The "PAST" Determines The "FUTURE"!

[Gimpy]

Greetings My Friends,


With New Year's Eve fast approaching, I thought it might be good to revisit a little past history. This review has been published in the past by many others more expertly qualified than myself, but none more dedicated to the publication and presentation of the T-R-U-T-H than myself.

But, it should also be considered by veterans that history will repeat itself, sometimes even sooner than expected. So, if the past determines the future, then maybe veterans should only expect more of the same in this next year. It is obvious that the Republicans have provided the means necessary and obviously have the power available to see that continued mistreatment and inadequate funds for veterans programs will be part of their 'agenda' in 2006 as it has been in recent years.

Below are several facts that have transpired over these past few years.

Don't expect much to 'change' with this current 'gang' in charge!

###START###

Timeline on Veterans? Health Care

3 Years of Facts

2003

January 2003

Bush Administration cuts off veterans? health care for 164,000.

In January, the Administration cut off VA health care for 164,000 veterans without service-connected disabilities, who make as little as $25,000 a year. Through 2005 this has denied health care to more than 522,000 veterans. [68 Fed. Reg. 2670, 2671, January 17, 2003]


March 2003

Republicans vote to slash veterans? health care.

House Republicans voted in their budget to cut $14 billion from veterans? health care. The GOP budget also included the President?s proposal to impose a $250 fee for enrollment in VA health care for low and moderate income veterans, along with a doubling of the drug co-payment for those veterans. [H Con. Res 95, Vote #82, 3/21/03]


July 2003

Republicans break promise on veterans? health care.

After agreeing to reduce some of their budget cuts, the House GOP reneged on their promise to increase funding for VA health care and passed an appropriations bill providing $1.8 billion less than their FY 2004 Budget. [H. Res. 338, Vote #450, 7/25/03]


October 2003


Democrats seek an additional $1.3 billion for veterans health care, but Republicans reject it.

The Bush Administration opposed and House Republicans rejected a Democratic motion to include $1.3 billion for veterans? health care in the Iraqi Supplemental. [H.R. 3289, Vote #600,10/31/03]


2004


February 2, 2004

Veterans Secretary acknowledges inadequacy of FY 2005 Veteran Budget:

"In a rare move by a Cabinet member, Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi told a House committee he had sought $1.2 billion more than President Bush was willing to put in his budget. 'I asked OMB for $1.2 billion more than I received,' Principi said...Last year, Principi said the administration did not provide as large of an increase as he requested for the 2004 fiscal year."- Associated Press, 2/4/04


February 26, 2004

Bipartisan House Veterans? Committee calls for an additional $2.5 billion funding for veterans health care.


March 25, 2004

Democrats seek to amend the budget both in committee and on the floor to add money.

Republicans defeated ? by a vote of 194 to 232 (Democrats votes YES) ? the Democratic substitute to the GOP FY 2005 Budget Resolution to include a $2.5 billion increase over the Bush budget for veterans' health care for FY 2005, which veterans critically needed to maintain the current level of veterans' health care services. [H.Con.Res. 393, Vote #91, 3/25/04. Rejected 194-232 (R 0-224; D 193-8)]


March 25, 2004

Republicans pass inadequate budget resolution that
shortchanged veterans' health care by $1.3 billion, compared to the amount the bipartisan Veterans? Affair Committee said was needed just to maintain current services. [H.Con.Res. 393, Vote #92, 3/25/04 .Adopted 215-212 (R 215-10; D 0-201)]


June 24, 2004


Democrats offer ?National Priorities? Bill to increase veterans? health care by $1.3 billion.

Republicans defeated an ?investing in national priorities? bill that would have invested in key priorities, providing an additional $1.3 billion to improve veterans' health care, shorten waiting times at VA health care facilities, and provide critical mental health services to address needs resulting from wartime deployments. The Paralyzed Veterans of America called this bill "vital," as it would have brought veterans? health care funding to the level that the House Veterans' Affairs Committee on a bipartisan basis had said was needed to maintain current services. [H.Res. 685, Vote #301, 6/24/04. Rejected 184-230 (R 2-217; D 181-13)]


September 29, 2004

Democrats offer motion to add veterans? health money to Fiscal Year 2005 Continuing Resolution.

