As it applies to veterans, it is time for pay-go to go

As it applies to veterans, it is time for pay-go to go
© Getty Images

Last year, the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act bill was one for the few substantive legislative initiatives to pass the House of Representatives unanimously. Although the bill died in the Senate, 98 Senators were willing to allow unanimous consent. The stumbling block, as it has been in previous years was the offset requirements of the pay-as-you-go.

Pay-go, enacted in 2010, requires increases in new benefits be offset by a corresponding decrease in other benefits. In other words, restoring the presumption of herbicide exposure to Navy veterans who served in the bays, harbors and territorial sea of Vietnam required a reduction of benefits or a corresponding funding increase.

ADVERTISEMENT
In 2015 Military-Veterans Advocacy proposed financing the bill with cost of living round downs. This would require annual cost of living increases to be rounded down to the nearest dollar. The most it would cost any one veteran would be $11.88 per year but would raise $1.8 billion to cover 90,000 additional veterans. Led by Sen. Bernie SandersBernard (Bernie) SandersResurfaced Buttigieg yearbook named him 'most likely to be president' On The Money: House Dem says marijuana banking bill will get vote in spring | Buttigieg joins striking Stop & Shop workers | US home construction slips in March | Uber gets B investment for self-driving cars Buttigieg joins striking Stop & Shop workers MORE (I-Vt.), with support from the Veterans of Foreign War (VFW) and Disabled American Veterans (DAV), the effort was defeated. A similar attempt to use this offset in 2017 again drew the ire of the VFW and DAV and was crushed by then House Ranking Member Tim WalzTimothy (Tim) James WalzMinnesota House votes to allow driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants Minnesota governor announces goal of 100 percent clean energy by 2050 Minnesota governor rips lawmaker for saying gun control backers should be ‘run over' MORE (D-Minn.).

In 2016 Military-Veterans Advocacy worked closely with Sen. Chuck GrassleyCharles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyOn The Money: Inside the Mueller report | Cain undeterred in push for Fed seat | Analysis finds modest boost to economy from new NAFTA | White House says deal will give auto sector B boost The 7 most interesting nuggets from the Mueller report Government report says new NAFTA would have minimal impact on economy MORE (R-Iowa) and the Judiciary Committee to forge an offset using a surcharge for foreign student visa fees. Sen. Patrick LeahyPatrick Joseph LeahyDurbin calls Mueller report findings on Trump team 'troubling' 20 Dems demand no more money for ICE agents, Trump wall The Hill's 12:30 Report: Trump, Dems prep for Mueller report's release MORE (D-Vt.) , then Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee torpedoed that idea and the Blue Water Navy bill with it.

More recently, pay-go sank another Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act. Staff members of the House Veterans Affairs Committee cobbled together an offset by increasing some veterans home loan fees. In a show of bipartisan support the bill passed the House 382-0. In the Senate, however, anti-veteran elements struck back.

The VA reversed their previous support of the bill, repeating the often-refuted allegations that the science did not support the exposure. Then several VSOs attacked the PAYGO offset that they had previously approved.

In a Sept. 19, 2018 letter to Senate Veterans Committee Chairman Johnny IsaksonJohn (Johnny) Hardy IsaksonCongress punts on disaster aid amid standoff with Trump, Dems Overnight Defense: Transgender troops rally as ban nears | Trump may call more troops to border | National Guard expects 3M training shortfall from border deployment | Pentagon to find housing for 5,000 migrant children Pompeo: Russia complying with nuclear treaty that's up for renewal MORE, the VFW and DAV, joined by the American Legion and the Paralyzed Veterans of America withdrew their support from the jumbo loan fee provisions of the pay-go offset.

After ten weeks of opposition, these groups agreed to support the bill but only if the jumbo loan fee provisions were removed in the 116th Congress. During this VSO forced hiatus, the VA was able to convince CBO to add another $1.3 billion to their score — thrusting the cost above the bills pay-go offset. This led to holds by Senators Enzi of Wyoming and Lee of Utah. Despite many efforts to force the bills passage, including belated lip service from the VFW, the bill died in the Senate.

Unfortunately, the fate of the "Blue Water Navy" bill is typical of veteran’s legislation. Hobbled by the draconian pay-go rules, legislation to cover the victims of military toxic exposure languishes in committee. As a result, casualties of herbicides, burn pits, radiation, contaminated water supplies, PCBs and other self-inflicted wounds go without compensation or medical benefits.

The change in control of the House of Representatives has brought no relief. The new Speaker of the House, Nancy PelosiNancy Patricia D'Alesandro PelosiImpeachment? Not so fast without missing element of criminal intent 20 years after Columbine, Dems bullish on gun reform Hillicon Valley: House Dems subpoena full Mueller report | DOJ pushes back at 'premature' subpoena | Dems reject offer to view report with fewer redactions | Trump camp runs Facebook ads about Mueller report | Uber gets B for self-driving cars MORE (D-Calif.) reenacted the pay-go provisions. Rep. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalOvernight Health Care: How 2020 Dems want to overhaul health care | Brooklyn parents sue over measles vaccination mandate | Measles outbreak nears record Democratic proposals to overhaul health care: A 2020 primer Dems counter portrait of discord MORE (D-Wash.), has introduced legislation to repeal the rule.

The Jayapal bill, HR 242, has 32 Democrat supporters and zero Republican support. It is not expected to pass.

What could pass, and perhaps generate some GOP support, is an exception for veterans. Veterans believe that they have bought and paid for their disabilities by their service to the nation. Here, unlike other entitlements or other mandatory benefits, disabilities were caused by the government and flowed directly from government service.

The VSOs are singularly unhelpful in this regard. The VFW, and others tout that they will oppose taking money from one veteran to pay for another's benefits. On the face of it, their position is noble, but it ignores the realities of pay-go.

The VSOs tell Congress it is their job to come up with funding then grandstand and criticize congressional funding efforts. As a result, toxic exposure victims continue to sicken and die without relief. Veterans slide into bankruptcy while trying to pay for their own medical costs as their declining years come early. This is a national disgrace. We need to keep our promise to veterans. Under current law that will not happen.

John B. Wells is a retired Navy Commander. After retirement he became an attorney practicing military and veterans’ law. He is Executive Director of the nonprofit Military-Veterans Advocacy, In and a proponent of veterans benefits legislation.