[Gimpy]

related to this subject.

VETERANS RESOURCES NETWORK http://www.valaw.org

SUPPORT H.R. 515, THE "ASSURED FUNDING FOR VETERANS HEALTH CARE ACT OF 2005"


Evans : Priority funding for vets By Barb Ickes:

As Congress scurries for dollars to close a major gap in funding for veterans' health care, U.S. Rep. Lane Evans, D-Ill., is pushing a bill that would permanently fund medical operations for veterans. Evans told a roomful of area veterans Monday in Rock Island that the current estimated $1 billion shortfall in health-care funds is "unconscionable" and said he is trying to fix it. The ranking member of the House Veterans Affairs Committee said a short-term solution to the current funding gap is getting Congress' attention and efforts, but he said veterans deserve a long-term solution as well.

He said veterans benefits are "in trouble" and are being sacrificed. A bill he is sponsoring would guarantee a permanent funding stream for veterans' medical needs. "At a time of war, funding for veterans must be a clear and unmistakable priority," the longtime congressman said. "But that applies at all times and we have to change priorities so we fulfill our duties to our vets. "When I was in the Marines, we said, `Leave no one behind,'" he added. "As a country, our pledge must be that we leave no veteran behind."

Evans' bill, dubbed the Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2005, is accompanied by the signatures of 111 other members of the U.S. House. A staffer from the Rock Island Democrat's office gave a list of reasons for the shortfall in funding for veterans, including a new generation from the war on terror seeking government-paid medical services. He also attributed the deficit to an increasing number of unemployed veterans who have lost their private health insurance and are using Veterans Administration, or VA, benefits. Two other factors are increasing overall health-care costs and an aging population of World War II and Korean War veterans who need more health services.

Evans added that few federal lawmakers have been willing to tackle the looming problems of increased costs and reduced funding for veterans' needs. "The (latest) generation of veterans coming into the system is not being treated fairly," he said of the men and women serving in today's armed forces. "The real problem is that the VA is not facing up to the full extent of the problem. "The secretary of the VA claims the quality of health care isn't being adversely affected," he added. "He is badly mistaken." Evans used the VA medical center in Iowa City as an example of a struggling health-care provider.

He said hospital officials there have had to shift money from equipment and maintenance funds to cover medical care expenses. In fiscal years 2004 and 2005, he said, the Iowa City VA has experienced budgetary shortfalls totaling $10 million.

The VA nationally stands to lose 3,000 employees, mostly nurses, under the current Bush administration budget, he said. "We can and must do better than that," he added.

Barb Ickes can be contacted at (563) 383-2316 or bickes@qctimes.com.

http://www.qctimes.net/articles/2005...c42d346c9bc684 388437064.txt

--- Rep. Evans Bill to fund VA Health Care ---

http://veterans.house.gov/democratic...5shortfall.htm

VA SECRETARY FINALLY ACKNOWLEDGES VETERANS HEALTH BUDGET SHORTFALL

SUPPORT H.R. 515, THE "ASSURED FUNDING FOR VETERANS HEALTH CARE ACT OF 2005"


June 24, 2005

Dear Colleague:

In June 2005, as a result of a mid-year budget review VA Secretary Nicholson acknowledged that the VA had at least a $1 billion shortfall in veterans' health care. Previously, he has strongly opposed providing VA with needed dollars because he claimed that the Administration's budget was adequate to do the job. Just ten weeks ago he told Congress that VA was not in a dire emergency and did not need any supplemental funding for FY 2005. In fact, the Secretary claimed that any funding problem could be solved by VA's "own management decision capability."


A $1 billion shortfall in veterans' medical care is dire during times of peace; while we are at war it is unconscionable. H.R. 515, the "Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2005," would create assured funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs health care system based on the number of veterans it serves and the medical inflation rate for hospitals.

This landmark legislation would help avoid these budget shortfalls and provide real resources to meet real needs. The President's Task Force to Improve Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans found that: "?the only effective way to address the growing problem of access in VA is to reduce the mismatch [between demand for access and available funding]."

One solution proffered by the task force to address the "mismatch" was mandatory funding for VA health care. My bill proposes an approach to implement this recommendation. Nine major veterans' service organizations, who comprise the Partnership for Veterans Health Care Budget Reform, have identified assured funding for the veterans health care system as one of their top legislative priorities.