Republicans defeated the Democratic motion to provide an additional $1.3 billion for veterans' health care for FY 2005, which veterans critically need to maintain the current level of veterans' health care services. [H.J.Res. 107, Vote #478, 9/29/04. Rejected 200-221 (R 1-219; D 198-2)]


2005


January 6, 2005


House Republicans oust Chris Smith as chairman of the Committee on Veterans Affairs for his tireless advocacy of veterans rights.

"It all came down to the fact I wanted to spend too much on veterans," Smith said following a 90-minute meeting in which he detailed the 22 laws he authored to help veterans in his four years as chairman . .... "This is not only a slap at Chris Smith, but a shot over the bow at veterans organizations," said Richard Fuller of the Paralyzed Veterans of America. "The Republican leadership has made a statement that the country is making too much of a commitment to the men and women who have served in uniform." [New Jersey Star-Ledger, January 06, 2005]


February 16, 2005

Despite news reports of VA shortfalls, newly appointed VA Secretary and former Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson testifies that he is unaware of that VAs are deferring purchases and maintenance to address shortfalls.


February 17, 2005

House Democrats, led by Reps. Baird and Hooley, send a letter to the President urging him to support including $1.3 billion for veterans health care in the Iraqi Supplemental.

February 23, 2005


House Veterans? Affairs Committee Chairman Buyer supports increasing veterans co-pays and imposing health enrollment fees for in the budget views and estimates.


March 15, 2005

Republicans vote to block Democrats from offering an amendment add $1.2 billion for veterans? health care for FY 2005 on the $82 billion Iraqi Supplemental offered by Rep. Darlene Hooley (D-OR).
[H.R. 1248, Vote #69, 3/15/05. Motion agreed to 220-195 (R 220-1; D 0-193)]

March 15, 2005


Republicans blocked consideration of an amendment by Rep. Bob Filner to add $3.1 billion for veterans? healthcare in FY 2005.
[H.R. 1248, Vote #71, 3/15/05. Motion agreed to 224-200 (R 220-1; D 0-193)]


March 17, 2005


Democrats make repeated efforts on the budget to add money in committee and on the floor on the FY 2006 Budget.

Democratic Rep. Obey of Wisconsin attempted to offer an amendment to provide $3.2 billion more than the President?s budget in FY 2006 for veterans' health care, to meet the growing needs of returning soldiers, The Democratic budget included a $20.9 billion increase over 5 years, for veterans? health care and to eliminate the President?s proposal to increase fees. Similarly, Democratic Rep. Chet Edwards offered an amendment in to increase health care funding and to eliminate the Republican budget's plan for $798 million in veterans cuts over five years. [H CON RES 95, Votes #82 & 87, 3/17/05]


March 17, 2005

Republicans pass a budget that is more than $2 billion short
of what is needed for veterans? health care this year, cuts veterans? health care by $14 billion below the amount needed to maintain these programs at their current levels over five year, and cuts of $798 million over the next five years ? requiring either new fees for veterans? health care or cuts in veterans? benefits. [H CON RES 95, Vote #88, 3/17/05]


April 5, 2005

Bush Administration denies any funding shortfall.

On April 5, 2005, the Veterans? Affairs Department Secretary Nicholson said ?I can assure you that VA does not need emergency supplemental funds in FY 2005 to continue to provide timely, quality service?? [Con. Rec. 4/12/05, S3466]


May 18, 2005


Democratic Rep. Obey offered an amendment in full committee to increase VA health care spending by $2.6 billion in FY 2006,
but Republicans defeated it.


May 26, 2005


House Republicans block consideration of a Democratic amendment to provide an additional $2.6 billion for veterans? health care in FY 2006, supported by the coalition of AMVETS, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Disabled American Veterans, and Veterans of Foreign Wars. [H.R.2528, Vote #223, 5/26/05. Motion passed 223-194 (R 223-0; D 0-193)]


June 23, 2005

Bush Administration acknowledges FY 2005 shortfall of $1 billion, even though they have been aware of this since April.

?The Bush administration, already accused by veterans groups of seeking inadequate funds for health care next year, acknowledged yesterday that it is short $1 billion for covering current needs at the Department of Veterans Affairs this year?Leaders of the American Legion, the Paralyzed Veterans and the Disabled American Veterans all noted a striking partisan division in Congress on veterans issues, with Democrats giving them much more support than Republicans.? [Washington Post, 6/24/05]


June 24, 2005

House Democrats, led by Rep. Chet Edwards, seek to offer an amendment to eliminate the Republican VA funding shortfall by adding $1 billion for VA health care in FY 2005 to the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations bill.

