coming up today, "newsmakers" with john thune. the first meeting between negotiators over legislation dealing with the then jeh johnson with what the federal government is a with the recent influx about immigrant children along the u.s. mexico border. on "newsmakers", senator john thune, the chair of the republican conference. in studio, or just everett with cq roll call. the first question. you are a member of the finance committee. there has been talk with the highway trust fund going to reach a critical stage or in the

coming weeks. center chuck schumer is a democratic senator from new york. and on the finance committee. he said recently that it is iffy that there will be a deal done to divert the highway trust fund to find the revenue to patch that hole. what is your view on the prospect that there will be an agreement before the middle of july when this really get to a head? >> i think they are better than but it is tough. there are not a lot of ways to find offsets for highway trust fund spending. indeal with this sometime july. we may push it into early august. it is coming. it is a crisis. it always seems it has to be a real crisis before you fine the critical impetus to get something done. highs will ask on an

extension, perhaps we will see it before the senate. we are scheduled later today for a lease starting the markup of a solution that will come out of the senate. hard finding an agreement. i think we can do that. there are things that have been proposed by democrats and republicans. usually on highway trust fund issues, people eventually come together. it is that important. i hope we can find a way forward. there seems to be the will on both sides to do that. as usual, the devil is in the details in coming up with what that right solution is is not going to be an easy process. it is necessary. we have got to get this done. the dutch are the things necessary? >> they are. we cannot continue to borrow from the general fund.

shortfallve a consider paying for we just put it on the back of our children and grandchildren. we cannot keep doing that. if we are going to have a have a program, we have to pay for. to have a smaller program or have to come up with a way to make sure that we are doing this and accounting for it. i think there's general consensus about that. will are people who probably do this because it would be the easy way out to just to a general fund transfer as we have done before. you have to come to grips with reality. we have the short-term problem we need to fake until the -- we need to fix until the end of the year. then we need to confront the reality of a five or six-year highway bill reauthorization that is funded and come up with the funding mechanism.

there are a lot of different totals out there about how best to do that. the immediate crisis will be the short-term extension. colleagues, bob corker, said let's raise the cap tax on this issue. the problem is our cap tax receipts have not been keeping up with spending. what do you prove -- proposed to do with this long-term? do you think it should be looked at? a userou want to keep fee based program, that is probably the most logical place that most people would end up. then they came up with a six and increase the first year and then index of after the second. this things into consideration, it is still something that highway users pay for. ifre are reasons why that

you have to raise revenue to do that in as an option that is being discussed. there are other things being talked about as well. some democrats are talking about using repatriation. multicultural. it would generate some revenue that would fun things for a time. that is not a permanent solution. talkedre house numbers i to that believe that opening up federal lands for exploration would more than cover the shortfall in the highway trust fund in time. there are several ideas out there about them longer-term fix. all of which have short-term short-comings.

president hashe not expressed any kind of an openness to this. they found out a little more open to that. and so they get to that point it will be awkward going forward with that sort of a solution. theou do not have administration weighing in. we will see what happens on the longer-term fix. right now we're focused on this immediate crisis. >> i want to be clear. option on the table as a general fund transfer, are republicans no vote? >> i would say yes. they may be a handful they could get that would vote for that. we cannot continue to do what we have been doing for the past five years. that is where we have these shortfalls every year. do not think we see this as an

acceptable solution. these things need to be paid for. there have been a number of things offer. put forward a list of offsets that we give you the number. his are mostly tax increases. our boast -- are both far spending reductions. there are probably something that can be done that our middle ground. if there are compliance issues that do not represent an spending reforms that would get you to a place we might be able necessary with the shortfall and cover it. i do not think that is a solution that out there. finance market schedule today. another one subsequent to that after we get back after the july where we will try to resolve this issue. turning to environment issues, there has been an

amendment on the republican side by mitch mcconnell that would effectively block the administration's epa regulations for existing power plants. it seems the democrats may be going to link to avoid having a vote on amendment on the senate floor. do you think that amendment is going to have to get a vote before the november election in must to move some sort of pass legislation to be of the highway bill, the a continuing resolution to fund the government? i think any legislation to assume thatould republicans are going to try to get a vote on the amendment. it is incredibly important. i represent a state

