Anger as Republicans block bill to help military veterans exposed to toxins

[Meister]

Your argument is that the Republicans were too stupid to understand what they originally vote on in the first place. Not exactly much of a hill to stand on.

Neither party has much to stand on, pknopp.

 

[Meister]

What Toomey wants is to keep previous funding as discretionary so he can use that AGAINST other spending programs unrelated to this.

“We’ll if you want to fund THAT… we will have to remove funding from the burn pit bucket”

Turning it into a political football.

It’s cynical partisan shit

It's a wording gimmick just like what Toomey stated.

 

[Winston]

So you discount what Toomey says because it doesn't fit your fucking narrative, am I right?

We discount what Toomey is saying because it is bullshit, on its face. Let's look,

Toomey insisted that he and his fellow Republicans don’t oppose the bill itself, but are worried instead about Democrats using it to acquire funds for unrelated matters and switch discretionary funding to mandatory.

Toomey defends burn pit vote, citing ‘false accusations’ by Jon Stewart

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) on Sunday defended his “no” vote on a bill to aid military veterans exposed to toxic burn pits against what he called “false accusations” from comedian Jon Stewart. Toomey, during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” with host Jake Tapper, called the former “Daily...

news.yahoo.com

Throughout this thread I have explained the difference between discretionary funding and mandatory, on non-discretionary funding. Intuitively, it should be clear to see that Toomey is blowing smoke up your ass. Discretionary spending, which Toomey wants and which his two amendments attempted to change from mandatory, means the spending is subject to the "discretion" of the VA. More importantly, the spending is subject to pay as you go rules and the debt ceiling. If discretionary, those funds are also subject to being confiscated for some other purpose in case of a national emergency, you know, like building a wall on the border. Or maybe building windmills if Biden declares a national emergency around global warming. Wonder how Toomey would fill about that.

The spending was classified as mandatory to protect those funds for the exclusive purpose of treating the Vets the bill is targeting. And I went back and checked the Veterans Choice Program and Extension Act signed by Trump in 2017. Yep, funded with mandatory spending and ends with an exemption against pay as you go rules and the debt ceiling.

But hey, don't take my word for it.

Proposed amendments by Republican senators to a bill aimed at aiding veterans exposed to toxic burn pits would results in “rationing of care for vets,” Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough said on Sunday.
“I can’t in good conscience do that, because the outcome of that will be rationing of care for vets, which is something I just can’t sign up for,” McDonough told Jake Tapper on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

VA secretary: GOP-backed burn pit amendments would lead to ‘rationing of care for vets’

Proposed amendments by Republican senators to a bill aimed at aiding veterans exposed to toxic burn pits would results in “rationing of care for vets,” Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough said on Sunday. “I can’t in good conscience do that, because the outcome of that will be rationing of...

news.yahoo.com

So, there was no objection to the funding arrangement back in June. Republicans used the same type of arrangement to fund the continuation of the Choice act when Trump was president. In fact, almost all funding bills for health care benefits use mandatory spending.

One has to believe that Toomey and some 25 other senators and their staffs just missed that funding arrangement initially and now, well they just discovered it. It is just pure coincidence that the timing happens to be immediately after Manchin agrees to a compromise BBB act.

 

[Winston]

You are not understanding the ramifications.
And, it was not a minor change when you're talking about the taxation. Quit downplaying that.

Do you support doctors that work for the VA being able to sell their practices free from income taxes?

 

[Winston]

But it is of course NOT an “open ended credit card”

There IS A FINITE amount of funds available for this program.

But those funds are not subject to pay as you go rules or the debt ceiling, which work like a credit card limit. If Toomey's amendment is passed that will change, health care for Vets could be rationed, and worse, those funds could be subject to confiscation by a unilateral national emergency declaration by any president.

 

[Meister]

We discount what Toomey is saying because it is bullshit, on its face. Let's look,

Toomey insisted that he and his fellow Republicans don’t oppose the bill itself, but are worried instead about Democrats using it to acquire funds for unrelated matters and switch discretionary funding to mandatory.

Toomey defends burn pit vote, citing ‘false accusations’ by Jon Stewart

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) on Sunday defended his “no” vote on a bill to aid military veterans exposed to toxic burn pits against what he called “false accusations” from comedian Jon Stewart. Toomey, during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” with host Jake Tapper, called the former “Daily...

news.yahoo.com

Throughout this thread I have explained the difference between discretionary funding and mandatory, on non-discretionary funding. Intuitively, it should be clear to see that Toomey is blowing smoke up your ass. Discretionary spending, which Toomey wants and which his two amendments attempted to change from mandatory, means the spending is subject to the "discretion" of the VA. More importantly, the spending is subject to pay as you go rules and the debt ceiling. If discretionary, those funds are also subject to being confiscated for some other purpose in case of a national emergency, you know, like building a wall on the border. Or maybe building windmills if Biden declares a national emergency around global warming. Wonder how Toomey would fill about that.

The spending was classified as mandatory to protect those funds for the exclusive purpose of treating the Vets the bill is targeting. And I went back and checked the Veterans Choice Program and Extension Act signed by Trump in 2017. Yep, funded with mandatory spending and ends with an exemption against pay as you go rules and the debt ceiling.

But hey, don't take my word for it.

Proposed amendments by Republican senators to a bill aimed at aiding veterans exposed to toxic burn pits would results in “rationing of care for vets,” Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough said on Sunday.
“I can’t in good conscience do that, because the outcome of that will be rationing of care for vets, which is something I just can’t sign up for,” McDonough told Jake Tapper on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

VA secretary: GOP-backed burn pit amendments would lead to ‘rationing of care for vets’

Proposed amendments by Republican senators to a bill aimed at aiding veterans exposed to toxic burn pits would results in “rationing of care for vets,” Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough said on Sunday. “I can’t in good conscience do that, because the outcome of that will be rationing of...

news.yahoo.com

So, there was no objection to the funding arrangement back in June. Republicans used the same type of arrangement to fund the continuation of the Choice act when Trump was president. In fact, almost all funding bills for health care benefits use mandatory spending.

