Va Secretary Gop Backed Burn Amendments Would Lead To Streamlining Care For Vets

“I can’t in good conscience do that, because the result is going to be a reduction in care for vets, which I just can’t subscribe to,” McDonough told Jake Tapper on “State of the Union” of CNN. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) appeared on the show earlier Sunday morning to explain Republican opposition to the bill, which was blocked last week when it fell five votes short of the tally needed to override the filibuster . All Democrats and eight Republicans supported the proposal, and Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (DN.Y.) said Democrats would advance the bill a second time on Monday. Republicans have accused their Democratic colleagues of a “fiscal gimmick” in funding the bill. Toomey said Sunday that “hiding behind a veterans bill the opportunity to go on an unrelated $400 billion spending spree is wrong.” But McDonough said the dollar amount Republicans are concerned about is not a Trojan horse for the Democratic agenda. “If you look in the bill for $400 billion that he’s talking about, you won’t see it. You’d have to go deep into some – some charts of the back of the CBO [Congressional Budget Office] report for — to find it. Why is this fund in the bill? The fund is in the bill to ensure [that] all expenses for this program are for veterans exposed to these toxins.” The GOP-backed amendments would put an annual cap on spending and phase out funding for veterans after 10 years. “So the impact would be, if we — if his estimates are wrong about what we’re going to spend in any given year, that means we might have to take care of veterans,” McDonough said. Manchin defends climate and tax deal with Schumer in multiple shows as Democrats cheer for Biden after big week “CBO proposed, for a program we’re running right now, the MISSION Act, that we would spend $14 billion a year less this year. So they’re off $14 billion. And they are only four years away from their initial investment.” Toomey “is asking us to take their word for it in eight or 10 years,” the secretary said. “I can’t in good conscience do that because the effect of that will be to limit care for vets, which I just can’t subscribe to.”