In response to a Napavine resident concerning his letter to the editor on Aug. 28 bashing Joe Kent and praising Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez regarding veterans, I felt more clarity is needed.
First off, Joe Kent himself is a 20-year veteran. As you might imagine, many of his closest friends are veterans, and he is always happy to meet with veterans, often seeking them out due to their common bond. In relation to the claim that Joe Kent didn’t talk to veterans at the two events last year, I know firsthand this is untrue.
I was working the Joe Kent booth at Vader, and I was there when Joe walked over to talk to the veterans booth.
To say anything else is petty and inaccurate.
Gluesenkamp Perez had a town hall in Packwood on Aug. 11. She was questioned as to why she voted against funding the VA on July 27, 2023.
In paraphrasing, Gluesenkamp Perez stated her reason for voting against this bill was because it didn’t fully fund the VA, and she was voting no because she cares for the veterans. I thought it was like throwing out the baby with the bathwater by voting no on all of the critical VA funding that our veterans so desperately need in retaliation over a few items.
I wasn’t familiar with this bill but wanted to find out more about it. I found in 2022 Biden requested $270 billion for VA funding. In 2023, the House of Republicans requested approximately $317 billion in VA funding. The large increase of the 2023 VA funding package is more than ever requested for VA funding, and yet Gluesenkamp Perez insinuates the VA funding was insufficient.
I searched further trying to zero in on her reasoning. Then I ran across several items that were withdrawn, and there I found what was near and dear to Gluesenkamp Perez. The Republicans withdrew Democrat-suggested funds for surgical or non-surgical procedures, or hormone therapies for the purposes of gender affirming care. For example, a person that wanted to be transgender from a male to a female. Also, strict prohibition of flying specific flags over VA facilities. The gay pride flags currently flying over some VA facilities wouldn’t be allowed. They prohibited funds being used for abortion-related services and prohibited funds from enforcing any COVID-19 mask mandates.
Gluesenkamp Perez wouldn’t agree with any of these prohibitions.
Gluesenkamp Perez is willing to refuse all VA funding if these items are not included and then says it’s because she cares about our veterans. Why didn’t she explain these items in her response in the town hall at Packwood.
Gluesenkamp Perez has deceived all those in that audience, making it appear that she voted no for the benefit of the veterans when it was her own personal and political ideology of her Democratic Party that she put above the wellbeing of our veterans.
Chris Granger
Silver Creek
