A Big Step for Homeless Veterans

As a Veteran, a former State Director of Veterans Affairs and now as Assistant Secretary at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs I understand the urgent need to address homelessness. Last week’s meeting of the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness with Secretary Shinseki, and his counterparts at HUD, Labor and HHS, took an important step in coordinating our efforts to eliminate homelessness in our country. The VA estimates that one-third of homeless Americans served in the military, so this partnership is central to our efforts to help these brave soldiers.

One important outcome of the meeting was the announcement of an additional $75 million in housing vouchers. This new money will provide shelter for an additional 10,000 homeless Veterans and their families. These resources offer vital support to a community in need.

For state and local Veterans’ agencies, these funds come at a time when many local budgets are being squeezed by the current economic situation. While the VA works hard to offer support services and case management to eligible homeless veterans, local agencies play a crucial role in the care of these individuals.

Our nation's Veterans placed the good of the nation before their own and we are all dishonored when even a single Veteran sleeps on the street. I am proud of this administration’s commitment to fulfilling our nation’s promise to these brave soldiers. I look forward to working with my colleagues throughout government and the private sector to continue to fight this problem and make sure that no Veteran or American has to face the harsh reality of being homeless.

Tammy Duckworth is the Assistant Secretary of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs for the Department of Veterans Affairs.

• A Big Step for Homeless Veterans - sm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

t is the VETERAN, not the preacher, who has given us freedom of religion. 

It is the VETERAN, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the VETERAN, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
   
It is the VETERAN, not the community organizer, who has given us freedom to assemble. 

    
It is the VETERAN, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial. 

It is the VETERAN, not the politician, who has given us the right to vote. 

There was one VETERAN and one community organizer in the last election.  We know now that we made a very bad choice and we did it because one was young and one wasn't; one was black and one wasn't; one was glib and one wasn't, and because one would say anything to get elected while the other wouldn't.

Bad thinking = wrong reasons = poor choices = catastrophic outcomes.  This is one catastrophe for which we have no one to blame but ourselves and our shallow enthusiasms..

McCAIN HAS NOT DELIVERED ON HIS PROMISES TO VETERANS

Union members respect Sen. John McCain’s service to our country. When will he start respecting ours? Although McCain talks about his support for veterans, he repeatedly votes against increased funding for veterans’ health care—and more. We call on John McCain to join us in supporting our veterans and working to turn around America.

McCAIN REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST VETERANS’ HEALTH BENEFITS

McCain Opposes the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Is Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would “encourage more people to leave the military.” (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)

McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)

Opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)

McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)

Voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)

McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)

McCain Voted in Support of Disabled Veterans Only 25 Percent of the Time from 2004-2005. While McCain claims he “has been a leading advocate” for veterans with disabilities, statistics show he supported the Disabled American Veterans’ interests only 25 percent of the time in 2004-2005. In 2006, that figure slipped to 20 percent of the time. (Project Vote Smart)

McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-ofliving adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)

INCLUDING BETTER ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE FOR GUARD AND RESERVISTS

McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (www.johnmccain.com/Informing/ Issues/9cb5d2aa-f237-464e-9cdf-a5ad32771b9f.htm; S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)

McCAIN ALSO VOTED TO OUTSOURCE JOBS AT MILITARY FACILITIES

McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)

He Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center—outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a “disgrace.” (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City, Mo., 4/4/08)

AND HE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST FUNDING FOR THE VETERANS AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT

2003: McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)

2001: McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)

2000: McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)

1999: McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)

1996: McCain Voted Against a $13 Billion Increase in Funding for Veterans Programs. McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. (S.C.R. 57, Vote 115, 5/16/96)

1995: McCain Voted to Underfund Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion. (H.R. 2099, Vote 470, 9/27/95)

1995: McCain Voted Against Closing Tax Loopholes to Increase Veterans Funding by $74 Million. McCain voted against eliminating tax breaks and closing tax loopholes to provide revenue to restore some of the proposed cuts in Veterans Affairs spending. (S.C.R. 13, Vote 226, 5/25/95)

1994: McCain Voted Against Funding the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of nine senators to vote against appropriating $90 billion in budget authority for the Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development departments. (H.R. 4624, Vote 306, 9/27/94)

http://www.vaiw.org/vet/index.php

Here's what I don't get.  Everyone knows that going into Iraq was a bad move.  Even Bush is saying now that he would have done things differently (part of his rewriting history).  Noone is blaming the soldiers, noone at all.  They simply did what they do -- obeyed orders.  Granted, it's bound to be pretty crappy right now to be a soldier and realize that you are/were fighting in an unjust war, but that does not mean it was their fault.  It simply means they were dumped on by an irresponsible, oil hungry government -- namely Bush and Cheney.  So, instead of these people trying to justify the war by saying the people of Iraq were freed (while they are now dodging more bullets than ever before) and blaming those who oppose the war (not the soldiers), why don't they spend more time being mad at the ones who put them and their families as well as the people of Iraq in this mess in the first place?

