Marine Corps News, news from Iraq - Marine Corps Times

Veto threatened over extra vet funding

A threatened presidential veto involving a $118.7 billion House veterans and military construction funding bill is being called a “slap in the face” to veterans.

The White House isn’t threatening to veto the bill that includes $93.7 billion for veterans and $24.8 billion for facilities. Instead, it is threatening to veto all other federal funding bills unless they are reduced by the $3.4 billion in spending over the Bush administration’s request that the House of Representatives is proposing to spend.

“In my 18 years in Congress, this is one of the worst decisions I have ever seen come out of the White House,” said Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Texas, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee panel that prepared the funding bill.

“For a country to send its sons and daughters to war and then to cut corners on their health care, benefits, and housing when they return home does not reflect the values of the American people,” Edwards said in response to a July 30 policy statement from the White House’s Office of Management and Budget threatening a veto if the bill is not substantially changed.

““This is a slap in the face to every veteran in the nation, especially our Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans,” Edwards said. “I do not understand the values that would suggest, during a time of war, we provide tax breaks for people making over $1 million a year, but we cannot afford to provide the health care our veterans deserve and the housing our troops need.”

The White House statement says is supports the goals of improving treatment of veterans and the quality of bases but believes Congress has gone too far with a bill that provides $10.3 billion more in fiscal 2009 than for the current year and has $3.4 billion more than the Bush administration requested. If Congress wants to spend more, extra money for veterans and construction needs to be offset but cuts in other programs, the policy statement says.

This is not an unexpected position. The Bush administration made a similar argument last year in fighting attempts by Congress to increase the Department of Veterans Affairs budget that led to a compromise where some extra spending was provided as emergency spending that under government accounting rules was considered off-budget, although it did add to the national debt.

In the military construction portion of the bill, HR 6599, Congress has included more than 100 projects costing more than $500 million that the administration did not request and that the White House says would “needlessly burden taxpayers.” Additionally, the bill cuts $140 million from the administration’s request for $241 million for construction related to a missile defense site in Europe, a reducing the White House statement says “could jeopardize the security of the United States and our European allies by delaying the fielding of missile defense assets to protect against the emerging missile threat posed by Iran.”

On veterans’ funding, the White House says it “appreciates” continued support of Congress for veterans but the Bush budget “provides the resources needed to ensure that the Nation’s veterans, including those returning from current combat operations, receive the quality care and services that they deserve.”

One provision of the House bill that sets aside funding to restore VA medical care for mid-income veterans who do not have service-connected injuries or disabilities drew a direct complaint, with administration officials saying money spent on these veterans could reduce access to medical care for other veterans.

“The administration continues to believe that the VA medical care system should focus on its core population — veterans with service-connected disabilities, lower-incomes, special needs, and those returning from combat,” the policy statement says.