-- i think the goal is to completely wipe out coal power. it is a reliable energy source, probably the best one we have cared until we come up with other replacements, i find it hard to see where what they are attempting to do would do anything but genetically to electricity rates. it is important to a lot of our members and it is important to a lot of democrats why senator reid wants to have it on the ther or even at appropriation committee level. they are trying to move appropriation bills. amendments are being offered. the bills are being pulled down. democrats do not want to vote on some of these. one of them would be this amendment. you have to assume that any vehicleant legislative will be an attempt to at least

get a vote on this epa issue. we will see what happens. income ofrtant to the americans. >> last fall was all republicans fund on obamacare. you think your party should take a stand on anything? ? >> i think we will have vigorous debates. hopefully we can get on the floor to get it discuss. no republican is talking about using that as leverage. any continuing resolution is adopted this year.

would mean that number. the spending issue should not be a question. other of- are there these matters that may be a part of that discussion? it is quite possible they could be. it shuts the government down. as not something anyone is talking about. >> there might be a truth to get their spending? >> because the numbers were locked in by the budget agreement that was adopted earlier this year, you would see .epublican and democrat coming if you get them to stay under. i suspect that issue probably will not be as contentious as it has been in some past years. are having a real debate

about the level of spending. it has been agreed upon. the end of voting on this tune the parameters. it gets done in a way that finishes up the fiscal year. then everyone can go and litigate these issues. around. -- you neverno really know. recently they announced the said senator grassley he was a member of the finance committee may have been subjected to some extra scrutiny or there may have this by the internal revenue service. i am curious if you have any

comments on the state of the irs and whether to have all been reviewing their own personal area to see if anyone other than senator grassley may have been suspected in any enhanced scrutiny. they may be targeting conservative senators. has ar grassley reputation in terms of his integrity that is impeccable. lerneruggestions by lois that they ought to audit him or examine him. of ananother example agency with a bunch of people who have an agenda. is there a discussion about sick? yes.

with respect to the finance committee, we were trying to get this concluded. byipartisan investigation the finance committee. we cannot can answers from the irs. we are misleading. there is no accountability there. the republicans are incredibly frustrated. this latest revelation is solar piling on a very cumulative amount of evidence. they were completely using that agency who had tremendous power. they're using it for political

purposes. that is wrong. if we cannot give these investigations that congress is trying to do, we need a special prosecutor to look into this. they are not getting these answers. >> we're talking about this pent-up frustration. suing thealking about executive overreach. do you agree with this? is this something they may associate themselves with? this.t will support speaker boehner is recognized -- has recognized the enormous overreach of the administration.

they would probably have to get the votes to get a resolution to that. i support what they have done. it could be a cost to the taxpayers in the millions. it takes month to get through the court system. and may not even be put up during the administration. >> those are all good questions. i do not know. this is a process that is fairly new to me.

a lot of agencies are acting outside of their legal authority. somehow that has got to be challenged. can you guys do something about it. sometimes this can control a little bit of that. it protects the president from the accountability. there are tools at your disposal. this is something the speaker has just recently announced. at thisus are looking as a possibility. when way we can get that accountability is maintain the checks and balances.

>> i wanted to turn to our politics. we're looking at a the context of the appropriations process. republicans might take that control of the united states senate. your party has come under a challenge. to what extent do youth inc. example isf the people go after party leaders?

you were successfully able to out the democratic leaders. have you talked about how that race may have changed things since then? in my example, i argue that senator daschle was using his leadership position in a way the was contrary to where majority were. he was misaligned with the views of the majority people in our state. senator mcconnell's views on the reflects theuch spirit. you do not have an individual

whose leadership is out of alignment and not representative of the views of the people in the state. there are people that draw parallels. they are defeating members that were leaders in the united theys senate appeared voted overwhelmingly for the republican nominee for president. are being advanced by the obama he isstration spirit running against him when his positions are going to be very much left of the state.

