View Full Version : Bush's War Against Veterans
knightroar
06-30-2005, 01:42 PM
The war against veterans
PRESIDENT Bush gives plenty of lip service to men and women in uniform. Now it’s time for the President to put his money where his mouth is and fully fund veterans’ benefits.
An official of the Department of Veterans Affairs admitted last week that it is short $1 billion for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, but giving short shrift to those who have served their country is nothing new for this administration.
For several years now, the Bush bean counters have been slashing funds for veterans’ medical care. Playing cheap with those who have put their lives on the line would be a concern any time. Coming as the shortfall does as soldiers return home daily from war in Afghanistan and Iraq with horrific injuries, it’s a scandal.
The outrage on Capitol Hill is bipartisan, even though Republicans have continually thwarted Democratic attempts to give the VA more money under the guise of budget restraint.
Sen. Larry Craig (R., Idaho), chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, let it be known that he has reamed out Jim Nicholson, who heads the VA.
Sen. Patty Murray (D., Washington), a member of an appropriations subcommittee overseeing the VA, declared that the administration is unwilling “to make the sacrifices necessary to fulfill the promises we have made to our veterans.”
The result has been a longer wait for medical care and the closing of some VA clinics.
Veterans groups are understandably hot, with most of their ire directed at Republicans, who control Congress and have made a priority of cutting so-called “domestic spending” at the behest of Mr. Bush. One thrust of the Bush policies has been to direct benefits mostly toward those with certain medical problems that are directly attributable to military service.
Steve Robertson, legislative director of the American Legion, says the spending cuts “are inconsistent with a nation at war.” He’s especially critical of dividing veterans into “little groups, the ones that ‘deserve’ and the ones who ‘don’t deserve.’”
Such discriminatory policies clearly are out of line. The federal government cannot be all things to all of the American people, but the least it can do is to keep faith with those who kept faith with it by serving in the armed forces.
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050630/OPINION02/50630004
Lotimer
06-30-2005, 01:43 PM
Yep. The right has been totally silent about Bush's cuts to Veteran's benefits.
See this thread as well
http://www.wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5334
This guy goes out of his way to shaft Vets.. yet they continue to support him for the most part..
Fuck 'em.. Vote for Bush, get what you deserve.. A bad President who puts your interests last
Lotimer
06-30-2005, 02:06 PM
How predictable. The hypocrite right ignores this thread. WHERE'S YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE TROOPS NOW?
Bush looks and acts likes he enjoys screwing the good things the USA has up badly. There seems to not be mercy in Bushs voice for our people and our military.
Bush is sending the views to our people that he and his Party are profiting from the Iraqi war and messing up our nations security and economy.
John Kerry praises the Vets and says in relation to what is wasted in Iraq the Vets deserve much more.
Kerry with the face and heart of honest Abe Lincoln
holds back the tears as he praises our fellow countrymen of who has given it all for our freedom and
for the people of America. The Vets should be treated with care is the message of this man of feelings for his brothers and sisters in arms.
PROGENY
06-30-2005, 02:16 PM
Funding for veterans is going up twice as fast as under the former Clinton Administration. The number of veterans recieving healt benifits has gone up about 25%, and Bush has twice signed bills allowing "concurrent receipt" of military retirement and VA disability for combat-injured and severely disabled veterans. Disability claims processing has been dramatically shortened, and the VA medical care budget is up approximately 40% from 2001.
Most Vet hospitals are understaffed, under equipped, and underfunded. Due to the present battles there is more need for funding and Bush has little feelings for helping the Vets who needs better healthcare and has shortchanged the hospitals again.
VFW Greatly Disappointed in VA Budget Proposal
Tim Dyhouse. VFW, Veterans of Foreign Wars Magazine.
Kansas City: Apr 2005.Vol.92, Iss. 7; pg. 12, 2 pgs
VFW leaders were disappointed in President Bush's proposed VA health care budget when it was released Feb. 7. After crunching the numbers, they determined the Administration's $27.8 billion proposal for 2006 represented only a paltry increase from last year and would not be enough to maintain services at current levels.
