McCain On Veterans' Benefits

by hilzoy

As a lot of people have noted, John McCain is opposed to Sen. Jim Webb's bill expanding veterans' educational benefits. Brian Beutler writes about John McCain's record on veterans' health care:

"Times have changed since McCain needed veterans services so urgently. And for many of those thirty-five years, McCain, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, the candidate who talks the best talk on veterans issues, has demonstrated a tendency to work against veterans' interests, voting time after time against funding and in favor of privatizing services--in other words, of rolling back the VA's improvements by supporting some of the same policies that wrecked Walter Reed.

During a March 2005 Senate budget debate, McCain voted to kill an amendment that would have "increase[d] veterans medical care by $2.8 billion in 2006." That amendment lacked an assured funding stream, but lest one mistake this incident for a maverick's stance against budget-busting, there's more. Just a year later McCain voted against an amendment that would have "increase[d] Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes." Two days after it failed, he voted to kill "an assured stream of funding for veterans' health care that [would] take into account the annual changes in the veterans' population and inflation to be paid for by restoring the pre-2001 top rate for income over $1 million, closing corporate tax loopholes and delaying tax cuts for the wealthy." That amendment died quietly, forty-six to fifty-four.

In September 2006 McCain voted to table an amendment to a Defense appropriations bill that would have prevented the department from contracting out support services at Walter Reed. The amendment was indeed tabled--by a vote of fifty to forty-eight, the sort of margin a true veterans' senator might have been able to flip if he really cared about veterans' healthcare.

"John McCain voted against veterans in 2004, '05, '06 and '07," says Jeffrey David Cox, who spent twenty-two years as a VA nurse before moving to the American Federation of Government Employees, where he serves as secretary-treasurer (AFGE represents employees of several federal agencies, including the VA). Cox is right. Under Bush, McCain has voted for measures that target so-called Priority-7 and Priority-8 veterans (those whose injuries are not service-related and whose incomes are above a low minimum threshold) for annual fees, higher co-pays and even suspended enrollment. Priority-7 veterans without dependents earn more than $24,644 annually. Priority-8 veterans without dependents earn an annual minimum of $27,790."

I am wary of using this as a political issue if the facts aren't there. On the other hand, if the facts are there, then it ought to be a political issue. So, even though I trust Brian Beutler, I decided to check.

I put the wonky results, with links to all the roll call votes, below the fold. Short version: during the last four years (all I checked), McCain has supported basic appropriations for vets. However, when there are two competing proposals, he generally chooses the cheaper one, and often, when only one proposal to increase benefits is available, he opposes it. But, as Beutler says, this doesn't seem to be because he is in general in favor of fiscal discipline: in 2006, in particular, he voted against several bills that actually tried not just to increase spending on vets, but to pay for it, in one case voting for an identical bill that was not paid for.

If you think that we ought to be spending more money on veterans' benefits and health care, it's not a very good record. (Brandon Friedman thinks it's part of a larger pattern. I think he's right, though I haven't marched through all the bills I'd need to look at to lay it out.)

I used the following rough method: the Senate's roll call database has little descriptions of all the bills and amendments being voted on. So I called up the last four years, and searched for "veterans", which (I hope) pulled up all the votes on bills where veterans' issues played a significant role. (Note: these little descriptions are, I think, the source of the quotes in Beutler's article, in case anyone was wondering who, exactly, said that the amendment McCain voted against in March 2005 would have "increase[d] veterans medical care by $2.8 billion in 2006.") I omitted a couple of bills that seemed less important (iirc, on concerned a memorial.)

Here are the results:

2005: McCain voted for an amendment to the bankruptcy bill "clarifying the safe harbor" for low-income vets and people called to active duty, but voted against an amendment "to protect servicemembers and veterans from means testing in bankruptcy, to disallow certain claims by lenders charging usurious interest rates to servicemembers, and to allow servicemembers to exempt property based on the law of the State of their premilitary residence." He did vote for a subsequent amendment that disallowed means testing of disabled veterans in bankruptcy, but that did not contain the other protections in the earlier amendment.

McCain voted against two amendments that would have waived budget rules and allowed for $1,975,183,000 for veterans' health care. He then voted for an amendment that would have raised spending on veterans' health care by $80 million. When the Veterans' appropriations bill this amendment amended came up for a vote, McCain is listed as "Not Voting". (It passed 96-0.)