>> a.p. chris mcdaniel. had the senate republicans being able to fend off these conservative challengers. do you think has hit a high ?atermark question o when labels get attached to people, i think most of us here arehe senate are does -- conservative. the conservative movement and well. these are races between the establishment. views or by the tea party. this is where the real contrast is.

most of these we have had primaries i think there have been individual circumstances. they are individualized races in various places around the country. i will not for a minute suggest that we should not be listening carefully to the views being articulated by people who are bringing challenges. they are running for reelection in the ninth of faith senate. republicans believe stream. they're pretty much down the line.

i think that is where most people will be. for a you preparing primary challenge in the future? >> a lot of outside groups spinning that you do not have control over, i think every candidate who gets into this arena needs to be paying close attention to their home state or , thing veryt connected to the people that are important to them. people in this country. people in south dakota have a way of punishing people that get out of step with whether interest are. >> you better be prepared to .efend yourself we have seen a lot more primaries as of late. it will probably not change in the future.

it is our democracy at work. collect when tension between the establishment republicans and the tea party is is is debatable whether they reauthorize this. to support the reauthorization? >> i have in the past. get into the debate, i will determine what the role of the bank has been, should be. transparency can be brought to it. i think we have to constantly examined these agencies, what their role is, what the costs and benefits are and make sure we are creating this were a free-market economy can really thrive and prosper. place. these are put in

they have a debate about what the role of these institutions should be going forward. for sure we can do everything we can to bring about the kind of transparency or the type of reform that if they're going to continue to function only them more accountable and more efficient and better for the american taxpayer. question and on the about a different kind of primary. the one that comes up in 2016. wereup of schoolchildren not particularly interested in having higher expirations of your own. if you're planning any travel

there are have any other sort of plans the on trying to get the majority in the senate? >> i hope you get to iowa. out.n't rule anything if you want to make a difference in public basis, do not rule out potential opportunities. i am not running for president at the moment. that is not to say someone down the road you do not make an evaluation. >> thank you very much.

>> it is good to be with you. like let me turn to our two reporters here. let's talk a little bit about what we heard from the number three in addition in the senate. we began on the policy front. when they come back, the highly transportation bill is going to be staring many of them down. >> he has said this week that is that thison will become a problem july the 18th. it'll give him just about two when theyigure out come back from the weeklong july 4 rate. -- break. be, because he is talking about tax compliance democratic proposal that is out there it is about half compliance revenue.

if that is the case, we may only be looking at a 4 or 5 million dollar hole. >> he heard from the senator. offset.e not republicans are a no vote. but it is not unprecedented for them to miss this deadline. i have a hard time believing that for months before the election they will take this failure. probably passill this. .hey will relitigate this >> between now and election day, what will the senate be working on?

there will be a number of stage political vote by democrats that are designed to ones will be preventing the shortfall in keeping the government open. that will be the biggest key. one of the anxiety is very was that republicans will use every opportunity to get the greenhouse gas regulation amendment. then he said there was no appetite for shutting down the government. >> i get the sense nobody wants to have this government shut down. republicans are blamed largely for the shutdown.

there was the defining approval ratings. believingard time that they will take this pot life of the president. probably begwill away from forcing a vote on anything. >> do you think the sentiment and you are expressing is one that runs throughout the republican party? >> is is really hard to say. we would never be doing this anyway that shuts down the government. difference to the calendar. like you're shaking your head. >> i think that is right. certainly one of the things as wherek toward the fall, the polls start to go in some of money andpulling out

earnings and candidates under the bus, some of what we do and what we see happening may well be dictating by which are competitive. we will have to wait and see. thank you very much for this effort. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] daniel shulman on the koch brothers and their rise to political power in the two decades that'll over their father's empire. >> there is this lawsuit that played out between the four koch brothers. a board roomes in showdown. they weren't trying to expand

the size of the board. deposinghave ended up this. they would have taken a greater role in the direction. there is a really traumatic the board has to sit down and decide. now you can keep in touch with current demand using any phone, or any time. your --202-626-8888. can also hear audio of the