"The claimed increase of $880 million is really only about $111 million once you subtract those amounts that would be shouldered by military veterans," said VFW Commander-in-Chief John Furgess. "And $111 million neither matches inflation nor does anything to help VA keep pace with the needs of a veterans population that includes wounded troops from Iraq and Afghanistan."
The $111 million represents an increase of just four-tenths of one percent. VFW-along with Paralyzed Veterans of America, Disabled American Veterans and AMVETS through publication of the 19th Independent Budget-calls for an increase of 12.7%, and a total health care budget of $31.2 billion.
Co-payments Doubled/Enrollment Fee Levied
For the third time in as many years, the Bush Administration is proposing two items especially disconcerting to VFW: a $250 annual fee to enroll in VA's health care system and an increase in prescription drug co-payments from $7 to $15 for each 30-day supply.
Over the course of a year, the co-payment boost could be significant. In a Cincinnati Enquirer article, a Marine vet, who relies on VA for four monthly prescription drugs, said his annual out-of-pocket expenses would jump from $336 to $970, which includes the $250 enrollment fee.
The co-payments and enrollment fees would fund much of the 2.4% increase the Administration claims VA would receive next year for health care, meaning veterans would actually pay for it.
"The message this budget communicates is that part of the federal government's deficit will be balanced on the backs of military veterans," Furgess said. "It's clear that the proper funding of veterans health care and other programs is not an Administration priority. That is especially shameful during a time of war."
Some 2.4 million veterans-about 10% of the nation's total-would have to pay the new enrollment fee and be subjected to the higher drug co-payment. They comprise VA's lowest priority categories for non-service-connected disabled veterans who earn more than $25,000 annually (Priority 7 and 8 veterans).
The staff at VFW's National Legislative Service (NLS) calls the proposal "completely unacceptable" and recommends a $3.5 billion increase above the President's budget request.
Warning that waiting times for health care appointments "could skyrocket" and "hundreds of thousands of veterans would have to pay hundreds of extra dollars" because of the prescription co-payments and enrollment fees, NLS noted that:
* 222,000 veterans could elect to stop receiving VA treatment because of the enrollment fees and higher co-pays;
* 28,000 fewer veterans would receive long-term care because the Administration's proposed budget cuts $351 million from nursing homes and eliminates $104 million in state grants;
* 3,700 health care workers would be eliminated;
* $9 million would be cut from prosthetic research; and
* VFW-supported increases in death benefits for the families of GIs killed in Iraq and Afghanistan would not be funded.
Speaking before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee on Feb. 15, NLS Director Dennis Cullinan criticized the Administration's planned reductions to state-run veterans homes.
"These cuts, at a time when demand for VA long-term care services is on the rise with a rapidly aging veteran population, are unconscionable and reprehensible," he said.
Mandatory Funding a Solution
New VA Secretary Jim Nicholson defended the President's proposed budget. "We have to make tough decisions," he said. "We have to set priorities."
He said VA will focus on "those who are disabled because of their military service, those who are down on their luck, those who are poor and those who have chronic illnesses or special conditions like spinal cord injuries."
Furgess, who says veterans organizations "are tired of fighting this battle over again every year," believes a simple solution to the annual fight over dollars would be mandatory VA funding. "VA health care should be guaranteed," he said. "The VA must be adequately funded in order to provide timely and quality health care to military veterans who need their services."
[Sidebar]
"It's clear that the proper funding of veterans health care and other programs is not an Administration priority. That is especially shameful during a time of war."
-VFW Commander-in-Chief John Furgess
Lotimer
06-30-2005, 04:11 PM
Good article.
Bush has not remorse for Vets of which needs more healthcare in Vet hospitals or the elderly that Bush would take Social Security benifits from.
