Bruce Trivellini is a dentist from Contoocook with no background in politics nor any military experience. He is neither a political expert nor a veteran. Mr. Trivellini, this is a conversation among Americans who have served their country with honor and bravery, and are simply asking that the federal government provide them with the basic health care benefits that they deserve. There's no place for you here.

I also used Word so apologize for some formatting issues.

It is good to see good such discussion concerning my letter which states that Obama’s health care plan is better for vets which it is. I also think that any discussion of veteran’s health care needs to be considered in a broader context of the proposed health care plans for both candidates and I would encourage you to read the editorial in last Sunday’s Boston Globe and the 9/16 editorial in the WSJ which clearly state the differences between the proposed health plans of Senators Obama and McCain.
Based on these articles and many more, it should be clear that Senator Obama’s plan will ensure that health care is available and affordable for everyone who needs it while McCain’s plan could force employers to drop health care coverage for over 20 million Americans which could bring the total number of uninsured in the US to 67 million! As a veteran under the Obama health plan, you will be able to get the care you need even though there is no VA hospital in New Hampshire.

Senator McCain's voting record on veterans' issues should not inspire confidence in the way we would be treated under a McCain administration. As a Life Member of the DAV, I was not surprised to see that Senator McCain was given a grade of 20% after reviewing his votes on health care issues (2007).

Over the past few years, Senator McCain voted against proposed legislation to increase veterans' medical care by $2.8 billion and another bill that would have funded $20 million to provide counseling services for those returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Senator McCain also voted no on a bill that would have ensured that veteran’s health care benefits are protected from inflation.

Here is the specific voting record of Senator John McCain on key proposed legislation since 2005 from Vote Smart and you should take a look at these bills yourself:

1.) 05/22/2008 GI Bill and Other Domestic Provisions
S Amdt 4803 NV Amendment Adopted - Senate
(75 - 22)
2.) 01/22/2008 Defense Authorizations Bill
HR 4986 NV Bill Passed - Senate
(91 - 3)
3.) 10/01/2007 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
HR 1585 NV Bill Passed - Senate
(92 - 3)
4.) 02/02/2006 Tax Rate Extension Amendment
HR 4297 N Motion Rejected - Senate
(44 - 53)
5.) 11/17/2005 Additional Funding For Veterans Amendment
S 2020 N Motion Rejected - Senate
(43 - 55)
6.) 10/05/2005 Health Care for Veterans Amendment
HR 2863 N Motion Failed - Senate
(48 - 51)

If you remain unconvinced, you should take a look at the following web site which provides even more information about Senator McCain’s voting record on veteran’s issues:
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/articleid/9559

Wouldn't that include Veterans?

Try starting at the point that the VA will reduce your care! What does "persuadable" have to do with anything? I am very open minded to any argument, if you start to talk facts and ideas and not mis guided rhetoric.

So, how does creating another avenue for your healtcare, ie. going to a private care facility, shrink your benefit? The only way that your benefit is reduced is if the private care sector charges you more than the VA coverage pays.

Do you believe that the VA should be the only party payer or a third party payer? If you believe that it should be the only party payer then you just go to congress and lobby for an increase the beneifts.

That maybe what you are affraid of. Because, increasing the VA benefit for private health care delivery as an only party payer system isn't projected in budget numbers nor will the American people approve increased taxes to pay for the increase in costs to our VETs ( a very unwise postion on the peoples part I might add). There is a reason why the public feels that way, but there is no way that I am going discuss that in this forum!

So, it appears to me that the position that you are taking is one where you feel that the VETs shouldn't have to demonstrate thatthe need a bigger piece of the pie. Unfortunately, when it comes to taxes, I have never seen a tax increase disliked if the body asking for the increase demonstrated a real need! So may I respectfully state that the VETs better start mapping out a public relations plan for increased funding for the next 12 years!

After what now has happened in the financial markets, all tax dollars expeditures are going to be thoroughly scrutinized.

The real question regarding the VA changing over to treating only combat related injuries is, ARE THEY EXPECTING MORE COMBAT RELATED INJURIES? Does some one out there anticipate an expansion of our military's involvement in conflicts that will cause an increase in the number of patients requiring care?

