mr. chairman , i rise today in support of our troops serving overseas and h.r. 1268 . 
i would first like to recognize mr. lewis , mr. obey and the appropriations committee for their work on this bill . 
this past weekend , colorado welcomed home the 143rd signal company of the colorado army national guard . 
we honor the sacrifices these men and women have made and welcome them home . 
we must ensure the safety and well being of the brave men and women who are still serving our country overseas . 
by passing this budget supplemental , we send a message to our troops that , `` we support you in your cause to bring freedom and democracy to the world. '' i commend the committee for proposing to increase funding for vehicle armor kits , new trucks and night vision equipment above and beyond the administration 's request . 
this money will ensure our troops are safe in the line of fire . 
i am also very pleased that h.r. 1268 proposes to increase benefits for military personnel . 
for too long , life insurance and death gratuity benefits have not been enough to take care of families who lost a loved one . 
i urge my colleagues to support these two important provisions and not allow them to be stripped from the bill . 
although i will be voting for this supplemental , i hope in the future we will not have to vote for supplemental appropriations . 
i hope in the future we will vote on the funding of military operations during the budgeting process . 
we are dealing with known and fixed costs in this supplemental . 
it is time for the congress to send a message to the administration that we must include future funding for the war on terrorism in the federal budget . 
mr. chairman , i urge my colleagues to support our troops and pass h.r. 1268 . 
i yield back the balance of my time . 
ms. berkley , mr. chairman , first , i want to take a moment and commend the gentleman from texas , mr. edwards , ranking member obey , chairman lewis and the committee on appropriations for bringing this supplemental appropriation to the floor so quickly . 
this legislation is extremely important to the lives of servicemembers in iraq and afghanistan and their families . 
as many of my colleagues know , las vegas is home to the nellis air force base and many of the men and women stationed there have been sent overseas . 
over 1 , 000 nevada reservists and national guard members have been called to active duty . 
i have spoken to the parents and families of our men and women who have fallen in the line of duty and i am acutely aware of family conflicts which are exacerbated by the death of a servicemember . 
therefore , i have serious concerns regarding the application of the servicemember 's group life insurance ( sgli ) spousal consent requirements in section 1113 ( b ) of the emergency supplemental bill . 
this section requires a married servicemember to purchase a particular level of life insurance and to list their spouse as the beneficiary , unless the spouse consents otherwise . 
at first blush , this proposal sounds great-until you think about it . 
this `` one size fits all '' approach could result in the one-time payment of $ 400 , 000 to a spouse , at the expense of a servicemember 's wishes and the best interest of his orphaned children . 
we must remember that not all married servicemembers have the same types of families and relationships with their spouses . 
imagine a servicemember who is married to a man with a serious drug problem . 
this servicewoman may prefer to name their children as the beneficiaries of her life insurance policy so that in the event of her death , the insurance is spent on he children 's school , clothes , and health care . 
not her husband 's cocaine addiction . 
i do not believe that this woman should have to receive permission from her husband to name her children as the beneficiaries of her life insurance policy and that the government should be forcing her to do so . 
consider a serviceman who has minor children from a prior marriage . 
he may want his children to receive the monies , instead of his current wife . 
a man who wants to be responsible and take care of his children in the event of his death , should not be prevented from doing so . 
but the spousal consent provision in the emergency supplemental may do just that . 
current law allows a servicemember to designate 50 % of his life insurance policy to a spouse and the rest to a child . 
this flexibility has given servicemembers the opportunity to properly take care of their families upon their deaths , no matter what kind of family situation they have . 
the military officers association of america originally supported the provision , but now recognizes that the language is excessively stringent . 
the organization now supports striking the requirement for spousal consent . 
i would like to insert in the record a letter from moaa and a similar letter from the military coalition . 
mr. chairman , the potential of this provision to require that a large one time payment be made to the legal spouse of a deceased servicemember could have serious ramifications for the servicemember 's children . 
it needs to be reconsidered in that light . 
i do not want to delay passage of this important bill , since it contains many important and urgent provisions . 
i trust that the conferees will be able to address this issue in conference . 
association of america , march 11 , 2005 . 
dear mr . 
chairman : on behalf of the 370 , 000 members of the military officers association of america ( moaa ) , i am writing to inform you that , after discussing the issue extensively with the committee 's majority and minority staff , moaa has reconsidered its position on the servicemen 's group life insurance ( sgli ) spousal consent requirement , as included in the appropriations committee 's markup of the fy2005 defense supplemental appropriations act . 
we believe there is merit to the staff 's view that the appropriations committee 's language is excessively stringent and could inappropriately preclude servicemembers ' ability to make reasonable insurance decisions -- especially in circumstances where it may be reasonable and appropriate for a member to designate children as beneficiaries instead of the current spouse . 
moaa believes congress is doing the right thing in expediting passage of improved death benefits coverage in the supplemental appropriations act , and we have no wish to slow that process in any way . 
therefore , moaa urges your support for a floor amendment that would either substitute a provision requiring spousal notification ( instead of spousal consent ) or strike the spousal consent requirement to allow the committee to develop more appropriate language that could be offered in conference or another appropriate legislative venue . 
sincerely , colonel , usaf ( ret ) , alexandria , va , march 15 , 2005 . 
dear representative evans : the military coalition ( tmc ) , a consortium of nationally prominent uniformed services and veterans ' organizations , representing more than 5.5 million members plus their families and survivors , is writing to inform you that , after discussions with the veterans affairs committee 's majority and minority staff , tmc has reconsidered its position on the servicemen 's group life insurance ( sgli ) spousal consent requirement , as included in the appropriations committee 's markup of the fy2005 defense supplemental appropriations act . 
tmc believes there is merit to the staff 's view that the bill language is excessively stringent and could inappropriately preclude servicemembers ' ability to make reasonable insurance decisions -- especially in circumstances where it may be reasonable and appropriate for a member to designate children as beneficiaries instead of the current spouse . 
tmc believes congress is doing the right thing in expediting passage of improved death benefits coverage in the supplemental appropriations act , and we have no wish to slow that process in any way . 
therefore , tmc urges your support for a floor amendment that would either substitute a provision requiring spousal notification or strike the spousal consent requirement to allow the committee to develop more appropriate language that could be offered in conference or another legislative venue . 
sincerely , signed by the representatives of the following organizations : air force association . 
air force sergeants association . 
air force women officers associated . 
american logistics association . 
amvets ( american veterans ) . 
army aviation assn . 
of america . 
assn . 
of military surgeons of the united states . 
assn . 
of the us army . 
commissioned officers assn . 
of the us public health service , inc . 
enlisted association of the national guard of the us . 
fleet reserve assn . 
gold star wives of america , inc . 
marine corps reserve association . 
military officers assn . 
of america . 
military order of the purple heart . 
national association for uniformed services . 
national military family assn . 
national order of battlefield commissions . 
naval enlisted reserve assn . 
naval reserve assn . 
non commissioned officers assn . 
of the united states of america . 
reserve officers assn . 
the military chaplains assn . 
of the usa . 
the retired enlisted assn . 
united armed forces assn . 
uscg chief petty officers assn . 
us army warrant officers assn . 
veterans of foreign wars of the us . 
