Archived Issue: January/February 2007

110th Congress Brings Sweeping Political Changes

The 110th Congress that convenes in January will have both the House and Senate under Democratic control for the first time since 1995. Clearly, the sweeping political change as well as the general mood of the country will change the political agenda and challenge how NAUS will deal with Congress.

The shift of Congress to Democratic charge will shape the issues that dominate the upcoming legislative agenda. It will also affect how the President, DoD and the Department of Veterans Affairs approach their agenda in health care and related program changes. As Johnny Cash once observed, "Everything changes, as well it should. The bad ain't forever and the good ain't for good."

One of our top goals is to see Congress and the President pursue adequate resources for the security of our Nation, the protection of our homeland, and the defense of our people as their highest duty. NAUS urges the executive and legislative branch to proceed on a path that supports our troops and remembers our retirees, veterans, their families and survivors.

As a nation, we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to our uniformed servicemembers, past and present, for their service, patriotism and sacrifice. The benefits that these special individuals are legally entitled to are not the product of a social welfare program, as some might argue. Rather, they are another cost of freedom that should never be forgotten.

NAUS looks forward to working with lawmakers willing to deliver on the promises made to those brave men and women who answered the call to service, as generations before intended Americans to do. We have much to do, but we are encouraged that working together we can provide for the future of our nation and treat veterans and military retirees with the care they have been promised and the dignity they have earned.

Let's take a look at the legislative changes achieved at the close of the last Congress, the leadership changes we'll see in the new session and some of the issues that NAUS will tackle in the 110th Congress.

Congress Approves Veterans "Omnibus" Bill to Improve Benefits and Health Care
On the last day of the 109th Congress, the House and Senate Committees on VeteransÕ Affairs finally found agreement on S. 3421, a wide-ranging ÒomnibusÓ bill called the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Improvement Act of 2006.

The bill pulls together a package of proposals that only days before had failed to gain agreement in a failed conference between the House and Senate committees.

NAUS is pleased to see common sense restored in an end-of-session agreement that enhances veterans' benefits and health care, improves protections for veterans' personal information, increases mental health care access, and allows VA to begin major construction at health care facility sites nationwide.

Among the construction provisions, the new law authorizes $300 million for the restoration, new construction or replacement of the New Orleans VA medical center; $310 million for the restoration of the VA medical center in Biloxi, MS; and $98 million for the replacement of the VA medical center in Denver, CO. In addition, the bill authorizes $36.8 million for advance planning of a co-located, joint-use medical facility in Charleston, SC, which according to House Chairman Steve Buyer (R-4-IN) will preserve "the unique 'veterans' identity' of the medical center" and "increase access to better health care for veterans today and into the future."

In addition, there are twenty-two other major construction projects in 15 states authorized in the bill, which also approves continued leasing of eight medical facilities and requires VA to explore options for construction of a new medical facility in San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Other provisions increase support for care and treatment of troops returning from the war on terror. The bill adds $65 million to increase the number of clinicians treating post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and authorizes $2 million for additional blind rehabilitation specialists with increases in the number of facilities where these specialists will be located.

The new law also requires VA to establish an office of rural health with expansion in telehealth initiatives and outreach that would be invaluable to veterans living in rural areas.

In addition, the bill authorizes VA to designate six Parkinson's Disease Research, Education, and Clinical Centers of Excellence, and at least two Multiple Sclerosis Centers of Excellence, and strengthens VA's homeless grant and per diem programs.

The bill also requires federal government reimbursement to veterans homes run by State governments for the costs of care provided to veterans with a 70 percent or higher service-connected disability. Also, veterans living in those homes with service-connected disabilities rated at least 50 percent will be able to obtain their medications free of charge from VA.
On protecting veterans' personal information, the bill directs VA to provide breach notification to individuals, issue fraud alerts, data breach analysis, credit monitoring services and identity theft insurance. It also provides for an Information Security Education Assistance program, an incentive to allow VA the ability to recruit personnel with the information skills necessary to meet department requirements.

One of the more controversial items is a measure providing attorney representation that allows veterans to hire an agent or attorney to represent them after a notice of disagreement has been filed. Prior law prohibited paid representation until a claim had fully proceeded through the entire process. This change deserves close watching because it appears to imply that the VA claims process, which is supposed to be veteran-friendly and non-adversarial, should operate more like the criminal justice system.

