[Vision2020] Budget cuts could slash $1B from vets health care

[Joe Campbell]

Stop Roger. We've been through this. So it was congress not Reagan who led
the downfall of the Soviet Union?

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:45 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:

> Congress, not the president raises the debt celing and writes the budget.
> Roger
> -----Original message-----
> From: Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2012 15:23:05 -0800
> To: Paul Rumelhart godshatter at yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Budget cuts could slash $1B from vets health care
>
> > No, Paul. You're drinking the conservative cool aid.
> >
> > Reagan raised the debt as a creative way to cut government programs. The
> > story was he crushed the Soviet Union with an arms race. No one said
> > anything because that government spending had to do with the military and
> > for reasons that escape me conservatives refuse to think of the military
> as
> > part of the government.
> >
> > By the time Clinton took office we were in debt. To lose the debt,
> welfare
> > and other programs were cut. When Bush II took over he raised the debt
> > again, this time by waging 2 different wars. Again, no one said anything
> > because this was military spending -- and that's safety not government.
> So
> > more government programs now "must" get cut in order to get out of the
> > terrible shape we're in. It's the only "rational" thing to do.
> >
> > I have a hard time looking at these patterns and thinking these are
> > anything other than Republican strategies to cut government by
> > circumventing the democratic process -- cutting programs not by voting in
> > folks with that kind of mind set but by creating economic crises. The
> fact
> > that Congress can agree on how to cut "big" government might just be an
> > indication that there is less government fat than the conservative myths
> > suggest.
> >
> > And I want to be clear that I don't think you're the anti-Christ! (I know
> > this comment wasn't directed at me but I want to be clear.) Actually,
> I've
> > always liked you. I just disagree with much of what you say. I'm a little
> > tougher on you when it comes to the global warming debate because that
> is a
> > huge issue of importance to future generations, indeed to the human race.
> >
> > Best, Joe
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com
> >wrote:
> >
> > > **
> > >
> > > Because the Congressional "super-committee" couldn't agree on budget
> cuts
> > > and we've since defaulted to across-the-board cuts.  That was all part
> of
> > > the deal that was passed when we were trying to shave the smallest
> amounts
> > > off a small piece of the debt during the whole "debt ceiling" fiasco.
> > >
> > > We did this to ourselves by electing such a contentious Congress.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > >
> > > On 01/02/2012 10:09 AM, Joe Campbell wrote:
> > >
> > > Why do we have to cut back on programs? We were fine with the
> programs. It
> > > was the wars that got us in debt, right?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jan 2, 2012, at 9:50 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Well, that's the problem with across-the-board budget cuts, isn't it?
> > > Nobody is going to be pleased.
> > >
> > > We have to cut budgets, and since nobody in Congress can agree on which
> > > way is up, this is our only real solution.
> > >
> > > We have to cut back on how much we spend, since our spending is out of
> > > control.  It's ridiculous.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > On 01/02/2012 09:31 AM, Tom Hansen wrote:
> > >
> > > Nice, huh?
> > >
> > >  Courtesy of the January 9, 2012 edition of the Army Times.
> > >
> > >  ------------------------------
> > >
> > >  *Budget cuts could slash $1B from vets health care**
> > > Lawmakers may reverse on promises not to cut VA*
> > >
> > > By Rick Maze
> > >
> > > As veterans groups face the pos sible automatic, across-the-board cuts
> in
> > > federal spending that could begin in 2013, fear of the unknown is
> strong.
> > >
> > > The Budget Control Act of 2011 is “imprecise,” says a House staff
> member
> > > who has been trying to advise lawmakers on how the Vet erans Affairs
> > > Department would fare if $1.2 trillion in automatic budget cuts are
> ordered
> > > Jan. 2, 2013.
> > >
> > > Veterans disability, survivor, education and training benefits, and
> > > low-income pensions are exempt from the automatic cuts, a process
> known as
> > > sequestra tion. But it is unclear whether veterans health care funds
> are
> > > protected.
> > >
> > > A 2 percent cut in veterans health care funding appears possi ble under
> > > some readings of the law — and its references back to the 1985 Balanced
> > > Budget and Emer gency Deficit Control Act, more commonly known as the
