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."
Good question, McGavin.
The 'he's selling out his base' tripe and 'I won't vote for him in 2004 if....' crowd are getting really boring.
I guarantee that most of these gripers never voted for him in the first place.
These are idle threats, and do not represent most Republicans OR veterans who are thrilled to have George W. Bush as Commander in Chief.
My father in law, who retired from the air force, just passed away in April. The run around we got trying to get death benefits was almost criminal. They did send a flag to the funeral, but we are still waiting in nearly August for them to re-imburse the funeral costs like they promised him when he signed.
Alot of people bitch. But they made a promise. Risk your life, defending your country, and we will do certain things for you. The government should be ashamed for dishonoring their covenant.
It's $5 billion over 10 years for about 500,000 disabled military retirees.
1. The most significant point is this: NO OTHER Democrat or Republican President did anything to fix the problem of concurrent receipt. Why they'd turn to a democrat to do what the democrats for years had the chance to fix and never did would be ignorant.
2. Bush signed and the Republican Senate and House approved the very first FUNDED concurrent receipt program in the history of the nation. In other words, Pres. Bush DID KEEP HIS PROMISE! (The program applies now to those with a Purple Heart, or to those with war-connected disabilities AND 60% or higher disability ratings. It's a START!")
3. The naysayers are those in the veteran's service groups (DAV, VFW, AMVETS, etc.) Sadly, the leadership of these organization has been taken over by political democrats. They are spewing propaganda in their literature and need to be taken to task for failure to admit number 2 above.
4. My only criticism of Pres. Bush is the current size of the military. It is too small and will soon wear our soldiers out with constant deployment. I believe we need up to 17 Divisions instead of 10 -- 3 of those on the border as a new DoD-based Border Guard. (14 heavy combat and 3 light-infantry Border duty. These would inter-rotate and the Border divisions would be a stable non-deployable assignment for overseas-weary soldiers. It would immensely aid Homeland Security at the same time.)
5. The money for these divisions will soon be lost to future entitlements as we spend the "peace dividend" on prescription drug coverage that will take that formerly defense-oriented money and shift it to entitlements. This is a tragic misdirection of security money to social welfare programs.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!
Sorry, Steve, but where are they gonna find one of those in the demobaath party? Zell Miller's so sick of Washington politics he's getting the hell out.
I can assure you, firsthand, that the democrats have NOT infiltrated those organizations! :) If anything, it's the opposite! :)
Let's say that the disgruntled veterans rise up in protest against a President who is obviously pro-military, respects those who serve, and who have served, and has had to repair 8 years of corrosion done by xlinton, and as done so admirably.
Let's say that these veterans make so much noise that they influence the election, and instead of George W. Bush, we get say, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Al Sharpton or Howard Dean in office.
It would make you think those veterans weren't able to see the forest for the trees, wouldn't it?
That is not to say that he shouldn't honor the promises he made. But most people understand that he's had to deal with the worst crises since he took office in American history.
I'm willing to give him the time to honor his commitment.
As to your off-topic insinuation that he is not pro-Life and won't sign the abortion ban law, it's utterly ridiculous.
Good post. I agree 100%
What I am saying is that we have a President who is overtly pro-military, and respects those who serve. I do not believe when all is said and done that he will not honor his commitment to Veterans.
I understand the impatience.......my brother in law is a Viet Nam Vet who has been treated horribly by the government (but is also STRONGLY pro-Bush). But I also understand that the President's priority has been to fix the mess that xlinton left so that we can deal with the terrorist threats against America, and that things for active military have been improved tremendously. Give it time.
From the National Commander of the DAV
From the National Commander
A Year of Accountability
Edward R. Heath, Sr., National Commander
As we begin this new year, disabled veterans are facing immense new challenges and daunting obstacles to obtaining adequate health care and well-deserved compensation for service-connected disabilities. The obligation falls to us to ensure that issues that affect us receive fair treatment from our elected representatives.
A new Congress begins its session this month with many public policy issues on the agenda. There is the war against terrorism, a possible war in Iraq, and increased emphasis on homeland defense, to name just a few of them that our lawmakers must face. It is apparent that veterans issues may be given even lower priority.
At this time, the Congress has not passed a spending bill for the Department of Veterans Affairs. The temporary continuing resolutions passed by our elected representatives only fund the VA at last year's inadequate levels. Health care services at VA medical centers are already stretched to the breaking point. The VA has instituted a new priority system for disabled veterans, but some veterans still wait months before getting an appointment with a doctor or specialist.
Last fall, we witnessed how the Congress initially whole-heartedly supported concurrent receipt for military longevity retirement pay and disability compensation only to adopt a provision that was a mere shadow of the original bills passed in the House and Senate. The compromise offered to resolve the Bush Administration's objections to concurrent receipt was no compromise. Shamefully, only a few disabled military retirees will benefit from the legislation passed.
This year, the DAV will demand that Congress do better. Equally crucial is the continuing DAV drive for mandatory funding of VA health care. It is a much-needed initiative that will eliminate the annual uncertainty about VA health care funding, and would assure that veterans receive adequate health care. Many in Congress support this concept, but it requires the resolve of every DAV and Auxiliary member to help make it a reality.
That is why you are so important to this initiative. Your support can make all the difference. I am asking as many of you as possible to join in the DAV Commander's Action Network, or DAV CAN, to inform your elected representatives of your support for DAV initiatives. When your elected representatives are in their home districts, tell them face-to-face that you support mandatory funding for VA health care. Ask your members of Congress if they will support it. Also please make telephone calls and send e-mails, letters, and telegrams urging them to support mandatory health care funding. It is important that you make your desires heard.
If at all possible, please attend the 2003 Mid-Winter Conference February 23-26, and personally visit your Senators and Representatives on Capitol Hill to push for the DAV's legislative program.
It's going to be a tough year for veterans. As we have seen, neither Congress nor the Administration has shown a great interest in supporting fair and adequate treatment for veterans health care and benefit programs.
But Congress can be persuaded with an effective grassroots campaign to pay more attention to veterans issues. The DAV needs its members to voice their desires in support of our initiatives, not just once, but relentlessly and continuously. One contact from a DAV member is a huge help. Dozens of contacts from each DAV member becomes a tidal wave that your elected representatives cannot ignore or hide in conference committee dealings.
Each of you has stood up for our nation in the most difficult of times. You all have served with honor and courage. You are again being called, not in the defense of liberty, but in the defense of justice--to ensure that the promises made by our government are kept. I know that each of you will proudly serve the DAV and its initiatives during the coming year.
The DAV, along with the support of other veterans service organizations, will be a new, more powerful force before Congress in 2003. We depend on our outstanding DAV staff to tell members of Congress and the Administration what is fair and what is needed. But the DAV also needs you to tell your elected representatives that you will be watching, participating, and expecting your elected representatives and the Administration to truly represent us in a fair and equitable way.
That's what I plan to say when I address a joint meeting of the House and Senate Veterans' Affairs Committees in February. I hope you will join me in support of the DAV.
If you want the real story from the vets themselves go to Support the Vets
Many of them did. The 00 election runup had a lot of independents and C3PO's support Bush on the "anybody but gore" political principle.
The C3PO vote is gone, lessor of two evils is about done as a campaign slogan. The only question is if he can draw enough of the socialist leaning independents his way, and if so, what kind of credentials are those for a conservative.
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.