Disabled Veterans: Who Loves You Baby

Hello Everyone:

We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
The sacrifice of our physical and mental being. We fought in wars
without question, and asked for nothing more than what we have a right
to. If we offer life and limb for our loved United States, then we
should be provided health care that is comparable to our effort in
service.

Below you will find the vote on the recent Veterans Budget (2004)
Amendment which which would have added much needed dollars to our
health care system. These dollars would have offset some of the
recent tax reduction legislation dollars. The amendment failed along
party lines. The below document will also let you know about how the
two parties differ in the way they value our contributions to war.

Peace is better than aggression,

Famous


__________________________________________________ ______________________________
Date: July 21, 2003.
Measure: Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and
Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations
Bill, FY 2004.
Motion by: Mr. Edwards.
Description of motion: To add $2,200,000,000 to VA medical
services for priority 1-6 veterans offset by a reduction to tax
cuts for certain income groups.
Results: Rejected 26 yeas to 32 nays.
Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bishop Mr. Aderholt
Mr. Boyd Mr. Crenshaw
Mr. Clyburn Mr. Culberson
Mr. Cramer Mr. Cunningham
Ms. DeLauro Mr. Doolittle
Mr. Dicks Mrs. Emerson
Mr. Edwards Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Farr Mr. Goode
Mr. Fattah Ms. Granger
Mr. Hinchey Mr. Istook
Mr. Hoyer Mr. Kingston
Mr. Jackson Mr. Kirk
Ms. Kaptur Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Kennedy Mr. Kolbe
Ms. Kilpatrick Mr. LaHood
Mrs. Lowey Mr. Latham
Mr. Mollohan Mr. Lewis
Mr. Moran Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Obey Mrs. Northup
Mr. Olver Mr. Regula
Mr. Price Mr. Rogers
Mr. Rothman Mr. Sherwood
Ms. Roybal-Allard Mr. Simpson
Mr. Sabo Mr. Taylor
Mr. Serrano Mr. Tiahrt
Mr. Visclosky Mr. Vitter
Mr. Walsh
Mr. Wamp
Dr. Weldon
Mr. Wicker
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young
FORMAT>


DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVID OBEY AND HON. CHET EDWARDS

The appropriations bill for the Departments of Veterans,
Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies reported
by the Committee is wholly inadequate in its attempt to provide
resources for the needs of many of our most deserving citizens.
This is especially true with veterans--those men and women who
made sacrifice after sacrifice to guarantee our freedom.
Veterans who have laid their lives on the line deserve more
than waving flags and grateful words. Unfortunately, this bill
fails to meet many of its basic obligations to these veterans,
especially in funding for the VA medical care system.
In 1995, VA treated 2.7 millions veterans; in 2002 there
were approximately 4.5 million patients. An additional 600,000
veterans are projected to enroll in VA health care in 2003. The
$1.3 billion increase requested in the Administration's budget
for veterans' medical care and approved by the Committee is,
simply, not enough. Overall, the amount provided in the bill
for veterans' health care is $1.1 billion less than the $2.4
billion increase provided by the Congress last year for
veterans' health care. Enrollment in the VA medical care system
continues to grow at a rate of 9 percent per year and inflation
in medical care exceeds 3 percent. To deal with this 12 percent
minimum requirement just to maintain current services the bill
provides less than a 6 percent actual increase in funding. The
result is that the system cannot meet the increased demand for
services let alone address the large need for new investments
within the VA health care network.
Insufficient funding has put a huge strain on the system.
More than 235,000 veterans are currently waiting six months or
more for initial appointments and many veterans have reported
waiting two years to see a doctor. With so many veterans
waiting for care, VA has now reached capacity at many health-
care facilities and has closed enrollment to new patients at
many hospitals and clinics. Additionally, the VA has placed a
moratorium on all outreach activities to veterans to squelch
demand.
The Committee bill ignores the pledge made to veterans
groups by the House leadership. Veterans have been betrayed and
deceived. The Congress and the Republican Leadership of the
House have reneged on its promise made in the context of the FY
2004 Budget Resolution to provide a $3.4 billion increase over
the FY 2003 level for veterans' medical care. The concerns of
the veterans groups are expressed in the attached letter from
the Independent Budget group, as well as by numerous other
veterans' organizations. Here are some of the comments made by
the veterans' service organizations:

The VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations bill,
which calls for a $1.4 billion increase over last year
and approximately the President's request, is wholly
inadequate to provide health care to sick and disabled
veterans and represents a flagrant disregard of
promises made to veterans by this Congress * * * (The
Independent Budget, July 18, 2003)
So much for promises * * * The funding levels and
cost-shifting schemes are specifically designed to
ration care at VA hospitals, increase waiting times for
services and rely on higher fees and co-payments from
certain sick and disabled veterans to subsidize the
health care for others (Press release, AMVETS, DAV,
PVA, VFW, July 18, 2003)

My greatest disappointment with this bill is that the
drastic cuts made to the various programs in this bill are
preventable, the result of the myopic focus of the House
Republican Leadership on tax cuts as their top, if not only,
priority--regardless of the consequences. This VA-HUD bill
reflects this policy as veterans, as well as housing, and
environmental programs, are reduced to finance taxes for many
very wealthy Americans. We on the Minority want to be clear
that we reject this Republican fiscal policy. We believe that
the current bill is not an adequate response to the needs of
the American people. This country and its leadership have the
ability, even in difficult economic times, to provide the
necessary resources to serve its veterans, provide adequate
housing for its elderly, disabled and indigent citizens,
protect its environment and support basis scientific research,
if they so choose.
It is my view, and that of many on the Minority, that the
bill, as currently written, is not an adequate response to the
needs of the American people. For these reason, I would urge
all Members to vote against any rule which does not permit
amendments to address these failings. Members should insist
that this Congress honor the promise it made to American's
veterans and provide additional funds for veterans health care
and other critical programs.

Dave Obey.
Chet Edwards.

famous21@msn.com (Famous21) wrote in
news:4992d255.0309062237.4af82639@posting.google.c om:

> Hello Everyone:
>
> We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
> The sacrifice of our physical and mental being. We fought in wars
> without question, and asked for nothing more than what we have a right
> to. If we offer life and limb for our loved United States, then we
> should be provided health care that is comparable to our effort in
> service.
>
> Below you will find the vote on the recent Veterans Budget (2004)
> Amendment which which would have added much needed dollars to our
> health care system. These dollars would have offset some of the
> recent tax reduction legislation dollars. The amendment failed along
> party lines. The below document will also let you know about how the
> two parties differ in the way they value our contributions to war.
>
> Peace is better than aggression,
>
> Famous
>
>
> __________________________________________________ _____________________
> _________
> Date: July 21, 2003.
> Measure: Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and
> Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations
> Bill, FY 2004.
> Motion by: Mr. Edwards.
> Description of motion: To add $2,200,000,000 to VA medical
> services for priority 1-6 veterans offset by a reduction to tax
> cuts for certain income groups.
> Results: Rejected 26 yeas to 32 nays.
> Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
> Mr. Bishop Mr. Aderholt
> Mr. Boyd Mr. Crenshaw
> Mr. Clyburn Mr. Culberson
> Mr. Cramer Mr. Cunningham
> Ms. DeLauro Mr. Doolittle
> Mr. Dicks Mrs. Emerson
> Mr. Edwards Mr. Frelinghuysen
> Mr. Farr Mr. Goode
> Mr. Fattah Ms. Granger
> Mr. Hinchey Mr. Istook
> Mr. Hoyer Mr. Kingston
> Mr. Jackson Mr. Kirk
> Ms. Kaptur Mr. Knollenberg
> Mr. Kennedy Mr. Kolbe
> Ms. Kilpatrick Mr. LaHood
> Mrs. Lowey Mr. Latham
> Mr. Mollohan Mr. Lewis
> Mr. Moran Mr. Nethercutt
> Mr. Obey Mrs. Northup
> Mr. Olver Mr. Regula
> Mr. Price Mr. Rogers
> Mr. Rothman Mr. Sherwood
> Ms. Roybal-Allard Mr. Simpson
> Mr. Sabo Mr. Taylor
> Mr. Serrano Mr. Tiahrt
> Mr. Visclosky Mr. Vitter
> Mr. Walsh
> Mr. Wamp
> Dr. Weldon
> Mr. Wicker
> Mr. Wolf
> Mr. Young
> > FORMAT>
>
>
> DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVID OBEY AND HON. CHET EDWARDS
>
> The appropriations bill for the Departments of Veterans,
> Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies reported
> by the Committee is wholly inadequate in its attempt to provide
> resources for the needs of many of our most deserving citizens.
> This is especially true with veterans--those men and women who
> made sacrifice after sacrifice to guarantee our freedom.
> Veterans who have laid their lives on the line deserve more
> than waving flags and grateful words. Unfortunately, this bill
> fails to meet many of its basic obligations to these veterans,
> especially in funding for the VA medical care system.
> In 1995, VA treated 2.7 millions veterans; in 2002 there
> were approximately 4.5 million patients. An additional 600,000
> veterans are projected to enroll in VA health care in 2003. The
> $1.3 billion increase requested in the Administration's budget
> for veterans' medical care and approved by the Committee is,
> simply, not enough. Overall, the amount provided in the bill
> for veterans' health care is $1.1 billion less than the $2.4
> billion increase provided by the Congress last year for
> veterans' health care. Enrollment in the VA medical care system
> continues to grow at a rate of 9 percent per year and inflation
> in medical care exceeds 3 percent. To deal with this 12 percent
> minimum requirement just to maintain current services the bill
> provides less than a 6 percent actual increase in funding. The
> result is that the system cannot meet the increased demand for
> services let alone address the large need for new investments
> within the VA health care network.
> Insufficient funding has put a huge strain on the system.
> More than 235,000 veterans are currently waiting six months or
> more for initial appointments and many veterans have reported
> waiting two years to see a doctor. With so many veterans
> waiting for care, VA has now reached capacity at many health-
> care facilities and has closed enrollment to new patients at
> many hospitals and clinics. Additionally, the VA has placed a
> moratorium on all outreach activities to veterans to squelch
> demand.
> The Committee bill ignores the pledge made to veterans
> groups by the House leadership. Veterans have been betrayed and
> deceived. The Congress and the Republican Leadership of the
> House have reneged on its promise made in the context of the FY
> 2004 Budget Resolution to provide a $3.4 billion increase over
> the FY 2003 level for veterans' medical care. The concerns of
> the veterans groups are expressed in the attached letter from
> the Independent Budget group, as well as by numerous other
> veterans' organizations. Here are some of the comments made by
> the veterans' service organizations:
>
> The VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations bill,
> which calls for a $1.4 billion increase over last year
> and approximately the President's request, is wholly
> inadequate to provide health care to sick and disabled
> veterans and represents a flagrant disregard of
> promises made to veterans by this Congress * * * (The
> Independent Budget, July 18, 2003)
> So much for promises * * * The funding levels and
> cost-shifting schemes are specifically designed to
> ration care at VA hospitals, increase waiting times for
> services and rely on higher fees and co-payments from
> certain sick and disabled veterans to subsidize the
> health care for others (Press release, AMVETS, DAV,
> PVA, VFW, July 18, 2003)
>
> My greatest disappointment with this bill is that the
> drastic cuts made to the various programs in this bill are
> preventable, the result of the myopic focus of the House
> Republican Leadership on tax cuts as their top, if not only,
> priority--regardless of the consequences. This VA-HUD bill
> reflects this policy as veterans, as well as housing, and
> environmental programs, are reduced to finance taxes for many
> very wealthy Americans. We on the Minority want to be clear
> that we reject this Republican fiscal policy. We believe that
> the current bill is not an adequate response to the needs of
> the American people. This country and its leadership have the
> ability, even in difficult economic times, to provide the
> necessary resources to serve its veterans, provide adequate
> housing for its elderly, disabled and indigent citizens,
> protect its environment and support basis scientific research,
> if they so choose.
> It is my view, and that of many on the Minority, that the
> bill, as currently written, is not an adequate response to the
> needs of the American people. For these reason, I would urge
> all Members to vote against any rule which does not permit
> amendments to address these failings. Members should insist
> that this Congress honor the promise it made to American's
> veterans and provide additional funds for veterans health care
> and other critical programs.
>
> Dave Obey.
> Chet Edwards.