> > > Gramm-Rudman Act.
> > >
> > > “We have not heard any specifics, only vague references that earlier
> > > pledges not to cut VA health care or benefits may not be honored by
> > > Congress,” said David Autry of Disabled American Veter ans. “That is
> > > worrisome.” With a health care budget of about $51 billion to serve 6.2
> > > mil­lion patients, a sequester could result in a $1 billion cut at a
> time
> > > when the population of Iraq and Afghanistan combat veterans seeking
> > > treatment for the physical and mental wounds of war is on the rise.
> > > Some patients, particularly veterans who do not have serviceconnected
> > > disabilities, could be turned away, say representatives of veterans
> groups
> > > who have studied the potential impact.
> > >
> > > Fear of devastating cuts from sequestration is partly why leaders of
> the
> > > House and Senate Veterans’ Affairs committees were willing in October
> to
> > > propose cuts in veterans benefits.
> > >
> > > A joint letter signed by Sens. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Richard Burr,
> > > R-N.C., and Reps. Jeff Miller, R-Fla., and Bob Filner, D-Calif., the
> > > leaders of the committees, acknowledged that a “plausible legal
> > > interpretation” of the budget law puts veterans medical funds at risk
> for
> > > cuts.
> > >
> > > “We would rather make the difficult decisions now so that we may never
> > > reach that possibility down the road,” the four lawmakers said in a
> letter
> > > to the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction that tried but
> failed to
> > > come up with an overall $1.2 trillion deficit reduction package that
> would
> > > have avoided sequestration.
> > >
> > > The four were so concerned about harm to the VA health care budget that
> > > they were willing to take some controversial actions, including capping
> > > annual increases in GI Bill benefits at a level below increases in
> tuition.
> > >
> > > Miller, the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee chairman, said any
> automatic
> > > cuts “would have a negative impact on VA’s health care system and its
> > > ability to properly care for our veterans.” He expressed frustration
> that
> > > the White House and VA have not clarified the situation. “I have raised
> > > this concern numerous times in the past few months, but I am still
> waiting
> > > to hear,” he said. “It is now incumbent on the administration to
> clarify
> > > this issue immediately for veterans once and for all.” Ryan Gallucci of
> > > Veterans of Foreign Wars said there is still time to fight to protect
> > > veterans programs. “Since no one seems to know for sure, we have a
> year to
> > > make our case to preserve our earned veterans benefits,” said Gallucci,
> > > VFW’s deputy national legislative director.
> > >
> > > “It’s important for our members to call and write Congress to explain
> why
> > > these programs are important and why our veterans need them to remain
> > > intact.” In a Nov. 22 statement to its members, the VFW warns that
> > > sequestration could lead to increases in co-payments for medical
> visits and
> > > prescription drugs for veterans, and an increase in the enrollment fee
> for
> > > veterans who sign up for VA treatment but do not have service-connected
> > > health issues.
> > >
> > > Signed by Robert Wallace, executive director of VFW’s Washington
> office,
> > > the statement encourages members to contact lawmakers to press for a
> full
> > > VA exemption to sequestration.
> > >
> > > “Over the next year, many in Congress as well as thousands of
> registered
> > > lobbyists will be working hard to protect their special interests and
> > > programs,” the VFW statement says.
> > >
> > > “We must all work hard to protect the Department of Veterans Affairs
> > > health, benefits and cemetery administrations, as well as all military
> > > quality of life programs for the troops, their families and military
> > > retirees.”
> > >
> > >  ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Seeya later, Moscow.
> > >
> > >  Tom Hansen
> > > Spokane, Washington
> > >
> > >  "If not us, who?
> > > If not now, when?"
> > >
> > >  - Unknown
> > >
> > >
> > > =======================================================
> > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > >                http://www.fsr.net
> > >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > > =======================================================
> > >
> > >
> > >   =======================================================
> > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > >                http://www.fsr.net
> > >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > > =======================================================
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120103/39038e6a/attachment-0001.html>