Where Was Shinseki on the Plan to Bill Veterans' Insurance Companies for Service-Related Injuries?

By Mike Griffith, Staff Writer 

I was pleased when I heard that President Obama had selected retired Army general Eric Shinseki to be his Secretary of Veterans Affairs.  I was in the Army when General Shinseki was the Army Chief of Staff.  He had a reputation for being "a soldier’s general" and a man of action.

However, I just have to wonder: Where was Shinseki when the White House cooked up the awful plan to bill veterans’ insurance companies for service-related injuries that are supposed to be covered by the VA?

From everything I’ve been able to gather from news reports on the now-discarded plan, Shinseki always defended it in public, such as when he testified before Congress on the matter.

From everything I’ve been able to gather from news reports on the now-discarded plan, Shinseki always defended it in public, such as when he testified before Congress on the matter.

But did Shinseki privately oppose it?  When President Obama asked him for his input on the proposal, did Shinseki give him the hard truth that this was a terrible idea and a violation of the VA’s moral and legal obligation to care for wounded veterans?

On March 16, leaders of veterans groups met with President Obama, Rahm Emanuel, Steve Kosiak, and Shinseki to discuss the plan.  According to news reports, Shinseki said very little during the meeting.  Was this because privately he disliked the plan?  

If President Obama had not abandoned the plan, and had instead managed to push it through Congress, would Shinseki have resigned in protest?  I like to think that he would have done so.

Now, so as not to leave the impression that President Obama is hostile to veterans care, it should pointed out that his 2010 budget proposal calls for a huge increase in VA funding.  It would hike VA funding by $15 billion overall and would increase discretionary funding, most of which goes for VA medical care, by more than 10%.  This is good news.  It’s also an improvement over the Bush administration’s handling of the VA’s budget. 

After all, funding for veterans is specifically authorized by the Constitution, which is why even strict constructionist budget hawks like Congressman Ron Paul support increased funding for the VA.

Sources for Further Study: 

• http://www.marine-corps-news.com/2009/03/veterans_groups_irate_at_obama.htm 
• http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=45254
• http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/10/veterans.health.insurance/
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062301888.html 
• http://www.inteldaily.com/news/173/ARTICLE/9183/2009-01-07.html

———————————————

Visit Mike Griffith’s Real Issues Home Page