"This is another cheap attempt by the Bush administration to save a few bucks at the expense of our veterans who put their lives on the line for us," said DeFazio. "Veterans should not be subjected to trauma and emotional stresses of proving for a second time the wounds they suffered on the battlefield. Nor should our veterans be punished for inconsistency and inadequate training at the agency. The review is limited to those who were granted full compensation, but completely ignores the tens of thousands of veterans who were unfairly denied compensation. In fact, there are probably more veterans whose PTSD ratings are too low, and stand to receive increased compensation, compared to those who are receiving unnecessarily high compensation. I am disgusted by this administration’s actions."

Following is the text of the letter:

October 14, 2005

The Honorable James T. Walsh
Chairman
Subcommittee on Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs
House Committee on Appropriations
H-143 U.S. Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515

The Honorable Chet Edwards
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs
House Committee on Appropriations
1016 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Chairman Walsh and Ranking Member Edwards:

We are writing to urge you to adopt Section 224 from the Senate version of H.R. 2528, the fiscal year 2006 appropriations bill for the Department of Veterans Affairs, when you conference with the Senate to negotiate the final version of the bill.

As you know, in May of this year, the Department of Veterans Affairs proposed to review 72,000 individual cases of veterans who were rated at 100 percent disabled and unemployable within the last five years due to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). That review is scheduled to begin within the next month.

The VA review was launched in response to a VA Inspector General report about the disparity in rates of PTSD awards among regions of the country. However, the Inspector General's review of 2,100 claims only considered those who were awarded disability compensation at rates above 50 percent, not cases in which the claims were denied to determine whether the denial was justified. Denial of claims based upon lack of proper documentation is arguably a much more widespread problem.

We believe it is a disservice to veterans who served our country honorably to automatically treat them with suspicion when the issue may be merely proper agency documentation. We are also concerned that by requiring veterans to once again document the stressors responsible for their PTSD diagnosis, the VA investigation will reopen the psychological wounds of war for these veterans and result in further disability. Indeed, we have already heard reports of veterans whose symptoms have markedly increased as a result of the smaller scale review. Even in the smaller scale incomplete review, our government is putting at risk the health of veterans in order to obtain a more complete paper trail to support their diagnoses. A larger review is likely to put even greater numbers of veterans at risk of additional disabilities.

It just sends a terrible message to those who are serving in the military today for the VA to attack and question whether those who served before are entitled to receive the benefits the VA itself previously approved. To the extent there are disparities in the rate at which PTSD benefits are awarded or the required documentation wasn't collected, the VA should ensure that its employees are uniformly and properly trained going forward. But, veterans who applied in good faith and were awarded benefits should not be punished for mistakes the VA may have made.

Section 224 of the Senate bill would prohibit the VA from reducing a veteran's disability compensation for PTSD based on a finding that the VA failed to collect enough justifying documentation unless the failure was the direct result of fraud by the applicant. It would also provide for congressional oversight of any future VA effort to investigate PTSD unemployability and 100 percent ratings cases.

Thank you for your consideration of our request.

Sincerely,

/s/

PETER DeFAZIO

JO ANN EMERSON

BERNIE SANDERS

EARL BLUMENAUER

DARLENE HOOLEY

RICK BOUCHER

DALE KILDEE

COLLIN PETERSON

EDOLPHUS TOWNS

MARTIN MEEHAN

DONALD PAYNE

BARNEY FRANK

GARY ACKERMAN

LYNN WOOLSEY

ROSA DeLAURO

SHERROD BROWN

LUIS GUTIERREZ

CAROLYN MALONEY

MAJOR OWENS

NICK RAHALL

JEROLD NADLER

SILVESTRE REYES

BOB FILNER

MAURICE HINCHEY

LOUISE SLAUGHTER

TAMMY BALDWIN

JIM McDERMOTT

RUSH HOLT

BETTY McCOLLUM

JAN SCHAKOWSKY

SUSAN DAVIS

CHRIS VanHOLLEN

TOM UDALL

RAUL GRIJALVA

DONNA CHRISTENSEN

NEIL ABERCROMBIE

GRACE NAPOLITANO

BARBARA LEE

DENNIS KUCINICH

ED CASE

CAROLYN McCARTHY

ADAM SMITH

TIM RYAN

ROBERT WEXLER

TED STRICKLAND

MIKE ROSS

STEPHANIE HERSETH

HAROLD FORD, Jr.

PATRICK KENNEDY

STEVE ISRAEL

BRIAN HIGGINS

JAMES McGOVERN

FRANK PALLONE

EDWARD MARKEY

JIM OBERSTAR

-30-