Angie Craig: “I will be brief, but it is important I have the attention of my colleagues. Yesterday, with the Burns amendment, we…”

“I will be brief, but it is important I have the attention of my colleagues. Yesterday, with the Burns amendment, we increased veterans funding over last year by 14 percent, so we have already increased veterans spending by 14 percent. The Senator from Michigan wishes now to increase it by 36 percent. That is 104 billion new dollars over a 5- year period. And it is taxed for. At least she has the courtesy of offering something that is paid for. But even the Veterans Administration, with the Burns amendment, by their best guesstimation--and I use the word ``guesstimation''--would suggest that veterans' care next year will grow by less than 2 percent. There is absolutely no justification for increasing veterans health care budgets by a grand total of 36 percent in 1 year. This Senate has been progressively generous to America's veterans, as we should be. It is now one of the most rapidly growing health care budgets in our country, with the Burns amendment, not the Stabenow amendment. Please vote no on the Stabenow amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the roll. The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 54, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No.…”