Jesse Scheckner
U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna is a professed supporter of veterans and improving care policies for them. She’s a veteran herself. But a new video is calling her integrity on the matter into question.
It shows Luna, a St. Petersburg Republican, asserting that if she had been in Congress this time last year, she would have voted against the PACT Act, the largest expansion of benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances in more than 30 years.
“If I was in Congress, I would have voted ‘no,’” she said of the measure, which passed one year ago Thursday and has since helped an additional 65,000 Florida veterans who signed up for benefits.
Luna’s comments, depicted in the video produced by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), came during a wide-ranging Aug. 12 interview with Fox 13 political editor Craig Patrick.
She said the PACT Act contained “unnecessary spending that didn’t go to vets” and, as such, she didn’t agree with it.
“I would have proposed a better bill that actually had legislation that put that funding towards only veterans,” she said. “I would have gone to every single office I had to and knocked on those doors and twisted arms, as they say, in an effort to make sure that the bill went to veterans. That’s what I care about.”
DCCC spokesperson Justin Chermol said Luna’s stance on the issue is short-sighted and harmful to those she vowed to help.
“When Anna Paulina Luna campaigned on voting against the bipartisan (PACT Act), she put party politics over service to country,” he said in a statement. “Luna made clear she would vote against toxic-exposed veterans — a poignant reminder of just how extreme and unwilling she is to work to find common ground for those who deserve it most.”
Since taking office this year, Luna has filed four bills — two to help current and former service members — and five resolutions to censure Democratic U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff of California over his investigation into former President Donald Trump.
Five of her fellow federal lawmakers from Florida were in Congress at the time of the PACT Act’s passage and voted against it: Vern Buchanan, Neal Dunn, Scott Franklin, Greg Steube and Daniel Webster.
Altogether, 11 Senators and 88 Representatives — all Republicans — voted “no.”
Most cited unrelated spending in the measure as reason for opposing it. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office scored the package at $667 billion in total expected expenditures due to an estimated $400 billion in discretionary spending not part of the new $280 billion in mandatory spending for veterans’ benefits.
Critics of the law like Luna, a former member of the Air Force, warned the new fund will swell the deficit over the next decade.
Florida Politics contacted Luna’s Office for comment but received none by press time.
5 comments
C Galvis
August 10, 2023 at 1:46 pm
This woman is a disgrace to our political system. Her fascist stance towards important issues help no one in this country but her devoted maga fans…
My Take
August 11, 2023 at 5:02 am
She’s a bIg UFO ĺoon’a too.
Dont Say FLA
August 10, 2023 at 2:13 pm
More media manipulation here. This rep didn’t vote for a $667 billion which contained $280 billion for veteran’s benefits. She said the $387 billion unrelated to veterans was the reason she voted no.
The only story here is that Congress is broke AF. The way they bundle everything like it’s a bullshit new car options package, you can always poke at someone with stick for their vote about one part of a package when another part was the show stopper for them. Yes I want the $45 windshield wipers on my car, but no, i do not want the $900 “undercoating” since the roads where I drive are almost never salted.
Supposing it was $387 billion for (or for stopping) military “abortion tourism” that went along with the $280 billion for veterans benefits.. Would the very upset people still be upset?
Joe
August 10, 2023 at 2:37 pm
She’s pretty but dumb.
It’s Complicated
August 17, 2023 at 9:53 am
Only 42% of the bill’s funding was for defined Veterans program. Nothing wrong with voting against wasteful spending, or in this case, saying you would have voted against it. The GOP Primary and General Election occurred AFTER she made the August 2022 comment, so clearly voters in the district were not worried. Both sides of the aisle need to look at statements like this in the context they were made.
Agree – Congress is severely broken
Comments are closed.