Stunning statement of devaluing the veterans

by
Chaplain Kathie

We keep hearing how the veterans are so important to each president, that is when they want their votes, but not when it really counts and the veterans need the president to really support them.

It looks like Truman was the last real friendly Commander-in-Chief the veterans had.

Government Spending Priorities
Posted by DJ Drummond
Published: February 4, 2008 - 5:17 PM
One thing that has puzzled me about Republicans in the last few years, has been spending. Like tax reform, we hear so much about how it's got to change, yet little seems to change. But I also understand that to know how to solve a problem, you have to get a handle on the problem. So, I took a look to see where we've been spending money.
It's interesting. Here's a summary by Administration on what areas got money in the budgets. Because inflation is a factor to consider, I represent the numbers as percentage of the total budget, and show the categories which claimed 1% or more of the budget:

Truman (1946-52)
Veterans Benefits 9.6%

Eisenhower (1953-60)
Veterans Benefits 4.7%

Kennedy (1961-63)
Veterans Benefits 3.6%

Johnson (1964-68)
Veterans Benefits 2.9%

Nixon (1969-74)
Veterans Benefits 2.9%

Ford (1975-76)
Veterans Benefits 2.9%

Carter (1977-80)
Veterans Benefits 2.4%

Reagan (1981-88)
Veterans Benefits 1.9%

G.H. Bush (1989-92)
Veterans Benefits 1.6%

Clinton (1993-2000)
Veterans Benefits 1.6%

George W. Bush (2001-08)
Veterans Benefits 1.6% click link for more

It's been bothering me that we still really don't know where all the money went that was supposed to be given to people working with veterans.

But then you'd have to have been reading articles like the following making you believe they have finally arrived in the eyes of the elected as important again.

Spending on vets exceeds 1947 high
Updated 7/23/2008
By Gregg Zoroya, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The federal government is spending more money on veterans than at any time in modern history, surpassing the tidal wave of spending following World War II and the demilitarizing of millions of troops.

Expenditures hit $82 billion in 2007, because of the rising cost of health care, the expense of caring for an aging population of mostly Vietnam War veterans and a new crop of severely wounded troops from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That exceeds the $80 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars spent in 1947 after most of the 16.1 million Americans serving in World War II left the service, according to a Congressional Research Service report submitted to Congress last month.

An 11% hike in spending to $91 billion is slated for this fiscal year, and the Department of Veterans Affairs has proposed $94 billion for 2009. And still more is needed, says U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., who is seeking another $3.3 billion for the 2009 budget proposal.

"While we are spending more than in previous years, we are still not meeting many of the health care and benefits needs of our veterans," Murray says. click link for more

When it comes to the percentage of the budget, we see that the percentage has dropped after Truman.

Senator Joe Biden, the next Vice President, had this to say during the campaign. "My Dad told me not to tell him what I value. He told me to show him my budget and then he'd know what I value." or words to that effect.

That means they were worth 9.6% to President Truman but only 1.6% for the last three presidents. Some will argue that the older veterans have died off, but they would not be looking at the newer veterans that took their place. Vietnam veterans were really beginning to understand PTSD and Agent Orange during Bush 41's administration and kept coming during Clinton's and Bush 43's administration. Then you can add in the Gulf War veterans, Iraq veterans and Afghanistan veterans also seeking treatment and compensation. The truth is that Bush actually cut funding for veterans in 2005. There were less doctors and nurses, along with claim processors, than there were after the Gulf War. If this is not a stunning statement of devaluing the veterans, nothing is.

During the lives of the older veterans from WWI, WWII and Korea, they were not treated for PTSD even though they were dealing with the wound just the same. It was not until the Vietnam vetearns cames home and made sure it was treated like a wound and they were taken care of. The percentage of the VA budget should have gone up considering they were then treating more conditions like PTSD, Agent Orange, TBI, depleted uranium and whatever else is causing the Gulf War veterans to suffer they way they have.

Next time you hear an elected official talk about how much the veterans mean to them, tell them to prove it in their budget.

I really hope and pray President-elect Obama will be true to his word and take care of the veterans and their families better than the list of others have. We'll be watching and waiting to see what he does.

In between now and then, we need to do what we can to help them. After all, someone has to.