Veterans face consecutive budget cuts

  1. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070212/...80RhCh70eyFz4D
    WASHINGTON - The Bush administration plans to cut funding for veterans' health care two years from now-Bush is using the cuts, critics say, to help fulfill his pledge to balance the budget by 2012.
    After an increase sought for next year, the Bush budget would turn current trends on their head. Even though the cost of providing medical care to veterans has been growing rapidly-by more than 10 percent in many years-White House budget documents assume consecutive cutbacks in 2009 and 2010 and a freeze thereafter.
    •  
  2. 32 Comments

  3. by   Shamira Aizza
    In case you forgot, the Democrats control the House (and head the committees that determine the amount of money that the VA receives), and the House determines the budget based on the request of the Veteran's Administration.

    If the Dem's don't think the VA is getting enough money, they just have to give them more.

    Not sure how you can blame this on Pres. Bush.
  4. by   pickledpepperRN
    It is not blame. It is an attempt to adjust the budget submitted by the President so our veterans are provided what they were promised.

    According to the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, the President must annually submit a budget to Congress by the first Monday in February. In addition to the proposed spending plan, the President's Budget must show:
    • The condition of the Treasury at the end of the last completed fiscal year.
    • The estimated condition of the Treasury at the end of the current fiscal year.
    • The estimated condition of the Treasury at the end of the next fiscal year if the budget proposals are carried out.

    Here is the Presidents message: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget...8/message.html
    You can read the budget: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy08/browse.html
    Then the House of Representatives works to create a budget resolution, which sets the base line level of spending for the Federal Government as required by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Once this bottom line is established, Congress acts to decide how this level of funding will be dispersed among Federal activities.. - http://budget.house.gov/
    Page 80 of the analysis discusses the funding for Veterans health.
    Whatever changes are made must be signed into law by the President.
    This President often uses signing statements to avoid complying with the law he signed.
    Here is one opinion from Alaska: http://www.sitnews.us/Columns/0207/0...cfeatters.html

    From the Army Times - http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/02/TNSfilner070205/
  5. by   Shamira Aizza
    Sounds like blame when the president has submitted budgets which include increases of 83% for the VA since he took office, yet folks are targeting him for "cuts" when the dem's have the authority to increased the amount of money that the VA receives, and to authorize supplemental funding later as well.

    The president has never used signing statements to reduce the amount of money going to the VA, and Pres. Bush did not invent signing statements; if I ever heard any criticism from Democrats about the signing statements that the previous president made, then I might not be so reluctant to discard the partisan thinking that initiates these kinds of discussions.

    Democrats need to prove that they didn't uses lies and smoke screens to get elected, and stop acting like they are the minority...and stop blaming everyone else for everything.
  6. by   pickledpepperRN
    For 2008, the President’s budget provides $39.6 billion in appropriations for veterans programs, which is $3.1 billion (8.5 percent) more than the 2007 level and $1.9 billion (5.1 percent) above the amount needed to maintain purchasing power at the 2007 level. However, the budget cuts funding for veterans by more than $5 billion over the following four years, for a net reduction of $3.4 billion over five years (2008-2012). Almost 90 percent of appropriated veterans funding goes to medical care and hospital services.

    Total Appropriated Funds for Veterans
    (Budget Authority in Billions of Dollars)

    President’s Budget
    • 2008 39.6
    • 2009 38.8
    • 2010 38.6
    • 2011 39.4
    • 2012 39.7


    http://budget.house.gov/


    See we have a war that is causing physical and psychological illness that will continue for a generation. To support our veterans we need to allocate more money nevery year, not less.
  7. by   Kyrshamarks
    See thats what i love about politics and some people. Even though the budget has gone UP every year it did not go up what they wanted it to so they call that a budget CUT. Even if the budget stays the same in no way is it truely a CUT.
  8. by   pickledpepperRN
    To me these veterans are people who volunteered to serve us all. They deserve for us to keep the promise made to them when they enlisted.