One has to believe that Toomey and some 25 other senators and their staffs just missed that funding arrangement initially and now, well they just discovered it. It is just pure coincidence that the timing happens to be immediately after Manchin agrees to a compromise BBB act.

But Sen. Patrick J. Toomey, R-Pa., one of 14 Republicans to vote "no" in that chamber, objected. His chief concern was that the CBO estimated nearly $400 billion of existing VA health spending would no longer be bound by discretionary spending caps under a new Treasury fund the bill would create.

The alternative would have been to jump through the traditional procedural hoops in the Senate this month to get the blue slip problem fixed. Either way, the House would have had to re-vote on the amended version after the Senate worked through its process.

Toomey’s concern about shifting veterans health care funds to the mandatory side of the budget, thereby exempting the money from discretionary spending caps, was widely shared among House Republicans, including some who voted for the bill Tuesday.

Rep. Earl L. "Buddy" Carter, R-Ga., said it was “despicable” that Democrats were “using our veterans” to free up billions of dollars that could be spent on other programs. And Rep. Jake Ellzey, R-Texas, said he would push to move the VA health money back into discretionary accounts “when we take back the majority” in the November midterm elections.
Toomey’s concern about shifting veterans health care funds to the mandatory side of the budget, thereby exempting the money from discretionary spending caps, was widely shared among House Republicans, including some who voted for the bill Tuesday.

Compromise veterans bill passes House, heads back to Senate - Roll Call

Servicemembers who contracted any of 23 conditions after serving in combat zones would be eligible for health care and disability benefits.

rollcall.com

 

[Rambunctious]

I no longer have words to express the frustration and anger I feel after Senate Republicans blocked the PACT Act.

This was the dems fault for trying to shove something into the bill that can't pass on its own..... they pull this trick all the time..... so I blame the democrats.....

 

[Delldude]

OK idiot...I'll type slowly for you.

The 400 billion is EXISTING funding. It has already been allocated for Veteran healthcare on a DISCRETIONARY basis.

Following along retard?

This bill makes that funding MANDATORY as it should have always been. The original Senate bill did that and the revised version does as well.

Got it now?

I know you do but you'll continue to say stupid shit

The vet bill

OK idiot...I'll type slowly for you.

The 400 billion is EXISTING funding. It has already been allocated for Veteran healthcare on a DISCRETIONARY basis.

Following along retard?

This bill makes that funding MANDATORY as it should have always been. The original Senate bill did that and the revised version does as well.

Got it now?

I know you do but you'll continue to say stupid shit

That is the problem.....it should stay discretionary.....

Unfortunately, the Senate also inserted a budget gimmick that would make hundreds of billions of dollars of existing spending mandatory, an accounting shell game that would allow Pelosi, Biden, and Schumer to pursue more inflationary spending on unrelated programs without budget constraints.

 

[bodecea]

This was the dems fault for trying to shove something into the bill that can't pass on its own..... they pull this trick all the time..... so I blame the democrats.....

"This was the dems fault"...............

 

[Rambunctious]

"This was the dems fault"...............

They tried to sneak in 400 billion in new unrelated spending... and thank goodness the GOP said no... now the bill will pass clean....

 

[bodecea]

They tried to sneak in 400 billion in new unrelated spending... and thank goodness the GOP said no... now the bill will pass clean....

"This is the dems' fault".....

 

[Delldude]

"This is the dems' fault".....

Once again, use the vets for their own agenda.

 

[bodecea]

Once again, use the vets for their own agenda.

And the Republicans show, once again, that they don't give a damn about our vets. And you are all in for that lack of care.

 

[Lesh]

The vet bill

That is the problem.....it should stay discretionary.....

No it should not and it never was.

That would turn it into a political football.

Totally cynical and completely unacceptable

 

[Lesh]

They tried to sneak in 400 billion in new unrelated spending... and thank goodness the GOP said no... now the bill will pass clean....

It is and was always clean

 

[Lesh]

But those funds are not subject to pay as you go rules or the debt ceiling, which work like a credit card limit. If Toomey's amendment is passed that will change, health care for Vets could be rationed, and worse, those funds could be subject to confiscation by a unilateral national emergency declaration by any president.

And that is what Toomey is pushing for. Turning this funding into a political football

 

[Delldude]

No it should not and it never was.

That would turn it into a political football.

Totally cynical and completely unacceptable

It was discretionary and your hero's changed it to mandatory...to make a campaign issue out of our vet's funding package.

Unfortunately, the Senate also inserted a budget gimmick that would make hundreds of billions of dollars of existing spending mandatory, an accounting shell game that would allow Pelosi, Biden, and Schumer to pursue more inflationary spending on unrelated programs without budget constraints.

They can pass the bill with the $365 billion 'clean'.

It is and was always clean

Not so, clean means without the dem poison pill.

 

[bodecea]

 

[Lesh]

It was discretionary and your hero's changed it to mandatory

IN THE ORIGINAL BILL that the GOP Senators voted for. It's still mandatory in the revised bill.

to make a campaign issue out of our vet's funding package.

No because it's the right thing to do. Those Republican Senators knew that when they voted for it in the original Bill

 

[Lesh]

What Toomey wants is to keep previous funding as discretionary so he can use that AGAINST other spending programs unrelated to this.

“We’ll if you want to fund THAT… we will have to remove funding from the burn pit bucket”

Turning it into a political football.

It’s cynical partisan shit

I repeat

Toomey is a cynical asshole