Since 2001, President Bush has increased veterans funding by over $20 billion

[zuni_rocket]

Open Letter Signed by Twenty-one Medal of Honor Recipients
this letter can be verified by going to the URL Below
http://www.georgebush.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=2971

[Open letter signed by twenty-one Medal of Honor recipients]

Dear fellow Veterans:

We have listened to Senator Kerry falsely attack President Bush for months over funding for veterans, and it's time to set the record straight. The truth is President Bush has led the way on improving veterans? benefits, supporting our troops and restoring honor and dignity to the White House.

Since 2001, President Bush has increased veterans funding by over $20 billion, and funding for veterans' health care has increased by 40 percent since he took office. Funding for veterans has gone up twice as fast under President Bush as it did under President Clinton, and those who accuse the President of cutting funding are simply not being honest with veterans.

Meanwhile, John Kerry voted against a $1.3 billion increase in veterans health care, skipped votes on concurrent receipt and voted against funding for our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. And while he talks a good game, Kerry's record shows he is out of the mainstream. The American Flag symbolizes our ideals, our history and our values. President Bush shares this belief and supports a Constitutional Amendment banning desecration of the Flag. John Kerry believes this is "an attack on free speech."

We are disturbed that John Kerry would try to scare veterans with his false accusations, and we are disappointed in his lack of support for today's troops. Please join us in setting the record straight and showing your support for President Bush -- a leader who has proven his support for those who have served, backs our troops defending our nation and shares our values.

Sincerely,


*The signatures on this letter of Medal of Honor recipients does not denote the support or endorsement of the Congressional Medal of Honor Society
THE FACTS ON VETERANS

President Bush's Record:

Annenberg Public Policy Center: Kerry's Claims About Veterans Health Cuts Are Not True. The University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Center stated in a FactCheck, "[F]unding for veterans is going up twice as fast under Bush as it did under Clinton. And the number of veterans getting health benefits is going up 25% under Bush's budgets. That's hardly a cut. ? FactCheck.org twice contacted the Kerry campaign asking how he justified his claim that the VA budget is being cut, but we've received no response." (FactCheck.org Website, www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=144 , Accessed 2/18/04)

Increased VA Funding. The President's FY 2005 budget proposes to increase funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs to $68 billion from the 2001 level of $48 billion. The President's budget requests $29.5 billion for VA's medical care for next year, more that 40 percent above the 2001 level. The past four straight VA budget increases have provided more than a 40 percent increase in VA health care alone since 2001-- enabling a million more patients to receive treatment.

Increased Health Care Service to Veterans. In the past four years, President Bush's budgets have allowed the VA to enroll 2.5 million more veterans for health care services, increase outpatient visits from 44 million to 54 million, increase the number of prescriptions filled from 86 million to 108 million and open 194 new community-based clinics available for veterans. The number of veterans registered for health benefits increased 18 percent under President Bush and will increase by almost 26 percent by October 2004. ("Funding For Veterans Up 27%, But Democrats Call It A Cut," FactCheck.org Website, www.factcheck.org, Accessed 2/18/04)

Concurrent Receipt Of Benefits. President Bush has twice signed legislation effectively providing "concurrent receipt" of both military retired pay and VA disability compensation for combat-injured and highly-disabled veterans, reversing a century old law preventing concurrent receipt.

Cutting The Disability Claims Backlog. President Bush promised to reduce the disability claims backlog, and at his request, Congress has provided VA with the resources it needs to reduce claims. Claims backlogs have dropped from a high of 432,000 and are approaching the goal of 250,000 while the volume of claims decisions per month has increased from 40,000 to 68,000. The average length of time to process a veteran's compensation claim has dropped from approximately 230 days to 160 days and the VA expects to meet its goal of 100 days this year.

Help For Homeless Veterans. As a result of the President's 2003 budget, community grants were expanded to all 50 States and Washington, D.C. for the first time in history, ensuring that homeless veterans have access to housing, health care and shelter.

Additional Prescription Drug Coverage. Last year, President Bush took the unprecedented step of allowing veterans waiting for a medical appointment who already have a prescription from their private physician, to have those prescriptions filled by the VA. This is saving veterans hundreds of dollars in drug costs.