Certainly, Obama wants to expand operations in Afghanistan. Could Iran be on the radar screen. What about Syria or even Russia! Now that is what we should be focusing on!

If you don't think McCain has explicitly proposed shrinking the VA to deal exclusively with combat related injuries, I don't know where to start. We could exchange cites, but that's too much trouble where the discussion is just about hammering the other guy. Now we're into assertions about whether the bailout is needed and that Obama has implied that he will raise taxes on regular people. Let's adjourn and go talk to people who are persuadable.

Thank you for your response and thank you for serving our country.

I am a bit puzzled by one thing, your comment, "McCain proposes it in an entirely different context, one opposed by ALL the VSO's btw. His proposal is to cut the VA way back to dealing only with combat related injuries."

With the card and in McCain's proposal how is the VA being cut way back? In fact, you are expanding you choices of where to go for care. By allowing you to go away from the VA for your care, he is freeing up the VA for combat related treatment. This isn't cutting anything! Cutting means that you will be without care or reduced the level of care now offered. There is no reduction of VA coverage. The only thing changing is that you don't have to go to the VA for the care. you will be able to go to wherever you want and receive the same amount of coverage.

As for Obama, I really don't understand why you think he will help you. He has sided on the Bush bailout plan! He now says that it's either a rise in taxes or he will have to rethink he's campaign promises. I think his record is pretty clear on Vets.
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/12/20/while-illinois-veterans-suffer-o...

I typed my comment in MSWord, so I can use the spell checker. This blog messes up punctuation that pastes over. Sorry for the mess folks.

Trying to paint progressive minded people as “tax and spend liberals” is old hat. I don’t favor pork. I favor transparency and minimizing the influence of lobbyists on Capitol Hill. That is why I support Obama.

However, for years, when given the choice, McCain has opted to short vet’s critical funding. How unfortunate that “politics as usual” stains vet funding, but that is how it has always been done. McCain should have picked his battles. Don’t you think it is odd that McCain is NOT known as a giant in the Senate, when it comes to supporting vets? We all know he is a hero, but when it comes to drafting key vet legislation, his office is MIA.

Now on your question of how much is enough. Ask Sen. Jim Webb that question. I can’t put a $$ figure to that. What I feel is that when money in D.C is allocated for defense, the weapons and the warfare never go wanting for dollars. Yet, when it comes time to care for the servicemember, most of the cost is shrugged off on the vet and his/hers family. DOD can project the cost of the manufacture, fielding and maintenance of a M-16 rifle, from cradle to grave. The soldier that shoulders that weapon is recruited, trained, supported with a full complement of logistics up to the point they no longer carry that M-16. Once the servicemember leaves the service; the support, thus funding, drops off considerably. How is that? What is our nation’s priorities? Building a missile defense, “Star Wars” program? Or making sure the folks coming home from Iraq are given a true homecoming? Hell, McCain will throw one hell of a parade, but once the ticker tape is swept up, vets are left on their own.

If I am “disparaging” Sen. John McCain, it is on this one point. That he touts is service to the nation, but that he has failed to use his influence for maintaining the sacred trust with veterans. To speak plainly, he takes vets for granted.
…………………………………………
On Sen. Obama,
I am not eligible for VA benefits, though I served as an Infantryman with the 101st Airborne in Saudi Arabia and Iraq from 1990-1991.

Obama has pledged that one of his first acts as president would be reversing the 2003 ban on enrolling modest-income veterans for VA care. That ban has denied care to me and around a million other veterans.

I’ll be glad to have that option. Just in case. With the economy these days, we could all use a safety net. No?

If you want a decent breakdown of Obama’s work to date and proposals, go here:
http://www.aflcio.org/issues/politics/unionveterans2008.cfm

I appreciate Bruce Trivillini's comments on the card. This can become a usefull exchange. (It does seem to me that the cut and past from noquarterusa web site is just eyewash that lowers the discussion with peripheral assertions.)

While the card has some application here in NH for rural vets, and could be part of a solution here, McCain proposes it in an entirely different context, one opposed by ALL the VSO's btw. His proposal is to cut the VA way back to dealing only with combat related injuries. Vets would use the card for everything else. This is really just a way to make the VA go away and to reduce the nation's commitment to vets under cover of low reimbursement rates for the card. Obama would do just the opposite: make a fundamental commitment to the service member, from "oath to grave," as he says, removing all judgements about combat related, service related, etc.

