, meaningful employment in the country they fought to defend is the least we can provide our veterans.
We have submitted our views on the bills in question, Madam Chairwoman. This concludes my testimony and I will be pleased to respond to any questions you or the Members of this Subcommittee may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Brown appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you very much, Mr. Brown.
Mr. Embree, you are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY S. EMBREE
Mr. EMBREE. Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America’s 180,000 members and supporters, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify before your Committee today.
As a special note, I am new to the IAVA team and to Washington, DC. This is my first appearance in front of the Subcommittee and, in fact, my first Congressional testimony. I am honored to be here.
My name is Tim Embree and I served two combat tours in the United States Marine Corps Reserve in Iraq. During my time in uniform, I saw many fellow deployed Marines struggle with strained family relationships and wrestle with the transition from military life back to civilian life.
I remember coming back to the FOB, heading over to the phone tent to wait hours in line to call home. There was no privacy. And while waiting, I would often hear heart-wrenching conversations throughout the tent. I would watch men cry, begging their wife not to leave them. I would see the anguish on a Marine’s face talking to her young child, her knowing that the kid is confused because they do not recognize their mother’s voice.
I did not like going to the phone tent, not because I did not want to call my family and tell them I was okay, but because I could not stand seeing all the horrible stories play out in front of me. The Marines in that phone tent need to be focused on their mission, but too often were worried about a mortgage payment back home or a failing marriage.
Much of the legislation being considered today will profoundly affect veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan and their families. These bills will help the folks in the phone tent, and I appreciate this opportunity to
Sign Up for Committee Updates
Stay connected with the Committee