    Please look at the analysis in the link if you are interested in this topic.

    Current Services Level
    * 2008 - 37.6
    * 2009 - 38.7
    * 2010 - 39.8
    * 2011 - 41.0
    * 2012 -42.2

    Amount Above/Below Current Services;
    * 2008 - +1.9
    * 2009 - +0.1
    * 2010 -1.3
    * 2011 -- 0.5
    * 2012 - .05

    TOTAL 2008-2012 - -2.3


    The President's budget does not specify medical care funding after 2008, but the
    budget cuts total veterans funding by more than $3 billion from 2008 to 2012. Given that medical care appropriations are nearly 90 percent of total appropriations for veterans, medical care funding faces significant cuts over the five-year period.

    http://budget.house.gov/


    Study: Number of wounded veterans could cripple VA
    By O'Ryan Johnson
    Sunday, January 7, 2007 - Updated: 11:15 AM EST

    The Veterans Administration is in danger of collapsing under the burden of caring for the medical and psychological needs of returning U.S. forces from Iraq and Afghanistan if it does not receive a huge infusion of cash, a new Harvard study warns.

    According to the report, the VA is already overwhelmed...
    http://news.bostonherald.com/nationa...5762&srvc=news
    Soldiers may not get needed mental help
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16713999
  9. by   HM2VikingRN
    Quote from Shamira Aizza
    In case you forgot, the Democrats control the House (and head the committees that determine the amount of money that the VA receives), and the House determines the budget based on the request of the Veteran's Administration.

    If the Dem's don't think the VA is getting enough money, they just have to give them more.

    Not sure how you can blame this on Pres. Bush.
    He consistently proposes these cuts. If you look at the history of this Administration in the way it funds veterans and serving members of the military it has pursued a policy of cutting at every opportunity. It has been the Democratic caucus who have stood up for taking care of the troops. Chris Smith of NJ (R) was fired from his committee chairmanship by the Republican caucus last session for trying to say cutting spending on veterans was wrong.
  10. by   HM2VikingRN
    Quote from Kyrshamarks
    See thats what i love about politics and some people. Even though the budget has gone UP every year it did not go up what they wanted it to so they call that a budget CUT. Even if the budget stays the same in no way is it truely a CUT.
    If the number of people in need of a specific service increase and the budget stays flat that equals a cut of available resources to meet the needs of those people. A cut by any other name is still a cut.
  11. by   CseMgr1
    My BIL, who is a veteran of the Korean War, has seen his monthly VA benefits cut by several hundred dollars since September, in addition to over $3,000 in unreimbursed medical expenses. :angryfire
  12. by   Shamira Aizza
    Quote from HM2Viking
    If the number of people in need of a specific service increase and the budget stays flat that equals a cut of available resources to meet the needs of those people. A cut by any other name is still a cut.
    You can call it what you want, but a Democratically controlled House in charge of the budget is not George Bush.
  13. by   Shamira Aizza
    Quote from HM2Viking
    He consistently proposes these cuts. If you look at the history of this Administration in the way it funds veterans and serving members of the military it has pursued a policy of cutting at every opportunity. It has been the Democratic caucus who have stood up for taking care of the troops. Chris Smith of NJ (R) was fired from his committee chairmanship by the Republican caucus last session for trying to say cutting spending on veterans was wrong.
    The last thing the Democrats will be able to do is pretend like they are the bigger friends of the military.

    I was in the military during the Clinton administration, and the biggest cuts for the military and it's veterans happened during Clinton's first two years when the Dem's controlled Congress. After that, Clinton opposed raises for our military, and the only way we got a raise one year was because the Republican House said we would.

    BTW, Smith was not "fired." He was simply challenged for the seat when Congress reconvened and lost the vote.
  14. by   pickledpepperRN
    No matter the party WE the people need to let OUR representatives in Congress and the President know WE want the promises to our veterans kept.
    They deserve healthcare!

close