Accordingly, the Department is opposed to this provision of S.1501 and any provision that would permit the Veterans Administration to provide medical or psychological care to an active duty member except under a formal VA/DOD Sharing Agreement entered into under P.L. 97-174. The Administration continues to Support taking advantage of mutually beneficial opportunities for sharing health care resources in accordance with the Sharing Act.

The Office of Management and Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the Administration's program, there is no objection to the presentation of this report for the consideration of the Committee.

Or review of legislation. S. 1501. which you introduced on Juiv !5. we find ourselves in substantial disagreement over some of the specific provisions. Therefore, we respectfully request a forma, public hearing to examine the contents of this legislation. While we are mandated by National Convention resolution to support the "Vet Center" program. the genera expansion of it under section 3 (A) and (B) of 3. 1501 to include eligibility for counseling for "any veteran or person" is objectionable. The meaning of "or person" in the legislation is without definition in title 36 and we fear it may permit access to the program by dishonorably discharged individuals or others for whom the program was never intended.

A second consideration we believe justifies a hearing is the matter of personnel and fiscal resources that will be required to implement the expansion of the "Vet Center" program. By this we refer specifically to the provision of services by the VA's Department of Veterans Benefits and Department of Medicine and Surgery.

Moreover, in view of the foregoing reservations concerning S. 1501, we must conclude that it would be premature to mark up this legislation at the committee session scheduled for July 23. As always, your attention to the views of The American Legion is appreciated.

Sincerely,

E. Philip Riggin. Director
National Legislative Commission

The Veterans of Foreign Wars was greatly disturbed with the discovery of your intention to mark up the "Veterans Readjustment Counseling Preservation Act of 1987" this coming Thursday, July 23, 1987. S. 1501, should have the benefit of a hearing in order to fully explore its We firmly believe this bill, verits and/or shortcomings.

As you know, S. 1501 not only counters the intent of current law but redirects the entire thrust of the Vet Center Program. A bill of this magnitude demanda careful congressional oversight coupled with the recommendations and concerns of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and other veteran's organizations.

For these reasons, we strongly urge you to refrain from marking up 8. 1501 so as to properly allow for a congressional hearing.

Cc:

The Hon. Frank H. Murkowski
Ranking Minority Member

Sincerely,

COOPER T. BOLT
Executive Director

WASHINGTON OFFICE ⭑

VFW MEMORIAL BUILDING 200 MARYLAND AVENUE, N.E. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20002 5799 AREA CODE 202-543-2239

During the July 31, 1987, Veterans Affairs Committee "markup" hearing, Senator Frank Murkowski will offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute to S. 1501, The Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Counseling Program Preservation Act of 1987.

As presently drafted, S. 1501 proposes to delete certain language contained in Section 612A, Title 38, USC, and thereby remove the current statutory requirement that, by October 1, 1989, an orderly transition shall have occurred, transforming the current program of readjustment counseling services from one primarily located in centers situated apart from VA medical facilities, to a program primarily located within VA medical facilities.

As we understand the Murkowski Amendment it would, among other things, retain the current law requirement for an orderly transition of the majority of readjustment counseling services to VA medical facilities, however, it would postpone the date for such a transition to be completed until October 1, 1990.

In this regard, the DAV is supportive of an orderly and gradual programmatic transition of VA's Readjustment Counseling Centers into VA medical centers. Accordingly, we favor this aspect of the Murkowski Amendment which seeks to set a timeframe for the accomplishment of the transition.

Our organization has long been and continues to be a strong supporter of VA Psychological and Readjustment Counseling Services for Vietnam veterans. Indeed, the authorization for such services (P.L. 96-22) and subsequent evolution of the VA's "outreach" or "Vet Center" concept for provision of such services were influenced greatly by the DAV's own Vietnam Veteran Outreach Program which had its beginning in 1976.

-

A decade ago, when recognition and understanding of the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) problems of Vietnam veterans was just beginning to emerge and when Vietnam veterans themselves were filled with feelings of anger, suspicion and bitterness toward government authority and government institutions including the Veterans Administration -- it made a great deal of sense to position counseling and readjustment services out of the "traditional" VA setting. The logic and it proved to be very sound--was that Vietnam veterans, distrustful of government. authority/bureaucracy, suffering from PTSD and other types of readjustment problems, would be much more receptive to the extension of services in a local community setting.

Indeed, the VA's current program may never have gotten off the ground had it not been physically separated from the traditional setting.

But while the commitment was made to provide these services for as long as they were needed, a history of the program and its development reveals that all who were involved --the Congress, the VA and the veterans' community -- envisioned that at some point in time, although the need for these services might well continue to exist, their provisior. in the majority of cases, could be phased back into the traditional setting of VA medicai facilities.

The DAV has and continues to subscribe to this scenario.

He believe, from the standpoint of the ultimate reconciliation, readjustment and, if ❘ you will, self-acceptance of Vietnam veterans themselves, that it is essential for these services to be phased back if Vietnam veterans shall not, in fact, continue to be alienated or continue to perceive themselves to be alienated from the rest of the veterans' community and society as a whole. In a very real sense, if we establish an official policy that says to Vietnam veterans that they are so different from all veterans of prior wars that services of this type will always have to be provided in a segregated setting, we are encouraging and perpetuating the very thing we wish to abolism.

The national environment and the mindset of Vietnam veterans and many Americans that existed ten to fifteen years ago, that required segregated Vet Centers if the program was to work at all, no longer exists today...signs of this are everywhere the attraction of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial to millions of Americans, the plethora of movies and books about Vietnam and televised fund raising tributes are recent indications of an ongoing and healthy national reconciliation process. He would submit the attitudes and self-image of Vietnam veterans themselves have been and continue to be improved.

In short, the appropriate and orderly "phase back" of the majority of readjustment and counseling services for Vietnam veterans to a VA hospital setting is an attainable goal, born of sound policy, and should not be abandoned. The DAV does not support any change of current law that would deter us from such a goal or fundamentally alter such a policy.

He therefore urge that you and other members of the Committee strongly support this portion of the Murkowski Amendment to S. 1501.