The word is TRUST and who trust Bush or those that lead with him of who are the Party of the rich.
Bush looks and acts likes he enjoys screwing the good things the USA has up badly. There seems to not be mercy in Bushs voice for our people and our military.
Bush is sending the views to our people that he and his Party are profiting from the Iraqi war and messing up our nations security and economy.
John Kerry praises the Vets and says in relation to what is wasted in Iraq the Vets deserve much more.
Kerry with the face and heart of honest Abe Lincoln
holds back the tears as he praises our fellow countrymen of who has given it all for our freedom and
for the people of America. The Vets should be treated with care is the message of this man of feelings for his brothers and sisters in arms.
I can not believe how Bushs policy hides the real stories of Iraq and the Vets.
Congress is saying that they are passing legislature to help the Vet hospitals. Rather it is true time will tell. CNN NEWS
Lotimer
07-01-2005, 06:26 AM
Bump.
Lotimer
07-01-2005, 04:19 PM
Bump.
Bush is like others in our government which uses people and then pitches them into dumpsters when they are not of further use. There are some V A hospitals has a history of not doing the care that good hospitals do. Vets should be treated more than as though they were on a factory line with band aide repairs.
Bush has not remorse for Vets of which needs more healthcare in Vet hospitals or the elderly that Bush would take Social Security benifits from.
The word is TRUST and who trust Bush or those that lead with him of who are the Party of the rich.
Lotimer
07-02-2005, 02:23 PM
Bump.
Bump.
Bumpy roads are part of life.
Bush is playing his cards rather they are honest or not about giving Vets medals and Citizens talks about waving our flag. Vets needs good healthcare and not the B S that our leaders gives them. Americans needs a president who will work for peoples furtures and security at our borders and in our homes.
Our Governments prociple purpose is to protect our citizens and our nations welfare rights .
Somewhere values has been lost by our leaders to the people of this nation from its leaders.
Aziraphael
07-03-2005, 12:14 AM
Bumpy roads are part of life.
Bush is playing his cards rather they are honest or not about giving Vets medals and Citizens talks about waving our flag. Vets needs good healthcare and not the B S that our leaders gives them. Americans needs a president who will work for peoples furtures and security at our borders and in our homes.
Our Governments prociple purpose is to protect our citizens and our nations welfare rights .
Somewhere values has been lost by our leaders to the people of this nation from its leaders.
You are right guys, there is very little representation from the right here, possibly, they are all going out and registering as democrats, or libratarians(sp?).
The priciple purpose of our national government is to
protect our citizens and their rights.
Lotimer
07-03-2005, 02:10 PM
You are right guys, there is very little representation from the right here, possibly, they are all going out and registering as democrats, or libratarians(sp?).
They think by ignoring this thread that eventually it'll dissapear and nobody will care anymore. They just want to put their fancy little "support the troops" stickers on their cars but heaven forbid they actually do it.
Neoconservatives do not support the troops. They support Bush. There's a key difference.
Jack Griffin
07-03-2005, 02:16 PM
I support Bush and the troops.
Anybody who says Bush doesn't care is full of doo-doo...who are they to pretend to know what's in a man's heart
Het KnightRoar, do you have any thoughts of your own or are you just a simple C&P troll?
malum
07-03-2005, 02:26 PM
They think by ignoring this thread that eventually it'll dissapear and nobody will care anymore. They just want to put their fancy little "support the troops" stickers on their cars but heaven forbid they actually do it.
Neoconservatives do not support the troops. They support Bush. There's a key difference.
Have you donated yet?
..or is this just another chance to bush-bash...
Who is NCHV?
The National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (NCHV) — a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization governed by a 14-member board of directors — is the resource and technical assistance center for a national network of community-based service providers and local, state and federal agencies that provide emergency and supportive housing, food, health services, job training and placement assistance, legal aid and case management support for hundreds of thousands of homeless veterans each year.