The Republican majority refused to allow the amendment, so Congressman David Obey of Wisconsin then offered a motion to send the bill back and add the needed funding for veterans' health care. [HR 3010, Vote #320, 6/24/05. Failed 185-216]


June 28, 2005


Bush Administration acknowledges FY 2006 shortfall that amounts to $2.7 billion.

Secretary Nicholson acknowledged that there is also a shortfall of $1.5 FY 2006 ? which would reach $2.7 billion in fiscal 2006 if the Administration proposals are rejected, as they have been over the past few years. Secretary still refuses to acknowledge that the shortfall is hurting veterans access to timely, high quality care.


June 28, 2005

Republicans reject Democratic attempt to make up for the shortfall in the House.

House Republicans voted to block consideration of an amendment by Rep. Chet Edwards to add $1 billion for VA health care in FY 2005 to the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill. [HR 3057, Vote # 325, 6/28/05. Failed 217-189]


June 28, 2005


Veterans Secretary Nicholson says ?We certainly don?t have a crisis.? [NYT, 6/29/05]


June 28, 2005


Majority Leader Tom Delay said, ?Veterans need to know, no veteran will be without their health care in 2005 and no veteran will be without health care in 2006. There are solutions to this problem and those solutions are being addressed.? [CQ Today, 6/28/05]


June 29, 2005

Rep. Edwards introduces an amendment to the Transportation Appropriations bill to add $1 billion for VA health care but Republicans block it from consideration.


June 29, 2005


All House Democrats send a letter to President Bush urging him to send up a budget request for $1.3 billion to make up for the shortfall this year.


June 29, 2005

The Senate votes 96 to 0 to add $1.5 billion for FY 2005 for veterans health care.


June 30, 2005

Several months after becoming aware of the shortfall and more than one week after acknowledging a shortfall, the White House and House Republicans begrudgingly act to deal with the current year shortfall in veterans? health care, passing only $975 million ? significantly less than the Senate passed ? thereby delaying funding for veterans? health care.

Democrats attempt to bring the total of the supplemental to $1.5 billion to match the Senate amount, but Republicans reject this effort to get the money to veteran?s medical facilities immediately on a party line vote. [H RES 345 Vote #359, 6/30/05. Motion agreed to 216-191 (R 216-0; D 0-191)] So final action for this year?s shortfall is not completed as Congress adjourns for the July 4th recess.

July 12, 2005

Just two weeks after announcing the shortfall for FY05, the Bush Administration admits their numbers were wrong and requests an additional $300 million for FY05, bringing the total shortfall to about $1.3 billion, matching the number Democrats have been calling for all along.


July 12, 2005

The Senate again votes 96 to 0 to add $1.5 billion for FY 2005 for veterans health care.


July 14, 2005

The Bush Administration formally requests the additional $300 million this year, along with $1.7 billion for FY 2006 ? admitting a $3 billion mistake over the two years, but still leaving veterans health care $1.5 billion short in the upcoming year.


July 14, 2005


OMB Director Bolten testifies that ?There have been three consecutive years preceding this one in which more there was more money requested by the Administration and more money appropriated by the Congress for the medical care portion of veterans services than was actually needed in that year. The appropriations have exceeded the VA medical care needs in the preceding three years by over half a billion dollars in each of the receding three years.? (testimony before the House Budget Committee)


July 18, 2005


Senate Democratic Leader Reid ask to bring up legislation to provide $1.5 billion for veterans health care in FY 2005 separately, but Republicans objected.


July 28, 2005


35 Days after White House acknowledges shortfall, House passes legislation providing $1.5 billion for veterans health care in FY 2005, finally getting the money to the VA.


October 26, 2005

It is reported that the Republican Chairman of the Budget Committee has proposed a two percent cut in all programs, including veterans? health care.

This would cut more than $600 million in veterans? health care -- enough funds to care for nearly 100,000 veterans. The American Legion expressed concern that this cut would mean ?...rationing of care, hiring freezes of medical personnel, delaying repairs on facilities, growing backlogs of medical equipment, and many other fiscal-based constraints.? And Senate Republicans have proposed a five percent cut, which would slash veterans health care by $1.6 billion, the amount needed to care for 243,000 veterans. And now, the President agrees that ?I'm open to a further across-the-board spending cut as well." (Reuters, 10/26/05)


November 10, 2005

Disabled American Veterans and many other Veterans groups begin announcing concern and consternation that Republican Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Buyer (R-IN) recently announced that veterans service organizations will no longer have the opportunity to present testimony before a joint hearing of the House and Senate Veterans? Affairs Committees.

