Sen. Bernie Sanders suggested Wednesday that war funds could be used to pay for some or all of his omnibus veterans bill, but he could face an uphill battle in the House.
The bill, which Sanders introduced last week, tackles a swath of veterans issues, including health care, education, employment, and — an issue on the minds of many members of Congress — restoring the roughly $6 billion in pensions cut during the budget agreement to working-age military retirees.
Sanders proposed offsetting the cost of the legislation by using the Overseas Contingency Operations funds, which have been used to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“I believe, having looked at this, that there is more than enough money in that fund to fund this legislation,” Sanders said. But he noted that the final decision will have to be made in conjunction with Senate Democratic leadership.
Sanders told reporters Wednesday that he expects the legislation to cost $30 billion over 10 years.
The Vermont independent said Majority Leader Harry Reid wants to bring the bill before the Senate “as quickly as he possibly can,” but sidestepped questions on a specific timeline.
Reid has filed the bill under Rule 14 — which allows legislation to skip the committee process — meaning the proposal could be taken up as soon as the Senate reconvenes next week.
“This is one of the most comprehensive pieces of veterans legislation that has been introduced in decades,” Sanders said, adding that the bill tackles many concerns raised in recent years.
Approximately 18 military and veterans organizations have backed the proposal, and the senator said he believes it will soon have the support of every major veterans organization in the country.
The bill includes several pieces of legislation previously passed out of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, and Sanders noted that many of those bills received bipartisan support. He said he has yet to reach out to Republican colleagues, but plans to do so soon.
Although Sanders said he is “optimistic that we can work with our friends in the House,” a Republican aide with the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee quickly pushed back against the proposal.
“That money is not a regular budget item and by design will run out once Overseas Contingency Operations have ended, and therefore is probably not the best vehicle to use as an offset,” the aide said, referring to using the OCO funds to pay for the veterans bill.
A 2012 Congressional Budget Office report notes that “there is no ‘OCO fund’ set aside in the Treasury from which resources can be drawn in future years.”
The Republican aide added that although members “support the ultimate goals of a number of initiatives” in Sanders’s bill, “we feel veterans would be better served if the Senate took a more measured, piecemeal approach to passing some of the initiatives.”
What We're Following See More »
The Supreme Court announced "that it would consider a challenge to President Trump’s latest effort to limit travel from countries said to pose a threat to the nation’s security." The case concerns Trump's most recent attempt to make good on a campaign promise "tainted by religious animus" and only questionably justified by national security concerns. The decision to take the case, called Trump v. Hawaii, comes almost exactly a year after Trump issued the first travel ban. The ban under consideration affects Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Chad and North Korea.
Trump wants to move the two grants, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas grant and the Drug Free Communities Act, to the Justice and Health and Human Services departments, respectively. This would result in a $300 million plus reduction in funding, about 95 percent of the cost of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. "'I’m baffled at the idea of cutting the office or reducing it significantly and taking away its programs in the middle of an epidemic,'" said Regina LaBelle, who served as ONDCP chief of staff during the Obama administration. This is the second time the Trump Administration has proposed gutting the agency.
A new report assembled by the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has identified more than 500 potential conflicts of interest in President Trump's first year. First, the report notes, Trump spent 122 days at his properties during his first year. He has been accompanied by 70 federal officials and 30 members of Congress. "Second, far from this signaled access to power being an empty promise, those who patronize President Trump’s businesses have, in fact, gained access to the president and his inner circle." Lastly, about 40 special interest groups and 11 foreign governments have held events at Trump properties.