NCHV also serves as the primary liaison between those care providers, Congress and the Executive Branch agencies charged with helping them succeed in their work. NCHV's advocacy has strengthened and increased funding for virtually every federal homeless veteran assistance program in existence today...
http://www.nchv.org/about.cfm
Online Donations
We are currently accepting online donations (U.S. only) through Network for Good (http://partners.guidestar.org/controller/searchResults.gs?action_donateReport=1&partner=networkforgood&ein=52-1826860). Network for Good is a nonprofit venture subsidized by several technology corporations and everything you donate (100%) will go directly to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans.
NCHV is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation. Our Federal EIN is 52-1826860. Your donations to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans are tax-deductible.
http://www.nchv.org/donate.cfm
Bush has a war for the rich and the oil people at the expence of having more handicaped Vets who knows what kind of care that many Vets do not receive.
Lotimer
07-04-2005, 06:51 PM
Bump.
Jack Griffin
07-04-2005, 06:57 PM
Have you donated yet?He still hasn't answered. I say he only donates to gay and Islamic causes.
..or is this just another chance to bush-bash...You got it!
Who is NCHV?
The National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (NCHV) — a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization governed by a 14-member board of directors — is the resource and technical assistance center for a national network of community-based service providers and local, state and federal agencies that provide emergency and supportive housing, food, health services, job training and placement assistance, legal aid and case management support for hundreds of thousands of homeless veterans each year.
NCHV also serves as the primary liaison between those care providers, Congress and the Executive Branch agencies charged with helping them succeed in their work. NCHV's advocacy has strengthened and increased funding for virtually every federal homeless veteran assistance program in existence today...
http://www.nchv.org/about.cfm
Online Donations
We are currently accepting online donations (U.S. only) through Network for Good (http://partners.guidestar.org/controller/searchResults.gs?action_donateReport=1&partner=networkforgood&ein=52-1826860). Network for Good is a nonprofit venture subsidized by several technology corporations and everything you donate (100%) will go directly to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans.
NCHV is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation. Our Federal EIN is 52-1826860. Your donations to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans are tax-deductible.
http://www.nchv.org/donate.cfm[/QUOTE]
Lotimer
07-05-2005, 01:28 AM
Bush has a war for the rich and the oil people at the expence of having more handicaped Vets who knows what kind of care that many Vets do not receive.
Yep. Handicapped vets that will have to pay more out of pocket expenses under this "freedom on the march" administration.
Lotimer
07-05-2005, 09:29 AM
You can get a monkey to wave a flag, and a parrot to say support the troops, but how much do they really mean it?
Lotimer
07-06-2005, 11:35 AM
Those bumperstickers that say "support the troops" really mean "support Bush even if Bush does not support the troops."
Strike4ce
07-06-2005, 11:38 AM
Those bumperstickers that say "support the troops" really mean "support Bush even if Bush does not support the troops."
I thought you had me on ignore? :add09:
Bush is all talk and little action when he says he is helping the Vets and their hospitals.
This seems to be the rythem of the Republican Party
to promise our citizens a government that works for them and then profit off of aidig others of the world.
WHO SAYS THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REPUBLICANS AND DEMS IN CONGRESS?
No Sir, Mr. Bush.. you may not decrease benefits for Veterans while increasing the kitty for Lockheed Martin and Halliburton
ain't gonna happen.. !
Democrats reject health care fees for vets
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Mar 2, 2007 12:04:24 EST
Democrats who control the House and Senate veterans’ affairs committees have rejected the Bush administration’s call for new enrollment fees and higher drug co-payments for some veterans and have proposed bigger budgets for health care.
In the Senate, Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, the veterans’ committee chairman, and his fellow Democrats are asking for a $2.9 billion increase over the Bush budget proposal for the Department of Veterans Affairs, specifically for medical care.
The Bush administration had requested $39.4 billion for the VA for nonbenefits items, including $34.6 billion for health care-related costs.
