Bush budget raises drug prices for many
veterans
WASHINGTON,
Feb. 6 - President Bush's budget would more than double the
co-payment charged to many veterans for prescription drugs and would
require some to pay a new fee of $250 a year for the privilege of
using government health care, administration officials said Sunday.
The
proposals, they said, are in the $2.5 trillion budget that Mr. Bush
plans to unveil on Monday. White House officials said the budget
advanced his goal of cutting the deficit, which hit a record last
year.
"We are
being tight," Vice President Dick Cheney said on "Fox News Sunday."
"This is the tightest budget that has been submitted since we got
here."
The
proposals to increase charges to veterans face stiff opposition from
veterans organizations, Democratic members of Congress and some
Republicans.
Mr. Cheney
said the White House had judiciously identified scores of domestic
programs to be cut or eliminated. "It's not something we've done
with a meat ax, nor are we suddenly turning our backs on the most
needy people in our society."
The
proposals could provoke months of furious debate on Capitol Hill.
Democrats have already indicated that they are poised to pounce on
any sign that the Bush administration is stinting on veterans'
benefits.
Over all,
the president is seeking $70.8 billion for the Department of
Veterans Affairs in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, say
Congressional aides who have seen budget documents from the agency.
The total
consists of $33.4 billion in discretionary spending, which is
subject to annual appropriation by Congress, and $37.4 billion for
entitlements, like disability compensation, survivor benefits and
pensions, which are authorized under prior laws.
Health
care accounts for almost all of the agency's discretionary spending.
Mr. Bush is seeking an increase of 2.7 percent, or $880 million, in
such spending.
The
president would increase the co-payment for a month's supply of a
prescription drug to $15, from the current $7. The administration
says the co-payment and the $250 "user fee" would apply mainly to
veterans in lower-priority categories, who have higher incomes and
do not have service-related disabilities.
The
government had no immediate estimate of how many veterans would be
affected if the user fee and co-payment proposals were adopted. But
veterans' groups said that hundreds of thousands of people would end
up paying more and that many would be affected by both changes.
Veterans
groups attacked the proposals. Richard B. Fuller, legislative
director of the Paralyzed Veterans of America, said: "The proposed
increase in health spending is not sufficient at a time when the
number of patients is increasing and there has been a huge increase
in health care costs. It will not cover the need. The enrollment fee
is a health care tax, designed to raise revenue and to discourage
people from enrolling."
Mr. Fuller
added that the budget would force veterans hospitals and clinics to
limit services. "We are already seeing an increase in waiting lists,
even for some Iraq veterans," he said.
In
Michigan, for example, thousands of veterans are on waiting lists
for medical services, and some reservists returning from Iraq say
they have been unable to obtain the care they were promised. A
veterans clinic in Pontiac, Mich., put a limit on new enrollment.
Cutbacks at a veterans hospital in Altoona, Pa., are forcing some
veterans to seek treatment elsewhere.
But
Cynthia R. Church, a spokeswoman for the Department of Veterans
Affairs, defended the administration's record. "Our budget increase
from 2001 to 2005 for health care alone has been more than 40
percent," Ms. Church said. "President Bush has kept his commitment
to veterans."
The
department expects to care for five million people at its hospitals
and clinics this year. Under the new budget, the agency will focus
on what officials describe as their "core constituency," including
veterans with service-related disabilities or low incomes.
The budget
also advances previously announced plans to close or scale back some
veterans hospitals. Money spent on underused buildings and excess
land could be better spent providing care to veterans, the agency
said.
Veterans
groups want a $3.5 billion increase in the department's health care
budget next year, but Congressional aides said the request was
unrealistic.
Other
budget details came to light over the weekend as well. Sifting
through documents, Tobin L. Smith, a policy analyst at the
Association of American Universities, which represents 60 large
research universities, found a shift in priorities at the Pentagon.
"In the
budget request for 2006," Mr. Smith said, "Defense Department
spending for science and technology is significantly reduced, while
the budget for development, testing and evaluation of major weapons
systems increases."
The
Pentagon budget provides $10.5 billion for science and technology in
2006, a reduction of $2.5 billion from this year's level, he said.
"We are
concerned about that change because it means the Defense Department
will be providing less support for university research," Mr. Smith
said. "Engineering and computer science will be particularly hard
hit."
The new
budget will not show the costs of the president's top domestic
priority, revamping Social Security to let people divert some of
their payroll taxes to individual investment accounts.
To finance
the change, Mr. Cheney said, the federal government would need to
borrow $750 billion in the next 10 years and "trillions more after
that." But, he said, "the personal accounts will themselves provide
a significant return for those who hold them, so that they'll get a
better deal."
Any effort
to restrain spending on veterans programs is sure to provoke strong
criticism from Democrats, who contend that the Republican-led
Congress and the Bush administration have already shortchanged
current and former members of the military.
In recent
years, Democrats have been trying to emphasize their support of
veterans programs, taking aim at a constituency that has been seen
as reliably Republican. The administration's effort has caused some
discomfort for Republicans.
In early
January, House leaders ousted the chairman of the Veterans Affairs
Committee, Representative Christopher H. Smith, Republican of New
Jersey, who was seen as a strong advocate of veterans programs and
higher spending. Mr. Smith was replaced by Representative Steve
Buyer, Republican of Indiana.
Jim
Nicholson, the new secretary of veterans affairs, heard many
concerns about veterans' health care when he had his confirmation
hearing before a Senate committee last month.
Senator
Larry E. Craig, Republican of Idaho, chairman of the panel, the
Committee on Veterans Affairs, told Mr. Nicholson, "The fiscal
environment that you inherit will be considerably less friendly than
the relatively flush times the V.A. has enjoyed over the last four
years." |