VA Expansion. The President is seeking to improve outpatient veteran's health care services through the CARES improvements, which will result in the construction of two new medical centers in Orlando, Florida and Las Vegas, Nevada; over 100 major construction projects to revitalize and modernize VA medical centers in 37 states; creation of 156 new community-based outpatient clinics; potential creation of four new - and expansion of five existing - spinal cord injury centers; and opening up two new blind rehabilitation centers.

John Kerry's Record:

Kerry Voted Against Last Year's Supplemental Defense Funding, Which Included Extra $1.3 Billion For Veteran Health Care. Kerry voted against the fiscal 2004 supplemental package of $86.5 billion for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Senate version included an additional $1.3 billion for veterans' medical care.

Kerry Skipped Vote That Funded VA With $28.6 Billion For Fiscal 2004, Including $1 Billion To Expedite Processing Of VA Benefits Claims. Kerry skipped the vote on Fiscal 2004 Omnibus Appropriations, which included $28.6 billion for the VA. The amount was an increase of $2.9 billion over the previous year, and included $1 billion to "expedite claims processing at the Veterans Benefits Administration." (U.S. House Committee On Appropriations, "House Passes FY04 Consolidated Appropriations," Press Release, http://appropriations.house.gov/inde...elease_id=342, 12/8/03)

Kerry Voted Against McCain Amendment To Require Equal Access To Health Care For All Veterans. Kerry was one of only 18 Senators to vote against the measure. (H.R. 3666, CQ Vote #268: Adopted 79-18: R 50-0; D 29-18, 9/4/96, Kerry Voted Nay)

Kerry Voted Against Last Year's Supplemental Defense Funding, Which Included $1.3 Billion For Veteran Health Care. (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay)

In 2001, Kerry Voted Against Amendment That Would Have Increased Funding For Veterans' Medical Care By $650 Million. (H.R. 2620, CQ Vote #263: Motion Rejected 25-75: R 8-41; D 16-34; I 1-0, 8/1/01, Kerry Voted Nay)

In 1999, Kerry Voted To Kill Amendment That Would Have Reallocated $210 Million For Veterans' Medical Benefits And $10 Million For Construction Of Veterans' Extended Care Facilities. (H.R. 2684, CQ Vote #286: Motion Agreed To 61-38: R 16-37; D 45-0; I 0-1, 9/22/99, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry Skipped Vote That Funded VA With $28.6 Billion For Fiscal 2004. (H.R. 2673, CQ Vote #3: Adopted 65-28: R 44-4; D 21-23; I 0-1, 1/22/04, Kerry Did Not Vote; U.S. House Committee On Appropriations, "House Passes FY04 Consolidated Appropriations," Press Release, http://appropriations.house.gov/inde...elease_id=342, 12/8/03)

Kerry Missed Two Votes In 2003 That Extended Military Health Coverage To National Guard, Reservists And Their Families If Called To Active Duty. (H.R.1588, CQ Vote #447: Adopted 95-3: R 51-0; D 44-2; I 0-1, 11/12/03, Kerry Did Not Vote; S.1050, CQ Vote #185: Adopted 85-10: R 39-10; D 45-0; I 1-0, 5/20/03, Kerry Did Not Vote)

**************************************************
I am disabled, and a Viet Nam Veteran and I go to the Hunter Holmes McGuire VAH 2 times a week for numerous reasons. I also worked at Mcguire for a period of little of 5 years during the 80's. I also pay a small portion for my visits, as I am not service connected. Several years back I survived a stroke but it has side lined me.

I can't see how all of a sudden in little less than 4 years one president Bush can ruin the VA ??? The VA has been screwed up as long as I can remember. It has always needed something for as long as I can remember. I know some of the employees resent the fact that the Veterans get what they feel is "FREE MEDICAL"..You have to work there to really know the nature of the beast!

Now some of you who are mad because all you have are those people from another land treating you , well thank Bill Clinton for that back when he started paying the medical colleges to stop training new doctors here in the US of A because there are too many of them, his statement back then.... Great let's create a health care problem in the future and then we can blame the republicans..

I am dissappointed that Bush authorized 10 billion to fight AIDS in Africa. That Money could have been much better put to use at the V.A. for sure but NO. Africa can stop the spread of AIDS by keeping it ZIPPED!

