VFW Advocacy

1. VFW Defends Longstanding Tradition of Political Satire While Opposing Cuts to Veterans' Earned Benefits

   WASHINGTON -The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) today reaffirmed its opposition to Section 108 of the proposed Take Care of America's Veterans Act and defended its longstanding tradition of using political satire to advocate for veterans.

   "For more than 125 years, the VFW has been a fearless advocate for veterans, speaking plainly when elected officials propose policies that threaten the benefits generations of service members have earned through sacrifice," said VFW National Commander Carol Whitmore. "Our opposition to Section 108 reflects that longstanding commitment. Veterans' benefits are not funding sources or bargaining chips for Congress while they scrounge to score political points."

   While the VFW supports many of the bill's underlying goals, it strongly opposes Section 108 because it would reduce future veterans' disability compensation to pay for other veterans' programs. Disability compensation is not a government spending program to be trimmed when convenient. It is earned compensation for injuries and illnesses incurred through military service. Veterans should never be asked to finance new initiatives with benefits they earned through their sacrifice.

   The VFW also opposes using projected reductions in Title 38 disability compensation to finance separate Title 10 military retirement obligations. The organization continues to support passage of a clean and complete Major Richard Star Act, but believes Congress should fulfill that obligation without reducing earned disability benefits for current or future veterans.

   Since its introduction in the fall of 2025, the firing squad illustration has become a recognizable symbol of the VFW's ongoing Honor The Contract campaign. It is political satire that depicts bureaucrats and their pundits figuratively taking aim at veterans by proposing cuts to their earned disability benefits in order to save money or fund other initiatives. Despite House Committee on Veterans' Affairs Chairman Mike Bost's unprecedented and unacceptable accusations in a recent statement, the image is not a depiction of violence. It is a symbolic representation of the consequences veterans face when Congress targets the benefits they earned through their service. It is also protected First Amendment speech. Political cartoons, symbolism, satire and hyperbole have been part of American public discourse since the founding of our Nation. They remain among the most recognized forms of protected political expression because they communicate ideas through symbolism rather than literal depiction. Americans are free to disagree with the VFW's message, but disagreement with protected political expression does not transform satire into violence. Even Chairman Bost at one time agreed with this premise:

   "Free speech is foundational to democracy and the American way of life. That's why servicemembers and veterans have fought and died for it for 245 years," said Bost on October 13, 2021, during opening remarks of a committee hearing on violent extremism. "Free speech must be protected. I will oppose any effort to restrict it. It is every veteran's right to have an opinion - even one I find radical."

   The political illustration is also rooted in the VFW's own history. The use of satirical political cartoons was commonplace in early 20th century magazines, and the VFW regularly published works of illustrators' satire to convey the unjust ways America's veterans were being treated by the government. The current artwork is a modern interpretation of illustrations published in the VFW's Foreign Service magazine in 1933 and again in VFW magazine in 1956. Sadly, what veterans were experiencing decades ago is the same thing occurring today, which is why the illustration in question remains so relevant.

   The VFW has consistently used this imagery in official advocacy before Congress and in public communications. The illustration appeared prominently in the organization's October 2025 response to a series of Washington Post articles that characterized veterans' disability benefits as loopholes to exploit. VFW Washington Office Executive Director Ryan Gallucci presented the historic and modern illustrations during his testimony before the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs last October. Whitmore, along with VFW members in attendance, wore buttons displaying the illustration during her testimony before a Joint Congressional Veterans' Affairs committee this past March.

   "The VFW has never apologized for forcefully defending veterans and we are not about to start now," said Whitmore. "Political cartoons have long been part of American public discourse because they communicate difficult truths in memorable ways. When bureaucrats take aim at veterans' earned disability benefits, we will continue to use every tool available to ensure veterans' voices are heard."

   The VFW urges Congress to remove Section 108 from the Take Care of America's Veterans Act, preserve the integrity of the disability rating system and pass veterans' priorities without reducing earned disability compensation. America's obligation to disabled veterans is not negotiable and should never be treated as a source of savings to pay for other legislation.

   The VFW remains committed to working with lawmakers who seek to improve care and benefits for veterans. However, the organization will continue to oppose any proposal that weakens the commitments America has made to those who answered the nation's call.

2. Congress Can't Do Its Own Job, Much Less Determine Veteran Disability Status

   For decades, disability ratings have been based on medical evidence and the real-world impact of a service-connected condition on a veteran's life. Section 108 of the introduced Take Care of America's Veterans Act - House Resolution 9237/Senate Bill 4744, sponsored by senior Kansas Sen. Jerry Moran - would move Congress directly into that process by changing how certain disabilities, including tinnitus and sleep apnea, are evaluated and compensated.

   There are more that 200,000 veterans in the Kansas City metropolitan area, according to Veterans Affairs data, an estimated 65,000 of them disabled. That should concern every veteran and every member of Congress.

