America that must be prepared to come to the aid of our Nation when and where possible.

We looked at what it would take to be able to respond. The study indicated that we had a need for about $115 million in 2002, and about $104 million in 2003, and about $78 million in 2004, for us to really be able to take advantage of this unique capability and measure up to this new threat that our Nation faces, both focusing on continuing to support veterans and also being able to respond to the attack or disaster.

The $2 million provided certainly was not adequate, and we still have a need for much more, and we are doing all we can internally, but as you know, there is not a lot of resources that are available to be moved around internally.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. What gets in my craw is, again, I think too many people think of the VA as they thought of the VA 30 years ago, and everything is different. Again, it is the largest system of integrated health care in this country. If some people say, well, it is a Government-run thing, well, so is the war on terrorism, so is homeland security, for the most part. It is very offensive to me; that research is something that we pride ourselves on in the VA, it is the way we attract and keep physicians. It is offensive to me that you have been overlooked.

Lots of people get overlooked, but this is a case where I think it is not in the national interests, and that is why I think it is important to have somebody from VA at the homeland security planning table. Hence, you name a person. So that is why that bill is in there.

General KICKLIGHTER. Sir, let me make a few comments and I will pass it over to Dr. Murphy.

We could not agree with you more, and we are working hard to ensure that people/other agencies understand what the Department of Veterans Affairs brings to this war. We work a great deal with the Homeland Security Office and the White House. We had Governor Tom Ridge over yesterday for a conference. We had HHS over this past week, Dr. D.A. Henderson and his team. We have met with DOD. We are trying hard to make sure that our Nation understands what unique capability VA has to offer. We believe, once we have discussions/briefings with the other lay offices, they will go away with a new appreciation and understanding. This is a beginning not an end of what we need to do, we will to continue to educate, coordinate, and build relationships.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. Did the Governor have such a reaction? General KICKLIGHTER. My perception is he did, and we had his team over about 5 weeks ago, headed by Admiral Steve Abbott and all of his key deputies, and they left there with a new appreciation of what VA offers in the way of emergency response in time of crisis.

We are making progress, but not as much as we would like to, but we are trying.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. Have you talked with HHS?

General KICKLIGHTER. Yes, sir. We had a meeting with them this past week.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. Because they are the ones who are getting all of the money.

General KICKLIGHTER. And we pointed that out. [Laughter.] They agreed that we will start meeting on a monthly basis. In the very near future, we will start having monthly meetings with HHS, FEMA, with the Department of Defense, and with Homeland Security. That is our goal, and we are moving in that direction.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. Good. And the other agencies have agreed to those meetings.

General KICKLIGHTER. Yes, sir, they have.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. That is very good. That sounds like it is being handled well.

General KICKLIGHTER. It is a beginning. With that, I will hand over to Dr. Murphy.

Dr. MURPHY. I think General Kicklighter covered the issue very well.

I would just add that one of the misperceptions is that because we are a Federal agency and an executive branch Department, that we are not part of the local communities. In fact, VA is different than many of the departments, in that we are integrated into every city, every community in the country, and VA needs to be there to be part of that Federal public health infrastructure, and we can play a very valuable role if we are given the mission to do so.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. You are more than integrated, in terms of West Virginia. You play a huge part, and you are geographically dispersed in a perfect way. You are in each part of the State, and to pass this up is just absurd. It is just absurd.

Anyway, we have all of your testimony, and I very much appreciate

Senator Specter, my total apology, sir. My peripheral vision is not suitable today. Do you have any questions?

Senator SPECTER. Well, I had to go to another committee meeting, Mr. Chairman, so I did not hear the testimony that has been delivered up till now.

But let me ask, in a general sense, Mr. McClain, what do you consider to be the most important area of Veterans Administration activity which needs additional funding?

Mr. MCCLAIN. I think it is homeland security, security and preparedness, Senator.