Amazing, the Republicans favor the wealthy over the disabled veterans.
Maybe Bush should refrain from anymore flight suit escapades. The
Republicans are an unpatriotic bunch whose vote always goes to the
privileged and corporate interests. They alway pay lip service to the
vets and proudly commit the troops to protect their corporate interests
while proudly beating their breast and shaking their fists. Not once in
the history has the Republican party been for the working man or the
veteran or the children or the senior citizens. Not once have they done
the right thing, the patriotic thing or the moral thing without some
corporate interest's or privileged group's benefit. They are detestable
and worthless greedy bastards and any veteran who votes for these
bastards is voting against the interests of their disabled comrades.

On 6 Sep 2003 23:37:48 -0700, famous21@msn.com (Famous21) wrote:

>We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
>The sacrifice of our physical and mental being.

I am sure our Founding Fathers who fought for our country asked
"Where's my pay out?", "Where's my million dollar deal?".

Our veterans are cared for by our government. It is a fact. The
Democrats feel that defending ones country should be an extraordinary
event instead of a civic duty.

It is a shame and an affront upon the victims of 9/11 that the
Democrats blame 9/11 on us Americans instead of the murderous Islamist
extremists. Shame on the Democrats, they are an embarrassment upon
civilized culture.

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 08:36:49 GMT, Your Name Here
wrote:

>On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 0852 GMT, "mange@merde.com"
>wrote:
>
>>On 6 Sep 2003 23:37:48 -0700, famous21@msn.com (Famous21) wrote:
>>
>>>We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
>>>The sacrifice of our physical and mental being.
>>
>>I am sure our Founding Fathers who fought for our country asked
>>"Where's my pay out?", "Where's my million dollar deal?".
>>
>Who's asking for a 'million dollar deal'? How about the government
>living up to it's promises?

like Bush promised the 3 million members of the NRA to rid the country
of gun control? Another Bush lie?

