On the recordJanuary 20, 2022
To be clear, the Veterans' Affairs Committee had numerous opportunities in the last year to do that work that I had just discussed, and I don't know why the chairman chose not to. I have heard him say over the last week that it is okay we didn't have a hearing on the EVEST Act in this Congress because the bill has been in the public domain. Now, I am not sure what that statement really means because there have been almost 400 bills introduced in this Congress that have been referred to the Veterans' Affairs Committee. I guess that each of those are in the public domain. But I don't think any of them are ready for a vote here on the House floor. It is not too much to ask that we seek the input from stakeholders before voting on a bill to become law. That is actually the least we can do. I don't think our constituents sent us here to do anything less than that. During last week's Rules Committee, Congresswoman Torres, a member of Chairman Takano's own party, seemed to agree with me by lamenting the lack of process this bill has received this Congress. With all due respect to the Congresswoman, I doubt that we agree on much, but we do agree on this, though. Having this bill go through a much more robust process this Congress could have resulted in a much better product for our veterans. {time} 0930 Finally, I want to note that the bill will also cost taxpayers $3.1 billion in new discretionary spending. Not a penny of that $3.1 billion is offset.…





