Posted on 07/28/2003 7:32:04 AM PDT by Brian S
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - President Bush and his Republican Party are facing a political backlash from an unlikely group - retired veterans.
Normally Republican, many retired veterans are mad that Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress are blocking remedies to two problems with health and pension benefits. They say they feel particularly betrayed by Bush, who appealed to them in his 2000 campaign, and who vowed on the eve of his inauguration that "promises made to our veterans will be promises kept."
"He pats us on the back with his speeches and stabs us in the back with his actions," said Charles A. Carter of Shawnee, Okla., a retired Navy senior chief petty officer. "I will vote non-Republican in a heart beat if it continues as is."
"I feel betrayed," said Raymond C. Oden Jr., a retired Air Force Chief Master Sergeant now living in Abilene, Texas.
Many veterans say they will not vote for Bush or any Republican in 2004 and are considering voting for a Democrat for the first time. Others say they will sit out the election, angry with Bush and Republicans but unwilling to support Democrats, whom they say are no better at keeping promises to veterans. Some say they will still support Bush and his party despite their ire.
While there are no recent polls to measure veterans' political leanings, any significant erosion of support for Bush and Republicans could hurt in a close election. It could be particularly troublesome in states such as Florida that are politically divided and crowded with military retirees.
Registered Republican James Cook, who retired to Fort Walton Beach, Fla., after 24 years in the Air Force, said he is abandoning a party that he said abandoned him. "Bush is a liar," he said. "The Republicans in Congress, with very few exceptions, are gutless party lapdogs who listen to what puts money in their own pockets or what will get them re-elected."
Veterans have two gripes.
One is a longstanding complaint that some disabled vets, in effect, have to pay their own disability benefits out of their retirement pay through a law they call the Disabled Veterans Tax.
Since 1891, anyone retiring after a full military career has had their retirement pay reduced dollar for dollar for any Veterans Administration checks they get for a permanent service-related disability. However, a veteran who served a two-or-four-year tour does not have a similar reduction in Social Security or private pension.
A majority of members of Congress, from both parties, wants to change the law. A House proposal by Rep. Jim Marshall, D-Ga., has 345 co-sponsors.
But it would cost as much as $5 billion a year to expand payments to 670,000 disabled veterans, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld earlier this month told lawmakers that the president would veto any bill including the change.
The proposal is stuck in committee. A recent effort to bring it to the full House of Representatives failed, in part because only one Republican signed the petition.
"The cost is exorbitant. And we are dealing with a limited budget," said Harald Stavenas, a spokesman for the House Armed Services Committee.
The second complaint is over medical care. After decades of promising free medical care for life to anyone who served for 20 years, the government in the 1990s abandoned the promise in favor of a new system called Tricare. The Tricare system provides medical care, but requires veterans to pay a deductible and does not cover dental, hearing or vision care.
A group of military retirees challenged the government in a class-action lawsuit, won a first round, then were seriously disappointed when Bush allowed the government to appeal. Government won the next legal round.
"I voted for the president because of the promises," said Floyd Sears, a retired Air Force master sergeant in Biloxi, Miss. "But as far as I can tell, he has done nothing. In fact, his actions have been detrimental to the veterans and retired veterans. I'm very disappointed about the broken promise on medical care."
Stavenas said House and Senate negotiators were working this week on proposals to address the veterans' two specific complaints. He added that Congress has increased spending for veterans' benefits, including a 5 percent increase next year for the Veterans Health Administration.
Christine Iverson, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said: "The Bush administration and the Republican Congress have taken and will continue to take steps to enhance benefits for our veterans."
Not all military retirees will vote against Republicans, of course. Some, like retired Air Force Lt. Col. Gene DiBartolo of Tampa, will vote for Bush again gladly.
Though he believes his fellow veterans have a just complaint, he said the government simply cannot "do everything."
As for Bush, he said, "he has restored honor and dignity to this nation ...
"It would take a lot more than this issue to dissuade me from my support of this man."
So they are not going to vote for Bush because of a law that has been on the books for 112 years and was there when they joined???
Unf%&^(*& believable!
Do we really have to go into this neo-con/paleo-con crap again? In the words of the great Gunnery Sergeant Hartman, "To me, you are all equally worthless!"
Wrong! He is acting to keep this country as safe as it can be after 8 yrs of exactly the opposit. He is acting to put Judges on the bench that will protect our Constitution,instead of changing it by judicial fiat. He is acting to make the tax laws fairer and has plans to make them less complex. He inherited a country that was headed for the horrible consequences of Kyoto and subserviance to the U.N. He has made his priorities clear, has never blamed the socialist rats, just shouldered the load and set out to repair the damage.
The complexity of his job is enormous, and you should cut him some slack!!
Sometimes I agree with him, and sometimes I don't, because he's all over the map when it comes to Bush (depending on what day you listen to him), but I ALWAYS appreciate his ability to entertain. He's very good at it.
btw, who exactly is 'You people' and what deep end are we going over in your learned opinion?
Are you serious?? Have you talked with anyone IN the military lately?
What I have said repeatedly is that Rush is all over the map when it comes to Bush. I believe I used the word 'schizophrenic.' He says nice things one day, and he rants against him the next........to entertain......a fact which you obviously can't handle.
And I find it most interesting that you used the word 'popular' for the 'sentiment'.....that IS the word you used, isn't it??..... that Bush is 'liberal.' Does it make you feel warm fuzzies inside that you share in a 'popular sentiment?' :o)
btw, who are you really, newbie?
It's a shame, as both sides are f#$king up the Republican Party and conservatism in general. I have a suspicion that there are Democrats behind both groups who are salivating at this.
Right, for every statement like this, you have to bypass a thousand of the opposite!!The leftist press has cut their teeth on this practice.
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.