- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: There was a $400 billion blank check for "pork" in the PACT Act AKA Vets bill
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:19 pm to j1897
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:19 pm to j1897
quote:
Then quote it in this thread, i've asked 3 times, gotten zero results.
I've seen several tell you to read the bill. From what I can tell, you haven't done that. Start with Title VII and IX.
0
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:20 pm to stout
That must have been the bathing in money Nancy spoke of.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:27 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
What are you reading?
I’m reading from the bill. To wit:
quote:
(c) Authorization Of Appropriations.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for fiscal year 2023, or the year in which funds are appropriated for the Medical Facilities account, $998,137,000 for the leases authorized in subsection (a). SEC. 703. TREATMENT OF MAJOR MEDICAL FACILITY LEASES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS. (a) Congressional Approval Of Major Medical Facility Leases.—Paragraph (2) of subsection (a) of section 8104 of title 38, United States Code, is amended— (1) by striking “No funds” and inserting “(A) No funds”; (2) by striking “or any major medical facility lease”; (3) by striking “or lease”; and (4) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: “(B) No funds may be appropriated for any fiscal year, and the Secretary may not obligate or expend funds (other than for advance planning and design), for any major medical facility lease unless the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of the House of Representatives each adopt a resolution approving the lease.”
quote:
c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.-There is authorized to be appropriated to the Fund for fiscal year 2023 and each subsequent fiscal year such sums as are necessary to increase funding, over the fiscal year 2021 level, for investment in- (1) the delivery of veterans' health care associated with exposure to environmental hazards in the active military, naval, air, or space service in programs administered by the Under Secretary for Health; (2) any expenses incident to the delivery of veterans' health care and benefits associated with exposure to environmental hazards in the active military, naval, air, or space service, including administrative expenses, such as information technology and claims processing and appeals, and excluding leases as authorized or approved under section 8104 of this title; and (3) medical and other research relating to exposure to environmental hazards.
Your turn.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:28 pm to TheSocialGadfly
quote:
Your turn.
See above.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:38 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
See above.
Quote the passage(s) specifically and explain how it/they constitute pork spending.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:42 pm to TheSocialGadfly
quote:
Quote the passage(s) specifically and explain how it/they constitute pork spending.
FFS.
Did you read Title VII?
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:47 pm to Eurocat
How about any bills over a certain amount be live debated by Congress on tv.
That way you can hear both sides' stories without relying on lying news networks and over emotional leftist comedians.
That way you can hear both sides' stories without relying on lying news networks and over emotional leftist comedians.
This post was edited on 8/1/22 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:50 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
FFS. Did you read Title VII?
Yes. Title VII funds the improvement of claims evaluations and various treatment facilities, both of which relate to the treatment and compensation of veterans who were exposed to toxin burn pits, and both of which were in the bill that Republicans had previously approved.
Since the claim is that Democrats added pork to the newer version, I’m asking you to quote the added pork which compelled Republicans to oppose the bill.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:54 pm to TheSocialGadfly
quote:
Yes. Title VII funds the improvement of claims evaluations and various treatment facilities, both of which relate to the treatment and compensation of veterans who were exposed to toxin burn pits, and both of which were in the bill that Republicans had previously approved.
Are you familiar with how the VA operates?
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:54 pm to td01241
Nasty Nancy said it best
“We have to pass it first before we can read it”
“We have to pass it first before we can read it”
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:57 pm to TheSocialGadfly
quote:
Yes. Title VII funds the improvement of claims evaluations and various treatment facilities, both of which relate to the treatment and compensation of veterans who were exposed to toxin burn pits, and both of which were in the bill that Republicans had previously approved.
Yeah, this right here is your problem. The funding can be used to directly benefit exposed veterans. It can also be used for whatever the frick the VA can claim "improves" their processes.
I don't know how much experience you have with the VA and, more specifically, how they've handled burn pit exposure, but I'm going on 9 years.
I'm out of good faith that they'll not use the funding any way they see fit, which is exactly what the bill allows for.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 1:58 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Are you familiar with how the VA operates?
For the sake of argument, let’s assume that I don’t even know what the VA is. Great! So now that we’ve gotten that behind us, let’s now attempt to resolve whether the new bill one or more provisions that were snuck in which grants a $400B blank check for pork spending that’s unrelated to the treatment and compensation of veterans who were exposed to toxic burn pits.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 2:00 pm to TheSocialGadfly
quote:
For the sake of argument, let’s assume that I don’t even know what the VA is. Great!
In that case, you ought to take a knee here.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 2:02 pm to WaltWhite504
quote:
Trump was the one calling him lying Ted with no context. Where was your defense at that time?
What does this bill have to do with Trump? Stay on topic, retard.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 2:06 pm to TheSocialGadfly
The language of the bill doesn't necessarily need to be changed in order for the level of support to change. I don't know why the Republicans aren't doing a better job of trying to clarify what they mean by "snuck in."
Toomey is claiming Schumer said he would allow amendments when the bill would be returned to the Senate after the House made their adjustment to the language. Toomey's language would cap mandatory spending unrelated to veteran healthcare. I haven't seen any documentation of Schumer agreeing to this but Senators always tell each other things in the chamber that aren't recorded by the clerks.
I don't know how the procedure played out last week, but if Toomey's amendment was tabled and not put up for vote by Schumer, then the Republicans would technically be accurate in their claim that a ton of pork was "snuck in," since they didn't get a chance to amend the language before it was put up for final vote.
Toomey is claiming Schumer said he would allow amendments when the bill would be returned to the Senate after the House made their adjustment to the language. Toomey's language would cap mandatory spending unrelated to veteran healthcare. I haven't seen any documentation of Schumer agreeing to this but Senators always tell each other things in the chamber that aren't recorded by the clerks.
I don't know how the procedure played out last week, but if Toomey's amendment was tabled and not put up for vote by Schumer, then the Republicans would technically be accurate in their claim that a ton of pork was "snuck in," since they didn't get a chance to amend the language before it was put up for final vote.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 2:08 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
In that case, you ought to take a knee here.
I’m not saying that I don’t know anything about the VA. I’m merely proposing that we assume as much so that we can focus on the topic at hand.
What matters is what’s prescribed in the bill—not whether some random guy on the internet knows the inner-workings of the VA. For whatever it’s worth, I retire from the military in September, and I’m currently working with the VA on obtaining a disability rating. But that’s altogether irrelevant because I’m not the topic in focus; rather, the bill is.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 2:11 pm to TheSocialGadfly
quote:
I’m not saying that I don’t know anything about the VA. I’m merely proposing that we assume as much so that we can focus on the topic at hand.
Why? Your experience, or lack thereof, with the organization would explain your misunderstanding of the bill.
quote:
What matters is what’s prescribed in the bill—not whether some random guy on the internet knows the inner-workings of the VA. For whatever it’s worth, I retire from the military in September, and I’m currently working with the VA on obtaining a disability rating. But that’s altogether irrelevant because I’m not the topic in focus; rather, the bill is.
No, what matters is people who are using exposed veterans to gain political points for the upcoming midterms. As one of those exposed veterans, I find the political theater that "Republicans don't care about veterans" to be disgusting.
And, I've seen nothing from you or anyone else that shows how Cruz is wrong on this one.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 2:14 pm to stout
Yeah I heard Dems touting it was pork free only to find out they just put in 400 Billion and put names on the pork projects after.
fricking liars and clowns.
fricking liars and clowns.
Posted on 8/1/22 at 2:14 pm to theOG
quote:I was thinking the same thing. I mean, if anyone deserves the money, it's the vets. Well, behind the people that worked for it. But if you had a million vets to split the put, that's almost the post-tax equivalent of $1,000,000 each.
How is that money being spent? Paid directly to vets exposed to burn pits in settlement for their injuries?
Posted on 8/1/22 at 2:22 pm to VolcanicTiger
quote:
I was thinking the same thing. I mean, if anyone deserves the money, it's the vets. Well, behind the people that worked for it. But if you had a million vets to split the put, that's almost the post-tax equivalent of $1,000,000 each.
This is exactly what would happen if this was actually about veterans, rather than government bloat and political self-interest.
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News