let me simply say that i find it ironic , mr. chairman , and i thank the gentleman for yielding , because the entire history of the development of this expanded benefit demonstrates that both the gentleman from california ( mr. lewis ) xz4002391 and this gentleman from wisconsin were aiming to expand benefits , not to contract them . 
when i first drafted my first proposal we were told that the committee on veterans ' affairs itself was concerned that we might have gone too far in providing benefits to people because , for instance , the example used to me was we do not want to pay someone who was killed in a drunken driving accident because he had five martinis at a bar . 
we want to make sure that this occurred in the line of duty . 
so that is the way we drafted the amendment . 
but the overall effect of the amendment was to add benefits for 2 , 400 people who had died , who had not been killed in iraq and afghanistan , and that was estimated to cost $ 95 million . 
how an expansion of benefits can be described as a restriction is beyond me . 
it certainly does not fit my definition . 
