PERSPECTIVE ON FEDERAL SPENDING : Targeting Veterans Is a New Low : A mean-spirited pretense at economizing would kill our commitment to those the government calls to military service.

As we approach the end of widespread commemoration of the momentous events of World War II, there are disturbing signs of an impending loss of concern for veterans of military service. The euphoric celebrations and solemn observances of the past four years reminded both old and new generations what millions of veterans did for this nation, will fade from consciousness. But lately, ill will has surfaced, reflecting a mood that seems bent on trivializing and demeaning veterans’ service to the nation.

An attempt in the House to cut funds from the Department of Veterans Affairs’ medical budget was defeated, but not without blistering criticism by some columnists and government watchdogs. A bitter article in a national news magazine all but said that veterans’ benefits are a sham. Commentary writers have referred to veterans as sacred cows, demagogues and panderers. Veterans’ programs have been called sweet deals, third-rate, wasteful, useless and disgraceful. The thrust of much of this viciousness is that most veterans do not deserve anything and that taxpayers are being ripped off.

It will be a sad and dangerous time in America’s history when we allow the naive and ill-informed to lead us away from our most solemn obligation: caring for our defenders.

Were these revisionists actually to set foot in one of VA’s medical facilities, they would find compassionate and exceptional health care being provided to veterans disabled by battlefield shrapnel, amputees, blinded veterans, spinal-cord injured veterans, elderly veterans and combat veterans in need of psychological counseling. They also would witness poor veterans receiving care that the profit-driven private sector is not likely to provide.

Every American also benefits from a VA research program that has given us many medical innovations and breakthroughs and a training environment for more than half of the nation’s practicing physicians.

There is the notion that the federal government should not deliver health-care services to veterans. “Costs much too much, isn’t done well, can be done better by the private sector.” Here again, veiled by the noble motives of budget balancing and deficit reduction, critics lay claim to a body of knowledge that they expect others to blindly accept. Solid, independent and compelling data are readily available demonstrating that VA care is cost-effective and that its hospital quality scores are higher than those in the private sector.

Critics proclaim that if the government would just wise up and issue medical vouchers to veterans, not only would the taxpayers be happy, but so would millions of veterans. Wrong! In fact, veterans are seeking simplification of the laws that now restrict their access to VA facilities, where they are certain to find care that puts their needs first.

Among the suggestions that mask anti-veteran feelings is one that would allow benefits only for “real” veterans--a filter separating those who were injured in combat from “slackers” who had limbs torn off in accidents during their service. Low-income veterans who suffered no service-related medical consequences would also fail to make the cut. Common sense and fairness preclude such propositions.

Ask any combat-disabled veteran if he resents that his buddies made it back home without a scratch. Tell the pilot who shot down a dozen enemy planes and today cannot afford cardiac surgery that we owe him nothing. Explain to the veteran of Normandy who cannot afford treatment for Alzheimer’s that he has not earned his government’s assistance. Are we to deny future medical care to those who fought for their country in Vietnam and the Persian Gulf? How can a nation that supports billion-dollar battles in the name of freedom adopt penny-pinching policies toward its veterans?

The vast majority of Americans recognize that the government created our veterans, asked them to give up everything--homes, families, jobs, school--to stand vigil over freedom and democracy. Still, there are those with the gall and arrogance to “re-evaluate” the sacred obligation the nation incurred to those who served. And judging by the latest attacks, their numbers appear to be growing.

The next time there is artillery booming in the distance . . . the next time missiles are aimed at American shores or interests . . . the next time an emerging democracy, as America once was, reaches out for a lifeline . . . the next time a mother caresses a photograph of a son lost in war, or a child visits the grave of a parent in a national cemetery . . . the next time a soldier returns home blinded or without limbs . . . be sure to remind me why the wealthy need a tax cut and why deficit reduction should be achieved on the backs of veterans. I keep missing the point.