five network sunday there's program beginning sundays at noon eastern. long-distance phone charges may apply. >> house and senate lawmakers are in the process of working out differences between their health care bills. members met tuesday to give opening statements on delays the medical care. veterans would be allowed to get private care if they experienced long wait times. this would create more health centers around the country. this meeting is just under two hours. >> without objection, so ordered. we begin negotiations regarding the house amendment, it he senate amendment, the access to care at the 2014. i'm going to recognize myself

first and recognize our cochair senator sanders. then they will be recognized and senior -- recognized by seniority. each country will have five minutes at a maximum to make brief remarks. be recognized the next available slot from his or her chamber. toecognize he have a lot discuss. i would ask everyone to be cognizant of the five-minute time limit of each one of us has an opportunity to be heard. this is the first time in 15 sears that the veterans affair committee are involved in a conference. i like to acknowledge senator rockefeller. they're the only two members who participated in the 1999 conference.

this is my honor to serve alongside chairman sanders. a department own mission, they are suffering from widespread wrongdoing and a lack of integrity. been left to wait months and years for the cure they have earned. for then the work we begin today is too late. for them, the work we begin today is too late. but for those veterans still waiting our work begins not a moment too soon. the bureaucratic failure that is brought us to this point are legion and can only be solved by nothing less than meaningful reform.

that reform enacted after close and careful consideration in a face to face deliberation of both bodies. the work done by the house and senate veterans affairs committee is historically bipartisan and i expect this work here today will be the same. we may have differences to address moving forward all of us share the same primary goals. first, to ensure our nation's veterans have timely access to high quality health care and secondly to ensure that va leaders and employees are held accountable for actions that harm veteran patients. the work we do in this committee will impact the way in which this country's second largest bureaucracy operates in the manner in which veterans throughout the country receive needed care for years to come. and there's no doubt that hard work and tough decisions await us in the days ahead. however, those of us gathered around this doois bring years of diverse experience in

government, law, medicine and a variety of other disciplines, some of us are even health care providers. several are veterans including our friends senator john mccain who sacrificed to our country, a few of us can fathom. and senator -- [ applause ] senator, the gavel that i use over in the house was taken from the deck when the ship was sunk off the coast of pensacola but this was part of the deck of a ship you know very, very well. >> less landing than takeoff. >> yes, sir. all of us share a passion for making the va a better place, a better service. together, we will more than meet the challenges ahead of us. we'll be responsive to the needs of both our nation's veterans and her taxpayers. and we'll live up to the example set by those who wear her uniform. i'm committed to nothing less.

i want to thank senator sanders, senator bur, ranking member isho and each conferees for the work done so far and the work to come. i look forward to hearing your comments as we move forward and with that, i yield to chairman sanders for any open comments and introductions he may make. >> well, thereas co-chair of th meeting and the guy to wield the gavel, in fairness for people down on the list, i very much appreciate if all members kept their remarks to five minutes. let me begin by thanking chairman miller and ranking members michaud and burr and all of the members of this committee for their hard work on veterans issues. despite a very partisan environment here in congress, i am confident that we as democrats, republicans and independents will come together to pass a significant piece of

legislation which addresses some of the very serious problems currently facing the va. both pieces of legislation, the house bill and the senate bill, are focused on two main issues. first, the need to provide access to health care for veterans in a timely manner. and the need, also, for holding dishonest or incomp hent senior officials at the va accountable. nobody around this table, i believe, will accept va officials lying about wait times or falsifying data. nobody around this table will accept the fact that honest whistle-blowers, people who want to improve the system, are having their legitimate concerns ignored. i am pleased that in reality there are more similarities than differences between the two bills and i'm confident that we can reach an agreement that will be satisfactory to everyone and,

frankly, that is what our veterans deserve. i think everyone in this room understands that the cost of war does not end when the last shots are fired and the last missiles are launched. the cost of war continues until the last veteran receives the care and benefits that he or she has earned on the battlefield. war is as everyone here knows is a terribly expensive proposition in terms of human life, in terms of human suffering and in financial terms. and in my very, very strong view, if we are not prepared to take care of those men and women who went to war, then we shouldn't send them to war in the first place. taking care of veterans is a cost of war. period. in terms of iraq and afghanistan, the human cost of the wars is almost 7,000 dead. the cost of war is 530,000 veterans seeking care at the va

