pers, 572,000 veterans nationwide "are missing out on disability payments from the Veterans Administration"[2] even though they are owed those payments from their service. A large portion of these veterans are not receiving their payments because they do not know about them - a situation the White House has tried to perpetuate. In 2002, VA officials were ordered by the Bush administration "to cease efforts to enroll new patients into its health care system." The directive said it was "inappropriate" for local VA workers to attend health fairs, open houses and community meetings to educate veterans about what their eligibility and to enroll them in health care programs.[3]

The President's efforts to prevent veterans from getting the benefits they are owed came at the same time the White House was squeezing veterans programs overall. Specifically, the President has drastically underfunded veterans health care programs, leading to major veterans groups calling his policies a "disgrace" and noting his most recent budget falls $2.6 billion short of what is needed this year alone.[4] The President also raised premiums that veterans pay for their prescription drugs.[5]

Sources:

1. Presidential Remarks, WhiteHouse.gov, 7/04/04,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44009

2. "Thousands of disabled vets lack disability payments due to poor agency outreach, stigma," Knight-Ridder, 7/01/2004,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44010

3. "VA says `no' to new patients - Service," VFW Magazine, 9/02,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44011

4. "VFW Terms President's VA Budget Proposal Harmful to Veterans VFW

Appeals to Congress for Relief," VFW.org, 2/02/2004,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44012

5. "Bush calls for electronic medical records," CNN.com, 4/28/2004,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44013

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

7/08/04

BUSH COORDINATING WAR ON TERROR WITH ELECTION

In the months after the tragic attacks of 9/11, President Bush told the American people that he had "no ambition whatsoever to use [the War on Terror] as a political issue."[1] But according to a new report, the Bush Administration is now demanding that international allies coordinate the arrest of al Qaeda terrorists to coincide with key U.S. political events, so as to maximize political benefits for the President.

According to the New Republic, top Pakistani intelligence officials have confirmed that the Bush Administration is demanding the Pakistani government find as many "high value" terrorist targets specifically before Americans go to the polls in November. By contrast, no similar urgent push or "timetable" was discussed in 2002 or 2003. Even more troubling, Pakistani sources admit White House aides told the Pakistani Director of Intelligence that "it would be best if the arrest or killing of [any high value terrorist target] were announced on twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July" - the first three days of the Democratic National Convention in Boston.[2]

The report calls into question whether key military decisions were affected by similar political motivations during the last three years. For instance, during 2002 and 2003 when al Qaeda was regrouping along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, the Bush administration refused calls to seriously increase operations there. Only in March of 2004 - once the Presidential election campaign had begun -- did the President finally announce "stepped up efforts" in Afghanistan to find bin Laden.[3]

Sources:

1. "Republicans, Democrats seek political returns on 9/11, terror war," TwinCities.com, 4/01/04,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44445

2. "Pakistan for Bush. July Surprise?," New Republic, 7/07/2004,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44446

3. "U.S. military announces new operation in Afghanistan," USA Today, 3/13/04,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44447

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

7/07/04

BUSH APPOINTED PARTISANS AND CRONIES IN IRAQ

The Bush Administration publicly claims that it is pursuing "independent and objective oversight"[1] of taxpayer money in Iraq. Yet even as Halliburton overcharges for services in Iraq, its top auditor last week refused to admonish the company, instead offering a justification for further taxpayer rip offs.[2]

But according to a new report, this should be no surprise: the President specifically appointed auditors, investigators and budget officials based on their partisan and corporate ties -- instead of their political independence and experience.

As documented in a new American Prospect article,[3] the President appointed a Pentagon Inspector General and a Coalition Provisional Authority Inspector General with deep Republican Party ties -- despite those offices requiring nonpartisan leadership to oversee taxpayer dollars. Similarly, the Bush Administration appointed a Bush campaign donor whose law firm represented construction contractors to run the budget office that oversees Iraqi reconstruction.

See the full article with other examples at the American Prospect's website at:

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44900

Sources:

1. CPA-IG.org, July, 2004,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44901

2. "Mr. Glickman goes back to Washington," Houston Chronicle, 7/01/04,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44902

3. "These Dogs Don't Hunt," The American Prospect, 7/09/04,

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1427487&l=44900

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------