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."
I should have posted "ONE is not free to etc. etc." rather than "YOU."
I didn't mean to imply that YOU were guilty of this..sorry!
I have never been confused.
But thanks for yer thoughts.
I understand your point completely. I realy do think there are FReepers who view politics like professional sports and only want their "team" to win. Rest assured, I am not one of them.
PhiKapMom - "You and me both -- becoming more moderate instead of more conservative because of what I see from the so-called ultra conservatives that post on here. Their attitude with he must do as I say or I won't vote for him makes me absolutely disgusted. "
Well said, Godebert.
Bush supports gun control, Bush supports the drug war and it's illegal tactics, Bush goes to war on a whelm instead of getting a Declaration of War from Congress, Bush signed the Patriot Act, and Bush formed the Homeland Security Department to implement the illegal Patriot Act.
Those acts are not the actions of a conservative.
No it isn't. Here is your claim:
In post #254 you made this claime:
Yeah right, you have been on FR complaining about Bush since day 1 of your registering, IMO.
And couldn't back it up dispite my providing links in #265.
Then you made this excuse and claim in #295
I can only go back to your 50 last replies. But that still doesn't change the fact that you, IMO, have been a hopeless malcontent since you have registered on FR.
I had also given a link to my bookmarks which you obviously didn't look at. Now I have provided links again in post # 306 to the threads that I have posted myself or posted on.
Now you claim that the proof is on this thread. I'd like to see where on this thread I have proven that I have been "complaining about Bush since day 1 of your registering" or "that you, IMO, have been a hopeless malcontent since you have registered on FR".
Why in the world do people feel the need to tell everyone it is "just my opinion"?
We already know that.
LOL!
Shame on the Republican Party for not giving us a good candidate.
I don't like to vote for the lesser of two evils. Not didn't vote at all. I voted for Harry Browne.
I wish they had a "none of the above" vote.
He is the most conservative person that can be elected. He cannot move farther right than 50.1% of the population in the states comprising an electoral majority.
I don't like to vote for the lesser of two evils. Not didn't vote at all. I voted for Harry Browne.
I wish they had a "none of the above" vote.
As pleasant as it's been getting to know you, carenot, I have a life to live, and I prefer to live it quite apart from you and your 'chip' and your confusion about whose 'base' you belong to.
In your opinion?
I always figure that right out!
Why do you feel the need to say that?
To: nmh;
Bush does not want to help our veterans get the free health care promised to them. In fact, if Congress passes a law helping the veterans, President Bush has promised to veto it.
UCANSEE2, Lazamataz has a tagline you might want to borrow.
"PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!"
From the article:
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.
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.