NEWS FROM….

CONGRESSMAN LANE EVANS

RANKING DEMOCRATIC MEMBER

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS

    U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Washington -- Lane Evans, Democratic leader of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, today criticized as "cynical and simply wrong" the arguments being used by Republican Whip Tom DeLay to justify lumping veterans health care into the GOP’s proposed across-the-board appropriations cut.

"I’m strongly opposed to cutting the funding for veterans’ medical care just approved by Congress. Congressman DeLay claims the cut in veterans’ medical care funding he is recommending would not affect health care for America’s veterans," Evans says. "Veterans know better. You can’t cut health care funding without cutting health care."

DeLay sent a letter today to veterans service organizations defending a 1.4% cut in appropriations which will affect veterans, among other discretionary programs. In reply, Evans pointed to years of straight-line budgeting for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) that have left the agency struggling to meet the increasing costs of medical care for a growing number of enrolled veterans.

"Now," Evans says, "the Republicans claim a $190 million cut in veterans’ medical care funding would do no harm. He maintains these funds can be squeezed out of the budget and be found in ‘mismanagement and waste’. What the Republican leadership fails to acknowledge is the tremendous changes VA has already made to be more efficient. VA has closed thousands of beds, eliminated thousands of staff positions, and strengthened many of their auditing systems.

House Democrats have strongly supported proposals all year that would have added sums ranging from $2 to $3 billion to the President’s initial proposal for veterans’ medical care. To improve funding for veterans, Vice-President Gore announced that the Administration had revised its request to Congress by recommending an additional $1 billion for VA’s health care budget. Democrats on the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, led by Rep. Evans, recommended that the Budget Committee add $2 billion for veterans’ health care.

Many Democrats also supported a recommendation by four veterans’ service organizations, AMVETS, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America and Veterans of Foreign Wars, calling on Congress to appropriate $3 billion more than the Administration’s original budget proposal for veterans’ health care. These same veterans service organizations, in a letter to Members of Congress, vehemently denounced the Republican leadership’s proposed across-the-board cut and stated, "No one is fooled by this budget slight-of-hand."

Evans also referred to veterans’ complaints: "In many parts of the country, veterans must wait up to six months just to see a primary care doctor. VA has also unraveled mental health and long-term care programs which were once hallmarks of the VA system. There are now even complaints that VA’s highly-regarded special emphasis programs for which there is supposedly Congressional protection -- such as spinal cord injury and blind rehabilitation -- are under attack."

VA has done much to streamline its services in recent years. Over five years, VA has reduced its workforce by almost 10%, closed hundreds of beds throughout the system, reduced its inpatient census by almost 30% and eliminated 37% of its inpatient treatments per year. It has integrated or consolidated 50 medical centers. In testimony before the Veterans’ Affairs Committee this April, four Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) directors, commenting on the proposed future efficiency-derived savings, concurred that "all the low-hanging fruit has been picked." Savings available to the system in the future, the directors said, will be harder fought and more disruptive.

DeLay contended that VA could absorb further cuts "without having any effect on health care to veterans," citing figures from studies that were challenged earlier this year. For example, DeLay contended VA could save a million dollars a day by wrecking or leasing some of its capital assets. But whether savings of this magnitude could be realized in the immediate future without significantly uprooting current VA programs is highly questionable. "Even without the DeLay cuts," Evans says, "there isn’t enough money in the budget now to tear down or renovate under-utilized buildings, let alone to replace them with new, modern, smaller clinics. Any savings here will require investment, not magic, and will not come quickly."

Likewise, DeLay pointed to a report suggesting $17 million is lost each year in fraudulent or improper workers compensation claims. Actually, testimony at the March 24 Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing demonstrated that VA’s workers compensation costs are not unusual, and that the answer is in heading off injuries and helping employees with rehabilitation. In fact, VA has been cutting these costs since 1994, and is completing automation of its claims system for better management, but savings are already part of the FY 2000 budget.

The DeLay letter also noted his plan would not affect benefits checks. "Of course, it wouldn’t," Evans said. "That, at least, is still out of Mr. DeLay’s reach. It’s troubling that he would even mention compensation for service-connected disabilities and his restraint with regard to compensation for service-connected disabilities."