Bush, Republicans losing support of retired veterans

Knight Ridder ^ | 07-28-03

[Brian S]

Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - President Bush and his Republican Party are facing a political backlash from an unlikely group - retired veterans.

Normally Republican, many retired veterans are mad that Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress are blocking remedies to two problems with health and pension benefits. They say they feel particularly betrayed by Bush, who appealed to them in his 2000 campaign, and who vowed on the eve of his inauguration that "promises made to our veterans will be promises kept."

"He pats us on the back with his speeches and stabs us in the back with his actions," said Charles A. Carter of Shawnee, Okla., a retired Navy senior chief petty officer. "I will vote non-Republican in a heart beat if it continues as is."

"I feel betrayed," said Raymond C. Oden Jr., a retired Air Force Chief Master Sergeant now living in Abilene, Texas.

Many veterans say they will not vote for Bush or any Republican in 2004 and are considering voting for a Democrat for the first time. Others say they will sit out the election, angry with Bush and Republicans but unwilling to support Democrats, whom they say are no better at keeping promises to veterans. Some say they will still support Bush and his party despite their ire.

While there are no recent polls to measure veterans' political leanings, any significant erosion of support for Bush and Republicans could hurt in a close election. It could be particularly troublesome in states such as Florida that are politically divided and crowded with military retirees.

Registered Republican James Cook, who retired to Fort Walton Beach, Fla., after 24 years in the Air Force, said he is abandoning a party that he said abandoned him. "Bush is a liar," he said. "The Republicans in Congress, with very few exceptions, are gutless party lapdogs who listen to what puts money in their own pockets or what will get them re-elected."

Veterans have two gripes.

One is a longstanding complaint that some disabled vets, in effect, have to pay their own disability benefits out of their retirement pay through a law they call the Disabled Veterans Tax.

Since 1891, anyone retiring after a full military career has had their retirement pay reduced dollar for dollar for any Veterans Administration checks they get for a permanent service-related disability. However, a veteran who served a two-or-four-year tour does not have a similar reduction in Social Security or private pension.

A majority of members of Congress, from both parties, wants to change the law. A House proposal by Rep. Jim Marshall, D-Ga., has 345 co-sponsors.

But it would cost as much as $5 billion a year to expand payments to 670,000 disabled veterans, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld earlier this month told lawmakers that the president would veto any bill including the change.

The proposal is stuck in committee. A recent effort to bring it to the full House of Representatives failed, in part because only one Republican signed the petition.

"The cost is exorbitant. And we are dealing with a limited budget," said Harald Stavenas, a spokesman for the House Armed Services Committee.

The second complaint is over medical care. After decades of promising free medical care for life to anyone who served for 20 years, the government in the 1990s abandoned the promise in favor of a new system called Tricare. The Tricare system provides medical care, but requires veterans to pay a deductible and does not cover dental, hearing or vision care.

A group of military retirees challenged the government in a class-action lawsuit, won a first round, then were seriously disappointed when Bush allowed the government to appeal. Government won the next legal round.

"I voted for the president because of the promises," said Floyd Sears, a retired Air Force master sergeant in Biloxi, Miss. "But as far as I can tell, he has done nothing. In fact, his actions have been detrimental to the veterans and retired veterans. I'm very disappointed about the broken promise on medical care."

Stavenas said House and Senate negotiators were working this week on proposals to address the veterans' two specific complaints. He added that Congress has increased spending for veterans' benefits, including a 5 percent increase next year for the Veterans Health Administration.

Christine Iverson, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said: "The Bush administration and the Republican Congress have taken and will continue to take steps to enhance benefits for our veterans."

Not all military retirees will vote against Republicans, of course. Some, like retired Air Force Lt. Col. Gene DiBartolo of Tampa, will vote for Bush again gladly.

Though he believes his fellow veterans have a just complaint, he said the government simply cannot "do everything."

As for Bush, he said, "he has restored honor and dignity to this nation ...

"It would take a lot more than this issue to dissuade me from my support of this man."

[harpu]

"Their medical care sucks at V.A. Hospitals and MOST must pay for their own insurance because of this and money is not easily found by them for this. We really have screwed the Vet." NO SHIT, DIPSHIT!