(NAUS agrees that the claims process needs attention but sees the answer in additional resources to hire and properly train VA employees held accountable for proper decisions, not in hiring lawyers to intervene in a system that is troubled because it is short handed.)

The bill also contains a provision that removes the cremated remains of convicted double-murderer Russell Wayne Wagner from Arlington National Cemetery. Wagner brutally murdered Daniel Davis, 84, and Wilda Davis, 80, in Maryland on ValentineÕs Day in 1994. Chairman of the Senate Committee Larry Craig (R-ID) and Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) triggered the new look at the burial rules that previously allowed the ashes of the notorious killer to remain in honor at Arlington.

Congress Fails to Complete Military Construction-VA Spending Bill
In the waning days of the 109th Congress, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees decided to punt final approval of H.R. 5385, the Military Construction and Veterans appropriations bill for fiscal year 2007 (the fiscal year actually began Oct. 1, 2006) into 2007.

Hope actually lifted for a moment or two but then progress departed course, took a roller coaster ride and finally ended with a crash.

As readers know, the House passed the appropriations measure on time in May and sent the bill to the Senate for its consideration. Following Senate committee action in July, action on the bill virtually stopped. Things languished until November when the full Senate considered it, amended it, and approved it ready for conference with the House.

Already 2-months behind the fiscal year, action on the bill took another reversal when a group of Senators, fearful that the legislation would become a magnet for a late-session boatload of unrelated costly earmarks, decided to block the assignment of Senate conferees, which they did, thereby stopping progress dead in its tracks.

At that time, key members of the House leadership publicly placed failure squarely with the Senate. Frankly, the blame fit. It was, after all, the Senate that had delayed action for six months, turning to consideration at the last days of the 109th Congress.

But things became more bizarre. A compromise in the Senate lifted the hold on conferees. On Wednesday, Dec. 6, the bill was back on track.

Now, with progress at hand, the House balked. Despite assurances from House leaders that final adjournment for the year rested on "completing all necessary work," the conference was suddenly called off. The outgoing Majority Leader, John Boehner (R-OH), refused to appoint House conferees saying it was too late to complete any more appropriations bills.

The Chairman of the MilCon/Veterans subcommittee James Walsh (R-NY) said it would take at least four days to complete the conference. "Based on what the majority leader told me, we adjourn on Friday." He added, "It is physically impossible to get this done."

With neither the House nor Senate willing to complete appropriations bills in the time remaining for the 109th Congress, an increase in critical funding for sick and disabled veterans was punted into next year. Instead of adjourning on Monday, Dec. 11, leadership adjourned on Friday, Dec. 8, and punted responsibility over to the new 110th Congress.

In the opening days of the new Congress, NAUS will press both chambers to conclude action on the MilCon/VA bill at the earliest possible moment. And with a little bit of good will, we have every expectation that action can be completed, so VA is adequately funded.

As a final note, NAUS is more firmly convinced than ever that VA funding must be guaranteed and not left to the whim of Congress. We must make certain that our courageous men and women are never again left in the lurch on whether their promised health care is available when needed.

Congress Avoids Cuts in Medicare/TRICARE Physician Fees
As part of one of the last bills passed by Congress in Dec. (H.R. 6111), the House and Senate approved a broad ranging tax and trade package that includes a NAUS-supported provision to stop the 5.1 percent reduction in Medicare physician fees that would otherwise have taken effect Jan. 1.

Overcoming last minute objections from a number of Senators on various trade provisions contained in the bill, Congress avoided plans to cut payments to doctors seeing TRICARE beneficiaries that surely would have resulted in a decrease in military retireesÕ access to quality health care, especially in more rural areas where access is already a problem.

NAUS thanks everyone for using our NAUS-CapWiz Alert system for sending a message to members of Congress about the urgency of action on this matter. We are very pleased with the number of visits, emails, letters and phone calls that helped turn attention to this problem and help us avoid it.

It is clear, however, that the next Congress needs to change the current system. The failure of the current approach is apparent. Under the present formula, called the ÒSustainable Growth RateÓ formula, doctorÕs payments are projected to continue downward. Changes in this direction only discourage doctors from taking on new TRICARE patients and may even cause some to opt-out of the program altogether.

