Posted on 11/07/2002 6:17:32 AM PST by matrix
By JENNIFER SERGENT
Scripps Howard News Service
November 06, 2002
- For the first time in his adult life, retired Army Master Sgt. John McNatt voted a Democratic ticket in Tuesday's elections.
The Clearwater, Fla., man said he voted against Gov. Jeb Bush as a protest against Bush's brother, who is threatening to veto defense legislation that would increase pension payments to disabled military retirees - veterans with 20 or more years of service.
"Yesterday was the first time I voted for a Democrat, ever," said McNatt, whose service-related heart condition rendered him unable to work at age 46. "I was trying to send a message to the president that his administration's stance on this is wrong."
McNatt is not the only one fighting President Bush. More than 50,000 military retirees spread the word on the Internet to vote Democratic in this year's midterm elections. And if the president follows through with the pension veto, they promise to go after him in 2004.
"I think the veterans' community will voice their displeasure at the ballot box. This is one of the most cohesive issues that I've ever seen as far as bringing veterans together," said retired Army Lt. Col. Larry Wayne, 60, of Knoxville, Tenn. Wayne suffers from Lyme disease, which he contracted during his service and has led to painful arthritis.
At issue is a provision in the 2003 defense authorization bill that would allow disabled military retirees to receive their full pension from the Department of Defense at the same time they get disability pay from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
At present, their pensions are offset dollar for dollar by the amount they receive in disability. Some retirees who have major disabilities must forfeit their entire pension for that reason. The only advantage to the offset is that the disability portion of the payments is tax-free.
Congress enacted a law forbidding "concurrent receipt" of the two payments in 1891, after it discovered that the government was mistakenly paying active-duty soldiers a retirement pension and disability at the same time.
Veterans groups say the policy is outdated and grossly unfair. Soldiers earn their pension with 20 or more years of service; they earn disability if they are injured during that service.
"They are really two different things," said Marvin Harris, a spokesman for The Retired Officers Association near Washington. "They are not overpaid. Their benefits are not generous."
Congress is attempting to respond to that concern. The House and Senate each has a bill designed to help the veterans. The White House rejects both.
In its veto recommendation to President Bush, the Office of Management and Budget said the needs of active duty soldiers and the current war effort outweighs those of veterans.
The pension costs "would necessarily require tradeoffs with war fighting capabilities," a budget office memo said.
The defense bill remains in limbo because of the veto threat. Lawmakers expect to bring up the issue during a post-election session that starts Nov. 12.
Of the nation's 25.7 million veterans, only 643,000 are military retirees whose pensions are offset by disability payments.
David Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, said that small niche of veterans is taken care of through a generous retirement program, which includes 50 to 75 percent of base pay, free health care and deep grocery discounts at commissaries.
"We think we've done a good job at taking care of that group of people," Chu said. "There isn't the kind of need there that would justify the expense to the taxpayer and the sacrifices others will have to make if either provision passes the Congress."
Daniel McCarthy of Albuquerque, N.M., offered a one-word answer to the claim that soldiers would suffer if military retirees got more money: "Bull."
"It's not taking money from anybody," said McCarthy, 56, a retired senior master sergeant of the Air Force who is disabled from a gunshot wound in the Vietnam War and lingering post-traumatic stress disorder.
Back in Clearwater, McNatt said he isn't going to think about the Bush administration's excuses when the presidential election comes around.
"We would be very disappointed in a president who's willing to send American men and women into battle, knowing they will sustain injuries and wounds that are going to affect them for the rest of their lives, and not having the decency to provide them with their (disability) compensation and their retirement."
I don't think most people understand what a military career entails. Service members are voulenteers. Most of them serve because they love their country and are patriots. They submit to regimentation most civilians could neither understand nor tolerate. They are provided sub-standard housing, lousy pay, (some are on food stamps), they are seperated from their families for long periods, they work long hours, 12 hour 7 day weeks occur all too often, they are on call 24-7 for alerts, their work is often dangerous, and they stand the off chance of getting their butts shot off.
Remember the Nam POW's. These were mostly officers shot down by the VC. They spent YEARS in prison camps suffering hunger, beatings, and horrible torture. Most of them came home with some degree of disability. Many of them also found their faithful wives had taken all the pay checks, divorced them, and married someone else.
For every member, there are often postings to gosh-awful places like Hopedale, Labrador, Incerlik, Turkey, Diego Garcia, or Buggeroff, Bosnia. They work long and hard for that retirement at the end, but if they get wounded, injured, or suffer other disability, the government confiscates part or all of that hard earned retirement Pay.
Absurd!
Don't get me started on the supposed benifit of shopping at military BX/PX's where savings are a sham and service doesn't exist. The "deep discounts" at commissaries are a joke, too. Yes, prices seem low...until you get to checkout where they slap on a 10% surcharge!
The commissary died when they consolidated it. Where did all the supposed savings go? (Which senator's cousin owns the wholesale distibutorships?) And let's talk about VA funding fees for mortagages. Hah! The level of benefits used to help offset many of the inequities. Today, they compare to a good corporate package—the problem is you rarely risk your life for a corporate job.
OK,where will it come from then?Just print it up and hand it out?
I have no idea what he meant. Ask him.
Sad but true..Perhaps some FR folks could offer a little freep power to help them out
I have had the bitter experience to learn that while FReepers hold the active military in the highest esteem, they seem to forget that all these active members will some day become veterans, (if they live).
It would probably be used against him as a campaign issue in 2004, to boot.
Without the threat of a veto the provision would already have been passed.
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.