I've been a Vet since '66 and it is no worse today than it was in '66. YOUR "Blame it on Bush" shit is just so much BS!

[Notforprophet]

LOL

[caboonia]

If you want to know the real truth about TRICARE you will not get from a DOD website. Go to this one instead, this is written by real beneficiaries of TRICARE:

http://rebel.212.net/mhcrg/MRGRGwhitepaper.htm

[RightWhale]

Stereo-typing us as welfare recipients kind off chaffs our hides

The descendants of my ancestors who fought in the Revolutionary War still receive their gov't stipend. I believe it is $12 per year for each of 8 families. They all vote Democrat.

[exodus]

Fred Mertz - This Rummy guy is a major part of the problem. I haven't paid a dime to Tricare and don't plan to either. I'll just die young.
exodus - Rumsfeld is a flunky. Rumsfeld only does or says things that he has permission to do or say. President Bush is the one who said he would veto veteran benefits if Congress passed them, just as Bush is the one who said he would sign a bill to extend the "assault weapon" ban.
Squantos - Hmmmmm ???........my secret decoder ring must be busted.....splain dat for me again if ya have the time. Stay Safe !
***************

Sure, Squantos.

I mean that Rumsfeld is not in charge. His position is as a follower of his political leader, not as the one who makes the decisions. Fred Mertz said that Rumsfeld was a problem; I pointed out that Rumsfeld is just following orders.

Rumsfeld serves at the pleasure of Bush.

Rumsfeld does not do or say anything that would anger his boss.

[Squantos]

OK.....understand now. But I have to say that I believe that the singular mistake being made right now buy this administration is that they are passing laws and EO's that in the hands of adults who will use them responsibly is OK but they assume that this nation will never experience another Clintonista regime and with that understood we are treading on thin ice. The next band of sedition bent polidiots in office will use such power to put the last nail in the constitutions coffin IMHO.

Rummy aside the founders knew such would occur but each pack of power mongers thinks they have a better way..............

Stay Safe

[Retired_Disabled_Military]

"The descendants of my ancestors who fought in the Revolutionary War still receive their gov't stipend. I believe it is $12 per year for each of 8 families. They all vote Democrat."

Horse Puckey. They must have been American Indians, or a mercenary. A couple of dozen pensioners from the Spanish-American War are the oldest living recipients (about $900 anually) of veteran benefits. They all vote the Bull-Moose party ticket....

[RightWhale]

They must have been American Indians, or a mercenary

It's public record. They still receive the stipends. Massachusetts and New York.

[Retired_Disabled_Military]

"Thanks for your service but I'm not buying it. I think a law that treats military retirees differently from civiliann federal retirees is a stupid law."

But that's the whole point!! We are already treated quite diffeently than civilian federal employees! We have fewer and poorer benefits, and while on active duty, much lower pay and at times abhorent living conditions.

Give us the same benefits as Federal Employees get, and this issue goes away.

My father is retired military, and my mother is retired from the postal service. They use my mother's Federal Employee Healthcare Benefit Program over my father's Tricare benefits because almost no doctor's where they live accept Tricare, and the Federal Employee benefits are much broader. (I can tell you about veteran's that think Tricare is the best thing since sliced bread, but they invariably live in an area with a large veteran population).

[Retired_Disabled_Military]

I don't know what your point is by posting all this Tricare stuff. I live it in first person.

In the Dallas area doctor's don't accept new Tricare patients, if they take them at all. I can drive 30 miles and get a doctor for me, but I can't even do that for my wife and children

You might as well tell me that moon rocks sell for over a million dollars an ounce, and show me the moon in the sky.

Veterans can't benefit from healthcare if it's not available in their area, and for about 50% of them, it's not available because Tricare only pays about 30 cents on the dollar for doctors fees.

[Retired_Disabled_Military]

"It's public record. They still receive the stipends. Massachusetts and New York."

Then it's not a federal benefit. Kind of a non-sequitor, don't you think?

[RightWhale]

Sure, it's Federal. They live in Mass and NY.

[Retired_Disabled_Military]

"Sure, it's Federal. They live in Mass and NY.

Now you're being disingenuous and deliberately obtuse.

