Posted on 3/31/2005, 6:45:39 PM by Former Military Chick
Are you really a veteran? Better check it fast. I did. I've got my DD-214 that says "honorable discharge." I've got the red-white-and-blue VA identification card complete with lousy picture and the "service-connected" rating. So, I must be a veteran. Right? Not if Rep. Steve Buyer (R-IN), chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, has his way.
Buyer is trying to rewrite the definition of "veteran" in a cold and calculated manner that could cost millions of veterans their benefits. Buyer recently won a political tug-of-war and replaced Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) as chairman of HVAC. Smith was known as a true friend of veterans and often broke ranks with his party to forward legislation favorable to the veteran community.
Not so with Buyer. In a recent interview with journalist Tom Philpott, Buyer stated, "While some veterans' organizations like to create a theme, that 'A veteran is a veteran [and] there is no difference,' I disagree."
Shortly after winning the chair at HVAC, Buyer said, "Some of the veterans service organizations, they are having this belief that everyone should have open access to the VA system, when in fact I believe that the VA system should follow its core constituency and the intent of Congress when we laid out our priorities, and that was in fact to take care of our disabled and indigent veterans first." (This subject was covered in my Military.com article on "Welfarizing the VA.")
So, what is happening here? Buyer is trying to redefine "veteran," and in so doing, reshape benefit programs to meet his new definition. In short, this means fewer benefits for fewer veterans.
The two keys here are Buyer's references to "intent of Congress" and "core constituency." By rejecting the "intent of Congress" when they passed legislation defining benefits and eligibility, Buyer is telling us Congress was wrong and he is going to change it. By referring to the VA's "core constituency" as "disabled and indigent veterans," he is eliminating veterans who do not fall into those categories.
This is just plain absurd! And it is wrong! As Buyer continues to redefine who is really a veteran, here is some of what's at stake.
The bipartisan Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission will hold its first meeting soon. The Commission will review whether Congress went too far by allowing concurrent receipt of military retirement and VA disability payments. Also on the table is a change in the way disability ratings are determined, and a restructuring of the definition of "service-connected." Buyer says he cannot guarantee veterans who currently have disability ratings that they will be exempt from Commission findings.
Buyer also wants the Commission to consider offering lump-sum payments to veterans with current disability ratings of 20 percent or less. These "cash now" settlements would deny veterans the right to pursue any compensation claims in the future. A veteran with a progressive condition, one that causes degenerative disability with age, would have no right to further compensation.
What's really on the table when it comes to redefining a veteran and available benefits? Buyer says, "I think everything should be on the table."
Everything! Buyer is even suggesting that service-connected disabilities be combat-related only. This would eliminate treatment and compensation for injuries received while on active duty but not directly related to combat.
Buyer also took aim at the veterans' service organizations, saying their view that all veterans should have access to VA healthcare abandons values like duty and sacrifice. He chided the service organizations for using inflammatory rhetoric. "I asked them to be very careful with the words they select because ... they have an impact all over the country. It is upsetting to me when someone refers to veterans as whiney," Buyer stated.
Well, there you have it in his own words. The chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee calling our service organizations "whiney" and accusing them of abandoning values like duty and sacrifice.
It would be easy to dismiss Buyer as part of some lunatic fringe on Capitol Hill trying to stick it to veterans. But that is not the case. Buyer speaks for the majority in Congress who speak for the current administration.
And, Buyer is the one guilty of inflammatory rhetoric. Demeaning our service organizations and their attempts to preserve veterans' benefits is a slap in the face to ALL veterans. Our service organizations have, in the past, often done too little too late. Sometimes we wondered where they were as the VA budget took hit after hit. Now they find themselves in the position of doing what they were meant to do and being castigated for it.
Fellow veterans, if this is not a call to action, I don't know what is. We cannot allow Congress to redefine who is a veteran. We cannot allow Congress to restructure veterans' benefits and reshape the definitions of disability. We have worked too hard for too long to not receive proper recognition for our service to our country.