“We believe that this is the amount necessary to treat all eligible veterans and maintain the quality of VA medical services through the upcoming fiscal year,” Akaka said in a statement.
Specifically, Democrats and Sen. Bernard Sanders, I-Vermont, who also serves on the Senate committee, have asked for an additional $300 million for treatment of traumatic brain injuries, $357 million specifically for the health care of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, and $693 million more for mental health programs
In the House, Bob Filner, D-Calif., the veterans’ committee chairman, and his Democratic colleagues are recommending a $1.3 billion increase in the 2008 veterans’ health care budget, and also are asking for $5 billion for veterans’ programs to be put into the 2007 wartime supplemental funding bill.
Filner said in an interview that the $3 billion would be to pay for a post-traumatic stress disorder initiative, $1 billion would be for traumatic brain injury and polytrauma care, $500 million would be to try to eliminate, “once and for all,” the backlog of pending benefits claims and $500 million would be to pay for GI Bill improvements.
House Democratic leaders have not signed off on putting $5 billion for veterans in the supplemental appropriations bill, but in a March 1 letter, Filner told them this should be a priority.
“I believe that a storm is brewing across the country, a storm of discontent regarding our treatment of veterans, and we must act now and act quickly,” Filner wrote.
In an interview, Filner said his appeal is simple: “If we can fund the war, we must fund the warriors.”
Democrats on both committees have rejected Bush administration proposals to increase out-of-pocket costs for priority seven and eight veterans, those with moderate incomes who do not have service-connected disabilities. One rejected proposal would have increased the current $8 charge for prescription drugs to $15. A second proposal involved charging enrollment fees of as high as $750 a year, based on family income.
The funding requests are being made in letters to the House and Senate budget committees, which are required to draw up an overall federal spending plan. The budget committees are supposed to prepare budget plans for approval by April 15, although that deadline is rarely met.
Filner said he knows that the $1.3 billion increase in medical care spending is less than the amount sought by veterans’ service organizations, but Democratic leaders have stressed the need to hold down costs. The $5 billion in supplemental spending would make up for a reduced 2008 budget, he said.
It was not just Democrats who opposed the fees and who want more money for veterans. Rep. Steve Buyer, R-Ind., the former House veterans’ committee chairman and now ranking Republican, also rejected the fee increases in his budget recommendations.
Buyer and fellow Republicans on the committee recommended a $2.9 billion increase in administration’s VA budget plan, including $1.5 billion to improve the GI Bill for National Guard and Reserve members.
In a statement, Buyer said the increases are aimed at what he sees as “enduring priorities” — caring for disabled veterans, the indigent, providing a seamless transition to civilian life, and giving veterans “every opportunity to live full, healthy lives.”
That is an area where they all seem to agree. Akaka said, “It is important for both Congress and the administration to realize that meeting the needs of our veterans is an ongoing cost of war. Our nations’ veterans deserve timely benefits and quality medical care. We can provide no less.”
A budget letter from Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, the former chairman and now ranking minority party member on the Senate Veterans’ Affairs committee, was not available for comment, but Craig has been one of the few lawmakers to support the idea of charging fees — which he refers to as premiums — and he is expected to endorse the administration’s proposal for enrollment fees.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/03/TNSvabudget070302/
wanderer1
03-03-2007, 10:38 AM
Funding for veterans is going up twice as fast as under the former Clinton Administration.
I should hope so; after all, the alcoholic not Clinton sent them to that meatgrinder known as Iraq.:rolleyes:
The number of veterans recieving healt benifits has gone up about 25%, and Bush has twice signed bills allowing "concurrent receipt" of military retirement and VA disability for combat-injured and severely disabled veterans. Disability claims processing has been dramatically shortened, and the VA medical care budget is up approximately 40% from 2001.
Peanuts as reflected by tens of thousands of wounded coming back and the excellent care they're receiving at Walter Reed, just ask the cockroaches who have become intimately acquainted with "our heroes".:add09:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.7 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.