 |
Photo by James V. Carroll |
Rep. Chet Edwards is living up to the legacy of the man known in Washington as “Mr. Veteran.”
Texas Democrat Chet Edwards may never have served in the U.S. Armed Forces, but his 18 years in Congress have been shaped by those who did.
Until his district map was redrawn in 2003, U.S. Rep. Edwards counted among his constituents the massive Fort Hood Army community and a strong population of military retirees and veterans who make central Texas their home. He no longer has Fort Hood, but he does represent in Congress Commander-in-Chief George W. Bush’s hometown of Crawford, and has fought diligently to keep the Waco VA Medical Center from closing.
On the national level, however, is where Edwards has made his biggest impact on the lives of veterans. He received The American Legion’s 2008 Distinguished Public Service Award after shepherding the largest one-year funding increase in the history of VA – $11.8 billion – while serving on the powerful House Appropriations Committee. “Chet went above and beyond in keeping us informed and telling the truth,” American Legion National Commander Marty Conatser said when presenting the award in early April.
“To be a politician accused of telling the truth – what a special thing,” Edwards quipped in response .
The award, he said, ”was an honor I will always cherish. I know the real heroes are our nation’s veterans. I am simply fighting to provide the funding and services that our veterans have already earned through their service and sacrifice to our country.”
Edwards told Legionnaires gathered during the 48th Washington Conference that morning that his efforts to raise the bar on VA health-care funding are not a one-time shot. “In the new Congress, with your partnership, it will be a new day for America’s veterans. We know there is so much more that needs to be done.” Edwards recently spoke with The American Legion Magazine.
Q: Your relationship with veterans runs deep. What’s the source of that?
A: My political mentor was Olin E. “Tiger” Teague, who earned two Silver Stars and three Bronze Stars in World War II, fighting in Europe. He chaired the VA committee for over a decade, and was known as “Mr. Veteran” in Congress. When he first approached me to run for office in 1978, he asked me to make one promise to him. He asked me to never forget veterans if I got elected. I don’t make a lot of promises, but that’s one commitment I intend to keep.
My father was a naval aviator in World War II, and having represented Fort Hood for 14 years in Congress, including the first war in Iraq, I have seen up close and firsthand the incredible sacrifices made by our servicemen and women and their families. Those are reasons why I am so passionate about honoring and respecting those who have served our country in uniform.
Q: The Waco VA Medical Center in your district was pegged for closure under the Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services plan. Now, it’s off the chopping block and looking to pick up patients from other VA facilities in the state. How did that transformation occur?
A: The CARES recommendation to close the Waco VA was based on faulty data – faulty data that did not take into account, among other things, the need for medical care for our returning Iraq and Afghan war veterans. I felt it would have been a moral outrage to close the Waco VA hospital during a time of war, when Fort Hood, with two divisions serving continuously in Iraq, was so close by. One other point: the Waco VA has long been a Center of Excellence for PTSD. It has one of the few in-house long-term PTSD programs in the country, and it’s a very respected one. CARES got it wrong. This was an example of democracy working. The local veterans led the fight. Local officials, Sen. (Kay Bailey) Hutchison, and I joined with them. It was a great victory for veterans.
Now, the Waco VA is not just a key resource for Texas veterans. It is a key resource for blind rehab and PTSD all over the country.
Q: Veterans in many areas around the country still await hospitals recommended for construction under CARES. Isn’t that an example of the gap between budget promises and actual funding?
A: The congressional budgeting process is confusing to most people. It’s a three-step process. First, we have a budget resolution that sets out broad parameters of the federal budget. Then, the appropriations committee divides up the pie and says how much we get for the VA and Military Construction Committee, versus the other subcommittees. That’s a critical part of the process that goes largely unnoticed. Then, finally, on my subcommittee, we go to work deciding exactly how those dollars are spent. The battle is won or lost at the budget committee level and at the ... allocation level. That is where the decisions are made about how much money goes into VA programs.
The other part is the authorizing process. Just because a project is authorized does not mean it’s funded. There are projects that could have been authorized for decades that were never funded. Appropriations is where the rubber meets the road. When I came in as chairman in January of 2007, my frustration was that the veteran, veterans health care, and benefits programs had been on a treadmill for the past decade. While there were increases in the budget, they seldom kept up with inflation and population growth of veterans. Veterans were on a stationary treadmill at best, and falling backwards at worst.
Q: So you had some catching up to do.
A: We had some catching up to do. That is why I am so excited that we passed in just 12 months an $11.8 billion increase in VA health care and benefits programs.
Q: A few years ago, they revised the appropriations subcommittees, and The American Legion was concerned that VA and DoD would be put into competition with one another in the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Subcommittee you chair. How is the new subcommittee working out?
A: I think it was a good decision because now we don’t have veterans competing with NASA and housing programs. The common bond of our subcommittee is we are fighting for quality of life and health-care programs for our servicemen and women for our veterans and their families. The key to our subcommittee’s work is receiving a strong allocation of funding. Credit should be given where credit is due. Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi, along with Congressmen John Spratt and Dave Obey have been real champions in seeing that my subcommittee had an unprecedented amount of funding to spend on troops and our veterans.