About three weeks later, another bill came up, appropriating another $1.5 billion for veterans' health care. McCain voted for it, along with 94 of his colleagues (the rest were not there.) He also voted for an appropriations bill for military construction and the VA, along with 97 of his colleagues. But he voted against a bill to increase spending on mental health by $500 million a year for the next five years, against the bill Beutler mentioned, which would have increased spending on veterans medical care by $2.8 billion in 2006, and for an alternative bill that increased spending by $410 million instead.

2006: In Feb. 2006, Chris Dodd submitted a bill that would have raised the capital gains tax and the dividend tax on people making over $1 million a year, and used the money to pay for $16 billion in increases in veterans' health care, benefits, and the improvement of VA hospitals. McCain voted against it. Sen. Grassley submitted an amendment that was exactly like Dodd's, only without including any tax increases, budget offsets, or anything else to pay for it. Since that bill passed by unanimous consent, there is no record of McCain voting on it; however, since that vote took place just before the recorded vote on Dodd's amendment, McCain was certainly in the building; had he wished to object to appropriating $16 billion without paying for it, he surely could have. Likewise, he voted to instruct the Senate conferees that funding be found for this, without specifying how; but against more specific instructions involving raising taxes on millionaires.

Later, along with all other Senators, he voted to increase the amount available for veterans' health care spending in the budget resolution by $823 million, but against an amendment, offered the same day, that would have raised that amount by $1.5 billion, and would have paid for it by closing corporate tax loopholes. He later voted against adding $430 million for outpatient care for vets, against giving the Department of Veterans Affairs an additional $20 million or medical facilities, and for the general Veterans Affairs appropriations bill.

2007: McCain did not vote on a cloture motion for an emergency supplemental bill involving veterans' funding. (It passed 97-0.) The next day, he voted against the bill itself; a month later, he did not vote on the conference committee report. He voted for a later emergency appropriations bill that included funding for Veterans' Affairs, along with Iraq war funding and a lot of other stuff. He voted against an amendment that would have limited the VA's ability to use contractors, and for the general VA appropriations bill.

2008: McCain voted for a bill that would have provided (among other things) "tax relief to America's troops and veterans." He did not vote on a cloture motion for bill that increased life insurance, housing, and other benefits for disabled veterans, on an amendment increasing the benefits in that bill, or on the bill itself.

McCain also did not vote on an amendment proposed by Lindsey Graham, which would have increased veterans' educational benefits, but by much less than Webb's bill. Graham's bill was generally seen as a way to give Republicans who voted against Webb's bill political cover. McCain co-sponsored it.

Comments

[Catsy]

I won't go so far as to say that McCain is "against the troops" or any such nonsense, but I think it's crystal clear that taking care of veterans does not rank high on his priority list. At least, not when weighed against tax cuts for the wealthy, corporate interests, or other conservative ideological bugaboos.

[Sarah J]

Not that I'm surprised, but...wow.

[B Choate]

Good for you for actually taking the time to check facts. Far too often quantity reigns over quality in the blogesphere.

[merl]

He doesn't want his wife to have to pay for it, huh?

[Joe B]

Great research. Too many times, in the cloak rooms, deals are formed and the veteran gets hammered. I guess McCain and his cronies think providing veterans with good care amounts to pork barrel spending. McCain received the benefit of good care when he returned from Vietnam. Present day vets deserve the same. If we didn't have to pay for this tragic war, the money would probably be there.

[Sean]

We need to take care of our veterans and for sure the Vietnam vet.

[bedtimeforbonzo]

That McCain takes no real flak for opposing Sen. Webb's bill that would expand veterans' benefits is amazing.

Dan Abrams created a regular McMain segment on his 9 pm MSNBC show a couple of months ago that summed things up regarding the media's affection for the Senator.

Its title: "Teflon John."

[Gary Farber]

"and for sure the Vietnam vet."

Why do you write that vets of other wars are vets we should be less sure about supporting?

[Josh]

Clearly he doesn't want to raise taxes to pay for increased benifits, and 'closing corporate tax loopholes' is a snarky way of saying 'raising comporate taxes', which are the second highest in the world BTW - eliminating the mortgage interest deduction would also be closing a 'tax loophole'.

What earmarks were also attached to these bills? Is it unwarranted for him to vote against a bill that includes massive amounts of waste or duplication of bureaucracy? In these cases is it McCain who is doing a disservice to veterans, or is it the other senator that is holding veterans hostage to their pet project by attaching it to their bill?

And is it good for the country to allow veterans to declare bankruptcy no matter their income and assets?

[bedtimeforbonzo]

Josh,

You raise some legit questions.