Everyone knows the depth of the adversarial paperwork generated by the VA about what is combat-related and not. Just imagine how that would be amplified by reducing the VA to dealing with combat related injuries only.

Then you have the vet who, like most, has a number of problems, some combat related and some not, but all intertwined. The person would do what...go here for this, there for that?

This is a proposal, to the extent that it is serious at all, that would increase the bureaucratic complexity that vets would have to fight through to get treatment, at the VA or at a hospital. Just imagine the current fee basis program - a nightmare by any account - expanded to all treatment.

If you wonder about John McCain's commitment to vets and can you can explain away his 20% DAV rating compared to Obama's 80%, just look at his GI Bill performance. Totally cynical. Oppose it. Propose a meaningless alternative so you can say you're for something. Skip the vote. Then take credit for it.

This is serious. There's no comparison.

I have an idea of what you were trying to say. However, I am not quite so sure.

First, you seem to know that all politics in Washington evolves around, "worthless political pork." So it seems that if the political pork you favor isn't enough, then the politicians have let you down. So the $4.22 billion of increasaes for veterans was a way to, "gussy up his image as THE REFORMER."

Well if the $4.22 billion wasn't enough, how much should we have appropriated? Please be specific in your response.

Secondly, with a specific budget and a set amount of capital to spend isn't everything rationed? You make triage sound so pejorative! Everbody in life rations their activities.

I would love to take a 2 week vacation to Tahiti right about now. Can't do it though because I have to pay my son's college tuition. That d@mn b@#tard kid of my. Saddling me with that education ear mark! Maybe I can get his mother to pay more for his tuition. What we need is to have his step father to pay more too. And, his step grand parents. I just have to get a bigger pie I guess!

I understand that you will always feel that the country should pay more for the health care of our veterans. A noble cause to be sure. However, the real question to be asked is What has Obama done for you since he was elected to the senate. He doesn't even go to the Veterans Affairs Committee meetings!

Don't disparage the guy who is trying to make the most of what he and 49 Senators and 435 comgressmen approve. Remember, he has only one vote!

Before the VFW in Orlando, McCain said:
Exactly because funding VA programs command bipartisan support, some in the Congress like to attach unrelated appropriations and earmarks to VA bills. The result is to mix vital national priorities with wasteful and often worthless political pork. Earmarks show up in bills of every kind, and not just VA bills. That's how we end up budgeting hundreds of millions of dollars for bridges to nowhere,
...

So McCain had a simple choice, support veterans or gussy up his image as THE REFORMER. He let his fellow vets down.

And when McCain says:
We must also modernize our disability system to make sure that eligible service members receive benefits quickly, based on clear, predictable, and fair standards. And we must address the problems of capacity and access within our VA health care system. While this will involve a wide range of initiatives, I believe there is a simple and direct reform we should make right away.
...
This is political speak for RATIONING!

McCain thinks some vets are better then others. Remember the Webb GI Bill? McCain wanted to cut the pie so lifers got more. Hey Senator McCain! Here is a novel idea. Let's have a bigger pie.

McCain plays favorites with our tax dollars and all the while props himself up a frugal spender. Just wait until we need new aircraft carriers. Then the money pit will be oh so deep.

Nice copy and past job from the democratic party web site! Can't you do your own research and compose a post of your own interpretation of the facts?

Are you that limitted? Try debating fact and stop the hatchet jobs!

First let me say thank you for your service to our country!

A few things need to be cleqared up regarding McCain's voting record on veteran health care.

John McCain voted for increased health care money in 2004,2005,2006 and 2007. In fact McCain voted to increase verteran's health care by $4.22 billion.

Here are the facts:
1.) 2004 $1.80 B voted no $1.20 B voted yes
2.) 2005 $2.80 B voted no $0.410 B voted yes ($410 million)
3.) 2006 $1.50 B voted no $0.823 B voted yes
4.) 2007 $1.77 B voted no $1.79 B voted yes

The interesting thing about the 2007 bill. McCain voted no but it passed and was vetoed by president Bush. A few days later a larger bill was passed and McCain voted yes.