About the video.  Yes, he obviously has suffered, but I don't think he really has a grasp on the situation.  He talks about *freeing* the Iraqi people.  What he and many others like to ignore is that the term *freedom* means different things to different people.  In this case, Bush's idea was to turn Iraq into a miniature US, which would mean loss of culture and religion for these people.  Obviously the Iraqi people are oppossed to this and should be.  Did you notice all the Iraqi thumbs ups in the news when US troops drove through the streets in tanks?  Guess what?  That was an insult.  We were not welcomed with open arms, as Bush said we would be, and as soon as we get out of there the better, not only for us, but for Iraqis as well.  So, this guy in the video---I guess he wants more Americans to suffer in an attempt to do what?  Free a people who don't want our version of freedom? 

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/presidentbush/2008/09/arrest-bush-che.html

(I don't know how to make sophisticated links.) 

It's not just about torture of terrorists.  It's many, many other things they have done. 

My heart, and makes me furious at the same time.  Why isn't John "did-I-mention-yet-today-that-I-was-a-POW-for-5-years?" McCain more supportive of GI benefits?  Anyone?  Cause I'd love to know how he's justified it. 

This isn’t new (it’s from May), but it’s the first I saw it. I found it interesting but not surprising.  Our Veterans deserve much better.

Appearing yesterday at the Arlington National Cemetery to honor generations of sacrifices by American servicemen and women, President Bush said, "At our national cemetery, we take comfort from knowing that the men and women who are serving freedom's cause understand their purpose and its price." Yet the reality has been that the administration that most recently has sent those men and women to fight for freedom's cause has failed for live up to government's age-old promise to "care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow, and his orphan."

BUSH'S 2006 VA BUDGET HITS VETERANS HARD: President Bush's 2006 budget proposal included legislation that would raise veterans' premiums more than 100 percent on prescription drugs and add an annual $250 enrollment fee for veterans who want care for conditions not directly caused by military service and who generally earn more than $25,000 a year. The administration has recommended these same proposals in each of the past few years, only to have them beaten back by Congress each time. The user fee would increase costs for nearly 2 million veterans nationwide.

WAR VETERANS EXCLUDED FROM COST OF WAR ON TERROR: Conservatives in Congress rebuffed an effort to include $2 billion in emergency money for veterans' health care in the recently passed $82 billion Iraq war supplemental. The president's request increased the VA budget a mere 2.7 percent (including the increased co-pays and enrollment fees), hardly sufficient to deal with an expected influx of Afghanistan and Iraq war veterans in the coming years. Nearly 28,000 soldiers who served in Iraq and were discharged have already sought care at a VA facility. Of the nearly 245,000 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan already discharged from service, 12,422 have been in VA counseling centers for readjustment problems and symptoms associated with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. VA Secretary Jim Nicholson has said the budget circumstances are not "dire," yet Senate Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Larry Craig (R-ID) was forced to increase the 2006 budget request by $1 billion. Dave Autry, a spokesman for the Disabled American Veterans, said, "Vets are owed a debt and the government has said they are eligible for health care. The government needs to pay for it. It's a continuing cost of our national defense."

BUSH WANTS TO SHUT DOWN VETERANS HOSPITAL IN HIS OWN BACKYARD: Veterans in Bush's backyard, near his ranch in Crawford, Texas, are protesting his administration's decision to close a VA hospital in their town. "It would be, in my opinion, a tragic mistake to shut down our hospital, especially during a time of war when tomorrow's veterans are in harm's way today," said U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Waco). In May 2004, then-VA Secretary Anthony Principi announced he would be closing three veterans hospitals nationwide and partially closing eight others. For his work, Principi was rewarded with an appointment to the chairmanship of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) commission.

VETERANS GROUPS SLAM BUSH BUDGET: More than 300,000 veterans' claims are pending before the VA, according to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, and the number of claims pending for more than six months rose from 47,000 in 2003 to 75,000 at the end of March 2005. The deteriorating condition of VA health care has elicited plenty of criticism. The American Legion called Bush's budget "the wrong message at the wrong time to the wrong constituency." The Vietnam Veterans of America said the budget did a "disservice to those of us who donned the uniform to defend the rights, principles, and freedoms that we hold dear." And the Veterans of Foreign Wars decried Bush's decision as "especially shameful during a time of war."

We certainly cannot let these large employers fail.  Obama's team can think this through in the meantime and modify things in the future to benefit the nation. Doing nothing cannot be an option.

in her own words *Can you not see what is happening?  Hitler was elected into office during a democratic state.  I am not saying that O is Hitler, what I am saying is that someone with such extreme ideas has been elected to the highest power and there are many signs pointing to the fact that we are going to see some changes that even those that voted for him are not going to  like.*  That's in the *I am a democrat* post.

Just because you say you didn't call him Hitler right after you did, doesn't mean you didn't do it in the first place.

So, you are upset about this republican being in office and think republicans are all christians and christians do not sin.  Well, I am upset about Emanuel and his background and is now chief of staff for the O.  That is more important to me right now.