WHAT EXACTLY IS IN THE VETERANS BILL, AND WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG?
By Lisa Desjardins,
@LisaDNews
Correspondent
The modern Congress does things two ways – the hard way and the painfully hard way.
The most sweeping veterans benefits bill in decades has gone through what could be a third level of difficulty: a combination of false starts and stops, changing allegiances and some old-fashioned budget rules.
To clear up where things stand, here’s a look at what is in the “Honoring our PACT Act,” who it could help, why some Republicans have opposed it, and why others moved from “yes” to “no” and back again to “yes.”
What are the basics of the bill?
- The full name: Sgt. First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act. It is named for an Ohio veteran who died in 2020 of lung cancer, thought to be related to his exposure to military trash pits in Iraq.
- Nickname: The PACT Act.
- Length: 150 pages. You can read it here.
- Direct cost: $278.5 billion over 10 years, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate.
What does the bill do, broadly? It greatly expands who qualifies for veterans care, specifically expanding support for veterans affected by toxic exposures, including burn pits.
Could you lay out the specifics? Sure thing! Let me return to bullet points. The PACT Act:
- Creates a fund to ensure that veterans suffering from toxic exposures will get care.
- Extends eligibility so that younger veterans – those serving after 9/11 – can qualify.
- Changes how 23 symptoms of toxic exposure are considered so that they are *presumed* to be from that exposure. For example, hypertension. The presumption previously was that these kinds of medical problems were related to the individual’s physique, family history or other unknown factors – not toxic exposure. It also expands the ability of Vietnam War-era veterans to qualify for care due to conditions that could be caused by Agent Orange exposure.
- Finally, it takes on a host of specific other issues, including decades of water contamination at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. The bill would let families and others harmed by that to get reparations from the U.S. government.
These changes means millions of veterans will be able to get new benefits.
Why has this taken so long to pass?
There are two answers here.
The longer answer: This bill has been years in the making. Activists have pushed the federal government for decades to recognize the health problems of those who worked around burn pits. Affected individuals and devoted allies, including former “The Daily Show” host Jon Stewart, have
raised the profile and momentum for this issue with consistent advocacy. But that has taken time.
The shorter one: The bill hit a series of unusual snags this year.
The first is what’s known as a “blue-slip” issue. When the Senate first passed this bill in June, it then went to the House. But after passage there, clerks realized it included a provision that would raise some revenue. The U.S. Constitution spells out that those bills must start in the House. Thus, the process had to go through another round of votes.
That small section was taken out, and the bill was passed by the House again.
When it returned to the Senate, initially it looked like it would be on a glide path. Eighty-four senators had supported it in the first vote. But last week, 25 of them switched to “no.”
But why? Two factors:
- Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., had been pushing his fellow Republicans to switch their votes, hoping to negotiate a change in the bill. Toomey and others believe that the way this bill is funded could lead to an unintentional spending spike by the Department of Veterans Affairs in the future. Supporters adamantly disagree. But Toomey says he was changing minds. A Republican source familiar sent us an email Toomey’s office sent around last Wednesday morning, aiming to gather more ground with his argument.
- Republican sources also admit that at least some senators switched their vote as a form of protest over separate action from Democratic Sens. Schumer and Manchin, who announced last week a surprise $700 billion deal on climate, health care and reducing the deficit. This was a deal nearly all Republicans opposed and had thought was dead.
What happens now?
A final vote on the PACT Act is
scheduled for tonight, and it’s expected to pass. The bill would then head for a presidential signature. Once that happens, some programs go into effect Oct. 1.
THE NEXT FEW DAYS IN THE SENATE
August has rarely been so hot or so busy in the U.S. Senate. And that is not a low bar to clear.
Here is a quick cheat sheet looking at what we know about the timing ahead.
Today. PACT Act passage expected.
Forecast: Sunny skies for this bill after weeks of squalls.
Wednesday. This day could see the start of debate on NATO expansion to include Finland and Sweden. That idea is widely expected to pass, but has enough opposition, prominently from Sen.
Josh Hawley, R-Mo., that it could take some time to finalize. That means the NATO vote is “fluid.”
Forecast: Windy, unpredictable weather patterns for this bill, but it’s expected to pass undamaged by next week.
Thursday. Democratic leadership wants to begin debate on the Schumer/Manchin $700 billion deal, called the Inflations Reduction Act, this day. That is ambitious. It is not yet clear if Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., will be able to get on board and her vote is decisive.
Forecast: Cloudy skies hover for a few days, then a rainbow is likely to appear by the weekend. Expect final passage this weekend or next week.
A PRIMARY POSTCARD FROM KANSAS
By Matt Loffman,
@mattloff
Politics Producer
Kansas may be the Sunflower State, but what greeted our PBS NewsHour team during a recent drive from Kansas City to Topeka to Wichita and back again were campaign signs. Lots of them.
There were billboards, too, many featuring the familiar image of Rosie the Riveter — updated for a 21st century campaign.