You're not going to rattle a hard-core conservative/Republican like myself, but it is off the cuff, dismissive remarks that drive the fence sitters to vote Democrat, fearing the callousness of the far right wing and and presumed shallowness of conservatives in general.

[RightWhale]

The heirs receive the Federal stipend for service in the Revolutionary War. They were also given a few acres of farmland that they still farm. The stipend doesn't go as far as it used to, but do they complain? No.

[VRWC_minion]

it's not available because Tricare only pays about 30 cents on the dollar for doctors fees.

Whent the "promise" was made I assume most people didn't have coverage for doctors, only major medical. When I was a kid 30 years ago my mom worked for a GP and no one had insurance for his services. Assuming that the promise made applied to all medical including dental is a stretch isn't it ?

[Retired_Disabled_Military]

"Whent the "promise" was made I assume most people didn't have coverage for doctors, only major medical. When I was a kid 30 years ago my mom worked for a GP and no one had insurance for his services. Assuming that the promise made applied to all medical including dental is a stretch isn't it?"

We are kind of mixing two issues. But they blur together unless you are actively following them

The first issue, is Tricare which is riddled with problems, unless you live in an area with plenty of military around, then it is a pretty good deal.
But MANY retired people using Tricare wind up paying the doctor out of pocket and then get reimbursed from Tricare for only 30-40% of the bill, because the doctors won't accept the Tricare 'assignment'.

The second issue is the one about "promised free lifetime healthcare". There is no doubt that complete and universal healthcare was promised to WWII and Korean era veterans. It's in writing, but the courts found these written promises not to be binding on the government. Plus, these veterans were given this type of healthcare from 1947 until 1995. Any reasonable person would conclude that this type of healthcare was what was promised, after all, it is what ALL retirees were getting. One could see it everytime you went to the base hospital.
Then they went through 2 rounds of base closures, and a lot of base hospitals closed their doors. To top that off, Clinton told the over 65 retirees that they couldn't even go to the open bases/hospitals for treatment anymore. One day you can go to Walter Reed or Bethesda if you have a life threatening problem, the next you are persona non grata at ANY Military Treatment Facility.
The WWII vets took this to court, and after 5 years won a favorable decision, that their rights were unconstitutionally taken away.

Where Bush garners the ire of veterans is that he let the Justice Department appeal the decision, instead of just restoring what the WWII veterans had for decades, but Clinton took away.

I'm not a WWII or Korean vet, and I have nothing personal to gain, but these men have been wronged by the last two administrations.

[VRWC_minion]

I guess I'm still missing the main gripe. If the retired military is receiving medical care paid for by either TriCare, Medicare or by using military hospitals, how does that break the promise of free health care for life.

Second, at the time the promise was made, no one but no one considered that any insurance plan would cover anything but major medical. Were the vets at the time under the impression that they would never have to spend a dime on any health care costs ? Not even aspirin ? I'm finding that a bit hard to swallow.

From what I have gotten from thsi discussion is that the Gov't had provided health care as promised. Its just not as good as what current vets want. It might be the best plan in the world but yet its not good enough, is that about it ?

[caboonia]

The Retired Military were promised health care. They kept their part of the bargain, they earned it.

It boils down to if you can't find a doctor who will see you under TRICARE then you have no healthcare. If you can't use an Military Treatment Facility because there is no space available, you have no healthcare. Also while they were on active duty their pay was low, it was always cited to them that the benefits of healthcare after retirement was part of the reason. It was called "Deferred Compensation". Well they got low pay, now they are having a hard time getting healthcare they earned. One thing must be pointed out it was under Clinton that Tricare came into being. Prior to Clinton there was a very good healthcare plan called CHAMPUS. They keep saying that TRICARE is like CHAMPUS, it is not. CHAMPUS worked, it was also cheaper to run, TRICARE is a for profit driven program run by contractors. There is money to be made in Military Healthcare, problem is it doesn't get used on the patients.

President Bush campaigned on "A promise made is a promise kept" he sought out the Retired Military and solicited their support with saying he understood their plight and would help. So far he hasn't kept his part of the bargain. That's why so many are upset.

[VRWC_minion]

It is your claim that no retired military are receiving health care ?