Casey, Toomey at odds over bill involving veterans

Aug. 1—WASHiNGTON D.C. — A bill to expand free medical care eligibility for veterans who have been exposed to toxic chemicals remains stalled in the U.S. House.

On Monday, U.S. Senator Bob Casey, a Pennsylvania Democrat, lashed out at Republicans holding up the bill while his Republican cohort, Pat Toomey, said his problem isn't with the bill, but with a "budgetary gimmick" built into it that could lead to unrelated spending.

The Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxins Act, better known as the PACT Act, would expand eligibility for free medical care through the V.A. for thousands of veterans who have been exposed to toxic chemicals.

In June this year, the bill passed the Senate 84-14. But that bill was then delayed in committee while members debated over one section of the legislation.

With 60 votes needed to advance the bill, last Wednesday the Senate voted 55-42.

All 42 of the votes were Republicans. Twenty five of those 42 Republican senators had voted yes in June, but switched their votes to no in July.

Among the "no" votes was Toomey, a Pennsylvania Republican.

Toomey led the opposition, when on the floor of the Senate on Wednesday he said, "My concern about this bill has nothing to do with the purpose of the bill."

Toomey contended that there was a "mechanism created in this bill, a budgetary gimmick that has the intent of making it possible to have a huge explosion of unrelated spending, $400 billion."

"It's wrong to use a veterans bill to hide a $400 billion unrelated slush fund," Toomey said on Monday. "The Senate could have fixed this weeks ago, and we can still fix it now. We can very quickly amend the PACT Act to remove this budget gimmick without reducing spending on veterans in the underlying bill by a single penny."

Toomey added that "I have no interest in modifying the purpose of this bill. By the way, I suspect there are 85 votes for this bill if we fix this problem."

Casey, during the press conference said, "I disagree with the assertion that this bill is somehow going to lead to a problem down the road. The United States Congress — not just on a bill like this — ultimately decides down the road what will be spent on any bill. So the idea that this is some kind of problem? I don't see the logic in that."

Reverting to his earlier point, Casey said, "Let's be honest about this. There were 14 senators who voted no the first time around. They don't want to pass this bill."

They lost that argument overwhelmingly in June, Casey noted. "Why are we pretending there is a real difference in policy? Fourteen senators are against this bill and have been against it since June."

The fourteen senators have been the impetus behind wanting to get their colleagues to change their votes to no, Casey said.

Casey called the PACT Act "probably the most important veteran's bill in my lifetime."

Asked if the two sides could find a way to work out their difference, Casey said, "Here's how we can work it out. Pass the damn bill. As one of the Republican senators who voted yes in June, if you really believe this bill should go forward and you want to make some changes, why not do that after the bill is passed?

"We need to get this started, so veterans don't have to wait months or years more, after waiting 10 or 15 years for this," Casey said.