Bush must court veterans to get their support in 2004

The Kansas City Star ^ | 9/1/2003 | DAVID GOLDSTEIN

[tullycraft]

WASHINGTON - A sign of political trouble for the president surfaced at a breakfast meeting in July at an unlikely place: the Capitol Hill headquarters of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Present were groups representing the leading veterans organizations. Their members might be viewed as likely Bush backers in 2004, given that troops are under fire overseas and given the traditional loyalty former servicemen and servicewomen show the commander in chief.

But angry over health care and other issues, the veterans told a White House official that it will take more than patriotic appeals to win the support of their combined membership of about 5 million.

Veterans are angry. And they're ready to take their frustrations out on the Washington politicians at the ballot box.

They say the praise for troops by the president, other top administration officials and Republican congressional leaders is "ringing hollow" because they have broken promises to veterans and active-duty soldiers about benefits and services.

Rick Weidman, director of government relations for the Vietnam Veterans of America, said that the president has a "credibility gap" and that "it's widening every day and it's getting deeper every day."

Scott Stanzel, a spokesman for Bush's 2004 re-election campaign, replied: "No one honors this nation's veterans more" than the president.

While the American Legion, the VFW and other veterans organizations are prohibited from endorsing candidates, they intend to educate their members on issues and where the candidates stand.

The groups already have an advertising and letters-to-the-editor campaign in the works to pressure Congress when it returns after Labor Day to increase funds for veterans' health care.

Their complaint is that the White House and Congress have underfunded medical care. And House Republicans, they said, engaged in a public betrayal.

House Republican leaders invited top officials from the veterans community to a news conference in May before the Memorial Day recess to announce they would support $27.1 billion for veterans' health care.

The president had proposed $25.3 billion. Supporters of the higher amount said that $1.8 billion more would meet the demand for medical treatment caused by the increased use of troops in combat zones.

But when Congress returned after the holiday, the Republicans backed off in favor of the lower figure.

"We really thought we had won this battle, but they turned around and did a 180," said Steve Robertson, legislative director for the American Legion.

Among the veterans' other concerns:

• House Republican leaders refuse to allow consideration of a bill -- authored by a Republican -- to allow veterans with a disability related to their service to collect both their military pension and their disability compensation. Currently the disability payment is deducted from their pension.

"When the president was running, he said he supported it," said Joe Violante, national legislative director for the Disabled American Veterans. "Now the administration threatens to veto any bill that contains it."

• The administration wants to close seven hospitals operated by the Department of Veterans Affairs while enlarging others and building several new facilities, including centers for the blind and those with spinal cord injuries. Many veterans are worried the closings will make it hard to get medical treatment.

But VA Secretary Anthony Principi said in an interview: "This is not about closing hospitals. This is about transforming the VA health care system into a patient-focused health care system that adapts to medicine in the 21st century."

• The administration intends to drop more than half a million veterans from medical eligibility by 2005. It also has proposed higher prescription drug fees. Meanwhile, it takes an average of six months to get an appointment at a VA medical center.

Principi said he cut services to half a million veterans because their medical needs were a low priority and he wanted to reduce the waiting times for the VA's "core" clients -- the seriously injured and disabled.

"Sometimes, leaders have to make difficult decisions," Principi said.

But the problem of long delays took on a name and face earlier this month with the plight of Sgt. Vannessa Turner, who contracted a mysterious illness while serving in Iraq and nearly died.

After she recovered, Turner was sent home to Massachusetts, where she tried to schedule an appointment at a VA hospital and was told she couldn't be seen until mid-October.

"As we get more Sgt. Turners coming back that need help, that will outrage not only the veterans community, but the private citizens of this country, who will say that we sent those kids over there, we got them busted up, now we're not meeting our obligations," Robertson said.

Among the Democratic candidates, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, a decorated Vietnam veteran, has emphasized his ties to the military and the veterans community. He has been a leader with Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

Kerry will officially kick off his campaign Tuesday in South Carolina, a key Southern test, alongside veterans of the boat crews he commanded in Vietnam and with the aircraft carrier USS Yorktown in the background.

Veterans have also been perplexed by other administration actions, like the Pentagon's recent attempt to cut the pay of combat troops before quickly back-pedaling.

Veterans insist that their complaints are no reflection on their strong support for the troops in the field or their respect for the presidency.

It also seems unlikely that many will politically desert the president at a time of high support for the military, especially since an American Legion poll during the 2000 campaign gave him the edge over Al Gore by a 9-to-1 ratio.

But it's worth looking at what happened to an earlier president, Bush's father.

In the 1992 presidential election, veterans backed Democrat Bill Clinton, viewed by many at the time as a draft dodger, over Republican President George Bush, the hero of the Persian Gulf War, by a 2-1 ratio, according to exit polls.

Veterans were angry over their treatment by the VA and had running conflicts with its secretary, Edward Derwinski. Many thought they would fare better under Clinton.

"I believe that, like his father, there is a strong possibility that (President Bush) could very easily lose the support of veterans," said Richard Schneider, director of veterans affairs for the Non Commissioned Officers Association.

