No Dodging, No Sidestepping, No Ignoring

Junto Society ^ | 12/08/2002 | Col. Robert Pappas

[stoney]

In its 18 November 2002 nine to four decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied the appeal from a lower court ruling that awarded summary judgment to the government denying retired military members lifetime medical care for themselves and their dependants. The central complaint was that the plaintiffs, who represent retiree veterans who entered the service before 1956, were being denied the free medical care for themselves and their dependants that they were promised at the time of their enlistment and subsequent honorable service. The Courts reasoned that there was no entitlement despite the promises made by the Government's own recruiters and which were well known within the Government including the Congress, because the Congress had not authorized the promises.

Although one may agree or disagree with the Courts' reasoning, and the latest was a split decision, there were millions of military retirees who were incontrovertibly promised lifetime medical care and it is being withheld. If experience means anything, the dirty little secret in Congress

[stoney]

.

[RAY]

“Legally”, they may not be due the medical care. However, it would seem the government (us) would be liable for some type of compensation and punitive damages for the misinformation and lies under which they enlisted. But, at this point, where does one go for redress of this grievance?

It seems, somewhere in that mass of past judgments and rulings, a really dedicated lawyer could find something that could use to turn this around – or maybe someone in congress could tack it onto another bill – at least to cover the affected vets and any true “dependants”.

[norton]

OK, there are sour grapes contained in this response - but:

Considering the number of private enterprise workers who have in the past few years had their promised medical coverage jerked from retirement - what's the big deal when it happens to retired military?

I figure my formal retirement will just about cover medical insurance for two and a carton of smokes each month. (note the irony)

Retired military, following a second career on the outside, are making a whole lot more'n I will every month from two different commercial plans. Unless it is clearly a military related problem (ie, wounds) this seems to me to be no more or less than equality with the rest of us.

[Salgak]

Where's the big deal ? Were those corporate workers placed in harms' way ? Were they subject to being moved at the whim of their employer, with the choice of move or quit, repeatedly ?

More importantly, does a contract cease to exist because it becomes inconvienient to uphold it ?

[dark_lord]

Gosh. Military recruiters lied. So what? From personal experience I can tell you that unless it is a written contract as part of your enlistment, anything you are told when enlisting is crap. Period. It doesn't matter how many people where told. It doesn't matter over how many years people were told. Unless it is actually written in contractual language as part of the enlistment papers, it doesn't (legally) exist.

As many, many, many enlistees have found over the years.

Also, even if you have something in writing, they can always change their minds and change the policy later. Which can be and has been done retroactively. So you can even be given a document in writing, and they can change a policy later, and you can be screwed. Too bad. Its legal, and it happens.

BOHICA.

[Frohickey]

That is why this issue should be disseminated far and wide through the media, and be the subject of discussion in offices and schools nationwide.

Lets see how much of a drop in government recruiting would happen when the citizens finally get affirmation that the government lies.

[Demidog]

Even if the Congress had promised there is no obligation here since all expendatures by the federal government are subject to appropriations. There is no such thing as a government "contract" which originates in Congressional "promises." Social Security is not a contract. It can be abolished at any time.

[Demidog]

More importantly, does a contract cease to exist because it becomes inconvienient to uphold it ?

It is impossible for the Congress to make contracts via legislation.