THOM
>
>>Our veterans are cared for by our government. It is a fact. The
>>Democrats feel that defending ones country should be an extraordinary
>>event instead of a civic duty.
>
>Yep, the chickenhawks are usually GOP.
>
>>
>>It is a shame and an affront upon the victims of 9/11 that the
>>Democrats blame 9/11 on us Americans instead of the murderous Islamist
>>extremists. Shame on the Democrats, they are an embarrassment upon
>>civilized culture.
>
>
>You spelled Republican wrong. Tell us us Bush did to prevent terror
>in the first 9 months of his presidency.

On 6 Sep 2003 23:37:48 -0700, famous21@msn.com (Famous21) wrote:

>Hello Everyone:
>
>We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
>The sacrifice of our physical and mental being. We fought in wars
>without question, and asked for nothing more than what we have a right
>to. If we offer life and limb for our loved United States, then we
>should be provided health care that is comparable to our effort in
>service.
>
>Below you will find the vote on the recent Veterans Budget (2004)
>Amendment which which would have added much needed dollars to our
>health care system. These dollars would have offset some of the
>recent tax reduction legislation dollars. The amendment failed along
>party lines. The below document will also let you know about how the
>two parties differ in the way they value our contributions to war.
>
>Peace is better than aggression,
>
>Famous
>
>

It's OK though, we'll have some sort of parade.


>__________________________________________________ ______________________________
> Date: July 21, 2003.
> Measure: Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and
>Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations
>Bill, FY 2004.
> Motion by: Mr. Edwards.
> Description of motion: To add $2,200,000,000 to VA medical
>services for priority 1-6 veterans offset by a reduction to tax
>cuts for certain income groups.
> Results: Rejected 26 yeas to 32 nays.
> Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
>Mr. Bishop Mr. Aderholt
>Mr. Boyd Mr. Crenshaw
>Mr. Clyburn Mr. Culberson
>Mr. Cramer Mr. Cunningham
>Ms. DeLauro Mr. Doolittle
>Mr. Dicks Mrs. Emerson
>Mr. Edwards Mr. Frelinghuysen
>Mr. Farr Mr. Goode
>Mr. Fattah Ms. Granger
>Mr. Hinchey Mr. Istook
>Mr. Hoyer Mr. Kingston
>Mr. Jackson Mr. Kirk
>Ms. Kaptur Mr. Knollenberg
>Mr. Kennedy Mr. Kolbe
>Ms. Kilpatrick Mr. LaHood
>Mrs. Lowey Mr. Latham
>Mr. Mollohan Mr. Lewis
>Mr. Moran Mr. Nethercutt
>Mr. Obey Mrs. Northup
>Mr. Olver Mr. Regula
>Mr. Price Mr. Rogers
>Mr. Rothman Mr. Sherwood
>Ms. Roybal-Allard Mr. Simpson
>Mr. Sabo Mr. Taylor
>Mr. Serrano Mr. Tiahrt
>Mr. Visclosky Mr. Vitter
> Mr. Walsh
> Mr. Wamp
> Dr. Weldon
> Mr. Wicker
> Mr. Wolf
> Mr. Young
> >FORMAT>
>
>
> DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVID OBEY AND HON. CHET EDWARDS
>
> The appropriations bill for the Departments of Veterans,
>Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies reported
>by the Committee is wholly inadequate in its attempt to provide
>resources for the needs of many of our most deserving citizens.
>This is especially true with veterans--those men and women who
>made sacrifice after sacrifice to guarantee our freedom.
>Veterans who have laid their lives on the line deserve more
>than waving flags and grateful words. Unfortunately, this bill
>fails to meet many of its basic obligations to these veterans,
>especially in funding for the VA medical care system.
> In 1995, VA treated 2.7 millions veterans; in 2002 there
>were approximately 4.5 million patients. An additional 600,000
>veterans are projected to enroll in VA health care in 2003. The
>$1.3 billion increase requested in the Administration's budget
>for veterans' medical care and approved by the Committee is,
>simply, not enough. Overall, the amount provided in the bill
>for veterans' health care is $1.1 billion less than the $2.4
>billion increase provided by the Congress last year for
>veterans' health care. Enrollment in the VA medical care system
>continues to grow at a rate of 9 percent per year and inflation
>in medical care exceeds 3 percent. To deal with this 12 percent
>minimum requirement just to maintain current services the bill
>provides less than a 6 percent actual increase in funding. The
>result is that the system cannot meet the increased demand for
>services let alone address the large need for new investments
>within the VA health care network.
> Insufficient funding has put a huge strain on the system.
>More than 235,000 veterans are currently waiting six months or
>more for initial appointments and many veterans have reported
>waiting two years to see a doctor. With so many veterans
>waiting for care, VA has now reached capacity at many health-
>care facilities and has closed enrollment to new patients at
>many hospitals and clinics. Additionally, the VA has placed a
>moratorium on all outreach activities to veterans to squelch
>demand.
> The Committee bill ignores the pledge made to veterans
>groups by the House leadership. Veterans have been betrayed and
>deceived. The Congress and the Republican Leadership of the
>House have reneged on its promise made in the context of the FY
>2004 Budget Resolution to provide a $3.4 billion increase over
>the FY 2003 level for veterans' medical care. The concerns of
>the veterans groups are expressed in the attached letter from
>the Independent Budget group, as well as by numerous other
>veterans' organizations. Here are some of the comments made by
>the veterans' service organizations:
>
> The VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations bill,
> which calls for a $1.4 billion increase over last year
> and approximately the President's request, is wholly
> inadequate to provide health care to sick and disabled
> veterans and represents a flagrant disregard of
> promises made to veterans by this Congress * * * (The
> Independent Budget, July 18, 2003)
> So much for promises * * * The funding levels and
> cost-shifting schemes are specifically designed to
> ration care at VA hospitals, increase waiting times for
> services and rely on higher fees and co-payments from
> certain sick and disabled veterans to subsidize the
> health care for others (Press release, AMVETS, DAV,
> PVA, VFW, July 18, 2003)
>
> My greatest disappointment with this bill is that the
>drastic cuts made to the various programs in this bill are
>preventable, the result of the myopic focus of the House
>Republican Leadership on tax cuts as their top, if not only,
>priority--regardless of the consequences. This VA-HUD bill
>reflects this policy as veterans, as well as housing, and
>environmental programs, are reduced to finance taxes for many
>very wealthy Americans. We on the Minority want to be clear
>that we reject this Republican fiscal policy. We believe that
>the current bill is not an adequate response to the needs of
>the American people. This country and its leadership have the
>ability, even in difficult economic times, to provide the
>necessary resources to serve its veterans, provide adequate
>housing for its elderly, disabled and indigent citizens,
>protect its environment and support basis scientific research,
>if they so choose.
> It is my view, and that of many on the Minority, that the
>bill, as currently written, is not an adequate response to the
>needs of the American people. For these reason, I would urge
>all Members to vote against any rule which does not permit
>amendments to address these failings. Members should insist
>that this Congress honor the promise it made to American's
>veterans and provide additional funds for veterans health care
>and other critical programs.
>
> Dave Obey.
> Chet Edwards.