Schneider added: "It's not a foregone conclusion that this president is going to be re-elected. Quite the contrary. People are waiting. I think there is going to be an accountability from the veterans, not only for themselves, but for these veterans who are going to be coming out of Iraq."

[zencat]

Agreed. Mostly liberal spin. While there are some issues with veterans' benefits, does any actually see veterans throwing their support behind Howard Dean?

[joesnuffy]

A goodly many of our politicans seem to think that "Nothing is too good for our disabled combat veterans"....which is of course exactly what they wish to give them in exchange for their service

Looking at the legislative bodies you wont find many veterans let alone combat vets..the same can be said for their offspring

The re-education camps of higher learning aka universities make sure that few if any get out until they have made their party confessions of anti Americanism and anti veteran-ism..


Rudyard Kipling



Tommy

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o'beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:

O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's ``Thank you, Mister Atkins,'' when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's ``Thank you, Mr. Atkins,'' when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy how's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints:
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;

While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind,"
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country," when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
But Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!

[TexasCowboy]

You've evidently not been associated with veteran's hospitals or with veteran's using those hospitals.
This may be a spin piece, but there's a lot of truth here.
Bill Clinton cut funding to our VA hospitals.
George Bush has not reinstalled it.

Veterans are pissed, and they have reason to be.

[Pukin Dog]

Thats right, us Veterans are so mad at Bush that we are going to vote for Howard Dean? The Liberal media is really losing it.

[Burf]

Bush then candidate made the "promises made, promises kept" part of his campaign. Sounds like a redux of "Read my lips". Whoever the dems nominate we will hear this again.

[Porterville]

I can just see veterans clamoring over each other to vote for Dean or Hillary.

[q_an_a]

After visits to VA hopsitals and with an aunt who works in one I can tell you that closing a few to make them more effective would be no loss. Many small towns have a VA office in local hospitals and that works better than building/growing an asylum style system.

The VFW and American legion have been supporters of Klinton since 92. Why should we think they became Bush supporters. They made this bed and now want a true military friend to save them from their past folly.

[RANGERAIRBORNE]

That is mostly correct- however, as I have posted elsewhere on FR, the large Veteran's organizations (several of which I happen to be a member of) really do not exist to support the active duty force, so much as they are another "senior citizen" lobbying group. (Sort of a patriotic AARP.)

The VFW and American Legion received Bill Clinton warmly, even as he was selling out the country to the Chinese, sending toops on stupid and useless missions, and publicly demonstrating his low morals.

But he promised the veteran's more money, more government programs, and that is what they wanted to hear. So I don't think that Bush can be any surer of having their votes in his pocket than Bob Dole did in 1996. (You remember President Dole, don't you?)

[RANGERAIRBORNE]

"toops"="TROOPS". OOPS!

[Redwood71]

AS a vet, I am a member of a few organizations. I can tell you that there is a problem for Bush. Without concurrent disability, and more funding to the VA, he may lose the vet vote (And there are a bunch of us).

When he mentioned the change to disability, we had hoped to move on to the concurrent check, like every other business in the US, including politicians. When we found that it only added additional funds based upon our retirement and combat injuries only, the vet community was disappointed and felt betrayed.

Right now, we are receiveing a percentage of our current retirement as our pittance for being willing to step in front of a bullet for 20 years or physically destroyed early. I live in Tacoma, Washington, and there is a vet hospital nearby. Not only is the scheduling tough, but certain parts of each year, vets who live there, that need to be there, are released because there are no beds for them because the nurses are shorthanded due to something as rediculous as the nurses are taking vacations. If this what you call liberal spin, then you are wrong. It is real. And Bush had better get congress to do something or he just might be enjoying the weather in Texas sooner than he expected. He'll lose our vote.

[tet68]

The Liberal media is really losing it.



I'm with you.

[Non-Sequitur]

Thats right, us Veterans are so mad at Bush that we are going to vote for Howard Dean?

They don't have to vote for Howard Dean. They just have to stay home. And at the rate this administration is going that's a real possibility.

[RANGERAIRBORNE]

Yep- see my post #11. You have absolutely made my case for me. And I don't see all the guys down at the VFW running to the polls to vote for Howard Dean- but a lot of them might just stay home, like they did in 1996.

[Pukin Dog]

No it isnt. You alarmists are silly.

Any Republican or Conservative silly enough to risk Democrats being elected by staying home is plain stupid. This is the season for every special-interest group to make their hollow threats, looking for attention. Nothing more. Those who vote, will vote.

Certain groups want to believe that they are responsible for Bush 1 losing by their staying home, when in fact, had Ross Perot not run, Bush 1 would have beaten Clinton by a big margin. I invite all special-interest-single-issue voters to go ahead and sit home on their asses. They are too dumb to be of any value to either side.

[Non-Sequitur]

Any Republican or Conservative silly enough to risk Democrats being elected by staying home is plain stupid.

If you think that this topic hasn't got a lot of vets steamed then you aren't spending much time with retirees. As for voting, when you have a Republican administration who lies to you and Democrat administrations who lie to you then were is the risk? Why support either?