Cotton letter draws ire of vet

Constituent services are the customer relations department of a republic, hearing the grievances and concerns of those who have empowered elected officials to make laws on their behalf.

But a letter Garland County resident Jerry Roberts received in October from the Washington, D.C., office of U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., cautioned that outlet was no longer available to him, warning that any future contact would be reported to U.S. Capitol Police.

“That totally alarmed me,” said Roberts, a Republican and U.S. Navy veteran who had been

calling Cotton’s staff about the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act that has been stuck in the Senate’s Veterans Affairs Committee since the House unanimously passed it 382-0 in June. “He’s my representative. I wanted to know where he stands. Then I get this registered letter. I’m just so upset.”

James Arnold, Cotton’s press secretary, said the frequency and tenor of Roberts’ calls prompted the letter.

“The number and tone of calls has been escalating for years,” Arnold said. “They finally reached a point where our staff needed to contact U.S. Capital Police. It’s only in very rare cases do we ask people to stop contacting our offices. It’s usually when they’ve engaged in abusive or vulgar behavior.

“We don’t just send these letters to anyone who’s having a bad day. It has to be a repeated pattern of harassing phone calls.”

Arnold said Cotton’s office does not record constituent phone calls and provided only anecdotal accounts of staff’s interactions with Roberts when asked for more direct evidence that could substantiate his characterization of the calls. He said a database in the D.C. office logs calls, but he didn’t provide call log information related to Roberts despite being asked numerous times.

Roberts said the severity of the letter was disproportionate to calls he acknowledged had a persistent and direct tone.

“I was difficult,” he said. “I won’t deny that, but the worst thing I said to them was I wouldn’t vote for Cotton again. I expect honesty, and I expect answers. I can’t stand this type of treatment. My tax dollars pay them to do what they’re supposed to do, not play games. I was just seeking information.”

Arnold said Roberts is free to contact the D.C. office, an option the cease-and-desist letter sent in October failed to mention.

“Mr. Roberts did receive an outdated letter that did not make clear that he could still contact our D.C. office, just not the offices of our staff that he has harassed.” Arnold said after being presented with the cease-anddesist letter. “He will be getting a letter with that clarification as soon as possible.”

Arnold said Roberts has since been given the cellphone number of Cotton’s chief of staff, a fellow veteran whom he said has reached out to Roberts, but Roberts said his phone calls aren’t getting returned.

The Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veteran’s Act would allow shipboard personnel who served in the coastal waters of Vietnam from 1962 to 1975 to make the same presumptive exposure to Agent Orange claims land-based personnel were granted by the Agent Orange Act of 1991.

That law presumes all military personnel who were on the ground in Vietnam during the covered period were exposed to the toxic herbicide, whereas shipboard personnel with one of the 14 qualifying conditions have to prove the ailments are related to Agent Orange exposure.

Roberts said he served as an aviation boatswain’s mate on the USS Oriskany from 1969-70, manning a catapult that launched warplanes from the aircraft carrier’s flight deck. He and other Navy veterans who served on ships assigned to Vietnam’s coastal waters have been asking for presumptive exposure status since Congress granted it to landbased personnel in 1991.

Status has since been extended to brown water Navy veterans, or those who served on vessels assigned to Vietnamese rivers during the covered period.

Arnold said last week that Cotton was still determining if he could support the Blue Water bill. All four members of the state’s House delegation voted for it in June, with Reps. Bruce Westerman, R-District 4, of Hot Springs, French Hill, R-District-2, and Rick Crawford, R-District 1, joining the large bipartisan coalition that co-sponsored the legislation.

The staff of Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., the state’s senior senator and a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, said he supported the bill and would vote for it in committee.

The majority staff of the committee said last week that Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., the committee’s chairman, is waiting to advance the bill for full Senate consideration until all senatorial holds are released. The staff said Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, had placed a hold on the bill, meaning he would object to a unanimous consent motion suspending procedural rules facilitating a floor vote.

Veterans Affairs Undersecretary for Benefits Paul R. Lawrence told the Veterans Affairs Committee in August that his agency opposed the bill, explaining that it was unwise to use specious scientific reasoning as the basis for adding 70,000 veterans who would likely qualify for presumptive exposure to the agency’s already overburdened claims process.

He also said increasing fees on Veterans Affairs home loans to offset $500 million in additional claims over 10 years could make the home loan program inaccessible to some veterans and drive them toward predatory lenders. He said the fee would be about $250 for a $100,000 loan.

Veterans groups supporting the bill said shipboard personnel were exposed to Agent Orange through distillation systems that processed ocean water for onboard use, contending that dioxins from the herbicide reached the coastal waters via the country’s river systems and concentrated in the distillation systems.

They have cited an Australian study in support of their contention, but Dr. Ralph Erickson, the Veterans Affairs chief consultant for post-deployment health, told the committee that study was based on drawing water from closer to the shore.

He said it has been established Navy policy to draw water for distillation from 12 miles offshore, where he said any river-borne pollutants or dioxins would be diluted by the intervening ocean water.