But shouldn't McCain -- perhaps the most famous veteran in this country -- put his money where his mouth is and author a bill of his own that would truly (and without earmarks) help our veterans?

[Daniel K]

He's a flip flopper...pretty clear!!

[Steve]

did you hear McCains excuse for voting against expanded education funding for vets? He was afraid it would make them want to leave the service, crippling whatever strategy they are pushing now...

[Dick]

McCain is looking more and more like that Effing Clinton.
"I abhore the Military"
Clinton said that before he was elected and still a lot of Vetrans voted for him.

McCain has a lot of nerve accusing Hussein of changing his positions. McCain changed his daily.

[Frank]

For a Vietnam Vet like him it's so sad to see someone whose medical care and benefits is paid for by our taxes short change and short sheet today's and previous Vets from all Wars.
I'm not for the War on Terror, but you can't short supply the Americans that are willing to fight it!! To vote against Vets benefits,education,job training,etc. one might as well be having tea with the Taliban.

Typical Republican, all Blood and Guts for the fight, but run for cover whe it comes to caring for the Vets!!

[Country First, Hollywood Last!]

He voted against bills that "funded themselves" because they included JACKED UP TAXES that the Democrats included which he believed were wrong. He didn't vote against the benefits, he voted against the TAXES!

[Ron]

As a VietNam vet I can speak with some authority when I say that the Republican party is very good at sending our men and women into battle while doing what ever is necessary to deny them the benefits they were promised when they signed on the dotted line.
The Bush administration including McCain have let the Iraq war consume so much of our budget to the point that we are borrowing trillions from foreign countries in order to keep the war going that they cannot afford to HONOR the promises made to returning vets. McCain has voted 12 times against increased VA funding in the past 4 years as indicated in this article. That is reprehensible. And it is not limited to middle east veterans. I have seen my benefits erode away year after year.
Agent Orange has faded away as a footnote in history books. My 92 yo father, a WWII vet never asked for a dime from the VA his entire life. That is until he needed medication that costs him $150 a month which is not paid for by medicare. It took 18 months and Congressional intervention before the VA finally gave him what he was entitled to. He could have died in the interim just as many elderly do because they cannot afford the medicine they need.
What you all forget is that these politicians whether they are veterans or not get their health care free for the rest of their lives. And YOU pay for it!

[fats]

my dad is a vietnam vet, and thinks john mccain has voted FOR vets on every single bill that's ever existed. why? because he watches FOX NEWS. i try and explain to my parents that he's voted against vets more times than for them, i've even printed out his voting record for them to see- since FOX NEWS once mentioned web sites feeding false info online, they don't believe anything i've sent. they are all for the mccain/idiot ticket all the way- it's sad, we don't talk much anymore.

[Colin]

It has been my understanding for many years that bills get rejected due to the add-ons which include too much pork barrell spending. Many times these slip through the cracks, but with the economy headed downhill the past few years more people are looking at the "pork" spending and calling their elected representatives to ask about it.

[Belle Starr]

Thank you. For your incisive writing and your hard work. Wish you were one of the Op Ed writers for the NY Times. You've got your feet on the ground.

And Palin? I keep remembering something my late Special Forces partner said, "Hunt? You mean animals? Hell, no. Hunting animals with a gun is pure arrogance and cowardice. When it's human against human, then it is a different story.

[billy danze]

Fats, try not to feel bad. Its the same way with most veterans, and those serving in the military right now. They see and hear POW in all the Fox accounts, and automatically assume he's their guy. They dont WANT to see or hear the truth. Its pitiful. Those same guy will be echoing your thoughts 20 years from now when the VA sends them they're "disability not found to be service connected" letter. Its a vicious cycle...

[Mike Dey]

And now...the rest of the story. You got who you wanted for President. Now, instead of complaining that McCain isn't "increasing" benefits, you get your candidate and find that he is proposing cuts in benefits, e.g., requiring service connected injuries to be covered by private health insurance. He is so dumb, he doesn't even realize that private insurance policies do not cover pre-existing conditions, do not cover injuries caused by war, and have lifetime maximums of about 1 million which is used up by treatment for one war injury, thereby leaving our wounded with no coverage at all for the rest of their lives. BO didn't even listen to 11 veterans groups, and only scrapped the idea after being told it was DOA by Congress who were inundated by millions of angry letters and phone calls. Be careful what you wish for........it may be a lot worse than you can imagine. Change....yes, it is change all right, but none for the better.