The Missouri Legislature has come up with a scheme — excuse me, a plan — to take casino entrance fee money that used to go to early childhood education programs and divert it to veterans' homes.

But don't worry about those early childhood education programs. They will be funded by cutting the money available for lottery prizes.

This financial sleight of hand will provide about $30 million a year for the veterans' homes. Providing a permanent source of funding for those homes is a top priority of House Speaker Steve Tilley, R-Perryville.

The House Veterans Committee has unanimously endorsed the plan. No new taxes, stable funding for veterans' homes. What's not to like? As committee member Barney Fisher, R-Richards, said, "Everybody's rice bowl's intact."

Maybe our rice bowls are intact, but I have a question. What's the state doing in the nursing home business?

We got into it by happenstance. In 1891, the Confederate Soldiers Home was established in Higginsville with private donations. That spurred the state's Yankees to action, and in 1896, the Women's Relief Corps of the Grand Army of the Republic opened the Federal Soldiers Home in St. James.

The private groups quickly ran out of money, and in 1897, the state took over both homes. The Confederate Soldiers Home closed in 1950 after the last Confederate veteran died at the age of 108. The Federal Soldiers Home was renamed the Missouri Veterans Home.

So things stayed — one home in St. James — until 1983, when Gov. Kit Bond and the Legislature decided to expand the program. Why not? Who could be against veterans' homes?

We opened a second home in 1983, and then a third in 1985, and suddenly, the idea of nursing homes for veterans had momentum. Every part of the state needed one. So a fourth was opened in 1990 and a fifth in 1993. In 1996, on the 100th anniversary of the establishment of original Federal Soldiers Home in St. James, we replaced it with a new facility. We built two new homes in 2000.

So now we have seven homes. According to the Missouri Veterans Commission, which oversees the program, it costs the state approximately $33 million to operate those homes. They have a total of 1,350 beds.

There are currently 1,700 veterans on a waiting list. As the Vietnam vets age, the waiting list will grow.

I would enthusiastically support these homes — but argue for more federal funding — if they housed men and women with service-connected disabilities. If the country sends you into harm's way and harm finds you, the country owes you the best medical care, the best rehabilitative programs, the best skilled nursing care.

But these homes are inclusive. You don't need a service-connected disability. You simply need to be a veteran who served honorably — you can't have a dishonorable discharge — and you are required to need skilled nursing home care.

Does that make sense?

Daniel Bell is the public information officer for the Missouri Veterans Commission. "It's a way of giving back," he told me. "These veterans have protected us. We're serving those who served us."

I don't mean to be ungrateful, but very few young men and young women join the military for altruistic reasons. They want training or adventure or even just a job. And they get those things. The service is generally a positive experience.

Certainly, if I were an employer, I'd hire veterans. Not because I think they're heroes — very few are — but because young people get a lot of responsibility in the military. They might be in charge of expensive equipment. A young man barely old enough to drink might be in command of a group of heavily armed teenagers. I cannot imagine a greater responsibility.

I also strongly support programs that help veterans make the transition back to civilian life. I'm thinking, for instance, of programs that help pay for college.

But after we give these young veterans a helping hand, that ought to be enough. Our financial obligation should not be open-ended. It shouldn't include elder care.

We still have a safety net, frayed though it may be. If we were to close our veterans' homes, our veterans would not end up on the street. They'd end up in other nursing homes.

We're not likely to close anything. In fact, the state is talking about opening more homes. After all, we have veterans on the waiting list. Why not expand the program?

We'd be better served if we kept the money going to education, even if that meant phasing out our existing veterans' homes. But few legislators want to oppose elderly vets. The well-meaning people who started the Confederate Soldiers Home did us no favors.