Senator SPECTER. That activity does benefit the veterans in a general sense, as it benefits all of us, but let me ask for what area of veterans' benefits specifically would you request additional funding-educational benefits? Long-term nursing care? Additional outpatient service? More hospital beds? Where would you place priority insofar as additional spending is concerned?

Mr. MCCLAIN. Well, Senator, I am going to ask Dr. Murphy to address that. Certainly, health care is one of our main concerns. Senator SPECTER. Dr. Murphy?

Dr. MURPHY. Senator, we support the administration's budget. However, the needs for the veterans' health care system are growing day-by-day. The enrollment rates are outstripping our actuarial predictions for this year, as they did last year. Pharmaceutical costs are going up. Veterans are recognizing that the uniform benefits package that is offered by VA, and the pharmacy benefit, and the quality of care are really unparalleled in the U.S. health care system. Veterans are coming to us in larger and larger numbers.

We are providing care to a million more veterans and we would like to continue to have open enrollment. But in order to meet all of the legislative mandates, maintain the high quality of care and provide that uniform benefits package, we do require the resources that it takes to maintain all of those programs.

Senator SPECTER. Well, I understand, Dr. Murphy, that you obligated to support the administration's budget, but are you prepared to give your professional judgment that the efforts of some of us to supplement VA medical care funding by $2.5 billion would be excessive?

Let the record show a small smile and pause. [Laughter.]

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. No, let the record also show we do not want her to be fired. [Laughter.]

Senator SPECTER. You have the right to remain silent.

Dr. MURPHY. I think what I can say is that the 2003 budget that was put forward gives you an accurate picture of what the needs were at the time the budget projections was put together. The enrollment being above what we had predicted and some of the other health care costs being above projections, there needs to be an adjustment. The $1,500 deductible would require action by this body. Senator SPECTER. Well, I do not want the General Counsel to avoid some cross-examination.

Mr. McClain, how is the claims adjudication backlog? Do you need more judges? Do you need confirmation of the nominations now pending?

Mr. MCCLAIN. The judges to the Appellate Court, to the Court of Appeals for Veterans' Claims?

Senator SPECTER. Start there.

Mr. MCCLAIN. Certainly, there

Senator SPECTER. How many vacancies do you have?

Mr. MCCLAIN. Currently, I think there are two on that court, but they just authorized two additional swing slots, so to speak, because the 15-year terms of the initial appointments are now coming up in the next couple of years. That court was constituted in 1989, and so in the next couple of years, they will all

Senator SPECTER. So we now have Article One judges, Article Three judges and swing judges?

Mr. MCCLAIN. Well, we have got Article One judges.

Senator SPECTER. Tell me what a swing judge is. I know what an Article One judge is.

Mr. MCCLAIN. There was a legislation passed to add two additional judges to the court. There were five originally. There is, for a period of time, up to seven. I am sorry, Mr. Thompson corrected me, from seven to nine. One of the slots was a 13-year appointment in order to begin to stagger the term so that you do not have, in another 15 years, this same turnover of the court.

Senator SPECTER. Is a swing judge a judge appointed for a lesser period of time?

Mr. MCCLAIN. Yes.

Senator SPECTER. So how many vacancies does the court have, counting those which have not been replaced and counting the new slots?

83-181 D-3

Mr. MCCLAIN. Well, there is one currently. I believe there has been a nomination for that, and we understand that there may be some retirements coming up this year and next year.

Senator SPECTER. Would you provide the committee with what you anticipate there, and give us-my time is up-additional information as to what the backlog is and the adequacy of the existing resources to handle the backlog?

Mr. MCCLAIN. Yes, Senator, I will.
[The information referred to follows:]

FACT SHEET: JUDICIAL CASELOADS AND VACANCIES

CURRENT JUDICIAL VACANCIES

There is currently one vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC). On March 21, 2002, President Bush nominated Mr. Bruce Kasold to fill that vacancy. The nomination is pending in the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

However, as discussed at the hearing, Section 601 of Public Law 107-103, authorized the temporary expansion of the CAVC to nine members (from its usual seven) in anticipation that several of the judges may retire in the next few years as their terms expire. In fact, Judge Ronald Holdaway has already announced that he will retire in November of this year. The President has not as yet exercised this authority to nominate additional members to the CAVC.

