In short, “The incinerators were used on military installations throughout Iraq and Afghanistan to incinerate all types of waste, hazardous materials and chemical compounds. 86 post-9/11 veterans who served in Iraq or Afghanistan.” % burn the pits, according to a 2020 study by the nonprofit Iraqi and Afghan Veterans America.”
The Republican mastermind blocking the passage of the Burnpit bill is Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, a budget hawk who retired from the Senate and is no longer facing voters.
His problem is that the version of the bill considered earlier this year assumed that the Senate’s regular annual appropriations would go towards tending burnpits.
The version senators are currently considering would make the fund permanent in nature and put it in the category of “mandatory” spending, meaning it’s guaranteed forever, but would leave much-needed space in the discretionary budget. can also be created.
Toomey disagrees with this tweak and apologizes for standing in the way of the bill.
“We are spending too much money to spend. The opportunity to hide behind the Veterans Bill and continue spending irrelevant $400 billion is a wrong opportunity.
He worries that switching the Burnpit Fund from discretionary to mandatory spending will free up $400 billion in discretionary spending books for lawmakers to use for something else.
“If we make a big hole, imagine what that big hole would be like,” Toomey said on the Senate floor last month. It’s happening.”
While that may be a legitimate complaint, a bill to help veterans who suffered burns during war is an awkward place to stand up against.
It’s even more troubling considering the 25 Republicans who voted for the previous version of the bill are now standing in front of it.
What do veterans say?
Veterans protesting around the clock at the Capitol say the wait is too long. They want the bill to pass now. And they worry that if the spending is not made part of the mandatory budget, it could be removed in the future.
Matt Zeller, a major in the U.S. Army Reserve and adviser to American veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, told CNN from Capitol Hill that his activist group knows veterans who are desperate today. .
“When people get sick with these cancers, they have to mortgage their homes to stay alive.” You know, people think this is covered by the VA, but it’s not. , this bill would fix that for the more than 3.5 million of us who are exposed to burn pits.”
What is the answer to Toomey’s allegations?
Supporters of the bill say Toomey is seeing a mirage.
McDonough said Toomey’s approach puts an annual cap on what can be put into the fund, potentially ending the fund after 10 years, and the need to withhold care from veterans seeking care after being exposed to burns. I even said there is.
McDonough said of Toomey, “If his estimates are wrong on how much we spend in a year, it means we may have to distribute medical bills to veterans.
what is the subtext here?
With the November midterm elections just around the corner, legislators of all kinds want to get their jobs together and start campaigning for the remainder of August.
Possible escape route
Republicans may bow to public pressure to allow the bill to be voted on, which has a lot of support.
Democrats could bow to Republican pressure and allow the amendment to be considered, possibly changing the wording of the budget.
Or neither side buckles and the burn pit method is void.
Ultimately, both sides want the bill to pass. Republicans probably don’t mind it taking a little longer and further complicating other Democrat priorities.
Source: www.cnn.com
