The Administration has no objection to House passage of H.R. 2116, which
contains a number of provisions that would expand veterans' health care
services. The Administration is committed to providing veterans
high-quality health care through an increasingly effective health care
system.
The Administration, however, has serious concerns about some of the bill's
provisions and will work with the Senate to address them. In particular,
the Administration is concerned by provisions:
- Pertaining to long-term care benefits for the highest-priority
veterans. As the veteran population ages, the need for long-term
care is increasing. The Administration is committed to providing a
range of home- and community-based care for those high-priority
veterans who do not have access to such services. Hence, the
Administration has indicated its support for additional medical care
funding, a portion of which would go toward long-term
non-institutional community-based care, targeted to the Department of
Veterans Affairs' (VA's) top priority category of veterans with
disability ratings of 50 percent or greater. The Administration has
concerns, however, about this bill's approach to the problem (i.e.,
"shall provide") and believes that more time is needed to understand
fully the complex legal, policy, and cost issues associated with this
proposal to ensure that it supports VA's efforts to provide the full
continuum of care to all top-priority veterans.
- Requiring the Department of Defense (DoD) and VA to enter into an
agreement that would allow military retirees to utilize VA health
care services at DoD's expense. This provision would result in
increased costs for DoD estimated at approximately $175 million per
year. Both the DoD TRICARE and VA health care systems individually
manage continuity of care for their users, but the uncontrolled
interagency utilization of services that this provision encourages
could threaten this coordination. Moreover, DoD and VA already
cooperate in providing access to high-quality care to this population
through resource sharing initiatives, and TRICARE contractors may
enter into provider agreements with VA facilities whenever
beneficial. This provision would duplicate these efforts.
- Making VA's enhanced-use lease authority permanent. VA's original
pilot was undertaken to test alternatives to the Property Act. The
pilot authority did not contain provisions to protect the
opportunities available under Title V of the Stewart B. McKinney
Homeless Assistance Act for homeless assistance providers to lease or
obtain by deed certain Federal real property. However, VA recently
used this pilot authority to address the crucial needs of the
homeless by supporting the construction of a transitional housing
facility. In addition, VA's homeless assistance programs constitute
the largest integrated network of services in the United States. VA
provides medical services, rehabilitation, and housing assistance
internally and through construction partnerships with public and
private agencies and organizations. Because the Administration has a
long-standing commitment to Title V, the implications of making VA's
lease authority permanent must be carefully evaluated to determine
their impact on this important homeless assistance resource.
Appropriate safeguards must be developed and incorporated into any
permanent authority. An extension of the current pilot authority
through December 31, 2005, would allow the Department to continue to
develop leases currently under preliminary consideration.
- Imposing burdensome and costly restrictions and reporting requirements
on the management of VA's hospitals. These changes would inhibit
VA's ability to manage its health care facilities appropriately and
cost-effectively because they would require congressional approval
for changes in inpatient beds, an outdated measure of the
availability of health care. This provision threatens to delay VA's
continuing efforts to improve its health care system and to increase
the costs of that care.
Pay-As-You-Go Scoring
H.R. 2116 would affect direct spending and receipts; therefore, it is
subject to the pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) requirement of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990. OMB's preliminary scoring estimate indicates
that the bill would increase direct spending by a total of $2 million
during FYs 2000-2004.
|