?The tradition of legislative presentations by veterans service organizations dates back to at least the 1950s. And the timing of this announcement -- just before Veterans Day -- could not have been worse,? said DAV National Commander Paul W. Jackson. For several decades now, these joint hearings have been held each year to allow the elected leaders of veterans groups to discuss their organization?s legislative agenda and foremost concerns with the lawmakers who have jurisdiction over federal veterans programs. Senators and Representatives who serve on those committees also get the rare opportunity to address the hundreds of constituent members from these organizations? who make the annual pilgrimage to Capitol Hill.


November 15, 2005

House Democratic Leaders hold roundtable with Veterans and Veterans representatives to continue dialogue and work on passing the New GI Bill of Rights, ending the SBP/DIC Offset, fully funding Veterans Health care, fully ending the Disabled Veterans Tax, providing TRICARE to National Guard and Reservist along with many other issues of importance to America?s Veterans and Military Retirees. Democrats are listening and working with Veterans.

####END####


And there you have my friends, a truly despicable and obviously unpraiseworthy not to mention downright immoral and unprincipled record of broken promises and unfulfilled committments against the sick & disbaled veterans of this great nation by the Bush Administration and the Republicans in Congress!

You know, I believe I DID warn most folks around here this $hit would happen, didn't I????

Just asking?????........

Hope y'all have a HAPPY NEW YEAR while contemplating this info!

[urbsdad6]

Gimpy,

My wish for the New Year is that we could stop the finger pointing and get all the politics out of this so that the job could just be done.

Doc Urb

[SuperScout]

Per internal rules of the Republican party, members of Congress serving as a committee chairman can only serve a designated period of time, and then the chairmanship moves to the other ranking member of the committee. Chris Smith was not "ousted" in some form of alleged Machiavellian plot; his term as chairman came to an end. Unlike the Democrat party, the chairmanship of committees rotates to other members in the Republican party.

[Gimpy]

HELL ARE YOU TALKNG ABOUT????

THAT'S BULLSHIT! And you KNOW IT!.......................You want the TRUTH!........... You need go no further than the report given by the DAV this year..........and I quote, "In January 2005, the House leadership removed Representative Chris Smith as Chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee. Chairman Smith?s removal, two years before his six-year term limit , was the direct result of Chairman Smith?s strong advocacy on behalf of our nation?s veterans and his refusal to allow his colleagues in Congress to forget our government?s commitment to sick and disabled veterans. The House leadership also passed over Representative Bilirakis, Vice-Chairman of the Committee and a strong veterans? advocate, for the less senior Congressman from Indiana, Steve Buyer, who has been a strong proponent of reducing the number of veterans who are eligible for VA health care." ..............END QUOTE!

Where DO you come up with your ridiculous horseshit Super????

I guess you then must believe that Congressman Smiths 'replacement' , that asshole Steven Buyer, is OK with you huh????

Will you NEVER admit that 'your guys' are screwing the hell out of us??

Are you SO blinded by your support for these idiots that you aren't able to even SEE much less ADMIT the truth!!!!???

[SuperScout]

So with all the draconian cuts to the VA budget, all the closings of all the VA hospitals, all the programs sliced and diced by the Wascally Wepublicans, just what has been the overall budgetary increase dollar-wise from the previous administration to the current adminsitration? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

[Gimpy]

am I not surprised?

Typical shoot from the hip, no indication whatsoever of an attempt to address the facts of the evidence and much less an admission of error regarding not ONLY the misinformation about Congressman Smiths removal from Chairmanship of the House Veterans Affairs Committee by cut-throat and vindictive House of representative Republican leadership AND Whitehouse Republicans.

I say again.....................will you NEVER ADMIT what 'your boys' have done (or not!) for these past 5 years!

Why is it so almighty hard for you to accept the facts????

PS..............Short answer to YOUR question. Bill Clinton appointed Dr. Andrew Kiser as head of the Vetearns Health Care system of the VA late in his first administration and Kiser promptly went about "re-forming" and modernizing that Heath care system into a 'preventive care', formulary care system that has been recognized by every single leading health care and physicians organization in this country as a "World Class" health care system that is the envy of all private health care systems not only in THIS country but the ENTIRE world!

