Craig Warns Funding Plan Could Hurt Returning Troops

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Larry Craig, the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, today thanked his colleagues for their efforts to help America’s warriors. But at the same time he issued a strong warning about the latest budget resolution passed today by the Senate.

"This is not about the quantity of money. This is about how they plan to spend the money that worries me," Craig said. "I am absolutely committed to providing the highest quality of care to our veterans. I've supported a 70 percent increase in VA medical care funding since President Bush took office. I've spoken frequently about not sparing any expense when it comes to getting the highest quality of care to our Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, and veterans with service-connected disabilities."

"But what I see in this resolution put forward by Democrats has me deeply concerned. It may harm the care provided to the very veterans who are our number one priority – our combat wounded."

Craig noted that under the budget resolution, VA’s health care system will be expected to be reopened to upper income veterans – those with no service connected disabilities – at a time when veterans in serious need are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

"All I've been hearing from the Democrats for the last two years is how we must not make our veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan wait in lines for mental health care, traumatic brain injury treatment, or other specialty care. I agree. That is why their proposal puzzles me," said Craig, the top Republican on the veterans’ committee. "Where is the sense of priority here? It's like we're trying to keep a ship afloat by pouring tons of water onto the deck. It doesn’t make sense. If everyone is a priority, then no one is a priority. We must not put our war wounded in longer lines for care."

Craig noted that four years ago, just as the nation was preparing to go to war, then-Secretary of Veterans Affairs Anthony Principi suspended enrollment to those who were financially stable and who had no disabilities caused by their military service.

"At that time the Secretary warned us that we have a responsibility to ensure we have the capacity to treat men and women who may be disabled. This resolution assumes implementation of a policy that would break the trust that needs to be there for our men and women now returning from combat," Craig said.

There are 24 million veterans alive today and of those, 5.3 million currently use the VA health care system.

"There has been zero discussion about the long-term consequences of the Democrat’s proposal of opening up the system to every veteran. I’m afraid veterans with service connected injuries who need VA care, as well as taxpayers, will fall victim to the law of unintended consequences if, as I suspect, millions of veterans show up for care at VA hospitals which will soon be overwhelmed by the Democrat’s proposal," Craig said.

Senator Craig has proposed legislation – the Veterans Health Care Empowerment Act (S. 815) – which would allow veterans with service connected disabilities to receive treatment from the hospital or medical clinic of their choice.

"We need to ensure veterans get the top health care in a timely way. If some policies assumed in this resolution are adopted, there will be an even stronger reason for passing the Veterans Health Care Empowerment Act," Craig said. "Frankly if the Democrat’s don’t have the courage to say who can’t come in, then I believe it is necessary to say who can get out."

"Senator Craig has proposed legislation – the Veterans Health Care Empowerment Act (S. 815) – which would allow veterans "with service connected disabilities" to receive treatment from the hospital or medical clinic of their choice."

The above is the BEEF of the article and what Craig is pushing. The rest of it is just political/partisan posturing.

"with service connected disabilities" as stated is very far-reaching, since it includes every Vet with a solid "right" to care.......except those who are retired with 20 or more years active duty. All others currently receiving care are eligible on a means-test basis, not retirement or service-connected conditions.

So what Craig is proposing is relieving the VA of the absolute responsibility of caring for service-connected conditions (combat injuries and all other conditions arising from or while on active duty), leaving the VA with the absolute responsibility of caring for retirees only (these retired Vets are entitled to lifetime unlimited care without regard to the service-connection factor.....it was part of the deal to remain until retirement).

So now consider the means-tested Vets (under $24k/yr income) with non-service connected conditions and no health insurance........enrollment eligibility for these in recent years has still been available. Vets with incomes above this were excluded by Principi a few years back.

Craigs proposal seems to be the equivalent of an unlimited Medicare card for ALL Vets with service-connected DISABILITIES, but it appears to exclude Retirees without a service-connected disability.

This ain't gonna fly......there are way more retirees with no service-connected disability who have earned lifetime health care using the VA than Larry Craig ever imagined.

And there are way more Vets who have been successful at establishing service-connection status/claims (for this purpose the VA claims procedures give the Veteran the benefit of the doubt......the threshold is "at least as likely as not").

So that leaves the retirees and means-tested Vets to the VA.

I don't think Craig understands the breadth of the universe or its ramifications when he uses the phrase "service-connected disability".

(these retired Vets are entitled to lifetime unlimited care without regard to the service-connection factor.....it was part of the deal to remain until retirement).

