White House (CNSNews.com) – White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs declined on Tuesday to provide any further explanation of a plan the administration is considering to have the Department of Veterans Affairs bill the private heath insurance of veterans for service-related injuries.

Veterans’ groups and members of Congress, meanwhile, stepped up their criticism of the idea.  
 
The administration could face a fight in Congress over the issue, as members from both parties have slammed the plan. While administration officials say the idea is not yet a formal proposal, Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki and Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag confirmed in congressional hearings last week that it is under consideration as part of their fiscal year 2010 budget.
 
“That will be a place where we’ll have a battle,” Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), a deputy minority whip, told CNSNews.com Tuesday. “When individuals risk their lives to protect our freedom, one of the agreements this country made with them is that we would provide health care if they were injured in the line of duty. To ask them to now pay for it goes against everything America has stood for.”
 
Veteran groups, after meeting with Obama and senior administration officials Monday, said their impression is that the White House plans to move forward with the proposal.
 
“Let me not make the case for a decision that this administration hasn't made yet regarding the final disposition of a decision on third-party billing as it relates to services for service-related injuries,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters Tuesday.

“The VSO--Veteran Service Organizations--who we’re here yesterday meeting with the president, the VA chief and the chief of staff, and who will return later in the week to meet with the chief of staff, can have confidence that the budget the president proposed represents an historic increase in discretionary spending to take care of any wounded warriors.”
 
Not everyone expressed that same confidence about the meeting between veteran group leaders, President Barack Obama, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Shinseki.

“It became apparent during our discussion today that the president intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,” American Legion Commander David K. Rehbein said in a statement. “He says he is looking to generate $540 million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it.”

Veterans of Foreign Wars Commander Glen M. Gardner Jr. came away from the meeting with a different impression, however. "The president told us that he would not go through with the third-party billing proposal if he felt the veterans' community didn't approve of it," Gardner said in a statement. "We made our opposition clearly known."

Currently, the VA covers the full cost of medical ailments related to military service and bills third-party insurers for non-service related injuries.

For example, if an injured veteran is treated for the flu, the veteran’s personal insurance is billed. If the injured veteran is treated for a service-related injury and requires hearing aids or prosthetics, for example, the VA covers the cost. This proposal would shift the expense of service-related  injuries and illnesses covered by VA to private insurance.
 
Veteran groups fear that shifting more of the cost to private insurance will do several things: 1) drive up premiums for veterans; 2) make it more difficult for injured veterans to find and retain health insurance; 3) discourage employers from hiring disabled veterans; and 4) possibly make a war injury a pre-existing condition.
 
On Tuesday, Gibbs declined to answer questions as to the status of the proposal, or why it is on the table. But he stressed that there is an 11 percent increase in the overall VA budget to care for sick and injured veterans.
 
Currently, the amount of money for veterans’ health services that the federal government seeks reimbursement for from third-party payers, the private insurers, is $2.5 billion. Obama’s proposed fiscal year 2010 budget would boost that reimbursement collectible to $3.4 billion, roughly a 36 percent increase. However, the budget summary did not provide information about where those collections would come from.

In all, the Obama budget proposal increases funds for the Department of Veterans Affairs from $98 billion now to $113 billion in 2010, according to the White House budget summary. It also expands eligibility to about 500,000 veterans that are not currently eligible for VA health benefits.

A letter signed by the leaders of 11 veteran groups was sent to in late February to Obama asking that he not pursue this policy.

The letter in part reads: “Such a consideration is wholly unacceptable and a total abrogation of our government’s moral obligation and legal responsibility to the men and women who have sacrificed so much for our freedom. …. There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran’s personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties the country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable.”
 
Last week Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, said, “I believe that veterans with service-connected injuries have already paid by putting their lives on the line for our safety. When our troops are injured while serving this country, we should take care of those injuries completely. We shouldn’t nickel and dime them with their care.”

House Veterans Affairs Committee Rep. Michael Michaud (D-Me.) told Shinseki during a hearing last week, “If that [third-party payment proposal] is in the budget, I will not be supporting the budget. It is unconscionable and is an insult to our veterans who've been hurt overseas. So hopefully, you will give that message to OMB as it relates to third-party collections for disabled veterans, which is just unbelievable that anyone would ever think of doing that in this budget.”

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, also expressed opposition. “If this proposal reaches the Senate, I will strongly oppose it,” Burr told CNSNews.com in a statement Monday.

“The VA was created for the purpose of caring for those who have fought and sacrificed for our country, and the care for injuries sustained while serving is our responsibility.”