Are Veterans Getting the Money They Deserve in Latest Budget?

Lawmakers are skeptical that the growing needs of veterans can be met with the amount requested.

Vietnam War veteran Bernie Klemanek of Louisa County, Virginia salutes with fellow veterans during a Veterans Day event at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on the National Mall November 11, 2013 in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Stacy Kaper
Add to Briefcase
Stacy Kaper
March 12, 2014, 1:54 p.m.

Al­though budget re­quests are routinely dis­missed as pie-in-the-sky wish lists doomed to be slashed, law­makers fear that the Vet­er­ans Af­fairs De­part­ment ac­tu­ally might not be ask­ing for enough money to meet its needs.

Law­makers have a long list of con­cerns about the VA in the latest budget go-round, in which the de­part­ment is ask­ing for $163.9 bil­lion — a 6.5 per­cent in­crease over the cur­rent fisc­al year. They are faced with com­plaints back home of de­fi­cient vet­er­ans’ health cen­ters, long claims back­logs, and ques­tion­able treat­ment for Ir­aq and Afgh­anistan vets who are read­ily pre­scribed heaps of drugs to deal with ser­i­ous post-trau­mat­ic stress dis­order.

“It’s very easy to beat up on the VA,” said Sen­ate Vet­er­ans Af­fairs Com­mit­tee Chair­man Bernie Sanders at a hear­ing Wed­nes­day on its fisc­al 2015 budget re­quest.

Law­makers from both parties took turns rais­ing wor­ries that the VA is not equipped to handle the vet­er­ans’ needs back in their states, par­tic­u­larly when the wind-down of the Afgh­anistan war is send­ing a grow­ing in­flux of ser­vice­men and wo­men in­to the VA sys­tem.

“As I un­der­stand it, the VA an­ti­cip­ates see­ing an in­crease of ap­prox­im­ately 100,000 new pa­tients in the com­ing year,” said Sanders, a Ver­mont in­de­pend­ent. “But I am con­cerned wheth­er the 3 per­cent in­crease in med­ic­al care that is in the budget will be suf­fi­cient to care for these new users, ex­ist­ing users, will span vet­er­ans ser­vices, and keep pace with all of the is­sues we have here. Is that enough money? It sounds to me like it’s not.”

VA Sec­ret­ary Eric Shin­seki, who was testi­fy­ing be­fore the pan­el, said the VA tried to ask for what it an­ti­cip­ates need­ing for 2015, but he ad­mit­ted that the re­quest was put to­geth­er be­fore the De­fense De­part­ment an­nounced its latest plans to re­duce troop size.

“This budget re­quest is pri­or to that plan be­ing provided,” Shin­seki said. “We be­lieve we have in this budget an­ti­cip­ated what our needs will be in 2015, but this again will de­pend on what the downs­iz­ing plan en­tails.”

Con­gress has long been push­ing the VA to work through its back­log of claims, and law­makers con­tin­ued to press the de­part­ment Wed­nes­day to en­sure it is on track to clear through the back­log in 2015 as planned. Shin­seki said it would.

But the con­cerns most law­makers fo­cused on were about the VA’s ca­pa­city to provide ad­equate men­tal health ser­vices, and its abil­ity to main­tain and de­vel­op suf­fi­cient health care fa­cil­it­ies.

Re­pub­lic­an Sen. Mike Jo­hanns of Neb­raska com­plained about the VA’s pace on cap­it­al im­prove­ment pro­jects. Be­cause an Omaha pro­ject was far down on the wait­ing list, he said it could take years for vet­er­ans to re­ceive the ac­cess that they need.

“What I’m look­ing at, all these pro­jects, a pretty rough es­tim­ate is that $23 bil­lion is ne­ces­sary to ad­dress what is on the wait­ing list,” Jo­hanns said. “How can we best put a pro­cess in place to ad­dress what you are deal­ing with and what we are deal­ing with? It’s a lot of money; it would be very hard to come up with that.”

Shin­seki said that in the budget en­vir­on­ment, the VA is try­ing to pri­or­it­ize pro­jects ap­pro­pri­ately to provide for vet­er­ans’ safety and se­cur­ity and main­tain ex­ist­ing fa­cil­it­ies. The VA has re­ques­ted $561.8 mil­lion for ma­jor con­struc­tion in its fisc­al 2015 budget.

But Jo­hanns ques­tioned wheth­er spend­ing hun­dreds of mil­lions of dol­lars to main­tain old fa­cil­it­ies was ac­tu­ally coun­ter­pro­duct­ive.

“All these mil­lions we are put­ting in­to these fa­cil­it­ies across the coun­try, I just hope we are not chas­ing good money with bad money,” Jo­hanns said.

What We're Following See More »
PENCE BREAKS THE TIE
Senate Will Debate House Bill
5 hours ago
THE LATEST

By the narrowest of margins, the Senate voted 51-50 this afternoon to begin debate on the House's legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins defected from the GOP, but Vice President Pence broke a tie. Sen. John McCain returned from brain surgery to cast his vote.

Source:
WON’T SAY IF HE’LL FIRE HIM
Trump “Disappointed” in Sessions
5 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

“'It’s not like a great loyal thing about the endorsement,'” Mr. Trump said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. 'I’m very disappointed in Jeff Sessions.'”

Source:
MURKOWSKI, COLLINS VOTE NAY
Republicans Reach 50 Votes to Proceed on Health Bill
5 hours ago
THE LATEST
INTERVIEWED KUSHNER FOR OVER THREE HOURS
House Russia Probe: Kushner “Satisfied” Questions
6 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Republicans who interviewed Jared Kushner for more than three hours in the House’s Russia probe on Tuesday said the president’s son-in-law and adviser came across as candid and cooperative. 'His answers were forthcoming and complete. He satisfied all my questions,' said Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), who’s leading the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, including possible collusion between Moscow and the Trump campaign."

Source:
VICTORY FOR GUN RIGHTS ADVOCATES
Appeals Court Block D.C. Gun Control Law
7 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday blocked a gun regulation in Washington, D.C., that limited the right to carry a handgun in public to those with a special need for self-defense, handing a victory to gun rights advocates. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit's 2-1 ruling struck down the local government's third major attempt in 40 years to limit handgun rights, citing what it said was scant but clear guidance from the U.S. Supreme Court on the right to bear arms."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login