The 113th Congress is seated. The 112th Congress failed to recognize veterans of the Vietnam War. House Bill 3612 and Senate Bill 1629, to restore the Agent Orange Equity Act, did not make it out of committee. In all probability, these bills are dead and must be reintroduced.
There are 439 members of the House and 100 members of Senate. In the 112th Congress, only 126 representatives co-sponsored the House bill and 14 senators co-sponsored the Senate bill.
What does this say about those lawmakers who ignored the bills?
Veterans of the Vietnam War are low priority. We have become a liability for budget dollars. Our quality of life means little to our Congress. What is a veteran's life worth, those who honorably served country and flag? Freedom is not free.
Every day another veteran falls ill to a disease attributed to the deadly herbicide Agent Orange. Every week 400 to 500 sick Vietnam veterans die. The legacy we leave behind is that our government does not care.
We advocates for Vietnam veterans must start again to convince our legislators to do what is right. We are groups that volunteer our time to help sick veterans gather evidence required by Veterans Affairs for submission of claims. We do the leg work and meet with members of Congress in support of veterans. Our only reward is knowing we helped a veteran. What we do is not enough unless we have support from Congress.
We ask all Americans to urge our lawmakers to pass laws that will provide equitable VA health care and compensation for sick Vietnam veterans so they may realize a better quality of life.
John J. Bury
The writer is retired from the U.S. Navy and is a Vietnam War veteran.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.