REP. BOB FILNER TALKS ABOUT "BLUE WATER

UPDATE: REP. BOB FILNER TALKS ABOUT "BLUE WATER

NAVY" LEGISLATION -- House Vets' Chair intends to include

all veterans exposed to Agent Orange in new bill.


For background on the "Blue Water Navy" legislation, known as the "Agent Orange Equity Act" (H.R. 6562), use the VA Watchdog search engine... click here...
http://www.yourvabenefits.org/sesse
arch.php?q=h.r.+6562&op=ph

This interview came to me from the good folks at BlueWaterNavy.org. The interview was conducted by John Rossi.

Interview below:

Rossie: When 6562 was initially presented in July, it read as if its intention was to re-establish what the Agent Orange Act of 1991 had in place, specifically reinstating the Blue Water Navy and the air services overhead to a presumptive exposure status.

Filner: Yes, that was the intention, to restore what was originally intended by Congress.



Rossie: But in your discussion of this, including your remarks at the July 23rd introduction of the bill, you talked about including the veterans of Thailand, Laos and Cambodia. Was that your original intention for 6562 or did you see this as a second bill, as a follow-on to the first?

Filner: The veterans of Thailand, Laos and Cambodia should have been included in the original enactment. So we plan to re-introduce this bill with those veterans included. They would be included when 6562 is re-introduced and there won’t be any second, follow-on bill.



Rossie: Then the discussion began to include an even wider range of veterans; veterans everywhere, who had been exposed to Agent Orange anywhere in the world, such as Guam, and cargo handlers everywhere including on stateside bases.

Filner: Yes, we’re interested in doing that. We will research this and, if warranted, these veterans will be included in 6562.



Rossie: So, those veterans wouldn’t be written into some follow-on legislation?

Filner: No, they will all be included in this bill when it is re-introduced.



Rossie: When 6562 was initially introduced, it was already near the end of July. Did you intend to have this bill passed in the 110th Congress session, or did you see this carrying over to the 111th Congress?

Filner: We knew in July that there wouldn’t be enough time to get anything finished this year. We wanted to get this out on the table so people could start preparing for it. That would give us a chance to test the political scene for this. We will have this entire bill ready to re-introduce right off in January.



Rossie: When I look at the various places on-line that show the text of the bill, it still reads like it did at the initial presentation. Have any of the changes you refer to been made to the bill already?

Filner: No, the bill currently reads as it did. The change will be something we’ll be working on over these coming months to get it ready for re-introduction.



Rossie: It appears that your list of sponsors is continuing to grow.

Filner: That’s because of the great grass roots activity that has been going on. That’s where this kind of legislative interest begins. That’s the result of efforts like yours, and that’s the way you’re going to be able to get more sponsorship, so that effort has to be kept up.



Rossie: We’re concerned about the Senate side of this bill. When a bill like this is introduced in the House, is there an active effort on your part to work with the Senate to get their support?

Filner: Yes, we will be actively working with the Senate to help get something similar written on that side. But their awareness and interest for this will ultimately come from the efforts and activities at the grass roots level. You have to keep talking with them, and getting their support.



Rossie: I imagine that, with a new Congress, with possibly a lot of new faces, something like this would have to be held off until everything settles down, until maybe February or later before this is brought forward.

Filner: No, we’re going to re-introduce this bill in January. We have from now until then to get everything in order, and we should be ready to bring it out right at the first of the year.



Rossie: And that would be including all of the elements of this broader picture….?

Filner: Our intent will be to have it all in one bill. We don’t have any plans for any follow-on bill. This would be all packaged together when we re-introduce it.



Rossie: Is there any intention of specifying that the ports and harbors of Vietnam would be written in as part of the inland waters?

Filner: I don’t know. I haven’t heard anything about that. What would the reason be for that?



Rossie: Well, it would separate the ports and harbors from the “open seas” of off-shore. Some of the harbors, like DaNang, sit well back within the inland of Vietnam, perhaps nearly a mile from entrance to the inner docks. I’d think those should be distinguished from the Blue Water of off-shore and considered as inland waterways.

Filner: I don’t know. We’ll have to look into that and see if that makes sense… see if there is any support for that.



Rossie: I’d like to get some idea of how this process of development takes place. When your own staff does research regarding these issues, is there an outreach function? Do you contact the various veteran organizations for their ideas?

Filner: Yes, the staff will work with various veteran organizations to get their input. These organizations will tell us what they want.



Rossie: I’d like to ask you about some of the activity of the State Department and their recent efforts of proposing to work with the Vietnamese people who are victims of Agent Orange. Do you think that is appropriate, given that we still have veterans in this country trying to get their AO-related disabilities taken care of?

Filner: I think this is all well and good, because every victim of Agent Orange should be taken care of. But I also think we need to get our own house in order. I realize there are individuals who have had claims pending with the VA for 20 years. This is a bad situation. It’s our intent to eliminate those kinds of problems. I realize that Vietnam veterans didn’t get a very good reception when they returned from duty in the 60’s and 70’s. I think this is the best kind of “Welcome Home” they could get now, because it’s not just words; we’ll actually be doing something for them.



Rossie: When we look at the ambitious plans for 6562, where you’ll be attempting to offer this broad range of “something for everybody” and will be including all that in one bill, how will that effect the ability to get this bill passed?

Filner: I’ve had meetings all around the country, and there is very strong support at the grass roots that is now showing up by how many cosigners we are getting. I’m confident we can present this so that nobody is going to be against this. That’s the result of the great efforts of veteran organizations in meeting with local representatives and convincing them of the importance of this bill. You’ve got to tell them you really want this. You’ve got to keep that up and even increase your efforts. That’s what will get this bill passed.

Sphere: Related Content