HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Foreign Affairs & National Security » Veterans (Group) » Republicans Storm Out of ...

Wed Oct 30, 2019, 07:05 PM

Republicans Storm Out of Veterans' Affairs Committee, Refuse to Vote on Health Care Bill for Women V

Source: Newsweek

REPUBLICANS STORM OUT OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, REFUSE TO VOTE ON HEALTH CARE BILL FOR WOMEN VETERANS

BY JAMES WALKER ON 10/30/19 AT 6:00 AM EDT

Republicans were accused of trying to attach "poison pill" amendments to a bill on female veterans health care after they stormed out of the House Veterans Affairs Committee on Tuesday.

GOP committee members were filmed leaving a hearing room by Stars and Stripes reporter Steve Beynon after Chairman Mark Takano stopped debate on their proposed additions to the Deborah Sampson Act, a decision Republicans later called "partisan" and "shameful."

California Democrat Takano suggested that he stopped the debate because Republicans were trying to introduce "toxic, partisan amendments" to a bill that aimed to improve health care offered to female veterans at VA medical facilities.

The Military Times reported that GOP representatives tried to introduce amendments covering veterans' firearm rights and VA child care to the suggested expansions of health care rights in the bill.

"House Republicans just walked out on women veterans by refusing to vote on a historic and monumental bill to extend care and benefits included in the Deborah Sampson Act," Veterans' Affairs Chairman Takano said in a statement yesterday.

-snip-


Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/republicans-storm-out-female-veteran-health-care-bill-1468605

6 replies, 961 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Republicans Storm Out of Veterans' Affairs Committee, Refuse to Vote on Health Care Bill for Women V (Original post)
Eugene Oct 2019 OP
madaboutharry Oct 2019 #1
Haggis for Breakfast Oct 2019 #2
TreasonousBastard Oct 2019 #3
JustABozoOnThisBus Oct 2019 #4
The Polack MSgt Oct 2019 #5
James48 Nov 2019 #6

Response to Eugene (Original post)

Wed Oct 30, 2019, 07:08 PM

1. Republicans hate Americans.

They especially hate Americans who are women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eugene (Original post)

Wed Oct 30, 2019, 07:23 PM

2. This is OUTRAGEOUS.

Women veterans deserve better than this from male republican members of Congress.

Can someone post a list of these despicable congressmen ? I'd LOVE to see it and mobilize a phone tree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eugene (Original post)

Wed Oct 30, 2019, 07:26 PM

3. From the original Stars & Stripes article...

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/several-republicans-march-out-during-house-va-committee-debate-on-female-veterans-health-bill-1.605147

In a discussion on a bill aimed to expand health care at VA hospitals for women, Republicans wanted to add an amendment to the bill to prohibit the VA from paying a child care provider if they employ someone who has been charged with a sex offense, an offense involving a child victim, a violent crime, a drug felony, or other offenses that VA determines inappropriate.

Republicans also wanted to raise an issue with veterans having legal trouble purchasing firearms if they have a third party who helps them manage their VA benefits. The VA considers veterans who cannot manage their own finances as "mentally incompetent," and the agency reports the names of those veterans to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System a database that gun merchants are required to check before selling a firearm.


I don't fully understand the problem with child care providers not hiring sex offenders, but I suppose there's some gotcha in there. Making it hard for incompetent veterans to buy firearms seems to be a no-brainer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #3)

Thu Oct 31, 2019, 03:24 PM

4. "Incompetent" and "having a third-party help manage VA benefits" are two different things.

I don't feel "incompetent", but having American Legion expert/volunteers guide me through VA bureaucracy and Byzantine regulations would make me "incompetent"?

I don't feel "incompetent", but having a financial adviser help with investment strategies would make me "incompetent"? If I pay someone to do my taxes, am I incompetent?

It's lousy rule, but should be fixed on its own, not as an amendment/rider on a women's health bill.

As to the child care provider restrictions, I have a problem with the words "charged with". Change them to "convicted of" and I'm all for it. Except for the drug felony bit, that's stupid.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustABozoOnThisBus (Reply #4)

Thu Oct 31, 2019, 03:35 PM

5. Well stated. NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eugene (Original post)

Mon Nov 4, 2019, 04:47 PM

6. "incompetent veterans"

means something different than what you are thinking.

A few years ago, some data showed that a number of veterans living on the street were getting their VA checks, but either losing the money though poor management (buying totally inappropriate things), or buying drugs, or giving their money away to scam artists, or to poor people, etc, and not having enough money to make it through the month.

So the VA, in it's infinite wisdom, was directed by Congress to do a better job of trying to make sure veterans who were unable to manage their money (in the opinion of their case worker) should be required to get a guardian for their money, or demonstrate money management courses, etc, to prove that they were capable.

I saw it most often used by the VA when someone was a known drug addict, and was spending all their money on heroin. The VA put their disability money into a special account, and held it for them, until they named a guardian, or someone to help manage their money.

Later, the Congress also then said "Hey, if they are incompetent to manage their own money, why are the not on the "do not buy firearms list"? As if not managing money might be the same as being declared a mental danger. It became an issue for gun rights people.

I agree that it isn't the same, but it also shouldn't be banned form being considered by the VA whether or not they should probably be on the don-not-purchase firearms' list.

It's complicated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread