Ranking Member Takano: "Without action on my amendment today, homeless veterans will lose access to food, shelter, and transportation"
Press Contact
Libby Carlson
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, House Committee on Veterans' Affairs Ranking Member Mark Takano (D-CA) delivered remarks on his amendment highlighting that without Committee action, homeless veterans will lose access to life-saving services when the public health emergency expires in 13 days. The text of the amendment is from Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick's bill, HR 645, the Healthy Foundations for Homeless Veterans Act.
Ranking Member Takano's remarks as prepared:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The authority that this amendment extends expires on May 11th. In thirteen days, homeless veterans on the street will go without food, clothing, and shelter if we fail to act.
The underlying language of my amendment is Congresswoman Cherfilus-McCormick’s H.R. 645, the Healthy Foundations for Homeless Veterans Act. This legislation would extend authorities that we established during the pandemic, which have proven critical to VA’s efforts to end veteran homelessness.
During the pandemic – one of the toughest crises our country has faced – VA actually reduced veteran homelessness by 11 percent and housed over 40,000 veterans.
That success can be directly attributed to flexibilities and funding made available in the American Rescue Plan. My amendment authorizes VA to continue to use funds to immediately connect homeless veterans with the resources they need, like food, transportation, clothing, shelter, and communication devices.
Failure to extend this authority would claw back the critical gains we’ve made, and veterans in need will spend more time on the street if we do not act.
While I believe the authority in this amendment should be permanent, at the Majority’s request, the bill was limited to a two-year extension to reduce the cost at subcommittee mark-up.
My willingness to shorten a vital benefit for homeless veterans, I believe, demonstrates both a good faith negotiation on my part and the urgency and seriousness of this matter.
I understand your objection to including H.R. 645 on today’s agenda was due how the Congressional Budget Office scored the bill because of the Toxic Exposure Fund. Like you, Mr. Chairman, I remain concerned about CBO’s new scoring methodology for veterans legislation.
I know you want to find a solution, but I want to be clear—I don’t think the solution is to change or undermine the TEF.
I have spoken with many Members, including on the Budget and Appropriations Committee, and in Democratic Leadership, and I came to the conclusion that there was not a workable change to the TEF that would not undermine its
fundamental purpose: which is to ensure that toxic-exposed veterans are not pitted against other veterans, and that veterans are not pitted against other domestic spending priorities. This is a line we have drawn with PACT, and the TEF and it is a line I stand by.
My Republican colleagues have argued in favor of going back to the pre-TEF days of funding that would subject toxic exposed and burn pit veterans to uncertainty about whether funding will be available to cover their claims or stripping away the protections of mandatory spending. The solution here is not to go back to our pre-TEF days. Especially as we are now in an environment where funding is uncertain for non-defense discretionary programs.
I do think we need to continue to work with CBO to try and refine its methodology, because I do not think it reflects congressional intent.
I also think there should be a serious conversation about the harm that comes from hamstringing veterans’ policy because of arbitrary rules like CUTGO and PAYGO – and I think this is the case no matter who is in power in the House.
Under these budget rules, we are left to work with limited offsets. So, I would think the right approach is to focus on the most critical priorities.
That is why I am fighting so hard for this amendment to be given the same consideration for the same offsets as the Republican bill priorities that will pass out of our Committee today. The cost of the VET TEC package is over 400 million dollars.
The ANS, however, is over offset by about 3 million dollars. Is it so much to ask to use those 3 million dollars for homeless veterans?
My amendment would cover the remaining 3-million-dollar cost and allow VA to bring in more veterans from off the streets.
The cost of not helping these veterans is much greater.
Homeless veterans will be left to use emergency rooms to access health care and services, which is much more costly. On average, $44,400 is spent per year for the highest users of emergency departments. This bill costs around 500 dollars per homeless veteran.
This amendment is also a serious suicide prevention tool. We know that homeless veterans are 8 times more likely to attempt suicide than their veteran peers. This bill allows VA to identify homeless veterans and connect them to care and services immediately.
I want to share a short story from a VA Case Manager to illustrate the real impact of this authority:
“A veteran was residing in a storage shed in the middle of rural America. Because of this authority, VA was able to give the veteran a phone, pay for a hotel to get him immediately off the streets, and use Rideshare to get him to the hotel.
I am certain the funding saved his life, as he refused to leave the storage shed if he had to go into a shelter. The Midwest was experiencing the Arctic Blast with temperatures reaching negative 17 degrees. Rideshare was then used for a housing search and attending medical appointments and job interviews. The veteran is now employed, housed, and thriving in the HUD-VASH Program.”
It is impacts like this that we will be impeding if we fail to act to extend this authority.
Every day Congress fails to authorize and fund VA homeless programs leads to another night that a veteran is at risk of languishing on the streets.
This amendment brings veterans off the streets and saves lives. I urge my colleagues to support it.
Next Article Previous Article