Now................YOUR TURN................What about MY answer???

[SuperScout]

Contrary to what your little paranoid mind conceives, I don't have direct access to the inner workings of the GOP caucus at the US House of Representatives, (and I strongly suspect, neither do you), hence, do not know the exact reasoning why the change in committee leadership was done. Just because there is some "direct quote" doesn't make it correct or factual; obviously, the DAV and all other lobby groups have their particular agenda and any "direct quote" from them is colored by that agenda. I do believe that any change in leadership was not the result of some sinister plot by the GOP to screw veterans, but you can believe anything you want to.

Now to the salient point: how much as the VA budget increased duirng the current administration, actual dollar-wise, and percent of increase per year, as opposed to the previous administration? And, did the VA budget increase dollar-wise and percentage-wise greater than any other departmental budget?

And excuse me, but aren't you intelligent enough to post something without vulgarity attached to it? Or is that your little way of drawing attention to yourself, like some little child throwing a temper tantrum?

[Gimpy]

[quote]Originally posted by SuperScout Contrary to what your little paranoid mind conceives, I don't have direct access to the inner workings of the GOP caucus at the US House of Representatives, (and I strongly suspect, neither do you), .......(I don't need it, I have the PROOF from all the EXPERTS who DO HAVE 'access' to these individuals!.....GIMP)....... hence, do not know the exact reasoning why the change in committee leadership was done. (Well I DO...........and am MORE than glad to accomodate your curiosity below!.......GIMP)....... Just because there is some "direct quote" doesn't make it correct or factual; obviously, the DAV and all other lobby groups have their particular agenda and any "direct quote" from them is colored by that agenda. (The ONLY "coloring" of any "agenda" by the DAV, The Paralyzed Veterans of America, etc., is done SOLELY for the benefit of sick & disabled veterans, why do you seem to be so adamantly opposed to that, especially when it's the TRUTH?????.....Gimp) I do believe that any change in leadership was not the result of some sinister plot by the GOP to screw veterans, but you can believe anything you want to. (Oh, I DO........And I have MORE proof below that SHOULD CONVINCE you as well!.....GIMP )

QUOTE]


Well lookie heanh what I found for you. Since your seem to be unable (or unWILLING!) to accept the facts as I've presented them to you, and since apparently your inability to properly or adequately comprehend any documentation other than the outrageous lies and deceptions being spewed out by "your boys" in Congress & The Whitehouse which have become permanently instilled into your cognitive functions. Maybe THIS will convince you of your futile attempts to undermine the F-A-C-T-S!

From The Hill ...............A Capital Hill Newspaper.

"The Hill is a non-partisan, non-ideological weekly newspaper that describes the inner workings of Congress, the pressures confronting policy makers and the many ways -- often unpredictable -- in which decisions are made.

Founded in 1994 by Martin Tolchin after 40 years as a reporter with several major newspapers, the newspaper features strong investigative reporting and frequently breaks stories that are widely cited in national publications. The newspaper also profiles lawmakers and aides, offers features describing the sociology and politics of the Hill, book and restaurant reviews and a weekly column about the Capitol Hill neighborhoods.

Its print circulation of 21,000, the largest of any Capitol Hill publication, is aimed at the 100 senators, 435 House members, 40,000 aides and tens of thousands in the influence industry whose work affects the lives of all Americans ."

###START###

Vets fight to save Rep. Chris Smith

Published January 4, 2005

Worried that House Republican leaders are poised to oust Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) as chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, a wide array of veterans groups is warning that such a move would send the wrong signal to U.S. troops abroad

Sources on and off Capitol Hill said Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.) is the leading candidate to take Smith?s gavel. If GOP leaders appoint Buyer, a loyal supporter of House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), it would signal clearly to the Republican caucus that rebels will be punished.

Smith has been outspoken on veterans funding. He has two more years remaining on the Republicans? self-imposed term limits for committee chairs, but veterans groups fear he will not finish his term.


Sources said Smith?s chairmanship is to be challenged as the Republican Steering Committee today weighs which lawmakers will chair committees in the 109th Congress.


Dennis Cullinan, national legislative service director of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States (VFW), said it would be an ?absolute disaster? that ?such an effective chairman would be removed for political reasons.?


He said it would send the wrong message to U.S. troops, adding, ?We?re at war.?

Buyer ranks fourth in seniority on Veterans Affairs , behind Reps. Smith, Michael Bilirakis (R-Fla.) and Terry Everett (R-Ala.).