We must ensure the operation of a robust medical system for the nation's veterans in a time of war. VA officials have reported that one in four veterans returning home from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom have sought health care from the VA. Many thousands more veterans returning home will rely upon the VA for treatment of their combat injuries and the provision of post- deployment mental health care.

VA must be ready to meet the needs of our newest veterans and continue to care for veterans who have served our nation in the past. I hope you will join me and cosponsor H.R. 515, the "Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2005."

If you wish to be a cosponsor or would like additional information about this bill, please contact Leah Booth at the Committee on Veterans Affairs.

Sincerely,

/s/ LANE EVANS,

Ranking Democratic Member Committee on Veterans' Affairs

--- end ----


(Below see how both President Bush, and Rep. Steve Buyer Chairman House Veterans Committee schemed to cover-up the short-fall in veterans health care, by ousting Rep. Smith.)

--- start---

Lawmaker punished for being right ---

July 11, 2005

BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST ---

During an official Fourth of July celebration at the U.S. Capitol, Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey and Secretary of Veterans Affairs Jim Nicholson bumped into each other. They are both steadfast Republicans, devout Catholics and congenial gentlemen, but to onlookers, it looked like an uneasy encounter.

That's because Smith was right about a $2.6 billion shortfall in veterans benefits, and Nicholson's Bush administration was wrong.


Being right can hurt in Washington. It drove Smith out of the House Veterans Affairs Committee chairmanship, and it now may cost him becoming International Relations chairman. Nicholson represents an administration that operates on the principle that being in power means never having to admit being wrong.

There is no sign of any Bush official or House Republican leader apologizing to Smith. Smith, 52 and in his 13th term, knows politics is not beanbag. But his misfortune suggests the GOP's congenital fault is not being too conservative but trying to be too orderly. While often making principled stands on unpopular issues, the White House and House leadership often seem most interested in making the trains run on time.

That entails stifling dissent such as Smith's. Actually, Smith is no maverick. He is not part of the tiny liberal Republican clique that regularly opposes Bush and House leadership. He is center-right, as reflected by his voting record: 62 percent conservative (American Conservative Union rating) and 36 percent liberal (Americans for Democratic Action rating). He is really more conservative than that as a dependable vote for Bush's priority items, such as cutting taxes and war in Iraq.

He is a militant social conservative, battling abortion. Smith's problem has been failing to salute smartly when the leadership gives an order. That is the demand of Tom DeLay, the most effective majority leader in my 45 years of House-watching. DeLay found it intolerable that Smith functioned not as an obedient Republican soldier but as a fervent advocate of former U.S. foot soldiers.


At the end of the last Congress, the DeLay-headed leadership purged Smith from the Veterans chairmanship and from the committee itself for wanting $2.6 billion more for the Veterans Administration. Smith's vindication came June 28 when the Bush administration admitted that its estimate of 23,553 veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan for medical treatment fell far short of the real number: 103,000. The administration estimated its need for additional funds, coincidentally or not, at Smith's $2.6 billion.


Rep. Steve Buyer of Indiana, who was leapfrogged by the GOP leadership over two more senior congressmen to replace Smith as chairman, at first followed the party line by saying the shortfall could be covered by shifting funds. However, Buyer quickly had to change his position and say more funds were needed, just as Smith had insisted all along. Before Congress adjourned for its Independence Day recess, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi led a parade of Democrats chiding the administration for its blunder.


There will be more of the same when the 2006 VA appropriations bill comes up for votes the week of July 25. Republicans have been silent, but some in the House were smirking over Smith's vindication. There is little doubt Smith would easily have defeated Buyer had there been an open vote of the House Republican Conference without intervention. Similarly, Smith would be the conference's most likely choice for the International Relations Committee chairmanship against two other well- regarded conservatives, Reps. Dan Burton of Indiana and Ileana Ros- Lehtinen of Florida.

But the choice will be made by the DeLay- dominated Steering Committee, and so Smith is a long shot. If Smith is too independent to be a Republican committee chairman, a consolation prize might be a little commendation from the administration. None has come so far. According to all sources, the shortfall fiasco was not discussed at that Fourth of July chat between Smith and Nicholson. An orderly Republican Party does not dwell on mistakes, even to figure out what went wrong.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak...t-novak11.html

--- end ---

And there you have it friends, neighbors & countrymen. JUST WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG!