Posted on 03/03/2004 5:55:57 AM PST by jeterisagod
Military veterans have already played a prominent role in the 2004 presidential campaign, helping to propel one of their own -- Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts -- close to the Democratic nomination. If he is the nominee, Kerry is counting on strong support from his fellow veterans in the general election battle against President Bush.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I'll be very surprised if John F'in Kerry gets any significant support from veterans.
That anger is based solely on ignorance.
I'm a retired engineering manager. I have many former colleague friends, all retired. Many of them have net worth over $1 million, two homes, take very expensive trips annually (China, Russia, Europe, etc.)
Many of them have two years peacetime service in the military. They have no service-connected disability. I had two years service, mostly in Korea (1952-53), and no service-connected disability.
Many of these friends have signed up for prescription drugs from the VA. In order to get the prescription, they must see a VA doctor. There may be a small up-front fee, but for each 30 day prescription they pay only $7.
Is that fair? Do they deserve to bitch if the co-pay goes to $15?
My prescription drug bill runs about $2,800 per year, with 5 different drugs. If I went to the VA, I could get all of those drugs for $420 per year. Should I do that, and make the taxpayers pay the difference? I don't think so.
By the way, our former employer already pays 50% of our drug costs - for free, no limit and no deductible. That makes my bill $1,400.
Frankly, I am sick and tired of hearing the whining from the vets who do not have service-connected disabilities.
No kidding? If they're upset about the budget, as Jack just said it's probably out of ignorance. They can gripe all they like, but the choice between Kerry and Bush couldn't be easier for objective veterans.
We can have a debate about whether non-service connected veterans should be included, but your anecdote about having friends who are millionaires using the system is a far cry from the reality. Most people in the system are making far less than that. (And people, such as your friends, are no longer allowed to enroll in the VA system anyway)
Yes, the copayment of $15 may not be much for either you or I, but when it when it's tripled in the last few years, it can be very difficult for a veteran on a fixed income to keep up.
Your experiences are far from typical. And it's important to remember that when considering policy.
The employee of the newspaper is somehow in a position that enables him to get what he types in published.
"Kerry is counting on strong support from his fellow veterans." Kerry probably feeeeeeeeeeeeeels that he will get their support. I no longer have enough respect for the man to thank him for his service.
Benedict Arnold was a hero for both sides in the same war, too!
He's become a skidmark on America's clean shorts.
The very best treatment a veteran can expect is shabby to none. Many will say they receive excellent care, the majority will not agree.
I'll stick with the word.
Ignorant: 1 a : destitute of knowledge or education; also: lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified b: resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence
Then:
We can have a debate about whether non-service connected veterans should be included, but your anecdote about having friends who are millionaires using the system is a far cry from the reality. Most people in the system are making far less than that.
Indigent veterans don't have to pay the co-pay.
(And people, such as your friends, are no longer allowed to enroll in the VA system anyway)
Bull Crap! Did you read the article? What is the basis for your "knowledge"?
Yes, the copayment of $15 may not be much for either you or I, but when it when it's tripled in the last few years, it can be very difficult for a veteran on a fixed income to keep up.
Again: Indigent veterans don't have to pay the co-pay.
I suggest that you do a bit of research.
There's a subtlety in the connotation there. Feel free to look that word up while you're at it.
Indigent veterans don't have to pay the co-pay.
Indigent is anyone making under around $15,000 a year. People between that and around $30,000 a year would have to pay the copayment. No, they're not indigent, but they're definitely not flush with cash either.
Bull Crap! Did you read the article? What is the basis for your "knowledge"?
It's common knowledge in the veterans community that non-service connected veterans who make above $30,000 (but adjusted for locality) are no longer allowed to enroll in the VA health care system. (Category 8 veterans). But you're not ignorant, so I assume you knew that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.