In setting priorities for eligibility to health care, the VA emphatically does NOT take military retired status into account. You are SC or you're not. A vet with an SC disability goes to the front of the line, for his SC condition first, and then for NSC conditions. A vet with no SC conditions (retiree or not) has no inherent right to claim any services from the VA. This is the way it is.

Wrong. Retirees have an ABSOLUTE right. When certain clinics or specialty services are overwhelmed in a VA facility, (such as the pain clinic or certain rehab services) yes, all other than SC are on the "wait-list" (locally, not the whole VA) which amounts to stand-by status. So in that way only, you are correct.

Nonetheless, Craig should put a little effort into learning the reality of exactly what "service-connected" means.

I use the VA, regularly.....the condition that drove me to the VA is NOT service-connected, but by being creative I could most likely pretend that it is and get away with establishing "service-connection" and successfully get a disability claim on the basis of what I know in my soul to not truly be SC........or I could fake a PTSD claim.....easy to do....and in that way become a "service-connected disability"......in either instance, I'd be eligible for Craigs proposed program, which I know is not what he intends.

The mistake most people make is not understanding that in terms of obtaining care, the term "service-connected" is the status of the Veteran overall, and it is NOT limited to the service-connected condition or disability.

I know exactly how the VA works and doesn't work, and have no problem with the spirit of the priorities being considered. The problem is the term "service-connected".....it is too loose a term to be used in the context of what Craig is proposing, when I believe he really means combat-related.

This is my only point.....the terminology.

Wrong. Retirees have an ABSOLUTE right.

Don't want to beat this ready-to-expire horse too hard, but I must tell you VA eligibility is my job, one I've been doing for more than thirty years. Military retiree status (by itself) does not get you anything in the VA system. In fact, back in the days when military treatment facilities used to provide health care to retirees, we used to tell the "lifers" to beat it -- go to the Sub Base, go to USMA. In that case, being a retiree worked against you! But since MTFs can't be counted on to treat retirees any more, the VA will accept them -- and then bill their Tricare if it's a nonservice-connected condition.

I'm glad you use the VA successfully, but keep in mind the avalanche of OEF/OIF vets that will descend upon the system over the next couple of years. In fact, they're already here! Those men and women are our #1 priority right now, and we vets of earlier conflicts are going to have to take one step backward to make sure they have untrammeled access to the system.

"Those men and women are our #1 priority right now, and we vets of earlier conflicts are going to have to take one step backward to make sure they have untrammeled access to the system."

I agree completely.....and don't mind one bit. (little story here) I needed pain clinic procedures....periodic, as they don't last forever, but the pain-clinic at Ann Arbor was wait-list-only for non-SC (I don't even know if Detroit was, I avoid that snakepit, LOL) but it was open at Indy.....so I made 9 trips to Indy on my own nickel, 650 miles and a motel each time.....I was quite happy to do so in deference to SC's, Iraq or whichever, and agree that is the way it should be.

But the prob with terminology can and will get out of hand......had I had ANY "service-connected" claim, however slight - I could have gotten in on the SC basis, thereby likely getting a real-world priority equal to a returning Iraq Vet.......and that would be wrong, but that is how I see "service-connected" used while my feet are on the floors of 5 different Great Lakes area VAMC's.

If something is "service-connected", it is a (quote) disability, by definition (including section 1151 generated disability claims), yes?

Larry Craig might just create a monster, unless the legislation includes something other than blanket "service connected disability" terminology and instructions for the VA "to promulgate" accordingly (how many pigs-in-a-poke have you seen born in THAT way, LOL?).

If Veteran A (but not combat Vet) enrolled and has a minor service-connected disability, say one that caused a speech impairment, and has a motorcycle accident that seriously impairs his spinal cord at T-5. He will be eligible for all care in VA SCI units, treatment and residential, yes?

Now along comes Veteran B....hurt in Iraq, and exactly the same needs and rights as Veteran A....."service-connected disability"........no more, no less, just "service-connected disability".

Obviously, most people would want them both to be taken care of, but the VA only has so many SCI spaces and services to offer, so I'd have to choose the war injured Vet for the priority in this scewnario. (actually, there are few SCI programs as good as the VA's, IMO).

So what is the answer, using the present terminology.....More funds tagged specifically for "fee for service"? Or a gold card with carte-blanche for anything anywhere for Veterans with "service-connected (and sec 1151, yes?) disabilities"?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.