NAUS looks forward to working with Congress to correct a flawed pricing formula that threatens access to physician services. We are certain that our newly elected representatives and senators will see the flaws and create incentives for an improved system protecting the benefit earned through a military career.

Congress Expands Law Prohibiting Protests at Military Funerals
In the closing hours of the 109th Congress, the House and Senate approved S. 4042, a bill to expand existing law that prohibits the intentional disruption of a military funeral. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) introduced the bill called the Respect for the Funerals of Fallen Heroes Act.

S. 4042 expands previous law, signed by the President in May, to include funerals conducted at private cemeteries. The previous law protected solely the funerals of veterans and servicemembers at our 121 national cemeteries and Arlington National Cemetery.

In the last year, it is reported that more than 100 military funerals across the country were disrupted. Over the past 15 years, more than 22,000 similar disruptions have occurred.

This NAUS-supported legislation would preserve the dignity of a military funeral ceremony and provide shelter and assistance to grieving families. Twenty-six States have passed similar laws.

New House Chairmen
On December 7, the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee met to select committee chairmen for the upcoming 110th Congress.

Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO) was chosen by the House Democratic Caucus to be the new Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee for the next Congress, which starts in January. Rep. Skelton is a long-time leader in the House on defense issues. His district is home to Fort Leonard Wood, Whiteman Air Force Base and the Missouri National Guard Training Center.

Rep. Vic Snyder (D-AR) is the next chairman of the House Personnel Subcommittee. As chairman of the subcommittee, the six-term Congressman leads the panel responsible for military health care, quality-of-life, and benefit issues. Rep. Snyder is also an active member of the VeteransÕ Affairs Committee. He is a veteran, serving as a Marine in Vietnam before graduating from college, medical school and law school.

Rep. Dave Obey (D-WI) will chair Appropriations, and Rep. John M. Spratt, Jr., (D-SC) will chair Budget. As appropriations chairman, Rep. Obey will lead funding decisions on every discretionary program in the federal budget, which includes nearly all defense funding and nearly half of veterans. Rep. Spratt is an Army veteran, serving as a captain from 1969 to 1971. He also serves one seat away from the chair of the Armed Services Committee.

On Dec. 8, the Democratic caucus voted to select Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA) as chairman of the VeteransÕ Affairs Committee. Filner is a 14-year member of Congress and a strong advocate for The Independent Budget, a NAUS-endorsed comprehensive document authored by veterans for veterans to guide congressional budget and policy decision-making.

New Senate Chairmen
On November 15, the Senate Democratic leadership team, led by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, announced the committee chairmen for the 110th Congress.

Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan was selected to be the new Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Sen. Levin, now serving his fifth Senate term, is a strong supporter of national defense and a dependable advocate on behalf of our service men and women. He indicates that he will press to conclude US military involvement in Iraq and work to increase scrutiny of military spending programs.

Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia will chair Appropriations, and Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) will chair Budget. Sen. Byrd now serving his ninth Senate term, first joined the Appropriations Committee in 1959 and last chaired it from 1989 to 1994. He is also a senior member of the Armed Services Committee. Sen. Conrad, though voting against going to war in Iraq, has voted for every funding request submitted for the support of our men and women in uniform. He is now serving his fourth full Senate term.

Sen. Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, now serving his third full Senate term, will serve as chairman of the VeteransÕ Affairs Committee. Sen. Akaka is an Army veteran serving on active-duty from 1943 to 1947 and was stationed in Saipan and Tinian. He is also a senior member of the Armed Services Committee.

The Survivor Benefit Program
Among NAUS priorities in the new Congress is legislation to fix the inequities in the Survivor Benefit Program (SBP). We will pursue making SBP more equitable and more in keeping with our Nation's promise to our service members and their families.

Our goal is to eliminate the dollar-for-dollar deduction of the Dependency Indemnity Compensation (DIC), which the VA pays to survivors, from SBP annuities. Under current law, the SBP/DIC offset is nothing more than a tax on military survivors whose loved ones paid for the SBP insurance.

