So, yesterday’s response was a bit unexpected. Thanks, @jonstewart for the shoutout. A lot of people are asking for clarification about the toxic exposure fund and the facts around it. Here’s a deeper dive on this part of the #PACTAct.
The first question we need to answer is, when was the toxic exposure fund added to the bill? This was added prior to the first Senate votes in June.
So the fund was in there in June, but did it change when the bill went over to the House? No. And this is something you can verify yourself.
Here’s a document with the changes that were made between the PACT Act from H.R 3967, the old vehicle with the procedural issue, to the new vehicle, S. 3373. rules.house.gov/sites/democrat…
On page 50, you can see details about the hotly debated toxic exposure fund. There are no changes to this section. As mentioned in my last thread, the only changes were to remove a sentence that caused tax implications. You can see that deletion on page 56.
But can the money in this fund be used for non-veterans? No, here’s where it says that it cannot be used for other things, in fact, that money cannot be used on just any veteran, it must be used for costs to care for toxic exposed veterans.
What if toxic exposed veterans don’t need all the money put into the fund, could it be used for non-veteran issues? Again, no. That would be illegal.
The #PACTAct costs $278 billion dollars over the next 10 years. Every dollar is for toxic exposed veterans. There is no pork or unrelated spending.
So, what is this debate about? For every bill that Congress seriously considers, an organization called the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), develops a cost estimate so Congress knows the price tag on a bill.
The CBO offers very conservative estimates when they provide numbers. Because of this, they receive the scorn of both parties depending on the issue.
Right now, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs is caring for some veterans who are ill from toxic exposures. Not nearly enough, but some toxic exposed veterans are receiving care from VA.
In the CBO score, they estimate in future budget requests VA will ask for a large amount of their current toxic exposure related costs to be moved to this toxic exposure fund.
What does that have to do with unrelated spending? If the VA asks to move current toxic exposure bills into the mandatory fund and if Congress approves, that creates room in the discretionary budget that Congress could allocate for other things.
The discretionary budget covers all non-mandatory expenses for the US Government and is typically what we mean when we talk about “the budget.”
If there is additional room in the discretionary budget, Congress gets to decide whether that money is spent at all and how. This is the appropriations process. Every dollar in the budget is assigned to something - by Congress.
The problems that we are talking about this week are hypothetical and presume that Congress will stop doing its job after passing this bill.
The amendment proposed by Senator Toomey caps the toxic exposure fund, which could prevent veterans from receiving care after the cap is reached. It also sunsets the fund after 10 years, opening the whole issue back up for debate in a decade.
The added downside to making ANY changes to the bill is that it would have to go back to the House to be repassed for a third time. This would take weeks. That is time many veterans do not have. They are sick today and need benefits now.
84 Senators agreed about the importance and urgency of caring for toxic exposed veterans in June. When things get politically charged it is important to remember we all still share this common ground.
The debate this week is about the details of how Congress and the VA will manage funding to care for toxic exposed veterans, and future challenges those decisions create.
Considering the risk to sick veterans of continued delay, the potential that Sen Toomey’s amendment will exclude some from care, and Congress’s built-in oversight of all federal spending, the best course of action is clear. We need to pass the PACT Act immediately.
Your Senators need to hear how important this is to you. They need to vote YES on cloture, NO on any amendments, and YES to pass the PACT act. Here is a tool you can use to reach out. As always, be courteous to the staff.
moaa.quorum.us/campaign/41155/
moaa.quorum.us/campaign/41155/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
