Hiram's blog: "VA NEWS"

Rep. Steve Buyer (R-IN), Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, has proposed sweeping changes to VA benefits. Buyer does not believe that “a veteran is a veteran” and has said so in no uncertain terms. As you might expect, the changes are not for the positive. The driving force for these changes is the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission.

In November 2003, the President signed Public Law 108-136 that established the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission. This commission will conduct an independent study of the benefits provided to compensate and assist veterans and their survivors for disabilities and deaths attributable to military service.

The commission will examine and make recommendations concerning the appropriateness of the benefits, the appropriateness of the level of the benefits, and the appropriate standard(s) for determining whether a disability or death of a veteran should be compensated. (Emphasis is mine.)

The VDBC Charter uses the same language with a few clarifications.

From the outset the VDBC has been stacked AGAINST veterans. The very words used in the Charter confirm this. To consider the “appropriateness of…[VA] benefits” falls somewhere between the absurd and the criminal. And, to even question “whether a disability or death of a veteran should be compensated” shows the clear, immoral intent of the VDBC and those who formed it.

Who is the VDBC? The Commission is widely touted as a bipartisan effort. But, a quick look at how the Commission was formed will show differently. The Commission is made up of 13 appointed members. Two Commission members each are appointed by the Speaker of the House, House Minority Leader, Senate Majority Leader and Senate Minority Leader. So far, so good. Eight members, four appointed by each Party.

What about the five remaining members? They are appointed by the President. This is bipartisan? From the outset the VDBC is stacked 9-4 in favor of those who formed the Commission and propose the sweeping changes that will gut VA benefits.

So, what’s on the table? What VA benefits stand to be cut back or eliminated? This question was asked of Rep. Buyer and he said, "I think everything should be on the table.”

Buyer believes that current VA benefits were not the “intent of Congress” and feels that Congress went too far in passing legislation that authorizes current benefits and benefit levels.

Rep. Buyer has also said that the VA should serve a “core constituency” of “disabled and indigent veterans.” What about the remaining millions of veterans? This clear majority of veterans are those who stand to lose if Buyer’s recommendations become legislation.

The sad hypocrisy so clearly illustrated in the forming of the VDBC is that the Commission is not representative of those veterans who Rep. Buyer claims to want to serve. I cannot find a “core constituency” of “disabled and indigent veterans” being named to the Commission.

The VDBC is not even representative of the veteran population, in general. Some members are former military who are politically powerful individuals. And, just to round things out, there are politicians on the Commission, as well. The Commission is the perfect example of the Washington power elite who are as far removed from the daily concerns of the average veteran as the man in the moon.

Maybe I am being politically naïve. But, where, on the VDBC, are the “just plain folk” who make up the vast majority of veterans in this country? Where are the infantrymen? Where are the nurses? Where are the drill sergeants? The cooks? The unit clerks? The people who will be affected most by the findings of the VDBC have no voice on the Commission!