If congress authorizes the wars what difference does it make? Congress voted to authorize both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. How pray tell do the veterans get different treatment based on whether a war is authorized or declared? I suspect that your only motive is that you want to think that if it was merely authorized, you can blame Bush.
That is definitely open to debate but how the military IN GENERAL, and the VA get treated, is not.
If it's not a Congressional declaration of war, they get to put everything on the credit card and pass it along to the NEXT ADMINISTRATION.
They also get to sidestep a ton of requirements that have everything to do with being prepared for war, and they get to leave the planning to chickenhawks like Rumsfeld who is famous for saying "You go to war with the Army you have" despite the fact that it was a planned war and not a defensive move.
When Daddy Bush invaded Iraq at least he took the time to get ready, he made sure the services had what they needed.
It might not have been an official declaration of war but Daddy Bush at least treated it as if it was.
You don't "go to war with the Army you have", you BUILD the Army you need.
Likewise with the VA, Congress gets to pretend that we're not really at war, thus they get to treat VA funding as a whim.
No matter what you're looking at with regard to ANYTHING and EVERYTHING in the DoD, the armed services, the VA, the military hospitals, ANYTHING...the moment Congress officially declares WAR, no matter what the item or issue is, Congress GETS HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
When Congress officially declares war, you don't have wives and mothers holding bake sales to make sure the soldiers bulletproof vests and enough armor on their vehicles.
The other way: NO one does, but sure as shiite the next guy in the White House does.
OMG OMG OMG TEH DEBT OMG TEH DEBT AAAAAAAAGGGGHHHHH!!!!! (runs around like hair is on fire - screaming)