in 2013 for ptsd alone. not to mention those who were struggling with tbi. the cost of war is too many service members coming home with missing arms and legs, lost eyesight or lost hearing. the cost of war includes veterans each and every day dying by suicide, struggling with high rates of divorce, wives trying to rebuild their lives after losing their husbands. kids growing up in one-parent homes and too high rates of unemployment for returning home service members. those are some of the costs of war that none of us should forget. three weeks ago, senator mccain and i hammered together a proposal to deal with the current crisis at the va. i think it is no secret we have different world views. john, is that correct? is that a fair statement? >> safe to say. >> but i thank him very much for working with me to move this

legislation forward and to move it forward expeditiously. the sanders-mccain bill passed the senate with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 93-3. in terms of funding by a vote of 75-19. the senate made it crystal clear that the current crisis in the va is truly an emergency and should be paid for through emergency funding. as everybody here knows, in the last four years we have seen a significant increase in the number of veterans utilizing va health care. in addition many of our veterans of world war ii, korea and vietnam require a greater amount of care as they age and further an audit revealed more than 57,000 veterans on too long waiting lists to be scheduled for medical appointments and in addition to that there are other veterans seeking care at va who were never even added to these wait lists. this is clearly unacceptable and must be dealt with immediately.

i couldn't agree mor with senator mccain when he said on the senate floor in the debate, and i quote, if there's a definition of emergency, i would say that this legislation fits that. it is an emergency. it is an emergency what is happening to our veterans and the men and women who have served the country and we need to pass the legislation and get it to conference with the house as soon as possible. end of quote from senator mccain and i fully concur with what he said. veterans in this country must get quality care in a timely manner and we need to provide the funding the va needs to accomplish that goal and to do it as expeditious a manner as possible. the simple truth of the manner is the va needs more doctors, more nurses, mental health providers and certain parts of the country more space for a growing patient population and a letter sent to the house and senate veterans affairs committee june 17th and signed by virtually every major veterans organization, vietnam vets, iraq and afghanistan veterans, all of the groups, this is what they said and i

quote. protect and preserve the va health care system. any legislative, regulatory or administrative changes designed to respond temporary or permanent must protect, preserve and strengthen the va health care system so it remains capable of providing a full continuum of high quality, timely health care to all enrolled veterans and the letter continues, quote, unless the legislation simultaneously sets va on a path to intelligently strengthen health care, ensure that overall va funding matches its mission, the current problems confronting va and yvette rans will inevitably recur. end of quote from the veterans organizations and i agree with that important statement. to address the long waiting periods, the senate legislation says the veterans around the country if you cannot get into a va facility you're going to be able to go to a private doctor,

go to a community-based, you can go to a federally qualified health center, dod base or indian health service and that means that veterans will have access in their community to the health care they need. this bill also says to veterans who live 40 miles or more from a va facility that if they choose they have the option of seeking care outside of the va. so, let me just conclude by saying this. we are all aware of the problems within the va and i think we'll hear very valid criticisms of the va today but there's one point to make in closing is if anyone in the room thinks that the va is only health care system in the united states of america that has problems, they would be sorely, sorely mistaken. i don't have to give you the quotes. about 200,000 to 400,000 people dying every single year in hospitals around the country because of poor and errors made

the hospitals or the 45,000 people who die each year because they don't have health care. i think we all know those facts. so my hope is that we can work together in a bipartisan way and to develop legislation which strengthens the va so what every veteran in this country who is eligible for va health care gets quality care in a timely manner. thank you all. all right. now we're ready to go and i think we begin with -- all right. with congressman michaud. >> thank you very much, senator sanders and representative miller. as you heard earlier, it's well over a decade since lawmakers gathered in conference from the respective committees. this is a historic opportunity and we have i believe a responsibility to deliver profound changes in a way veterans services are delivered in a timely, safe and high quality health care way.