Q: That subcommittee seems like one of many examples where VA and DoD are growing more united in government.
A: There is a tie. Jack Murtha’s subcommittee on defense appropriations funds DoD operations and maintenance for hospitals. Our subcommittee funds military construction for new hospitals for major improvements for DoD. One of the things Mr. Murtha and I have discussed is pushing VA and DoD toward a more seamless transition in health care.
Q: In 2005, The American Legion and many members of Congress identified a looming shortfall in the VA budget. When it hit and emergency funding was needed, the problem was connected to unanticipated demand growth from Iraq and Afghanistan veterans entering the system. How do you prevent that from happening again?
A: Really good question. First, we adequately fund the VA health-care system. That $11.8 billion increase – about 95 precent of that goes to the VA health-care system. That’s the first key step. The second is that I added report language to the VA appropriations bill two years ago to require the VA to report detailed information quarterly to the Congress so that we don’t have to wait until the fourth quarter of a fiscal year to find out that the VA health-care system is in a crisis. The third thing I would add to that is I find The American Legion, along with our local hospitals and veterans, play an instrumental role in providing feedback to Congress on what’s really happening in the VA system. The American Legion was an instrumental partner in passing the largest increase in VA health-care benefits funding in the 77-year history of the VA. The American Legion really does make a difference. A big difference.
Eleven days after Secretary (Jim) Nicholson was confirmed, he said the VA health-care system had all the money it needed. I said, “Well sir, with all due respect, your staff has not given you the true facts.”
I knew that to be the case because I had heard from The American Legion and from our local veterans and from employees working in the VA hospitals. Those three things – adequate budgets, quarterly reports from VA, and constant outreach at the grassroots level– are the way we prevent a repeat of a VA health-care system in crisis.
Q: What has been done to improve VA demand projections, which at times have been outdated by the time the budgets are passed?
A: Demand projections, which were very flawed in the past, have been vastly improved. It’s a difficult process. It’s an art, not just a science. There have been significant improvements in the modeling for projecting the number of veterans needing VA health care ... plus, we need to be constantly vigilant in reviewing during the year whether the actual numbers meet the projected numbers.
Q: What are some of the most important accomplishments for veterans so far from the 110th Congress?
A: We increased funding for VA more in one year than in the previous six years in Congress. By the end of this year, we will have increased it more in two years than in the previous 12. Most of that funding was focused on improving VA health care. As a result, the VA has hired 1,335 new doctors and 4,968 new nurses and nurse assistants. They are in the process of plussing up medical services personnel by 15,000. What that means to an individual veteran is better health care and shorter waiting times for their medical services.
We provided a huge increase, and an important one, for VA mental health care services because of the needs of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans coming home. We added funding for 3,100 new claims processors to reduce the unfair six-month waiting times for veterans to have their benefits decided. For the first time since 1979, we increased VA gas mileage from 11 cents to 28.5 cents per mile, for veterans who have to drive long distances to receive their care. To some veterans, that may not seem like a lot. For some veterans, it’s the difference between being able to afford to go to the VA hospital or not. We increased medical research, in real dollars, above inflation for the first time in over a decade. We committed over $1 billion for major construction projects to ensure we don’t have a Walter Reed Annex 18 tragedy at VA. Those are just some of the things.
Q: Why have these funding improvements been so long in coming?
A: At the end of the day, this isn’t just about dollars and programs, it’s about respect. Veterans have always been respected by Congress, in our hearts and our words. I thought it was time to show our respect through our deeds, as well. When it comes to veterans, the moral principle is very simple. Our nation should keep its promises to those who have kept their promises.
Q: Do you foresee a day when all veterans are once again allowed to use VA health-care services?
A: Yes, I do. We can’t do it overnight because it would result in a massive increase in waiting times and a reduction in the quality of health care for veterans. But I am hoping that the unprecedented increases for VA hospitals in our last budget was the first step toward opening up our hospitals to more veterans. It’s just flat unfair to say that a veteran in some parts of the country making $30,000 a year is too wealthy to receive VA health care. His neighbor might be making $150,000 a year because he didn’t make the sacrifices of service that a veteran did. I am hopeful we can start phasing in higher income thresholds for veterans to receive VA care.
Q: What about mandatory funding for VA health care?
A: The ultimate goal is to adequately fund the VA and to do it on a timely basis. Mandatory funding could be a plus or a minus. If mandatory VA health-care funding had been in place last year, the pay-as-you-go rules would have made it virtually impossible to provide an $11.8 billion increase in VA discretionary spending. The goal of mandatory funding – adequate funding and funding on time – is absolutely laudable, and I support that goal 100 percent. We could continue to have unprecedented increases in VA funding through the appropriations process – and if we could get that funding on time each year – then a case could be made that would be more beneficial to veterans. I am glad The American Legion has pushed the goal of mandatory funding because that puts pressure on Congress to increase VA funding and to do a better job of getting these bills passed on time.