After 8 years of "B.J." Bubba Clinton, who was no friend of the VA, unless you wanted to buy a cemetery plot in Arlington for a campanige contribution..but we, or some of us tend to forget how ethical Ol' Bubba & Hillary were... Gawd, I mean these turkeys were loading up nation treasures to furnish there new home in New York ..the nerve of these people & still the law didn't do any to them..
Well enough for now, Jim Bishop

[SuperScout]

Oh my gosh, how can this be??!! For months, we've be treated to story after story about how the dastardly, wascally Wepublicans have cut funding for the VA, threw veterans out of VA hospitals, sold used prothetics devices intended for veteran amputees, and other horrible crimes against us veterans. Now, Bro. Jim Bishop comes along and dispels the myths, lies, and camoflague in such clear, irrefutably lucid, and uncontrovertible means that most will be able to finally see the truth. Some will still be so blinded by their hatred of the President that they will continue to believe the BS peddled by the Democrats.

It's good to see the story about how real heroes view this political race. Thank you MOH recipients, for stepping up to the plate on this most vital campaign of our lifetimes.

[firemedic]

Where is Gimpy on this thread?

[Gimpy]

Hogwash....Hogwash.....Hogwash...!


Don't worry..............Gimpy ain't going no where!


The real issue is that while the dollar amount going to veterans? programs has increased, the increases have fallen seriously short of demand. By the VA?s own account, demand for VA services has been increasing at a rate of about 15% per year while the average annual funding has increased by only 9.5% .

Using these numbers, one calculates that the VA budget is about $10 billion below the level determined by demand. VA director Anthony Principi admitted in February in a House committee hearing that he had asked the Bush budget team for approval to seek an additional $1.2 billion but that his request was denied. FactCheck.org called this blunt admission by Principi ?a rare break with administration protocol.?

And......that ain't all!

One more troubling aspect of the Bush administration?s handling of veterans is what is known as demand management: If funding is below demand, then do what is necessary to reduce demand. This is exactly what the VA has done with the program known as Veterans Outreach. This program, created by Congress in 1970, was intended to ensure that all veterans receive ?timely and appropriate assistance to aid and encourage them in applying for and obtaining? federal benefits and services. To fulfill this purpose, Congress charged the VA ?with the affirmative duty of seeking out eligible veterans and eligible dependents and providing them? with the federal benefits and services to which they are entitled.

In July 2002, the Department of Veterans? Affairs Deputy Secretary for Operation and Management, Laura Miller, issued a memorandum to all VA Network Directors regarding the agency?s Outreach policy toward veterans. In her statement, Miller instructed all Network Directors to ?ensure that no marketing activities to enroll new veterans occur within your networks.? It goes on to say that ?[e]ven though some sites might have local capacity ? all facilities are expected to abide by this policy.? In effect, VA employees were specifically directed to refrain from actively recruiting more people into the VA health care system and to provide only general information.

Representative Ted Strickland, Democrat from Ohio, objected strongly to the VA position on Outreach. According to Strickland?s office, Principi defended this policy, stating in a letter to Strickland in January 2003: ?I made the decision to temporarily restrict marketing in order to conserve scarce fiscal resources for the veterans already enrolled in the VA system.?

Shortly after Principi?s letter, Congressman Strickland and Thomas Corey, the president of Vietnam Veterans of America, filed suit in federal court ?to compel the VA to comply with its legal obligation to inform potential patients and beneficiaries of available VA programs and services. ? The lawsuit states that, ?Congress has explicitly directed the VA to perform outreach services to ensure that veterans and their families are aware of services and benefits to which they are entitled.?

The annual uncertainty in veterans? funding has led over the years for calls to make veterans? health care benefits mandatory. This would place them in the category of entitlements, the same as social security and Medicare. Imagine the nightmare if social security benefits were subject each year to congressional and executive branch priorities and whims. The moral argument is the same: As a country, we have an obligation to take care of those who served and sacrificed for our welfare .