In coordination with ending the SBP/DIC offset, NAUS also seeks to correct a serious inequity in SBP that currently requires over a hundred thousand older military survivors to pay extra into the system for the same benefits as more recent enrollees. Fixing this problem is a matter of basic fairness to these military retirees.

NAUS, in partnership with The Military Coalition, The Military/ Veterans Alliance and the Society of Military Widows, among others, maintains these actions as a top legislative goal, and it is our expectation that the SBP corrections will have strong support in the new Congress.

As voiced in the last Congress, it is vital that we keep faith with the men and women who serve in our military as well as their families. While we, as a nation, cannot fully compensate widows and widowers for their loss, we can ensure that the benefits that servicemembers earned are fair and just.

Concurrent Receipt
Another NAUS priority is to expand the phase-in of concurrent receipt of both military retirement benefits and VA disability compensation to all disabled military retirees, including those individuals forced into retirement due to their disabilities with less than 20 years of service.

Over the past several years, NAUS with a number of other military associations has successfully championed efforts in Congress to loosen the century-old ban on concurrent receipt. Today, disabled military retirees whose disability was incurred as a direct result of armed conflict, hazardous duty, or similar conditions now qualify to receive both their full military retirement pay and their VA disability compensation. For other disabled military retirees with VA-rated disabilities 50 percent or more concurrent receipt will be phased in over the coming years.

While much has been achieved, there is more to do. And as long-time supporters of concurrent receipt, we pledge to see appropriate action taken to fully remedy the continuing inequity disabled military retirees face. We will work with military advocates to extend concurrent receipt authority to include service-connected disabilities rated less than 50 percent; to repeal the phase in period; provide similar concurrent receipt for all 100 percent disabled; and allow pro-rated concurrent receipt to individuals medically discharged from service prior to achieving 20 years of service.

Senate Confirms Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense
On December 18, Robert Gates was sworn in as President Bush's Defense Secretary. The Senate approved the appointment of the former CIA Director and most recent past president of Texas A&M University as the new Secretary of Defense by an overwhelming vote of 95 to 2 on Dec. 6. The following excerpt is taken from Gates's opening remarks to the Senate Armed Services Committee tasked with considering his confirmation:

"The Department of Defense in peace time and in war time always faces multiple challenges, many of which were identified in the questions the committee asked me to answer. I will do my best to bring progress in addressing as many of these challenges as possible. At the same time, I am under no illusion why I am sitting before you today — the war in Iraq.

"Addressing the challenges we face in Iraq must and will be my highest priority, if confirmed. I welcome the many alternative strategies and tactics proposed by members of Congress and others. More are coming, most notably from the Iraq Study Group, of which I was a member until November 8, led by former Congressman Lee Hamilton and former Secretary of State James Baker. Other reviews are ongoing within the Department of Defense and elsewhere in government. I am open to a wide range of ideas and proposals. If confirmed, I plan urgently to consult with our military leaders and our combat commanders in the field, as well as with others in the executive branch and in Congress. I would then sit down with the president and members of the National Security Council to discuss the situation in Iraq and offer my thoughts and recommendations. I will give most serious consideration to the views of those who lead our men and women in uniform. Of course it is the president who will decide what, if any, changes are made in our approach.

"While I am open to alternative ideas about our future strategy and tactics in Iraq, I feel quite strongly about one point: Developments in Iraq over the next year or two will, I believe, shape the entire Middle East and greatly influence global geopolitics for many years to come. Our course over the next year or two will determine whether the American and Iraqi people, and the next president of the United States, will face a slowly, but steadily improving situation in Iraq and in the region, or will face the very real risk, and possible reality, of a regional conflagration. We need to work together to develop a strategy that does not leave Iraq in chaos, and that protects our long-term interests in and hopes for the region.

"I did not seek this position or a return to government. I am here because I love my country and because the president of the United States believes I can help in a difficult time. I hope you will reach a similar conclusion.

"Lastly, Mr. Chairman, perhaps the most humbling part of the position for which this committee is considering me is knowing that my decisions will have life and death consequences. Our country is at war, and if confirmed, I will be charged with leading the men and women who are fighting it. The patriots who have volunteered to serve in our armed services today have no equal in the world, and are in the long tradition of their forbearers who have fought our countryÕs wars for the last 230 years. I offer this committee my solemn commitment to keep the welfare of our forces uppermost in my mind."