   Congress can barely perform its most basic responsibilities. It routinely fails to pass budgets on time, relies on continuing resolutions to keep the government open, struggles to conduct meaningful oversight of the agencies it creates, and has spent decades trying to fix a Veterans Affairs claims system that remains frustratingly complex for many veterans. Yet now, some in Congress apparently believe they should be in the business of deciding how disabled a veteran is.

   If politicians cannot reliably handle the responsibilities already assigned to them, why should veterans trust them to make individualized medical and vocational determinations that require specialized expertise?

   The issue is not whether disability ratings should ever change. They should, when the medical evidence supports it.

   The issue is who should be making those changes and why.

   The ratings changes that members of Congress seek to codify did not originate with those lawmakers. They stem from a 2022 VA rulemaking proposal that generated significant opposition from veterans, advocates and stakeholders who questioned both the medical rationale and the practical consequences of the changes. The VA received more than 2,600 comments during the notice-and-comment process, yet Congress is moving to legislate the proposal before the VA has completed the process Congress itself established for evaluating such changes.

   The Constitution begins with "We the people." Thousands of veterans spoke out because they were told their voices mattered. Congress should not make those voices irrelevant by legislating the outcome before the process has run its course.

   Supporters of Section 108 argue that the proposed changes would modernize the disability compensation system and generate savings to fund other veterans' priorities. But disabled veterans should not be asked to finance veterans legislation.

   Disability ratings are not supposed to be budgetary tools. They are part of the nation's commitment to compensate veterans for injuries incurred in service to their country. When Congress alters ratings to fund other priorities, it transforms what should be an evidence-based medical determination into a political calculation.

   Section 108 raises a fundamental question about the future of the disability system: Should ratings be determined by medical expertise and evidence, or should they become another subject of political compromise whenever Congress needs to offset the cost of a new initiative?

   If Congress succeeds in using future disability compensation as offsets, it would establish a troubling precedent. Future Congresses may increasingly view earned disability compensation as a funding mechanism rather than a solemn obligation owed to those who served.

   Congress has a critical role to play in veterans policy: funding VA, conducting oversight, improving access to care and ensuring veterans receive the benefits they have earned.

   If disability ratings need to change, they should change because the evidence demands it, after a transparent regulatory process has run its course, not because a bill needs a pay-for. Veterans deserve a disability system guided by medicine, science and the actual impact of a condition on their lives, not projected budget savings.

   Disability compensation is part of the nation's commitment to those who served. It should never be treated as a budget offset.

   This OpEd was written by John Muckelbauer, general counsel of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and published in the Kansas City Star on Monday, June 22, 2026, here.

3. VFW Chief Reminds Congress to 'Honor the Contract'

   As the first woman to don the role of VFW Commander-in-Chief, Carol Whitmore testified before a joint hearing of the House and Senate VA committees at the Dirksen Senate Office Building chamber during the 2026 VFW Washington Conference on March 3.

   Whitmore opened her testimony by taking a moment to acknowledge Operation Epic Fury and those in harm's way, then thanked the committee members for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the nearly 1.3 million VFW members and their Auxiliary.

   Like her predecessor, Whitmore began with VFW's simple but resolute message to lawmakers: Honor the Contract.

   "When Americans raise their right hand and volunteer to serve, this nation makes a solemn promise: If they are wounded, become ill or die in service, America will care for them and their families," Whitmore said. "That promise is not charity. It is the binding contract between service members and the country they defend. When some suggest that veterans' benefits are too expensive, let us be clear: This is the cost of war."

   Whitmore praised the passage of the PACT Act, but warned its implementation must match intent. She urged Congress to ensure that VA addresses unrecognized toxic exposures such as Vietnam-era burn pits, K2 veterans, submariners and others.

   With the surge in PACT Act claims, Whitmore also stressed the need for an expanded VA health system to accommodate this growth, as well as for VA's direct care and community care to function as one system.

   "We must build a truly veteran-centric system," Whitmore said. "Veterans experience health care in moments of need. In those moments, what matters most is reliable, timely, high-quality care delivered
   with dignity and respect."

   To further strengthen this system, Whitmore called for clear benchmarks on wait times and travel standards and urged passage of the Veterans' ACCESS Act of 2025.

   "Veterans should never have to fight their way through red tape just to receive the care they earned," Whitmore said.

   Whitmore highlighted systemic shortcomings in the Foreign Medical Program, sharing the story of retired Army veteran Blane Gish in Berlin, who paid more than 5,000 euros (about $5,800) up front for hearing aids and waited six months for reimbursement, only to receive a check that did not account for exchange rates.

   "Veterans overseas deserve equal treatment," Whitmore said. "We urge Congress to modernize this program and provide veterans abroad, many of whom are still supporting the U.S. mission, with the care that they deserve."

   The Chief also called for modernizing CHAMP-VA, the Civilian Health and Medical Program for eligible family members of veterans. Whitmore cited slow claims processing and limited access as strains on military families, both emotionally and financially.

   "These gaps delay care for families who have already sacrificed enough," Whitmore noted.

   The VFW Chief then asked veterans and families affected by suicide to stand, and several dozen rose throughout the chamber.

