Robert B. Bluey, CNSNews.com
Monday, Aug. 2, 2004

Story Continues Below

  "Let me tell you," Edwards said, "the 26 million veterans in this country will not have to wonder when we're in office whether they'll have health care next week or next year. We will take care of them because they have taken care of us."

Edwards was referring to a repeated Democrat line of attack that Bush allegedly cut spending for the Department of Veterans Affairs.

'Blatantly a Lie'

"It's blatantly a lie," said Griffin T. Dalianis, a Vietnam veteran from Nashua, N.H. "Our own hospital in Manchester is receiving money now that has been moved into Veterans Affairs. It will give us a full-service hospital. Right now, disabled veterans, and I am one, have to travel over 140 miles round trip to get any kind of services outside of a little wound."

The Democrats' claim has been debunked by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. Bush, in fact, has overseen a 27 percent increase in funding for veterans. That number would increase to 37 percent, based on this year's budget proposal.

During a Democrat primary debate on Feb. 15, Sen. John Kerry raised the issue of the veterans' budget. He suggested that Bush's "cuts" were unpatriotic. His language, even five months later as the party's presidential nominee, continued to resonate last week.

"He's cut the VA budget and not kept faith with veterans across this country," Kerry said in February. "And one of the first definitions of patriotism is keeping faith with those who wore the uniform of our country."

But World War II veteran Byron Buckingham of Nashua, N.H., said he had experienced none of the supposed cuts suggested by Kerry.

"I get treatment at the VA hospital, and during the Bush administration, he put $45 billion into the veterans' budget," said Buckingham, commander of the New Hampshire Military Order of the Purple Heart.

Vietnam veteran Paul J. Chevalier of Portsmouth, N.H., said that when compared to other administrations, Bush had done more to help veterans than he's getting credit for.

"In the eight years under President Clinton, the total money allocated to the VA increased 30 percent during those eight years," Chevalier said. "In the first three years of President Bush's administration, it has already gone up 40 percent."

The New Hampshire veterans weren't the only one responding to the Democrats' attacks. Last week 24 recipients of the Medal of Honor released a letter criticizing Kerry for voting against a $1.3 billion increase in veterans' health care benefits and missing some Senate votes related to veterans.

Kerry's Scare Tactics

"We are disturbed that John Kerry would try to scare veterans with his false accusations, and we are disappointed in his lack of support for today's troops," they wrote. "President Bush has led the way on improving veterans' benefits, supporting our troops and restoring honor and dignity to the White House."

One veteran explained the Democrats' use of language as a clever ploy. Vietnam veteran Dana E. Hussey, also of New Hampshire, said veterans would like more money than Bush has proposed, but that doesn't constitute a cut.

The Annenberg Political Fact Check concluded in its analysis there was clearly a desire for more money. Secretary of Veterans Affairs Anthony Principi even split with President Bush when he requested more than the administration was willing to spend.

But at a time when Kerry has been continually portrayed as a war hero and surrounded by his Vietnam comrades, some veterans want voters to know that Bush is no slouch. Others, like Hussey, said it's Kerry who has some convincing to do.

"The veterans' population is huge, about 27 million, and I've seen the list of veterans supporting [Kerry] in New Hampshire, and I don't know one of them," Hussey said.

"I've been active for 25 years in New Hampshire. If he had legitimate veterans' support in New Hampshire, for instance, I would know at least one or two of them. I don't where he's getting these names yet."

Copyright CNSNews.com

Editor's note: