APPENDIX Honorable Jack Quinn Oversight Hearing for Compensation and Pension Persian Gulf Compensation, and Smoking-Related Illnesses May 14, 1997 The Subcommittee will come to order. Today we are holding the second hearing focusing on veterans benefits and the Government Performance Results Act. We will also receive testimony on VBA's processing of Persian Gulf claims, and hear remarks about the Administration's legislative proposal to limit VA's liability for smoking-related illnesses. The Compensation and Pension program distributes about $16 billion annually to veterans and their survivors. Title 38 states the mission of the compensation program is to provide monthly payments for disability resulting from personal injury or disease contracted in the line of duty, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty, in the active military, naval, or air service. At the end of last fiscal year, there were about 2.6 million veterans receiving compensation, 305,000 survivors receiving Dependency Indemnity and Compensation (DIC) and death compensation. Section 1155 describes the method of determining these payments as a "schedule of reductions in earning capacity.... based, as far as practicable, upon the average impairments of earning capacity resulting from such injuries in civil occupations." The current rating schedule provides monthly payments ranging from $94 to $1924 plus a wide array of supplemental benefits that may raise payments above the $5,000 mark for our most severely disabled veterans. Title 38 is less clear about the purpose of the pension program. However, it is clear that Congress intended the program to provide non service-connected, totally disabled wartime veterans a minimum level of income - about $8,450 for single veterans. There were 372,094 veterans receiving pension and about 200,000 survivors receiving death pension in September 1996. Last year, the average pension program benefit was $4,225. Clearly, nobody is getting rich. Judging from the VA's budget submission as well as the meetings between VA and Committee staff to discuss the Department's progress towards compliance with the Results Act, it is clear VBA has spent considerable effort on the project. Today, I hope we will hear about additional progress. (41) We are also going to review VA's handling of Persian Gulf claims. There appears to be considerable interest in decentralizing Persian Gulf claims processing, and I am very interested in what all the stakeholders have to say on the issue. I want to point out that each of the VSO witnesses today will criticize the way VA has handled these claims. I hope each of them will be prepared to go beyond their dislike of the centralized processing system that VA appears to be backing away from and address the more substantive issues like consistency, timeliness, and management direction. For my part, I want to be assured that VA now has a handle on the processing. It is unfortunate that the processing of Persian Gulf claims has been characterized by what appears to be a lack of strategic direction, a lack of training, poor outreach, inconsistent development of evidence, and failures in duty to assist. Therefore, I will ask the GAO to review processing, with an emphasis on duty to assist and development, of Persian Gulf claims and report their findings as soon as possible. There persists a strong perception that DoD and the intelligence agencies are not telling everything they know. I want to get to the bottom of this, and we will hold as many hearings as necessary to solve this problem. Trust is the glue that holds a society together, and I am deeply disturbed about the continuing revelations regarding chemical weapons incidents. I would like to ask VA to provide a list of all projects they are sponsoring concerning Persian Gulf Illness - the funding for each, a short description of the project and the name of the principle researcher. In addition, I would appreciate a strategic plan describing how all of the research programs fit together to solve this issue. To borrow a Results Act phrase, compensation is not the desired outcome. What we want are healthy veterans and their families, and research is critical to that effort. To round out today's hearing, we have asked our witnesses to discuss VA's proposed legislation on compensation for smoking-related illnesses. VA has sent a draft bill to the Congress that will place significant restrictions on who may be compensated for those types of illnesses. I am sure this will not be the last airing of this subject, and I look forward to an open discussion of the subject. I will now recognize my distinguished ranking member, Bob Filner for any remarks he may have. Our first witness is Ms. Christine Moffitt, Director of the VA Compensation and Pension Service. Today, she is accompanied by the Assistant General Counsel, Mr. John Thompson and VBA's Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Bob Gardner. Before we begin, I would like to compliment Bob Gardner and his staff for the forthright manner in which they have dealt with this Subcommittee on the Results Act. Ms. Moffitt, please begin. 2 I want to thank the panel for being here today and I look forward to a continuing open dialogue with the Department on all of VBA's business lines. May we have the next panel, please. Mr. Stephen Backhus, the Director of Veterans Affairs and Military Health Care Issues will speak on behalf of the GAO. He is accompanied by his Associate Director, Ms. Cynthia Fagnoni and Assistant Director, Irene Chu. Welcome back Steve, and please begin. The Third panel represents several veterans service organizations. Today we have Mr. Jim Magill, Legislative Director for the VFW, Mr. Chuck Burns, Service Director of AMVETS, Mr. Matt Puglisi, Assistant Director of the American Legion's VA and Voc Rehab Commission, Mr. Bill Russo, the Director of Veterans Benefits Programs from the Vietnam Veterans of America, and finally, Mr. Joseph Violante, Deputy Legislative Director for the DAV. Gentlemen, I'll note for the record that our letter of invitation to you requested that you submit written comments on C&P's Results Act testimony so that you would have a chance to review it thoroughly. Before you begin, I would like to congratulate the Legion on providing $600,000 in grants to Persian Gulf veterans and their families. Well done. Let's begin. I would like to thank all of today's witnesses for their appearance. These are difficult issues and I am optimistic about progress. I hope each of you shares that feeling. The Subcommittee stands adjourned. 3 Congressman Bob Filner Good morning and thank you for joining us today. We have a very full agenda, so I will keep my remarks short. I do, though, want to stress a few points. First, I look forward to the discussion regarding VA's proposal to move Persian Gulf War [PGW] claims from the 4 Area Processing Offices [APOS] to all VA regional offices. This difficult issue, which will have profound effects on the lives of thousands of Persian Gulf War veterans, deserves very serious and forthright discussion. I also want to know how VA reached its original decision to establish the adjudication responsibility for these claims in 4 area processing offices, in spite of objections from Congress and veterans' service organizations. What actions did the VA take to ensure that the 4 A-P-Os could do their jobs efficiently - to guarantee their success? What additional staff and computer assistance were provided to these regional offices? I know that when the Education Service designated 4 regional processing centers [RPCs] to adjudicate Montgomery GI Bill claims, these regional offices initially were not given the support obviously needed to fulfill their responsibilities. Within a year or less, however, the necessary assets were provided, and the education R-P-Cs have worked reasonably well. Apparently, the Persian Gulf A-P-Os have not been given the tools and training needed to meet their 2 challenges – and I find this very, very disturbing. And I want to know how, and why, this circumstance has developed. Additionally, I am bemused by assertions in the VA testimony that the very complex problem of redistributing the thousands of Persian Gulf War claims to regional offices across the country can be accomplished by early June!! How exactly does the VA propose to accomplish this? The procedure is not described in the VA statement. These, and other related issues, greatly concern me, and I hope we will get some satisfactory answers this morning. This Subcommittee and, most importantly, our Persian Gulf War veterans, deserve candid, honest answers from the VA this morning to our many questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. |