Departure of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
Prior to his departure as Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld sent the following memo to the White House. In the memo the former SecDef says that the current course needs adjustment, "Clearly, what US forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough." Below is the full text of the Rumsfeld memo on the war on terror.

SUBJECT: Iraq — Illustrative New Courses of Action
› The situation in Iraq has been evolving, and U.S. forces have adjusted, over time, from major combat operations to counterterrorism, to counterinsurgency, to dealing with death squads and sectarian violence. In my view it is time for a major adjustment. Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough. Following is a range of options:

ILLUSTRATIVE OPTIONS
Above the Line: (Many of these options could and, in a number of cases, should be done in combination with others)
› Publicly announce a set of benchmarks agreed to by the Iraqi Government and the U.S. Ð political, economic and security goals Ð to chart a path ahead for the Iraqi government and Iraqi people (to get them moving) and for the U.S. public (to reassure them that progress can and is being made).

› Significantly increase U.S. trainers and embeds, and transfer more U.S. equipment to Iraqi Security forces (ISF), to further accelerate their capabilities by refocusing the assignment of some significant portion of the U.S. troops currently in Iraq.

› Initiate a reverse embeds program, like the Korean Katusas, by putting one or more Iraqi soldiers with every U.S. and possibly Coalition squad, to improve our unitsÕ language capabilities and cultural awareness and to give the Iraqis experience and training with professional U.S. troops.

› Aggressively beef up the Iraqi MOD and MOI, and other Iraqi ministries critical to the success of the ISF Ð the Iraqi Ministries of Finance, Planning, Health, Criminal Justice, Prisons, etc. Ð by reaching out to U.S. military retirees and Reserve/National Guard volunteers (i.e., give up on trying to get other USG Departments to do it.)

› Conduct an accelerated draw-down of U.S. bases. We have already reduced from 110 to 55 bases. Plan to get down to 10 to 15 bases by April 2007, and to 5 bases by July 2007.

› Retain high-end SOF capability and necessary support structure to target Al Qaeda, death squads, and Iranians in Iraq, while drawing down all other Coalition forces, except those necessary to provide certain key enablers for the ISF.

› Initiate an approach where U.S. forces provide security only for those provinces or cities that openly request U.S. help and that actively cooperate, with the stipulation being that unless they cooperate fully, U.S. forces would leave their province.

› Stop rewarding bad behavior, as was done in Fallujah when they pushed in reconstruction funds, and start rewarding good behavior. Put our reconstruction efforts in those parts of Iraq that are behaving, and invest and create havens of opportunity to reward them for their good behavior. As the old saying goes, "If you want more of something, reward it; if you want less of something, penalize it." No more reconstruction assistance in areas where there is violence.

› Position substantial U.S. forces near the Iranian and Syrian borders to reduce infiltration and, importantly, reduce Iranian influence on the Iraqi Government.

› Withdraw U.S. forces from vulnerable positions — cities, patrolling, etc. — and move U.S. forces to a Quick Reaction Force (QRF) status, operating from within Iraq and Kuwait, to be available when Iraqi security forces need assistance.

› Begin modest withdrawals of U.S. and Coalition forces (start "taking our hand off the bicycle seat"), so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks, step up and take responsibility for their country.

› Provide money to key political and religious leaders (as Saddam Hussein did), to get them to help us get through this difficult period.

› Initiate a massive program for unemployed youth. It would have to be run by U.S. forces, since no other organization could do it.

› Announce that whatever new approach the U.S. decides on, the U.S. is doing so on a trial basis. This will give us the ability to readjust and move to another course, if necessary, and therefore not "lose."

› Recast the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals (how we talk about them) — go minimalist.

Below the Line (less attractive options):
› Continue on the current path.

› Move a large fraction of all U.S. Forces into Baghdad to attempt to control it.

› Increase Brigade Combat Teams and U.S. forces in Iraq substantially.

› Set a firm withdrawal date to leave. Declare that with Saddam gone and Iraq a sovereign nation, the Iraqi people can govern themselves. Tell Iran and Syria to stay out.

› Assist in accelerating an aggressive federalism plan, moving towards three separate states — Sunni, Shia, and Kurd.

› Try a Dayton-like process.