Over the past several years, loyalty to House GOP leaders has been viewed as more important than seniority in securing committee gavels. But removing Smith before his term is up would accentuate Hastert?s demand for loyalty.


In the 108th Congress, Smith was not known for consistently bucking House leaders.

He voted with them on budget issues and the Medicare drug bill but voted against them on drug reimportation legislation.


Hastert delegates much of his power to committee chairmen, so decisions on panel chairmanships are a top priority for him.


Veterans groups have showered Smith and Bilirakis with praise but are wary of Buyer. They fear that under his leadership veterans funding could be cut substantially in 2005, noting that the White House wants to scale back federal spending sharply this year.

While Smith has been outspoken against proposed cuts to veterans programs, sources with these organizations speculate that Buyer would do whatever leadership wants.


One source said Buyer ?would toe the party line? and ?is ideologically loyal? to leadership.


Leading veterans groups are standing firmly behind Smith. In a Jan. 3 letter to Hastert, 10 organizations, including the VFW, the American Legion and Vietnam Veterans of America, urged the GOP leader to make sure Smith remains at the helm.


Veterans yesterday hand-delivered letters of the support for Smith on Capitol Hill.

One read: ?In our view, it would be a tragedy of Chris Smith left the chairmanship. ? The unnecessary loss of his leadership, knowledge, skill, honesty, passion, and work ethic would be a deeply disturbing development not just to us, but to millions of veterans across the country whose lives he had touched.?


The organizations said they do not always agree with Smith but know he will ?always give us a fair hearing and an honest assessment.? They called Smith ?the foremost congressional expert and advocate on veterans? issues? and praised the lawmaker for putting ?principle over politics.?


Richard Fuller, legislative director for Disabled American Veterans, another group that signed the letter to Hastert, said that if Smith lost the chairmanship it would be for political reasons and to ?make an example? of him.

It would be ?placing politics above principle,? Fuller said, adding that it ?shouldn?t be about the party line. ? It should be about what is best for veterans.?


While there had been rumors of a change in the committee?s leadership, the letters supporting Smith indicate the lawmaker?s imminent danger. Fuller said it is rare for the veterans groups to join forces on one issue.


He criticized the behind-closed-doors process of choosing chairmen, adding that the organizations? letters were intended to make sure veterans were ?part of the discussion.?


The veterans groups made it clear that by taking the gavel from Smith the GOP leadership would risk alienating not only the country?s powerful veterans organizations but also 26 million veterans and their families.

Hastert spokesman John Feehery did not comment for this article, saying it was a Steering Committee issue. Hastert has the most votes on the committee but can be outvoted by the rest of its members. Lawmakers said Hastert has his fingerprints on most, if not all, major decisions that the committee makes.


Smith and Buyer?s offices did not return calls seeking comment.

Written By Bob Cusack and By Klaus Marre
Published January 4, 2005

###END###


NOW, I suppose that's STILL not enough to 'convince' you, huh??

How sad that you cannot see past your overwhelming, bilnd and misguided support for these scumbags that it affects your ability to admit the truth!

[SuperScout]

OK, so Smith was replaced by someone else. If veterans were worse off for that change, shame on the change-makers. I don't know any of the details under which one was replaced, but I suspect that there was some justification, other than the "Let's screw the veterans" mindsent as you claim.

But back to your original point, and my original question. How much larger is the budget now than before, etc. etc.

[Gimpy]

"original point"?

That's YOUR original "point"......NOT MINE!

You have yet to answer for 'your boys' conduct as described in the 'original post"!

Be that as it may, let me give you a little 'point' of information that you may like to ponder before attempting to compare 'apples to oranges".............OK???

According to the major service organizations, ie. DAV, AMVETS, Paralyzed American Veterans, American Legion, etc., the actual dollar(s) of Federal funds distributed PER VETERAN receiving health care or benefits from the VA has GONE DOWN in the past 4 years under George W. Bush!

Due in part to the influx of more Vietnam Vets nearing retirement and filing claims for disability benefits & health care, more and more WW II Veterans entering VA nursing homes and the incoming multitudes of Irag & Afganistan returning War Veterans. And, last but not least...................the inability of this adminstration and the Republicans in Congress to properly plan for these factors!

So dontcha be-a dragging that ole mantra of MORE $$$$$ into the system..............................cause that SHIT WON'T FLY!.....