As reported by Boston Globe columnist Tom Oliphant, in late June Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle proposed just this--making veterans? health care coverage mandatory. Daschle proposed a two-year trial of the entitlement idea. The cost of fully funding the health care need was estimated to be an additional $2.6 billion next year and then to rise with the number of eligible veterans and inflation after that. But, says Oliphant, ?The vote never had a chance.? The Senate needed to waive budget rules to consider the proposal as part of an annual military spending measure. That requires 60 votes; it got 49.?

But, as Oliphant noted, an important point was made. Congressional Democrats and John Kerry support mandatory funding of veterans? health care. George Bush, Dennis Hastert, and Bill Frist do not. If the Senate and House were not in Republican control, veterans with health care needs could rest easy.

As the November elections near, many veterans are being forced to reexamine their longstanding support for the Republican Party. What we have in Washington today is not the Republican party of Eisenhower or Goldwater or even Richard Nixon. Bush and his breed are something new, a mutant breed that feeds on ideology, greed, and pure political power. Veterans who support Bush are voting against their own interests and those of their comrades, particularly those who are disabled and others in need of medical care.

And that's a FACT...JACK!

[SuperScout]

What?? Increases to the DVA budget have increased every year, but have fallen short of demand? Would you believe that every federal, state, county, city, and burg governmental agency could make the same claim? There never has been, and never will be enough money to fund every agency, federal or otherwise, for what the demand, real or imagined, is or will be.

Where was Teddy Jane Kerry when the Demos controlled both the House and the Senate? Why didn't they get all the funding demanded by the DVA then? When Little Tommie Daschel was the Senate Majority leader, where was his magnificient proposals then? What the Demos are doing now is nothing less than political grandstanding, trying to make points by standing on the shoulders of wounded veterans, just like Teddy Jane Kerry did back in the '70's. If veterans' concerns were such an issue with them, they would have solved the problems long ago, but now, there hollow blather is too little too late.

[Gimpy]

Kinda like GEE-DUMBA stood on their "shoulders" in the 2000 campaign, HUH???? But.........that was OK cause he's a "compassionate" conservative, right??

Yeah........right! About as "compassionate" as Attila the Hun!

[SuperScout]

It would appear that the incontrovertible facts quoted by zuni_rocket speak for themselves. And it should also appear obvious to those still capable of fogging a mirror that Teddy Jane Kerry, by missing 92% of all called votes in the US Senate, did not support veterans. Oh yes, he did fly back to vote against the "Lacy Peterson Bill," which made it a federal crime to harm a fetus, and he did vote against the "Partial Birth Abortion Prohibition" bill. And oh yes, he claims to be a practicing Catholic, hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[Seascamp]

TJ only dances with what brung him, no more. That?s exactly why a supposed practicing Catholic is all for PBA and why he has such a lame excuse for supporting infanticide. Oh shucks I almost forgot, a Liberal Royal Magistrate in San Francisco decreed that PBA victim infants have no feelings and therefore no rights. Gosh, I keep forgetting these Royal Decrees, damn; I hate it when that happens.

The number one rated Liberal in the US Senate is now trying to dance the centrist Democrat two-step and is clumsy as a sore-footed ox trying to pull it off. It?s disingenuous at best and more the pity if anyone thinks that?s the real TJ. When do we get to see the real TJ? Is he going to tell us all about the intrinsic value of ?moral relativity? and why that?s such a way-cool concept. I?m waiting with baited breath.

Scamp

[reconeil]

Your being my all time favorite and Dem/Lib religiously faithful missionary aside,...it must be said that you most certainly prove the point that: "You can bring a horse (jack-ass also) to water, but you can't make it drink",..."Beyond the shadow of a doubt".

Neil

P.S. Zuni-rocket
Thanks again for more important information normally and purposefully kept from The American People by the largely Dem/Lib patronizing Mainstream Media. Appreciate reading: "The Real Deal" for-a-change.

[firemedic]

Originally posted by Gimpy Hogwash....Hogwash.....Hogwash...!
Gimpy, I'm glad you're not going anywhere. I actually apreciate your right to vigorous political debate. I only want to try and get you to see that it's the liberal persuasion, not the conservatives who care less for people like you (and me) who have served their country so honorably. I do agree that politicians on both sides, for the most part can't be trusted farther than you can throw them, but an honest look at history will prove that conservatives care more for the veteran than liberals do. The VA isn't perfect, I know that. I take men and women there on a regular basis, but there are far more factors involved than who's President at the time. Your last man in office had a total disdain for the veteran; what major changes did he accomplish with VA problems? Where is the same vitriolic accusations of him? Just trying to be honest in the debate...