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 0852 GMT, "mange@merde.com"
wrote:

>On 6 Sep 2003 23:37:48 -0700, famous21@msn.com (Famous21) wrote:
>
>>We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
>>The sacrifice of our physical and mental being.
>
>I am sure our Founding Fathers who fought for our country asked
>"Where's my pay out?", "Where's my million dollar deal?".
>
Who's asking for a 'million dollar deal'? How about the government
living up to it's promises?

>Our veterans are cared for by our government. It is a fact. The
>Democrats feel that defending ones country should be an extraordinary
>event instead of a civic duty.

Yep, the chickenhawks are usually GOP.

>
>It is a shame and an affront upon the victims of 9/11 that the
>Democrats blame 9/11 on us Americans instead of the murderous Islamist
>extremists. Shame on the Democrats, they are an embarrassment upon
>civilized culture.


You spelled Republican wrong. Tell us us Bush did to prevent terror
in the first 9 months of his presidency.

thomandpam@yahoo.com.au (Thom) wrote in inimitable style:

> On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 08:36:49 GMT, Your Name Here
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 0852 GMT, "mange@merde.com"
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 6 Sep 2003 23:37:48 -0700, famous21@msn.com (Famous21) wrote:
>>>
>>>>We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
>>>>The sacrifice of our physical and mental being.
>>>
>>>I am sure our Founding Fathers who fought for our country asked
>>>"Where's my pay out?", "Where's my million dollar deal?".
>>>
>>Who's asking for a 'million dollar deal'? How about the government
>>living up to it's promises?
>
> like Bush promised the 3 million members of the NRA to rid the country
> of gun control? Another Bush lie?
>
> THOM

Since gun control is constitutional, how do you suppose that Bush could do
that? Of course it was a lie.

At any rate, by letting the AK47 import ban lapse, Bush threw a bone to the
NRA just the same.

I judge by their actions and so far neither Party has nothing on my
scorecard.