we are all well aware of the incredible failures within the veterans administration. just yesterday, though systemic problems were compounded when the office of special counsel released findings to take va to task for not doing nearly enough to act on information provided by the whistle-blowers. we know that this inaction can directly harm our veterans. i urge all of us to see beyond the immediate crisis and take this opportunity to have real conversations on how we can fix the va. i hope as a group we can put forward meaningful reforms that positions the department of veterans administration to provide high quality, timely and flexible care in the future. we have a responsibility to ensure that the va has the resources it needs and most importantly the a toiblt plan strategicallial for the future so that the needs of our veterans no matter what age they

are or where they served are met. i'm proud to -- how quickly both the house and senate chambers responded to take action in this crisis. however, i do believe we could have made the amendment that passed in the house much stronger if we included a number of other bills aimed at strengthening performance outcomes and accountability within the va. and holding all va executives both senior executive service members and title 38 employees accountable. if you look at what happened in phoenix, arizona, and in florida and some of the other areas, those were title 38 employees that were responsible for that in this performance measures that passed the house does not cover those employees. i also believe that it's important for us to look at how we can deliver flexible care for our veterans in their local communities.

the odds program allows veterans to receive high quality care they need in their local communities with a built-in support network of family and friends nearby. i constantly hear from veterans in maine how much they love the arts program and i sincerely hope we can grow and expand the arts program through this conference. i will also note the fact that when cbo scores the arts program, they do not score the savings. in maine alone, the arts program saved well over $600,000 in travel costs. $600,000 in travel costs which is not considered in the cbo score and i urge all of us to remember first and foremost that we are doing this for our nation's veterans. these are men and women who put their lives on the lines day in and day out for our nation and our freedoms. when they made their incredible sacrifice, to earn the well deserved benefits that they should be receiving, benefits

they do so by working together in a cohesive and in a spirit of cooperation towards our national goal. we owe them the same as we move forward with legislation to address this health care crisis and i urge my colleagues on both sides of the ail and both chambers to work together in a collaborative way so we can get the best legislation to the president's desk for his cig signatu signature. i yield back. >> thank you. senator burr. >> chairman sanders, miller, thank you. let me at this time ask unanimous consent to ebt sbeer the record senator johanns comments. he's sick and can't attend. >> without objection. >> i thank the chair. let me say to my colleagues, we owe everything to our nation's vets. everything. we owe everything that they need to be provided. we're all aware that there's widespread, systematic failures that plague the health care system. the culture that has developed at the va and the lack of

management accountability is simply reprehencible. it's becoming increasingly obvious a cultural problem has taken deep root in va and simply increasing funding will not solve it. it could prove to only reinforce the culture. reforms are desperately needed within va and some of the changes can't be fixed through legislation. they must come from within va. but addressing the cultural problems within va won't provide relief for the roughly 100,000 veterans experiencing long waits across the nation today. it is now time for us in partnership with the va to begin to repair the damage that has resulted from systematic failures that have undermined the trust veterans have always placed in the veterans administration. to begin to change the culture at va, there's reforms to pursue to ensure veterans have access to timely, quality health care.

now, the start of an effective congress and a conference comes with accurate numbers. and since ranking member michauk mentioned cbo, let me talk numbers for just a minute. va is basically broken down in two sides. the veterans benefit administration and the veterans health administration. last year this congress for this year appropriated $55 billion for vha. veterans health administration. of that $55 billion, most members would be shocked to know that 48% goes to direct patient care. we're talking about $27 billion of appropriated money goes to the delivery of health care to our nation's veterans. 52% goes to administration and other programs that emanate out of the vha budget. of that $27 billion, that's doctors and nurses, it's the delivery of care to all of our

8.4 million veterans who cbo has scored enrolled and active. now, it brings us to the house bill and the senate bill. the house bill was scored at $35 billion a year. and if fully implemented after the two-year period, scored it $50 billion. the house bill was scored at $44 billion. basic difference of timing on the wait times from 14 days to 30 days. now, i asked my colleagues around this table, is the cbo product that they have produced reflective of anything sane? that the scoring of a bill that offers limited choice if one of two things is triggered in the house side and that's we have either gone past the 30-day established by the va or they