Don't worry..............Gimpy ain't going no where!


The real issue is that while the dollar amount going to veterans? programs has increased, the increases have fallen seriously short of demand. By the VA?s own account, demand for VA services has been increasing at a rate of about 15% per year while the average annual funding has increased by only 9.5% .

Using these numbers, one calculates that the VA budget is about $10 billion below the level determined by demand. VA director Anthony Principi admitted in February in a House committee hearing that he had asked the Bush budget team for approval to seek an additional $1.2 billion but that his request was denied. FactCheck.org called this blunt admission by Principi ?a rare break with administration protocol.?

And......that ain't all!

One more troubling aspect of the Bush administration?s handling of veterans is what is known as demand management: If funding is below demand, then do what is necessary to reduce demand. This is exactly what the VA has done with the program known as Veterans Outreach. This program, created by Congress in 1970, was intended to ensure that all veterans receive ?timely and appropriate assistance to aid and encourage them in applying for and obtaining? federal benefits and services. To fulfill this purpose, Congress charged the VA ?with the affirmative duty of seeking out eligible veterans and eligible dependents and providing them? with the federal benefits and services to which they are entitled.

In July 2002, the Department of Veterans? Affairs Deputy Secretary for Operation and Management, Laura Miller, issued a memorandum to all VA Network Directors regarding the agency?s Outreach policy toward veterans. In her statement, Miller instructed all Network Directors to ?ensure that no marketing activities to enroll new veterans occur within your networks.? It goes on to say that ?[e]ven though some sites might have local capacity ? all facilities are expected to abide by this policy.? In effect, VA employees were specifically directed to refrain from actively recruiting more people into the VA health care system and to provide only general information.

Representative Ted Strickland, Democrat from Ohio, objected strongly to the VA position on Outreach. According to Strickland?s office, Principi defended this policy, stating in a letter to Strickland in January 2003: ?I made the decision to temporarily restrict marketing in order to conserve scarce fiscal resources for the veterans already enrolled in the VA system.?

Shortly after Principi?s letter, Congressman Strickland and Thomas Corey, the president of Vietnam Veterans of America, filed suit in federal court ?to compel the VA to comply with its legal obligation to inform potential patients and beneficiaries of available VA programs and services. ? The lawsuit states that, ?Congress has explicitly directed the VA to perform outreach services to ensure that veterans and their families are aware of services and benefits to which they are entitled.?

The annual uncertainty in veterans? funding has led over the years for calls to make veterans? health care benefits mandatory. This would place them in the category of entitlements, the same as social security and Medicare. Imagine the nightmare if social security benefits were subject each year to congressional and executive branch priorities and whims. The moral argument is the same: As a country, we have an obligation to take care of those who served and sacrificed for our welfare .

As reported by Boston Globe columnist Tom Oliphant, in late June Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle proposed just this--making veterans? health care coverage mandatory. Daschle proposed a two-year trial of the entitlement idea. The cost of fully funding the health care need was estimated to be an additional $2.6 billion next year and then to rise with the number of eligible veterans and inflation after that. But, says Oliphant, ?The vote never had a chance.? The Senate needed to waive budget rules to consider the proposal as part of an annual military spending measure. That requires 60 votes; it got 49.?

But, as Oliphant noted, an important point was made. Congressional Democrats and John Kerry support mandatory funding of veterans? health care. George Bush, Dennis Hastert, and Bill Frist do not. If the Senate and House were not in Republican control, veterans with health care needs could rest easy.

As the November elections near, many veterans are being forced to reexamine their longstanding support for the Republican Party. What we have in Washington today is not the Republican party of Eisenhower or Goldwater or even Richard Nixon. Bush and his breed are something new, a mutant breed that feeds on ideology, greed, and pure political power. Veterans who support Bush are voting against their own interests and those of their comrades, particularly those who are disabled and others in need of medical care.

And that's a FACT...JACK!