There currently are no vacancies on the twelve-member U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears appeals of CAVC decisions.

PENDING JUDICIAL CASES

• As of May 9, 2002, a total of 1,875 cases were pending before the CAVC, consisting of: 1,607 appeals from the Board of Veterans Appeals, 45 writ petitions, and 223 petitions for fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

As of May 21, 2002, approximately 375 appeals from CAVC decisions were pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. However, the resolution of 273 of these (involving a common EAJA-fee issue) will be controlled by a decision in three lead cases.

ADEQUACY OF OGC RESOURCES

Barring unforeseen events, we believe the resources currently available to the Office of General Counsel and those requested in the President's FY 2003 budget will permit us to provide timely representation to the Secretary in these matters before the courts.

Senator SPECTER. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. Thank you, Senator Specter.

Let me just close this panel with something that was just handed to me. Getting back to the homeland security aspect, this has been an amazing sequence.

The working group chaired by Charlie Battaglia, who, of course, we all know, identified what it called a "bare bones" need to prepare VA medical centers, and it said "bare bones" was $248 million. The administration asked them to try again, and so they did, and they cut it to $77 million, and out of that you got $2 million. So let the record reflect that.

I thank all of you very much. I appreciate you taking the time to be here.

Mr. MCCLAIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman ROCKEFELLER. Our second panel represents the major veterans service organizations.

First, we have Jim Fischl, who is director of the National Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission for the American Legion.

If we could have order, I would appreciate it very much.

Second, we have Joe Violante, national legislative director of Disabled American Veterans.

Also, David Tucker, senior associate legislative director, Paralyzed Veterans of America.

Finally, Dennis Cullinan, who is director of the National Legislative Service, VFW.

So we welcome you all and hope that you will keep your statements to 5 minutes. Obviously, your testimony is part of the record.

Mr. Cullinan, we will start with you.

STATEMENT OF DENNIS CULLINAN, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SERVICE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS

Mr. CULLINAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

On behalf of the men and women of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States and our Ladies Auxiliary, I wish to express our sincere appreciation for inviting us to testify here today. The activities of this committee are paramount to the proper and timely provision of care, benefits and services to this Nation's veterans by VA. Today's extensive legislative hearing reflects yet another example of your long and proud tradition of service to this Nation's defenders in a strong, directed and bipartisan manner.

I will begin our testimony with S. 984, the Veterans' Road to Health Care Act of 2001. The VFW supports this measure in that it would ensure access to care for nonservice-connected veterans needing VA care and bring the VA rate into conformance with Federal mileage standards. These adjustments are clearly the right thing to do for our veterans.

Next, S. 1408. The VFW strongly supports the Veterans' Copayment Adjustment Act. This bill amends veterans' health care program provisions to conform income thresholds for copayment for outpatient medications to those in effect for hospital and nursing home care and medical treatment. Viewed by the VFW as being essential toward providing access to low-income veterans to VA medications, it is supported by VFW Resolution 635, calling for equity in VA health care copayments. I would also note here that the VFW did send a letter to Secretary Principi calling for just this action.

Next, 1517. The VFW supports the Montgomery GI Bill Improvements Act. This bill acts upon the long-sought VFW objective of amending the basic educational assistance provisions of the GI bill to eliminate the pay reduction currently required of a service member as a precondition of participation.

Next under consideration, S. 1561. We are supportive of this bill to strengthen the preparedness of health care providers within the Department of Veterans Affairs and community-based hospitals to respond to bioterrorism. We strongly recommend, however, that $250 million be authorized, the bare-bones level, for this purpose, in place of the $2 million specified in this bill.