Senators reject proposed fee increases for VA health services
Senate appropriators Tuesday warned Veteran Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi they again will reject administration proposals to charge new fees to make up for a shortfall in veterans' health care funds.
"These budget proposals were unacceptable last year to the Congress and I can almost assure you they will be unacceptable again this year," said VA-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Christopher (Kit) Bond, R-Mo.
Bond called plans to impose a $250 annual fee on veterans to enroll in the VA healthcare system and an increase in prescription drug co-payments from $7 to $15 "essentially a new tax imposed on our veterans."
Principi and the Bush administration have basically acknowledged the proposals are going nowhere with lawmakers. Principi argued the new fees should be examined, given the growth of the VA healthcare system to 25 million veterans, but added, "I understand the reticence of members of the committee."
It was the first shot in one of the most fiercely contested issues in the fiscal 2005 discretionary spending debate -- and one unlikely to be resolved until after the November elections.
In a March 24 letter to House Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, endorsing the House's fiscal 2005 budget resolution, Principi wrote that the resolution's proposed $1.2 billion increase over President Bush's request for veterans' benefits "gives the VA the ability to provide quality health care to these deserving veterans." The resolution does not assume any funds from new fees and co-payments.
Conferees on the budget resolution are expected to agree to assume the House-passed level of $30.4 billion in discretionary veterans' funds, although the Appropriations committees will make the final decision.
Bond made it clear the administration's 2005 discretionary request of $29.2 billion would be increased but added the program would be forced to compete with other priorities due to tight budgets.
He also expressed support for the department's "CARES" initiative, aimed at directing VA funds to hospitals with the greatest needs and closing others that are underutilized. Lawmakers who represent areas that would see hospital closings are opposed to the plan.
As usual, the VA budget will be subject to scrutiny by lawmakers trying to ensure their parochial needs are met.
Tuesday's hearing was peppered with references to home-state facilities, including a pitch by Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, for adequate funds to ensure that veterans in southeast Alaska do not have to fly to Seattle for treatment of alcohol and chemical dependencies.
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., noted the importance of his state's 11 rural VA healthcare clinics. VA-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., told Principi that VA clinics in her state, including one at Glen Burnie, are full and closed to new patients.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said funding has been "flatlined for the last several years," despite a growing need at the White River Junction, Vt., mental health clinic. "What do you have to do? You'd think in an election year someone would listen to what veterans are saying," Leahy said.