Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz Floor Remarks on the 2027 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Bill

WASHINGTON — Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL-25), Ranking Member of the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, delivered the following remarks on the fiscal year 2027 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies funding bill:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in tentative support of H.R. 8469, the fiscal year 2027 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies bill.

The past few years, the MilCon-VA bill strayed from our tradition of being one of the few appropriations bills that traditionally had bipartisan support. Our committee has a shared goal of supporting our servicemembers, veterans and their families, no matter who holds the majority.

We are proud to report that as the bill stands, this is a bipartisan bill, one we reported out of full committee 58 to zero.

However, it saddens me to see that the majority has made in order amendments that stray from the bipartisan commitment that both Chair Carter and I have maintained. 

I want to be clear that if any of the controversial amendments made in order are adopted, we will not be able to support this bill, and all the bipartisan work that we did to get this bill to this stage will all have been for naught. 

What a message we could send about our ability to work together if the House rejects these controversial amendments and votes to support the MilCon-VA bill –controversial amendments that really have nothing to do with protecting and preserving the quality of life of our servicemembers on active duty or our veterans for a critical bill that supports our servicemembers and those who served our country honorably. 

I want to be clear that we’ve already made compromises on this bill – this is not the bill that I would have written.

The bill includes a policy rider that prohibits the VA from reporting a beneficiary, for example, that has been deemed mentally incompetent based on medical evidence – and therefore is assigned a fiduciary to handle their finances – to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. 

Not only is this a violation of current law, but it will only put more veterans in harms way.

Additionally, I oppose the funding level for the NATO Security Investment Program, which is $122 million below the request level. 

Now more than ever, we should be reinforcing deterrence with the help of our European allies who disproportionately fund this program, especially as the war in Ukraine continues.

I was able to put these concerns aside as were my Democratic colleagues on the subcommittee and the full committee and support this bill – because that is what bipartisanship requires.

As I told the Rules Committee, Mr. Chairman, sometimes we have to compromise on what our preferences might be. You never compromise on principle, but to achieve a greater good, which this bill absolutely represents, sometimes you swallow hard and you look past some things not being exactly the way you would have preferred. 

So, today we will consider an amendment that bans funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion at the VA as well. Because there are problematic amendments that have been made in order beyond just the language in the current underlying bill. We are worried that we will tip the scales from bipartisanship into partisanship.

The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Voting Rights Act and swift action taken in southern states to disenfranchise black voters proves that we’ve always needed to lean in on ensuring there is diversity, equity, and inclusion.

We will not allow this attack on communities of color to continue, and we will strongly oppose this amendment if it is offered. 

The amendment does nothing to help veterans, and it is divisive, partisan, and unnecessary. 

Along these same lines, there is an amendment that attacks Filipino World War II veterans – veterans that fought for us and with us, resulting in one of the greatest victories in our history.

I want to be clear here – the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund exists to correct what was a racist decision made in 1946 that banned Filipino veterans from receiving compensation for their service in WWII. 

That is why the word “equity” exists in the title of this account.

There is also a messaging amendment on gender affirming care for veterans. I hope that is not offered.  

Regardless of what you feel about the LGBT community, it’s ridiculous to block a veteran from receiving the health care that they’ve earned. 

It’s disappointing that we are at this point, and I hope that throughout the rest of this process we can come together to defeat these amendments. I do want to underscore that Judge Carter and I could not possibly have a better working relationship, and we have worked hand in glove to reach this point, and I think I can safely speak for both of us that we hope that we can achieve the same outcome that we were able to achieve in the full appropriations committee, and I reserve the balance of my time.

###