New Haven Register
Vets’ needs outpace funding increases
By Joe Straw
Published on June 22
WASHINGTON - A recent report by a presidential task force stated officially what many American veterans, and their advocates, have long known: Increases in demand for care at Veterans Affairs health care facilities are far outpacing increases in funding.
The result is tangible to newcomers to the VA health care system: At the beginning of this year, there were more than 236,000 vets waiting at least six months to get an appointment for a routine checkup or follow-up visit.
The report’s recommendation was a simple one, but a tall order: "full funding" of the VA health care system to meet all demands provided for by law.
The problem, according to veterans groups and some legislators, is that unlike annual funding levels for Social Security or Medicare, which are mandated by law, yearly funding for VA health care programs is "discretionary," leaving it vulnerable to the budgetary and political climate of any given year.
Spurred in part by the findings and recommendations of the task force, which was formed by President Bush in 2001, lawmakers have drafted a series of bills they hope will place VA funding, and services to veterans, on steadier ground.
U.S. Rep Rosa DeLauro, D-3, has co-sponsored a bill written by U.S. Rep John Larson, D-1, that would institute time guidelines for veterans’ care.
Under the Larson-DeLauro bill, if VA health care institutions fail to provide care for a patient within a set period of time, that veteran is free to pursue the same care from a private provider, at the VA’s expense.
Three other bills address the funding issue at its root.
Two bills - one sponsored by U.S. Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., the other by U.S. Rep. Lane Evans, D-Ill. - would institute mandatory funding levels for veterans’ health care, determined by formula based on projected demand and the rate of health care cost inflation.
A bill co-authored by U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons, R-2, a combat veteran and chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Health subcommittee, would establish an independent panel composed of economists and health care industry experts that would recommend the needed budget appropriations to achieve "full funding" for the next fiscal year.
"Our approach is to take the politics out and put the experts in," said U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., chairman of the House Veterans Committee and the bill’s co-author.
While the Simmons-Smith bill would not mandate funding levels, a Republican House staffer called the bill "the best chance we have."
The Bush Administration’s opposition to mandatory funding levels - and the establishment of an independent panel - was discussed last week by Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs Leo S. Mackay Jr., in testimony before the Veterans Affairs Committee.
"We would strongly oppose any form of mandatory funding - including formulas set in statute and independent bodies directing budget levels," Mackay said.
Veterans groups, however, are pushing for mandatory funding, which would prevent cuts from authorized funding by the executive Office of Management and Budget, and during the legislative appropriations process, both of which, said Disabled American Veterans spokesman Dave Autry, are "subject to political whims."
"If it were mandatory, it would bypass the sausage grinder of OMB, and the sausage grinder of the appropriations process," Autry said.
Steve Thomas, a spokesman for the American Legion, said his organization would not back any piece of legislation until all are reviewed at the legion’s national convention this August.
Legislation introduced by Evans last year, similar to his new bill, was "very well-received," Thomas said.
The presidential task force’s 152-page report traced the growing gap between demand and funding at the VA to the Veterans Health Care Eligibility Reform Act of 1996, which expanded the VA’s mission from treating service-related disabilities to general health care for veterans.
The VA’s health care budget has grown over the past decade from around $20 billion to nearly $24 billion, but spending per patient has dropped from more than $7,000 per patient to just under $5,000 per patient, according to the task force report.
<
http://www.house.gov/simmons/print/inthenews96.html>
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(930 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
