During the last government shutdown, lawmakers feared veterans were days away from not receiving their disability checks.
Hoping to prevent a similar predicament, members of a House committee pressed Thursday for full funding for the Veterans Affairs Department’s discretionary budget a year ahead of schedule.
Currently, only the department’s health care services are funded a year in advance.
“This committee is again trying to look down the road and provide advanced appropriations authority for the remaining 14 percent of the Department of Veterans Affairs’ discretionary budget,” said Rep. Michael Michaud, the ranking member of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, at a hearing about the department’s budget request.
The Veterans Affairs Department is asking for $164 billion for its total 2015 fiscal year budget, a 6.5 percent increase over the current fiscal year.
Members on both sides of the aisle and multiple outside groups back giving advanced appropriations to the department. Proponents argue that it would give the department and veterans greater certainty, particularly in regard to making benefits payments during a government shutdown.
But efforts to get advance funding for the rest of VA’s budget have stalled. Michaud and committee Chairman Jeff Miller introduced the Putting Veterans Funding First Act, which passed the House Veterans Committee but has languished before the full body.
A similar push was included in Sen. Bernie Sanders’s wide-ranging veterans legislation, but that bill failed to pass a procedural vote, and the bill is essentially on hold as the Vermont independent tries to garner more Republican support.
During Thursday’s hearing, Florida Democrat Rep. Corrine Brown backed giving the department full advance funding and asked Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki to weigh in.
Although Shinseki didn’t reject the idea, he stressed that advance appropriations wouldn’t let the department avoid all of its problems if the government shuts down again.
“We still have to go to the Social Security agency to validate other disabilities payments. We have to go IRS to validate threshold income levels,” Shinseki said. “…This is a bigger discussion in some aspects than just the VA budget.”
Instead, Shinseki reiterated a familiar Obama administration talking point: “What would be most helpful to VA, [is] for “¦ the federal government to get a budget every year.”
What We're Following See More »
"Nearly half of American voters who support either Democrat Hillary Clinton or Republican Donald Trump for the White House said they will mainly be trying to block the other side from winning, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Thursday." When Trump supporters were asked to give their primary reason for supporting him, 47% said to block Clinton from winning. In almost a mirror image, 46% of Clinton supporters said they were primarily out to thwart Trump.
"Like Donald Trump himself, the Trump campaign’s new national finance chairman has a long history of contributing to Democrats—including Hillary Clinton. Private investor Steven Mnuchin, Trump’s new campaign fundraising guru, has contributed more than $120,000" to candidates since 1995, about half of which has gone to Democrats.
Paul Ryan told CNN today he's "not ready" to back Donald Trump at this time. "I'm not there right now," he said. Ryan said Trump needs to unify "all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement" and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of. And we've got a ways to go from here to there."
The Daily Beast has unearthed a piece that Donald Trump wrote for Gear magazine in 2000, which anticipates his 2016 sales pitch quite well. "Perhaps it's time for a dealmaker who can get the leaders of Congress to the table, forge consensus, and strike compromise," he writes. Oddly, he opens by defending his reputation as a womanizer: "The hypocrites argue that a man who loves and appreciates beautiful women (and does so legally and openly) shouldn't become a national leader? Is there something wrong with appreciating beautiful women? Don't we want people in public office who show signs of life?"