SwiftVets.com

[Guest]

M E M O R A N D U M



TO: National Officers

Supervisory National Service Officers

Department Commanders and Adjutants

National Legislative Interim Committee

Benefit Protection Team Leaders

Hospital Service Coordinators

DAVA National Adjutant

State Directors of Veterans Affairs

DAV CAN Members

Action E-List



FROM: Joseph A. Violante, National Legislative Director



SUBJ: PROPOSED CUT IN VETERANS’ HEALTH CARE BUDGET



DATE: October 28, 2005



The budget for veterans’ health care for fiscal year 2006 has not yet been resolved. Currently several bills have been introduced in Congress that either would call for one-, two-, or five-percent reductions in all federal agency budgets, to pay the costs of the restoration of the Gulf Coast from recent hurricanes. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), a two percent cut would be more than a $600 million reduction in VA health care funding and an estimated 97,257 veterans would be denied VA health care. A five-percent reduction would mean 243,143 veterans would need to leave VA health care.



We ask that you please consider sending the attached prepared e-mail to your Members of Congress, urging them to oppose any effort to reduce the VA health care budget, whether paying for hurricane damage or for any other reason. You can click here to be directed to the Action Alert: http://capwiz.com/dav/issues/alert/?alertid=8173321&type=CO.



Thank you for your continued support.



Sincerely,

JOSEPH A. VIOLANTE

National Legislative Director

Attachment



NATIONAL SERVICE AND LEGISLATIVE HEADQUARTERS « 807 MAINE AVENUE, S.W. « WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024-2410 « PHONE (202) 554-3501 « FAX (202) 554-3581


Dear Representative:

As your constituent, I am writing to express my concerns about proposed cuts in the veterans’ health care budget.

Several bills have been introduced in Congress that either would call for one-, two-, or five-percent reductions in all federal agency budgets, to pay the costs of the restoration of the Gulf Coast from recent hurricanes. This kind of indiscriminate reduction in funds, if applied to health care programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), would jeopardize the health and safety of thousands of sick and disabled veterans. Congress only recently completed action to add new funds to VA programs, after proving conclusively that VA health care programs were in a financial crisis. To now remove these funds that were just given to that good cause would be a serious reversal and would place veterans again in harm’s way.
The VA estimates that a two-percent reduction would cause 97,257 veterans to be denied further VA health care, and that a five-percent reduction would mean 243,143 veterans would need to leave VA health care. These patients’ health needs would not go away but the veterans themselves would go away—to Medicare, Medicaid, or charity care. Some might go away without any care at all.
The national veterans organizations that create the Independent Budget each year have jointly written every Member of the House and Senate on October 25, 2005 to urge VA be spared these harmful reductions. I fully agree with those concerns and ask that you oppose any effort to reduce the VA health care budget, whether paying for hurricane damage or for any other reason. Veterans have earned their right to receive VA health care, and it should not be taken away.

Please let me know how you plan to vote on these proposals.

Sincerely,

[GM Strong]

There is a proposed cut because with the passing of the the WWII generation there are fewer beneficiaries. Think about it. There are also outdated and underutilized facilities that bloat the budget.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69

[Deuce]

GM,

Just some stats to support your point...the number of vets 65 and over declines from about 9.8 mil in 2005 to 9.3 mil in 2010, after which a slow rise is again projected:

vets 65 and over:
male total
2000 9.5 9.8 mil
2005 9.0 9.3
2010 8.5 8.8

see
http://www.agingstats.gov/chartbook2004/tables-population.html#Indicator%206


Deuce
(apparently we warriors aren't imortal after all)

[LewWaters]

Another matter not considered is that a recent Democrat initiative blocked the VA from reviewing several thousand PTSD claims. While on the surface this sounds very pro-veteran, it has been shown that there are quite a few people drawing disability pay for PTSD that never served in combat and even a few phonies that were never in the military.

VVAW was also instrumental in demanding a bloated VA budget covering the Veterans of Viet Nam, often whether they served or not. See Stolen Valor by B.G. Burkett for one source of information on this.

While I am all for the finest care available for Veterans, a blanket acceptance of whatever they say they need is not conducive to quality care for actual Veterans.

Also, in D.C. a "budget cut" usually turns out to be a reduction in proposed increase, not actually a cut in spending at all.

I urge you all to carefully check into this budget before writing Representatives and demanding what someone else says is best. Personally, I'd like to see bloat from the VA system decreased or eleminated as well as full funding for VA Medical.

[Deuce]

[LewWaters]

Duece, what with computer technology today, Burkett says DD-214s are easily fabricated. While I can see that point, it appears that most VA Hospitals do not check back to verify the DD-214. Of course, this was in 1998, when he published his book.

Through his research into military records, he says he was able to confirm several veterans, primarily those that made it to Sixty Minutes and such programs, had either not served in the military or never went near Viet Nam. He also claims he turned this material over to the VA and they did not want it.

If I get the chance later, I'll copy some of what he says about this and post it, for those that don't have the book.