live outside of 40 miles from any va facility, be it clinic, outpatient facility or major medical facility that it would exceed by $7 billion on an annual basis what we spend for the entire delivery system for our nation's veterans. to my colleagues, this is ludicrous. this is impossible for us to even start an intelligent discussion on what we put in legislation and when we have got number that is are this so go's thing grotesquely out of line. let me give you a few other references. va estimated that of the 8 million veterans eligible for va but not enrolled, that if we passed this legislation they would automatically drop whatever coverage they have today. be it medicare, tri-care, private insurance, fehpb for

those federal employees and when they dropped that they would immediately go into the va system for two years. i want to ask you to stop and think about that for just a second. to a veteran on medicare, they're going to drop their medicare, go into the va for two years? and then pay the penalty to get back into part "b" medicare? for an employee who has private insurance, they're going to drop their insurance and leave their spouse uncovered because they see some advantage to being on va? it's estimated that 90% of those veteran who is are eligible but not enrolled in va have less than 50% disability rating. the threshold to where it's va care comes without a co-pay. these are individuals who have already made a determination that the coverage they're under is the best coverage they could have. if not, they would be enrolled in the va today.

so, the fact that cbo now says with just the execution of this minor reform legislation it would trigger 8 milliillion peo in the system that exist and don't enroll is just as ludicrous as $35 billion or $44 billion price tag that cbo has put on the bill. cbo determined as you would imagine that only 3% of their cost is attributed to the 40-mile trigger that we put in the senate legislation. in other words, there are very few veterans around the country living more than 40 miles from a va facility but like i have heard some of my colleagues say, when you've got something that makes as much common sense as this, that it's less expensive to let them get local care than it is to pay their reimbursement to a va facility, can't we accommodate the veterans once?

his needs and the taxpayer's fiduciary responsibility to come out cheaper by doing it. this is the only place within the cbo score that they actually agreed that the impact is minimal from a standpoint of the number of people that are affected. so, it leaves one thing. how could cbo come to the conclusion that the va was at a point where it couldn't add any more enroll lees without a masse increase in providers? in other words, the va's full. don't knock. don't come. well, let me suggest to you that the va just on one matrix and that's primary care panels sees 1,200 patients when non-va providers see 2,500 patients. the va sees 1,200 patients on a primary care panel when the non-va providers see 2,500

patients. when we talk about systemic problems, talking about cultural changes, this is not targeted at folks that veterans don't see every day. it's targeted at providers that for whatever reasons within the va don't conduct themselves at the same rate that non-va providers, in fact, experience. so, i say to my colleagues, i hope that the chairman and the ranking members will challenge cbo on the score to start this process we need to know exactly what it is that happens when we begin to move the dials one way or the other and to start at the point we have started because of that score is, in fact, more challenging than anything i could ever think of. i thank the patience of the

chairman. >> congressman? >> thank you. i would like to thank the chairman and ranking members of the house and senate va committees for the leadership on this issue. it's a real honor to be a member of this conference committee and i look forward to working with you all. the last of transparency at the va and the very nature of data manipulation and secret wait lists have made it very difficult to expose the true nature of the problems facing our veterans. there are almost 100,000 veterans living in my district. in an effort to find out a they're seeing, i've held conference leaders with local leaders, spoken with the facility directors in denver and colorado springs to evaluate the quality of care and i've put out a call to veterans to call my office. we have subpoenaed documents and testimony, heard from numerous witnesses from the va. i've sent multiple letters demanding answers as i'm sure all of us and supported legislation to expand fee basis care and to give va leadership more flexibility to fire negligent employees. at first, the va attempted to

down play the significance and extent of the problem. only through the efforts of whistle-blowers, brave individuals from across the country that have taken great risk to expose the truth, has the depth of the issues at the va come to light. subsequently, the interim va office of ig validated the claims and labeled them systemic. yesterday, the va's bimonthly access data said the electronic wait list in denver had more than doubled since their last report just two weeks ago. this problem is not getting better. it is getting worse. we cannot kick this can down the road. we can't simply seek to create an assembly line to get veterans in and out faster without regard to the quality of care. ultimately, we must focus on changes that yield better health care outcomes for the veterans through timely access to quality care. in order to achieve this and ensure that these solutions are