Tom

"Famous21" wrote in message
news:4992d255.0309062237.4af82639@posting.google.c om...
> Hello Everyone:
>
> We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
> The sacrifice of our physical and mental being. We fought in wars
> without question, and asked for nothing more than what we have a right
> to. If we offer life and limb for our loved United States, then we
> should be provided health care that is comparable to our effort in
> service.
>
> Below you will find the vote on the recent Veterans Budget (2004)
> Amendment which which would have added much needed dollars to our
> health care system. These dollars would have offset some of the
> recent tax reduction legislation dollars. The amendment failed along
> party lines. The below document will also let you know about how the
> two parties differ in the way they value our contributions to war.
>
> Peace is better than aggression,
>
> Famous
>
>
>
__________________________________________________ __________________________
____
> Date: July 21, 2003.
> Measure: Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and
> Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations
> Bill, FY 2004.
> Motion by: Mr. Edwards.
> Description of motion: To add $2,200,000,000 to VA medical
> services for priority 1-6 veterans offset by a reduction to tax
> cuts for certain income groups.
> Results: Rejected 26 yeas to 32 nays.
> Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
> Mr. Bishop Mr. Aderholt
> Mr. Boyd Mr. Crenshaw
> Mr. Clyburn Mr. Culberson
> Mr. Cramer Mr. Cunningham
> Ms. DeLauro Mr. Doolittle
> Mr. Dicks Mrs. Emerson
> Mr. Edwards Mr. Frelinghuysen
> Mr. Farr Mr. Goode
> Mr. Fattah Ms. Granger
> Mr. Hinchey Mr. Istook
> Mr. Hoyer Mr. Kingston
> Mr. Jackson Mr. Kirk
> Ms. Kaptur Mr. Knollenberg
> Mr. Kennedy Mr. Kolbe
> Ms. Kilpatrick Mr. LaHood
> Mrs. Lowey Mr. Latham
> Mr. Mollohan Mr. Lewis
> Mr. Moran Mr. Nethercutt
> Mr. Obey Mrs. Northup
> Mr. Olver Mr. Regula
> Mr. Price Mr. Rogers
> Mr. Rothman Mr. Sherwood
> Ms. Roybal-Allard Mr. Simpson
> Mr. Sabo Mr. Taylor
> Mr. Serrano Mr. Tiahrt
> Mr. Visclosky Mr. Vitter
> Mr. Walsh
> Mr. Wamp
> Dr. Weldon
> Mr. Wicker
> Mr. Wolf
> Mr. Young
> > FORMAT>
>
>
> DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVID OBEY AND HON. CHET EDWARDS
>
> The appropriations bill for the Departments of Veterans,
> Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies reported
> by the Committee is wholly inadequate in its attempt to provide
> resources for the needs of many of our most deserving citizens.
> This is especially true with veterans--those men and women who
> made sacrifice after sacrifice to guarantee our freedom.
> Veterans who have laid their lives on the line deserve more
> than waving flags and grateful words. Unfortunately, this bill
> fails to meet many of its basic obligations to these veterans,
> especially in funding for the VA medical care system.
> In 1995, VA treated 2.7 millions veterans; in 2002 there
> were approximately 4.5 million patients. An additional 600,000
> veterans are projected to enroll in VA health care in 2003. The
> $1.3 billion increase requested in the Administration's budget
> for veterans' medical care and approved by the Committee is,
> simply, not enough. Overall, the amount provided in the bill
> for veterans' health care is $1.1 billion less than the $2.4
> billion increase provided by the Congress last year for
> veterans' health care. Enrollment in the VA medical care system
> continues to grow at a rate of 9 percent per year and inflation
> in medical care exceeds 3 percent. To deal with this 12 percent
> minimum requirement just to maintain current services the bill
> provides less than a 6 percent actual increase in funding. The
> result is that the system cannot meet the increased demand for
> services let alone address the large need for new investments
> within the VA health care network.
> Insufficient funding has put a huge strain on the system.
> More than 235,000 veterans are currently waiting six months or
> more for initial appointments and many veterans have reported
> waiting two years to see a doctor. With so many veterans
> waiting for care, VA has now reached capacity at many health-
> care facilities and has closed enrollment to new patients at
> many hospitals and clinics. Additionally, the VA has placed a
> moratorium on all outreach activities to veterans to squelch
> demand.
> The Committee bill ignores the pledge made to veterans
> groups by the House leadership. Veterans have been betrayed and
> deceived. The Congress and the Republican Leadership of the
> House have reneged on its promise made in the context of the FY
> 2004 Budget Resolution to provide a $3.4 billion increase over
> the FY 2003 level for veterans' medical care. The concerns of
> the veterans groups are expressed in the attached letter from
> the Independent Budget group, as well as by numerous other
> veterans' organizations. Here are some of the comments made by
> the veterans' service organizations:
>
> The VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations bill,
> which calls for a $1.4 billion increase over last year
> and approximately the President's request, is wholly
> inadequate to provide health care to sick and disabled
> veterans and represents a flagrant disregard of
> promises made to veterans by this Congress * * * (The
> Independent Budget, July 18, 2003)
> So much for promises * * * The funding levels and
> cost-shifting schemes are specifically designed to
> ration care at VA hospitals, increase waiting times for
> services and rely on higher fees and co-payments from
> certain sick and disabled veterans to subsidize the
> health care for others (Press release, AMVETS, DAV,
> PVA, VFW, July 18, 2003)
>
> My greatest disappointment with this bill is that the
> drastic cuts made to the various programs in this bill are
> preventable, the result of the myopic focus of the House
> Republican Leadership on tax cuts as their top, if not only,
> priority--regardless of the consequences. This VA-HUD bill
> reflects this policy as veterans, as well as housing, and
> environmental programs, are reduced to finance taxes for many
> very wealthy Americans. We on the Minority want to be clear
> that we reject this Republican fiscal policy. We believe that
> the current bill is not an adequate response to the needs of
> the American people. This country and its leadership have the
> ability, even in difficult economic times, to provide the
> necessary resources to serve its veterans, provide adequate
> housing for its elderly, disabled and indigent citizens,
> protect its environment and support basis scientific research,
> if they so choose.
> It is my view, and that of many on the Minority, that the
> bill, as currently written, is not an adequate response to the
> needs of the American people. For these reason, I would urge
> all Members to vote against any rule which does not permit
> amendments to address these failings. Members should insist
> that this Congress honor the promise it made to American's
> veterans and provide additional funds for veterans health care
> and other critical programs.
>
> Dave Obey.
> Chet Edwards.

