Central Texas State Veterans Cemetery, Nov. 11, 2009. AP Photo/Paul Sakuma
The Senate would have liked to honor veterans on Veteran's Day by passing a bill to improve veterans' benefits and health programs. Thanks to Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), the bill was put on hold.
The bill is known as the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2009 (S. 1963). Omnibus bills typically include several bills rolled into one legislative packet that can later be shaped through compromises in both chambers and passed relatively quickly, usually in a voice vote.
According to Military.com, the centerpiece of S. 1963 is unprecedented support for family caregivers of severely wounded veterans, partcularly those injured since 9/11. They would be paid a stipend based on hours and level of care. The VA would ensure caregivers are properly trained and have their own medical coverage to include stress counseling if needed. The VA also would pay for replacement caregivers when family members seek respite from their care obligations. The idea is to give severely wounded veterans options other than institutionalized care.
Sen. Coburn (R-OK) prevented the bill from coming to vote today by putting a hold on it, which is a legislative tactic to prevent passage of a bill. He sent a letter to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), saying that the bill needs to be fully debated because it will cost taxpayers an estimated $3.7 billion over the next five years and it is unclear how it will be funded.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) called Coburn's stance on the bill illogical, criticizing the Oklahoma Republican for supporting war funding while blocking health care funding for veterans. “Where was he when we were spending a trillion dollars on the war in Iraq?” Reid asked. “That wasn’t paid for. I didn’t hear him stopping the bill from going forward at that time. I think he should become more logical and understand we have people who are suffering.”
"To say that we should do nothing for these people is to make a mockery of this Veterans Day," said bill co-sponsor Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), noting that 6,800 veterans of the wars Iraq and Afghanistan currently need services provided by the bill.
To get around Coburn's hold, Reid has placed S. 1963 on the Senate calendar which could mean up to 60 hours of debate during which Coburn can make his points publicly to colleagues and C-Span cameras. It will be interesting to hear what he says then.
While Coburn is correct that the government is spending too much money, Durbin is also correct that there are veterans whose health care needs are not adequately met. When put in perspective, however, it only takes common sense to realize that before the government starts talking about troop increases and spending more money on the wars, our wounded veterans should be adequately cared for. Perhaps the relatively modest $3.7 billion cost over five years for the Caregivers bill could be funded by diverting some of the $190 billion in supplemental war funding that is planned for 2010, or some of the $512.7 billion for the defense appropriations bill for FY 2009.
Comments
No surprise here - the hypocritical, phony, flag-waving Republican politicians who claim they always "support the troops" obviously only support spending money to send them to far away lands to do the heavy lifting for corporate interests. They support them then. But when the soldiers return home, a lot of them broken and in need of help, they are thrown into the pot of average Americans who the Republican politicians do not give a damn about, veteran or not. So to expect to have them support spending a dime on these veterans is naive. This jerk needs to be put on the spot so he can explain himself. I'd love to see him studder and slobber all over himself trying to explain his hypocrisy.
Say that again, Bruce -- the truth always needs repetition.
The Republicans have long played this disgusting 'support our troops, except where it counts game,' voting against many bills to help the enlisted ratings and their families.
At least on this particular bill, every vet group has lined up against Coburn. You have to wonder: who paid him to take this stand, or does he really believe not taking care of vets is a good idea?
Maybe there is an upside -- it may move OK voters to dump this phony C-Street goofball. Certainly he's handed his Dem opponent a perfect campaign issue in a conservative red state.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!