His explanation for his no votes was that the bills contained earmarks that didn't pertain to the bill. Without reading all of those bills I will have to take his word!

The point, McCain has always found a way to increase funding for veterans healthcare.

Now to the Veterans care access card. I don't think I would put any stock into something posted by anonymous. The "card" is designed for low income vets and those vets who live in rural areas. It is designed to increase the veteran's ability to seek care. Sure would make it easy for vets around here who travel either to Manchester, Boston or Vermont.

The card program would not privatize the VA. The card program is designed to increase the vets options for health care.

So as you can see McCain does not have, " a long history of voting against any increases in health-care funding for veterans, starting as early as August 2001. This was followed by votes in March 2004, March 2006, April 2006 and May 2007 in which he was consistently against any increases in health care funding for veterans." It seems to me that $4.22 is a substantial increase. May not be enough, but that is for another debate.

It seems to me you are getting some very bad information. Thank you for your post Rick.

Senator McCain places his vote where the money is, and shamefully (or unabashedly as the case appears) leaves his fellow Veterans in the lurch. If Senator McCain truly puts his Country First, then why has he voted at least fifteen times to prioritize tax cuts and tax loopholes for Americas wealthiest over funding for Veterans? Since his election to the Senate in 1987, McCain has voted at least fifteen times in favor of keeping tax cuts and various tax loopholes for America's top earners, instead of providing valuable funding for United States Veterans. [2006 Senate Votes #7, 15, 41, 63, 67; 2005 Senate Vote #343; 2004 Senate Votes #40, 48; 2003 Senate Votes #74, 81, 83; 1996 Senate Vote #115; 1995 Senate Votes #226, 465, 466].
Why has this decorated combat Veteran not placed us first? The answer is simple, John McCain puts “Country First” when waving the flag suits his political interest to do so, but he puts the interest of wealthy Corporations, Wall Street, and the richest Americans first whenever possible. Perhaps John McCain knows that all he needs to do is stand on a stage behind photographs of his heroic return home from unimaginable imprisonment in the Hanoi Hilton, and Veterans will forget what he has failed to do for us since he was given a great trust to fight for all Veterans in serving in the United States Senate. Perhaps it is those Countrymen making up to five million dollars a year that McCain is talking about putting first, I don’t know about you, but not too many Veterans I know fit that category, and I don’t know any that can’t count how many houses they own. I don’t know why John McCain has abandoned Veterans budget needs on the legislative floor, perhaps it is that Senator McCain just doesn’t understand the economics of the country, or his inexplicable position of allowing Iraqis to retain a $79 billion Oil surplus, while my fellow men and women in arms not only fight for their freedom on foreign soil, but then pay for it here at home at the gas pump. What I do know is that enough is enough.

Not sure about the plastic "Heroes" card. I have heard some horror stories of vets being refused sevice because Docs only will take a quota. Seems they don't like the negotiated rates, so they only take as many as the HAVE to. This happens with vets on medicaid, it seems. I think it best to have a strong VA, taking care of all vets. No rationing like mcCain proposes!

What Army? 'God's' Army?

I'm a veteran also, and what this man wrote in his letter is the truth. It's Obama's plan ALL THE WAY.

That's what we need in this country... more plastic cards. Please, no!

McCain is another Bush.
His record about vets is proof.
There were times over the last eight years when bad health care of vets made the news.
Only then was something done.
McCain has no real plan.
He does not even care.
He is so busy being out of touch that is is sick.
Did you read about Sarah Palin?
If not, here is something just out on yahoo.com:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080925/ap_on_el_ge/palin_witchcraft_blessin...

...that John McCain has consistently voted against veterans.

There are a lot of cheap shots and jokes about this in the blogosphere, but I think it's more effective just to let the fact speak for itself.

McCain subscribes to the Republican view that "suppprt the troops" is a marketing ploy, not something you actually do.

Check out the McCain's web site and you will see a great plan for taking care of us. He will issue us a plastic card, like other health care cards, that we can use at any health care sites including our local doctors off and our local hospital. We will not have to travel down the Manchester and out of state for getting any operations.