wrote in message
newsbqllv0pa9m6jcbt5d4uoadkshoblo9jo2@4ax.com...
> On 6 Sep 2003 23:37:48 -0700, famous21@msn.com (Famous21) wrote:
>
> >We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
> >The sacrifice of our physical and mental being.
>
> I am sure our Founding Fathers who fought for our country asked
> "Where's my pay out?", "Where's my million dollar deal?".

In point of fact, our founding fathers did recieve a "million dollar
payout". They were able to free themselves from the policies of the British
that forced them to sell their goods on behalf of England. They came away
far richer after the war.

And the soldiers who fought and died were payed in IOU's and staged riots to
get what was promised to them.

Of course, for the ones who were successful in threatening the local
governors (remember, there was as yet no federal government) , they were
paid in land on the frontier, so's they could buffer them injuns and fight
that war too.

Things are not very different now.

Hello Gene:

I could not have put it any better. The administration's position on
this issue slaps the face of all veterans.

Peace,

Famous


Gene wrote in message news:...
> famous21@msn.com (Famous21) wrote in
> news:4992d255.0309062237.4af82639@posting.google.c om:
>
> > Hello Everyone:
> >
> > We veterans have given this country the utmost a citizen can offer.
> > The sacrifice of our physical and mental being. We fought in wars
> > without question, and asked for nothing more than what we have a right
> > to. If we offer life and limb for our loved United States, then we
> > should be provided health care that is comparable to our effort in
> > service.
> >
> > Below you will find the vote on the recent Veterans Budget (2004)
> > Amendment which which would have added much needed dollars to our
> > health care system. These dollars would have offset some of the
> > recent tax reduction legislation dollars. The amendment failed along
> > party lines. The below document will also let you know about how the
> > two parties differ in the way they value our contributions to war.
> >
> > Peace is better than aggression,
> >
> > Famous
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________ _____________________
> > _________
> > Date: July 21, 2003.
> > Measure: Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and
> > Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations
> > Bill, FY 2004.
> > Motion by: Mr. Edwards.
> > Description of motion: To add $2,200,000,000 to VA medical
> > services for priority 1-6 veterans offset by a reduction to tax
> > cuts for certain income groups.
> > Results: Rejected 26 yeas to 32 nays.
> > Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay
> > Mr. Bishop Mr. Aderholt
> > Mr. Boyd Mr. Crenshaw
> > Mr. Clyburn Mr. Culberson
> > Mr. Cramer Mr. Cunningham
> > Ms. DeLauro Mr. Doolittle
> > Mr. Dicks Mrs. Emerson
> > Mr. Edwards Mr. Frelinghuysen
> > Mr. Farr Mr. Goode
> > Mr. Fattah Ms. Granger
> > Mr. Hinchey Mr. Istook
> > Mr. Hoyer Mr. Kingston
> > Mr. Jackson Mr. Kirk
> > Ms. Kaptur Mr. Knollenberg
> > Mr. Kennedy Mr. Kolbe
> > Ms. Kilpatrick Mr. LaHood
> > Mrs. Lowey Mr. Latham
> > Mr. Mollohan Mr. Lewis
> > Mr. Moran Mr. Nethercutt
> > Mr. Obey Mrs. Northup
> > Mr. Olver Mr. Regula
> > Mr. Price Mr. Rogers
> > Mr. Rothman Mr. Sherwood
> > Ms. Roybal-Allard Mr. Simpson
> > Mr. Sabo Mr. Taylor
> > Mr. Serrano Mr. Tiahrt
> > Mr. Visclosky Mr. Vitter
> > Mr. Walsh
> > Mr. Wamp
> > Dr. Weldon
> > Mr. Wicker
> > Mr. Wolf
> > Mr. Young
> > > > FORMAT>
> >
> >
> > DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVID OBEY AND HON. CHET EDWARDS
> >
> > The appropriations bill for the Departments of Veterans,
> > Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies reported
> > by the Committee is wholly inadequate in its attempt to provide
> > resources for the needs of many of our most deserving citizens.
> > This is especially true with veterans--those men and women who
> > made sacrifice after sacrifice to guarantee our freedom.
> > Veterans who have laid their lives on the line deserve more
> > than waving flags and grateful words. Unfortunately, this bill
> > fails to meet many of its basic obligations to these veterans,
> > especially in funding for the VA medical care system.
> > In 1995, VA treated 2.7 millions veterans; in 2002 there
> > were approximately 4.5 million patients. An additional 600,000
> > veterans are projected to enroll in VA health care in 2003. The
> > $1.3 billion increase requested in the Administration's budget
> > for veterans' medical care and approved by the Committee is,
> > simply, not enough. Overall, the amount provided in the bill
> > for veterans' health care is $1.1 billion less than the $2.4
> > billion increase provided by the Congress last year for
