UPDATE ON DISABLED VETS SCREW JOB

The Retired Officer Association | Today

[advocate10]

This is TROA's legislative update for Friday, June 21, 2002.

Issue 1:  Senate Approves Concurrent Receipt Amendment.  The Senate has
adopted an amendment to the FY 2003 Defense Authorization Bill which would
fully eliminate the VA disability compensation offset to military retired
pay for all disabled retirees with 20 or more years of service, effective
October 1, 2002.

Issue 2:  Administration Issues Veto Threat.  A letter released by the
Office of Management and Budget on June 19 said the President's advisors
would recommend that he veto the FY2003 Defense Authorization Bill if it
includes a plan for partially or fully eliminating the disability offset
to military retired pay.  See below for a suggested message to the
President.

Issue 1:  Senate Approves Concurrent Receipt Amendment

On June 19, the Senate adopted an Armed Services Committee amendment to
the FY 2003 Defense Authorization Bill that would eliminate the VA
disability compensation offset to military retired pay for all disabled
retirees with 20 or more years of service, effective October 1, 2002.

Many thanks to all the people who sent more than 17,000 messages to
Congress on this subject through TROA's Web site this week.

As originally drafted, the Senate bill contained a provision similar to
that passed by the House in May, which would phase out the offset over
five years, but only for retirees with 20 or more years' service and
disability ratings of 60 percent or higher.

The new "full concurrent receipt" amendment, sponsored by Senate Armed
Services Committee (SASC) Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) and the rest of the
SASC, was adopted by voice vote.

Senate leaders hope to complete action on a long list of other defense
bill amendments by the end of next week, before leaving for the
Independence Day recess.  That will set the stage for the real test in
July, when House and Senate leaders will sit down to resolve the
differences between their two versions of the bill-with the House's
phase-out plan as the floor and the Senate's "full" concurrent receipt
plan as the ceiling.

TROA is very grateful to many in the Senate for helping pave the way for
Wednesday's successful vote.  Special thanks in particular go to Chairman
Levin and Ranking Republican John Warner (R-VA) and Senators Tim
Hutchinson (R-AR), Harry Reid (D-NV), John McCain (R-AZ), Bob Smith
(R-NH), and Max Cleland (D-GA).  You can find a list of all of the members
of the SASC at http://www.senate.gov/~armed_services/members.htm

Issue 2:  Administration Issues Veto Threat

TROA was extremely disappointed, to say the least, at the contents of a
June 19 letter sent to Congress by the Office of Management and Budget,
which threatened a possible veto of the FY2003 Defense Authorization Act
if that legislation proposes eliminating the VA disability compensation
offset to military retired pay.  The letter asserted that the President's
advisors would recommend a presidential veto if the final Authorization
Act includes either the Senate plan to eliminate the offset immediately or
the House plan to phase in partial elimination for severely disabled
military retirees.

The Administration's opposition to this long-overdue initiative is nothing
new.  No Administration of either party has ever supported providing any
relief from the current unfair, in large measure because of the cost. 
But threatening to veto the defense bill if it provides any relief to
disabled retirees is a new low.

TROA shares Sen. Harry Reid's view of the letter, as he expressed them on
the Senate floor Wednesday.  "I know President Bush as well as most
members of the Senate," Reid said, "and this wasn't written by the
President.  It doesn't say he would veto the bill over the concurrent
receipt issue.  It says his advisors would recommend a veto. This was
written by staff bureaucrats.  If the President were to veto this, he'd
have to be a much different person than the George W. Bush I know.  Here's
what I'm doing with this staff letter." and he folded it up and put it in
a wastebasket.

When Sen. Thomas Carper (D-DE) asked how Congress was expected to pay for
this initiative, he was answered promptly by Senators Levin and Reid.

"We're going to pay for it the same way we pay for everything else
Congress approves," said Sen. Levin.  "Congress always has to make
difficult decisions on spending priorities," Sen. Reid added.  "But one of
the priorities we must take care of is treating our disabled military
retirees fairly."

It's precisely because the Executive Branch has failed to seek a fix for
the current gross inequity that Congress has seized the leadership role.

At a time when the country has been particularly sensitized to the
sacrifices of those who serve in uniform, TROA finds it difficult to
conceive that the President would veto the defense bill for the express
purpose of denying disabled military retirees their earned retired pay.

Should this actually occur, TROA and all other military and veterans
associations would expect the 83% of senators and 90% of House members who
have signed their names as cosponsors of this important legislation to
back up those signatures and override any such veto. But any possible need
for that is still at least a month away.

In the meantime, we urge TROA members and others to write the White House
to let the President know how far wrong his advisors have gone on this
issue. You can send a TROA-prepared message via TROA's Web site
( www.capwiz.com/troa/home/ ).  Just click on the "Don't Veto Concurrent
Receipt" action alert link, then click the "Go" button.

[advocate10]

Please contact the WH with the link provided.

[advocate10]

Please contact the WH with the link provided above. The letter is already written for you!

I am writing to urge you not to veto the FY 2003 Defense Authorization Bill over Congress' support for concurrent receipt of military retired pay and VA disability compensation. Military retired pay and veterans' disability compensation are two entirely different things. Each is earned in its own right--retired pay for a career of arduous service and disability compensation for the pain and suffering, and lost future earnings, resulting from service-connected disabilities. In many cases, military members with decades of service must forfeit most or all of their earned retired pay to receive the same disability compensation paid to a similarly disabled member with just a few years of service. 90% of House members and 83% of senators recognize the right answer and have made it a national priority to fix this major inequity. In this time of heightened national awareness of the sacrifices inherent in military service, I cannot conceive that you would veto the defense bill for the express purpose of denying disabled military retirees their earned retired pay. I urge you most strongly to ignore any such misguided advice and to help bring closure to the great disservice our disabled military retirees now suffer. Sincerely,

[advocate10]

Ping!

[Militiaman7]

Done

You can do the same though the DAV at Disabled American Veterans

Press the Go button in the TAKE ACTION NOW box.

[Militiaman7]

Whitehouse contact numbers

A phone call is worth many emails so I've been told.

Give GWB a call and let him know you support Retired Disabled Vet and for that matter all vets.

[advocate10]

Good idea!

Thanks!

[old school]

Thanks for the heads-up!

[MJY1288]

Done deal, I sent a letter yesterday when I first heard of this, From what I have read, the veto threat did not come from the White House on this issue, The White House has said it would veto the bill if the "Crusader" weapons system was included.

[Kaisersrsic]

I must be missing something. Military retirment pay and veterans' disability compensation should both be generous, and a person eligible for both should get more money than a person only getting one, but why should anyone get full benefits under both programs at once? Most of us are both Patriots and Taxpayers here at FreeRepublic. I guess I should go back to work.

Before I put the gas can down and let the flames ignite, I better remind everyone that this anniegetyourgun started a "Complement Week" thread this morning so that we could be nice to each other.

[Jumper]

Wonderful News! It is sad that many of the Nation's most deserving Vet's, the one's who fought WWII and Korea, will not ever see a penny of this much deserved Compensation.

The Retired Military are the only people who pay their own disability; my DOD Civil Service coworkers who served a few years draw both their full Civil Service Pay Checks and their VA Disability and have the nerve to think a Retiree is double dipping.... I sometimes feel that it would be only fair to endorse taking Civil Servant's pay to offset their VA Disability Compensation just to shut them up.

[surely_you_jest]

The actual OMB message, which contains the threat to recommend to the President that he veto the bill if concurrent receipt in included is linked here - http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ legislative/sap/107-2/S2514-s.html/

The Crusader is also discussed.

[surely_you_jest]

My mistake; the link does not include the final "/" mark, therefore

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ legislative/sap/107-2/S2514-s.html

[MJY1288]

Thanks for the link

[advocate10]

I read the "Concurrent Receipt" crap on the WH site. Did Bush mean what he said about veterans benifits during the campaign, or not!

I guess he is just another candidate who will say anything to get elected!

Am I disappointed in him?!

[cva66snipe]

I must be missing something. Military retirment pay and veterans' disability compensation should both be generous, and a person eligible for both should get more money than a person only getting one, but why should anyone get full benefits under both programs at once? Most of us are both Patriots and Taxpayers here at FreeRepublic. I guess I should go back to work.

What if you put in your 20 years at the Ulcer Factory in your town? You had retirement benifits earned with a potential to work another 20-30 years but an injury disabled you at 20 years to where you could not work those remaining 20-30 years either at the Ulcer Factory or the Heartburn plant across the road. Now do you think it is right for your pay to stop and for you be told to live on the 20 year retirement pay at the Ulcer Plant? Especially when you had the potential to earn 20-30 years more wages there or elsewhere? That's what this is about. Military Retirement like any other retirement is a condition of employment.

Disability payments are not retirement benifits but disability benifits. It's not double dipping by any means. They like you have paid for their Socical Security dues and disability coverage in case this unfortunate event should occur.

[Militiaman7]

Additional threads on Concurrent Receipt.

Senate Oks pay for Disabled Vets

Let's End Inequity to Disabled Vets

Administration Threatens Veto Over Concurrent Receipt

[surely_you_jest]

While I suspect that this thing was written by some military-hating bureaucrat in some flyspecked cubicle somewhere in DC, responsible adult leadership should never have allowed this to go out. (I'm attempting to be charitable here.)

My wife and I were on active duty during the last election (since retired) and cast two of the now-famous Florida Military Absentee ballots, in favor of Dubya. We are, to say the least, very disappointed.

What is really interesting is what a firestorm this has started down in SW FL, where I live, which is normally very solidly Republican. In the last 24 hours, I have been into my VFW, DAV and American Legion posts. Those guys are sorely PO'd about this. As are some of my TROA brethren in other states. The local guys are threatening to take it out on Jeb at the polls, who is up for re-election this fall, just to get Dubya's attention, and so on. I believe that this OMB letter has managed, at a stroke, to create a sizable number of one-issue voters amongst folks who normally try and see the big picture.

One this is for sure - this is going to be interesting.

[Militiaman7]

It isn't only Florida. DAV'S in Virginia are fired up too.

Any Pubbie running will feel the pain.

[Kaisersrsic]

You should not compare the veteran's disability payments to private sector disability insurance because in almost any private sector disability plan benefits would cut off completely after only two years if the person could hold any job. The VA plan sounds alot closer to Worker's Compensation, which is no picnic because employers actually fight claims.

You said: Now do you think it is right for your pay to stop and for you be told to live on the 20 year retirement pay at the Ulcer Plant? Especially when you had the potential to earn 20-30 years more wages there or elsewhere? That's what this is about

Even if the 60% limitation were put in place, that does not mean that a vet eligible for both retirment and disability benefits will not also find good work. If this was really just about vets who can no longer work then Congress then I would agree with you. Congress should write a bill that fixes that problem rather than throwing together two programs that were specifically designed to have an offset.

[Militiaman7]

Many 60-100% DAVs are unemployable and therefore cannot earn a living.