America owes its veterans a debt that can't be repaid. The very least we can do is ensure that those vets - some of whom come back from war with debilitating injuries or illnesses - receive the highest quality medical care.

No one in the dispute over the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs' plans for the the Denver area would take issue with those statements. The disagreement is over how to deliver the best medical care, and whether the most expensive way is also the only way.

On one hand, there is a $1.1 billion plan to construct a stand-alone veterans hospital at the Fitzsimons medical complex in Aurora - championed by Sen. Ken Salazar and Rep. Ed Perlmutter, both Democrats, who have accused the administration of dragging its feet on the project and shelving a $4.5 million master plan for the campus in a stealth effort to cut costs.

On the other hand is the secretary of Veterans Affairs, who told the lawmakers in a July 18 letter that the final billion-dollar estimate far exceeded the $769 million previously submitted to Congress. "We therefore stopped further development of this schematic design and began exploring alternatives to satisfy the full program requirement within the (total estimated cost)," wrote James Peake.

Peake added that evolving medical practices and the location of many of the veterans themselves - spread out across the Rocky Mountain region - also argued for a different approach than a large, centralized facility. Mulling solutions that would put care closer to veterans' doorsteps, Peake sent the project back for review.

There are few things more frustrating than the pace of bureaucracy. Vets who brought shovels to Civic Center on Sunday feel that frustration, as talk about a new veterans hospital at Fitzsimons was first hatched 13 years ago. As the timeline distributed by Salazar and Perlmutter notes, the Fitzsimons site was pegged as a priority project in 2004, with agreement reached on the land price two years later.

But just because the VA, after its pricey review, suggests a tweak in the plans doesn't mean its new path should automatically be discounted.

And just because there are savings to be had doesn't necessarily mean that veterans won't get top-notch care.

Peake is still proposing a new building similar in size to the aging Clermont Street VA medical center, which would include outpatient surgical facilities, 22 nursing-home beds and 18 beds for those suffering from spinal injuries. Overnight patients would stay on floors leased from the University of Colorado Hospital, where veterans would have an exclusive entrance and additional spinal-injury beds. Peake estimates $500 million in savings on construction, which could then fund outpatient surgical centers - including one in Colorado Springs - and increased services in locations such as Grand Junction.

"We and Colorado's veterans want to work with the VA to find a reasonable and fiscally responsible way of getting the project done, but the fact is that we have an obligation to serve those who have served us," Salazar said at Sunday's press conference.

Absolutely. But could veterans receive top-notch care in facilities that are ready faster and cost less than the billion-dollar stand-alone hospital? The notion is definitely worth a second look.