   "Members of the Committee," she said, "this is the scope of the challenge before us." Whitmore then called for written, informed consent for VA-prescribed psychiatric medications, as well as urging the passage of the Veteran Suicide Prevention Act.

   "Many veterans seeking mental health care are often prescribed psychiatric medications, including some that carry the strongest FDA warnings, for risks such as suicidal thoughts and behaviors," Whitmore said. "Veterans must be fully informed and actively engaged in their treatment decisions. We cannot improve what we do not examine."

   Whitmore emphasized the need for cutting-edge treatment for traumatic brain injury and PTSD, sharing the story of Afghanistan veteran Joshua Starks, who found healing outside the VA only after a devastating personal loss.

   "Veterans should not have to leave the VA to fi nd healing," Whitmore said.

   She urged Congress to pass the Innovative Therapies Centers of Excellence Act to ensure that treatment is driven by science and urgency.

   With nearly 200,000 service members leaving active duty annually, Whitmore raised concerns about the inadequate use of the Transition Assistance Program - particularly for troops separating overseas. She urged Congress to pass legislation such as the TAP Promotion Act.

   "When service members separate without proper guidance, they risk delays in receiving the benefits they earned through their service," Whitmore said. "Ensuring seamless continuity of care and compensation is how we honor the contract in real time."

   Whitmore concluded her testimony by returning to a passionate call to end the unjust off set affecting more than 50,000 medically retired combat veterans. She reminded lawmakers that America's all-volunteer force depends on trust.

   "Veterans have fulfilled their obligation. Now the country must Honor the Contract," Whitmore said. "Not partially,not eventually, not someday, but today, fully and faithfully."

   This article is featured in the 2026 May/June issue of VFW magazine, and was written by Ismael Rodriguez Jr., associate editor for VFW magazine.

4. VFW Action Alert: Tell Congress to Oppose Veterans' Benefit Cuts

   Congress has introduced the Take Care of America's Veterans Act, legislation that includes many provisions the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) has fought for and supports.

   But there is a serious problem.

   To pay for those benefits, Congress would codify previously proposed VA disability rating cuts for tinnitus and sleep apnea. According to VA's own estimates, these changes could reduce disability compensation payments by approximately $57 billion over 10 years and affect up to 1.5 million veterans.

   Let's be clear. Those savings do not come from waste, fraud, abuse, or bureaucracy. They come directly from veterans.

   That is $57 billion that would no longer help veterans pay mortgages, put food on the table, cover medical expenses, support their families, or support local communities across America.

   We do not want this fight.

   Many of the benefits in this bill are priorities that the VFW has worked for years to achieve. But we cannot support paying for those benefits by taking compensation away from other veterans.

   And we cannot allow Congress to establish a dangerous precedent. If veterans' disability compensation becomes an acceptable funding source today, it will become easier to use it again tomorrow.

   The VFW refuses to accept the idea that one group of veterans must lose so another group of veterans can win. Veterans' benefits are not charity. They are an earned obligation of the nation and part of the promise made through military service. Congress should Honor the Contract.

   A grateful nation pays its debts to veterans - it does not send them the invoice.

   TAKE ACTION:Tell Congress to remove the disability compensation offset provisions from the Take Care of America's Veterans Act and find a funding solution that does not come at the expense of veterans and their families.

5. VFW Strongly Opposes Disability Benefit Cuts Included in Proposed Take Care of America's Veterans Act

   WASHINGTON - The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) stands defiant in its opposition against provisions contained within the proposed Take Care of America's Veterans Act, H.R. 9237 and S. 4744, which would offset the cost of expanding benefits for combat-injured veterans by cutting disability compensation and health care access for future generations of disabled veterans.

   "The VFW strongly opposes the Take Care of America's Veterans Act as currently drafted because it asks future disabled veterans to bear the cost of expanding benefits through changing the VA rating schedule for tinnitus and obstructive sleep apnea which are common conditions associated with combat poly trauma," said VFW National Commander Carol Whitmore. "We have long maintained that veterans' benefits are an earned obligation of the nation, a promise made through the military service contract, and should not be financed through offsets, fee increases or reductions that place additional burdens on veterans, military families and survivors."

   According to VA estimates, these changes could reduce disability compensation payments by approximately $57 billion over ten years and affect up to 1.5 million veterans. The VFW vehemently rejects these provisions not only because they would unfairly penalize disabled veterans, but also because they set a dangerous precedent by allowing Congress to alter disability ratings for budgetary purposes rather than relying on medical evidence and the established principles of the VA rating schedule.

   "Congress should Honor the Contract and strengthen veterans' programs without creating new costs for those who sacrifice in service to our country," said Whitmore. "A grateful nation pays its debts to veterans; it does not send them the invoice."

   The VFW is urging Congress to remove the disability compensation offset provisions from the legislation and identify alternative funding mechanisms that do not come at the expense of disabled veterans and their families.

   Veterans, service members, family members and supporters are encouraged to contact their elected officials and urge them to oppose the disability compensation offset provisions contained in the bill.