January 2005: Veterans' Benefits "hurtful" to National Security, says Pentagon

[babylonsister]

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/597/

Veterans' Benefits "hurtful" to National Security, says Pentagon

By Joel Wendland


The Wall Street Journal describes the pittance set aside for veteran’s benefits as "Congress’ generosity" as the Republican-controlled Congress and Bush Pentagon get set to slash billions more from Veterans Administration’s (VA) programs. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal (1-25-05), Pentagon official David Chu, in a mockery of the contribution of veterans, defended a new round of cuts by ironically describing funding for programs like veterans' education and job training, health care, pensions, VA housing and the like as "hurtful" to national security.

Despite Republican pretense that spending increases for the VA budget under the Bush administration have been large, new spending neither has matched inflation over the same period nor does it keep pace with growing need.

For example, as private sector health care costs skyrocket, veterans are more and more turning to the military’s health insurance program, Tricare. Retired service members account for half of the people covered by Tricare, whereas just five years ago they accounted for only 40 percent. The Bush administration wants to find ways to stem this tide – none of which have anything to do with keeping private sector insurance affordable. The slow rate of VA spending growth enforced by Bush and the congressional Republicans over the last four years won’t cover growing deferred benefits, such as education, housing, retirement, health care and so on, promised to current service members or that are supposed to be available for new enlistees.

Slow spending growth isn’t even the biggest immediate problem for vets. In the last two years, Bush ordered the closing of several VA hospitals in different parts of the country, pushing waiting lists for medical services for veterans as high as six months for about 230,000 vets. These closings followed in the wake of the congressional Republican’s concerted drive in 2003 to cut $15 billion from VA spending over the next ten years.

And, since his razor thin victory over Senator Kerry and his claim of "political capital" to rule as he sees fit, President Bush, according to an Associate Press story about a leaked White House Budget Office memo, plans to slash veterans' health care benefits by over $900 million and veteran’s housing programs by $50 million in 2005 alone. A Center for American Progress analysis says, "President Bush’s 2005 budget would increase prescription drug co-pays from $7 to $15 for many veterans. In 2002, the co-pay went from $2 to $7." This co-pay increase would have the biggest impact on "near-poor" veterans whose incomes are just high enough to require that they pay the new premium.

In fact the Republicans are so desperate to cut veterans' benefits they have started attacking fellow Republicans who want to preserve current benefit levels. The Wall Street Journal reports that "the House Republican leadership took the unusual step of stripping New Jersey Rep. Christopher Smith of his chairmanship of the Veterans Affairs Committee" for pushing "so aggressively for veterans benefits that he at times threatened to oppose their spending plans – and President Bush’s – unless more retiree benefits were included."

more...

[Monkeyman]

1. Smith was removed by Hastert and placed Steve Buyer in his place

Buyer was the must anti-veteran Chairman that ever sat

[PDJane]

2. When you lot decide on the revolution,

I suggest that you clear out the infestation of neocons, neo-nazis and freaks in the pentagon at about the same time you tackle the white house.

[Big_Mike]

3. IMHO Dr. David Chu

is the worst thing to ever happen to the American Serviceman, and in this I include Pearl Harbor and 9/11. At least those attacks were visible and publicized. That worthless cretin has backstabbed more veterans and servicemembers than OBL ever dreamed of. He is the bean counter's bean counter. Nothing is more important to him than saving a dollar.

[babylonsister]

5. You are so right about Chu. Here's an article from today that addresses

Chu's mindset.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3152215&mesg_id=3152569

But Chu shocked veterans' advocates two years ago when he said, according to the Wall Street Journal, that too much was being spent on benefits for soldiers, as opposed to bullets and bombs. "The amounts have gotten to the point where they are hurtful," Chu said about veterans' benefits in a Jan. 25, 2005, article. "They are taking away from the nation's ability to defend itself."

[Dinger]

4. K & R

Doesn't surprise me. How many repukes are combat-tested veterans anyway?