> > veterans' health care. Enrollment in the VA medical care system
> > continues to grow at a rate of 9 percent per year and inflation
> > in medical care exceeds 3 percent. To deal with this 12 percent
> > minimum requirement just to maintain current services the bill
> > provides less than a 6 percent actual increase in funding. The
> > result is that the system cannot meet the increased demand for
> > services let alone address the large need for new investments
> > within the VA health care network.
> > Insufficient funding has put a huge strain on the system.
> > More than 235,000 veterans are currently waiting six months or
> > more for initial appointments and many veterans have reported
> > waiting two years to see a doctor. With so many veterans
> > waiting for care, VA has now reached capacity at many health-
> > care facilities and has closed enrollment to new patients at
> > many hospitals and clinics. Additionally, the VA has placed a
> > moratorium on all outreach activities to veterans to squelch
> > demand.
> > The Committee bill ignores the pledge made to veterans
> > groups by the House leadership. Veterans have been betrayed and
> > deceived. The Congress and the Republican Leadership of the
> > House have reneged on its promise made in the context of the FY
> > 2004 Budget Resolution to provide a $3.4 billion increase over
> > the FY 2003 level for veterans' medical care. The concerns of
> > the veterans groups are expressed in the attached letter from
> > the Independent Budget group, as well as by numerous other
> > veterans' organizations. Here are some of the comments made by
> > the veterans' service organizations:
> >
> > The VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations bill,
> > which calls for a $1.4 billion increase over last year
> > and approximately the President's request, is wholly
> > inadequate to provide health care to sick and disabled
> > veterans and represents a flagrant disregard of
> > promises made to veterans by this Congress * * * (The
> > Independent Budget, July 18, 2003)
> > So much for promises * * * The funding levels and
> > cost-shifting schemes are specifically designed to
> > ration care at VA hospitals, increase waiting times for
> > services and rely on higher fees and co-payments from
> > certain sick and disabled veterans to subsidize the
> > health care for others (Press release, AMVETS, DAV,
> > PVA, VFW, July 18, 2003)
> >
> > My greatest disappointment with this bill is that the
> > drastic cuts made to the various programs in this bill are
> > preventable, the result of the myopic focus of the House
> > Republican Leadership on tax cuts as their top, if not only,
> > priority--regardless of the consequences. This VA-HUD bill
> > reflects this policy as veterans, as well as housing, and
> > environmental programs, are reduced to finance taxes for many
> > very wealthy Americans. We on the Minority want to be clear
> > that we reject this Republican fiscal policy. We believe that
> > the current bill is not an adequate response to the needs of
> > the American people. This country and its leadership have the
> > ability, even in difficult economic times, to provide the
> > necessary resources to serve its veterans, provide adequate
> > housing for its elderly, disabled and indigent citizens,
> > protect its environment and support basis scientific research,
> > if they so choose.
> > It is my view, and that of many on the Minority, that the
> > bill, as currently written, is not an adequate response to the
> > needs of the American people. For these reason, I would urge
> > all Members to vote against any rule which does not permit
> > amendments to address these failings. Members should insist
> > that this Congress honor the promise it made to American's
> > veterans and provide additional funds for veterans health care
> > and other critical programs.
> >
> > Dave Obey.
> > Chet Edwards.
>
> Amazing, the Republicans favor the wealthy over the disabled veterans.
> Maybe Bush should refrain from anymore flight suit escapades. The
> Republicans are an unpatriotic bunch whose vote always goes to the
> privileged and corporate interests. They alway pay lip service to the
> vets and proudly commit the troops to protect their corporate interests
> while proudly beating their breast and shaking their fists. Not once in
> the history has the Republican party been for the working man or the
> veteran or the children or the senior citizens. Not once have they done
> the right thing, the patriotic thing or the moral thing without some
> corporate interest's or privileged group's benefit. They are detestable
> and worthless greedy bastards and any veteran who votes for these
> bastards is voting against the interests of their disabled comrades.