It's time to put severe pressure on Congress. Recently 400 disabled veterans did just that when they jammed Committee hearings, booing and jeering Buyer and others who want to cut benefits. This new level of activism must increase if we are to preserve our benefits and guarantee a properly funded VA for the veterans of the future.
In 1789 President George Washington said, "The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional as to how they perceive veterans of earlier wars and how they were treated and appreciated by this country."
If we do nothing now we will only be able to say that we did nothing.
Here's another Maggot that needs to be taken out of office.
I'm so damned fed up with our Government and it's BS it's not funny.
This guy is a scumbag.
I (and thousands of others) have already been means-tested out of promised veterans' benefits. Meanwhile, millions of illegal aliens suck on our welfare and health care systems. Thanks, congress.
This doesn't sound right. Buyer is generally rock-solid. He is also a veteran I think is still serving in the JAG corps like Senator Graham. He was one of the impeachment managers.
There's something missing here. My guess is he's attempting to streamline the Veteran Affairs dept.
Wow, another example how hard-core Republicans can be. Anti-entitlement, even for vets.
Signed:
90 percent disabled 23year vet, and a card carrying republican
I suggest we read these bills before we jump to conclusions. I've served in the military and know that they will rail against any change.
1. H.RES.113 : Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs in the One Hundred Ninth Congress.
Sponsor: Rep Buyer, Steve [IN-4] (introduced 2/16/2005) Cosponsors (1)
2. H.R.1220 : To increase, effective as of December 1, 2005, the rates of disablity compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for survivors of certain service-connected disabled veterans, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Buyer, Steve [IN-4] (introduced 3/10/2005) Cosponsors (3)
3. H.R.1292 : To make technical corrections to the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2004.
Sponsor: Rep Buyer, Steve [IN-4] (introduced 3/15/2005) Cosponsors (1)
In principle at least, VA medical care is for service-connected conditions; it's not a blanket health-care scheme for anyone who was ever in the military, although 'benefits creep' has moved it in that direction. I think Buyer is just saying that.
I worked with a guy who had 10% disability and preference for getting a finger in the eye playing basketball in Idaho.
Somehow, that doesn't seem quite right.
A military lawyer wants to redefine what a vet is? Scary. Was his active duty in the JAG Corps or was he a combat vet?
That is the type of abuse that makes those of us who actually injured themselves in the line of duty look bad.
He was in the medical corps first and served in the first Gulf War.
Have you noticed the things that the Republican party has been seeking to put behind it are now reborn in people like Steve Buyer (R-IN)?
These are the same type of recommendations that Congressman Dana Roherbaucher(sp)(R) of California floated in 2004. I feel the president may well have his hand involved in this action. Not one bit of proof but a simple feeling.The party is heading back to the old days of the elitest Eastern leadership that turns its nose down to all but themselves.
Hillary Clinton must be thanking her lucky stars every day for calous hearted fools like Buyer and Roherbaucher. I'm sure she isn't thanking God.
Here's his service record.
http://stevebuyer.house.gov/biomil.htm
Example, please? Who promised you what? If someone promised you, e.g., VA health care and you have no service-connected disabilities, then that someone was talking through his hat. There has never been such a promise, except for maybe a "campaign promise." And we all know about them.
What "promised" veterans' benefits?
Flames be damned, I say "amen" to that. I, too, served 4 years in the USAF from 1977 to 1981. I didn't see any combat and I don't have any service related health issues. Does the government owe me a lifetime of health care for 4 years of service? I don't think so.
You had better read the article again. He wants benefits available only to those who are injured in combat.
Injury from a training parachute jump wouldn't count; loss of a leg in Irag from a tanker truck crash, not good enough. For this moron only the tip of the spear would be able to receive benefits.
Remember that the President dumped Anthony Princepi(sp)as the head of the VA. The man was a combat Navy vet of Vietnam and a go getter for the Vets.
Once again only my feelings but I think the president is turning the knife in the backs of the vets while he bleeds for the illegal immigrants.
Nothing has ever been promised to anyone from the government except taxes.
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.