GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Senate OKs war supplemental bill with veterans' benefits

• 55266
  

  In the September-October 2004 DAV magazine, the DAV asked the then presidential candidates the following question: Do you support provision of concurrent receipt to veterans rated 40% or less and will your administration actively work to bring it about? Why or why not? Do you support elimination of the phase-in period for concurrent receipt? Why or why not? President George W. Bush: I have addressed the issue of "concurrent receipt" for military retirees in a fair and responsible manner. My administration has been the first to act on allowing military retirees to receive both disability compensation and retirement pay. I have twice signed into law legislation effectively allowing military retirees to receive VA disability compensation without having to offset the amount from their retirement benefits. This policy for those military retirees most deserving--combat-injured and highly-disabled veterans--finally reverses, for the first time, a century-old prohibition on concurrent receipt. Senator John F. Kerry: I believe military retirees who have a service-connected disability should receive both military retired pay and disability compensation. I agree with DAV that any offset of military retirement pay and disability compensation is unjust. No other category of federal employee is subject to this kind of unfairness and it must stop. Far too often in our history veterans' benefits are cut or reduced based solely upon budgetary considerations. There are plenty of places to cut back in government--but benefits for veterans are not one of them. As President, I will actively push for full concurrent receipt.

  This was truly the last effort by the DAV and other military veteran service organizations to address the issue for the 40% or less category. In the 2008 presidential election the issue is no longer discussed, but the same 400,000 or more retired disabled veterans still are paying the veterans disability tax, just as they did in the year 2004. We are the "ignored veterans" the "unworthy" not by choice, but by administration, congressional policy and abhorrence.

  Kenneth Hanft Posted July 29, 2008 9:16 PM
• 51433
  

  "It just disturbs me and I believe dilutes these sacrifices when articles or even legislation does not differentiate between the two." What is your benchmark? We have "support" troops from the USAF LRS units now running convoy duty in Iraq, for example. If you use some narrow "combat" benchmark, it will inevitably exclude many deserving people and include a few "square fillers". The original G.I. Bill wisely avoided that because the military is a team.

  ML Posted May 28, 2008 7:06 PM
• 51314
  

  Wow!! First let me start with M. Smith, a veteran by definition is anyone who has serve "Honorably" any tour length with the military, from 2-30 years. I have known and know many "desk based bean counters" and "doughnut makers" who have put themselves in harm's way. Several who have volunteered to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan), Operation Northern Watch and Southern Watch, after Operation Desert Storm/Shield and let's not forget Vietnam, Korea, WWI, and WW II. Any place there is a major military operation you will find your "bean counters and doughnut makers", someone has to process paperwork and feed the military machine. I know several retired military personnel that would love to talk to you about while administering a contract, or in the middle of serving chow having to run for the bunker because of incoming ordinance. I have one friend that is disabled from fragments of an IED that he took while he was one his way to do some bean counting, he received a purple heart and lost over 40% of muscle mass to his right arm and side, thus now has limited mobility in his arm. Now to "Let's not forget the disabled vets" I agree that our Government hasn't stepped up to compensate you or our disabled vet for your sacrifice but you too fall under this category. Have you Registered with your local VA hospital they have several programs and funding to assist you in your needs. Join the Disable Vets of American put your voice together with theirs they are a power in Washington. Their website is very easy dav.org Not that I have to justify my position but I have 27 years with the Air Force Reserve including 4 years Active Duty working on the flight line. Of that time I have worked with Special Operations and Combat Search and Rescue, 2+ years in the Middle East in some very remote locals. A Vet is a Vet period and I will proudly serve to allow people their right to voice their opinion as they choose, but allow me mine. Disabled Vets have sacrificed a lot more and we are bound, by honor and ethics, to serve them and enable them to succeed in what ever they choose. Thanks for your voices and opinions they all count use them to effect a positive change in our government.

  Disapointed 1Sgt Posted May 27, 2008 11:46 AM
• 51220
  

  I am a veteran from the Vietnam Era and my son is in service with having done two tours in Iraq. We both have this for thought. Anyone who is in service and has served their time honorably is entitled to all the benfits that our Country decides to set aside for "veterans" everyone who serves also supports those who serve. Everyone wo serves is committed to carry out whatever assignment thay are handed. There should be no differentation between combat served to conus served or combat injured versus non-injured. There should be the benefit for our combat injured/disabled that everything is done to make them as whole as possible and to maintain their personal dignity. All vets are equal.

  GB Posted May 23, 2008 11:44 AM
• 51200
  

  M Smith your real anger should be directed at gov't scholarships for the feather merchants and landcrabs working for the Federal government. It makes no sense to reward these people for coming to work, where is their sacrifice? Its nothing more than a give away. As for unemployment benefits real Americans work and are not on the dole

  Dan ketter Posted May 23, 2008 10:11 AM
• 51192
  

  In some ways, Webb is correct in his emphasis on re-engineering the GI Bill to fit the modern-day needs of a GI who has decided to transition from military service to student. The naysayers point out that greater retention problems would be created by such a lucrative educational benefit. These are the same nogooddoers who support stop-loss and would reinstitute the draft if they had their way. However, better educational opportunities must be afforded to the active duty service memeber -whether serving in the U.S., abroad, overseas, or even in Iraq and Afghanistan. I was on a Navy ship recently - with 350 sailors onboard and found out - the hard way - their limited access to online learning curriculum along with the classic PACE programs and job certification programs is still atrocious and must be fixxed immediately. Also, more has to be done to revalue education - it does no good for a vet to leave the military, go to school, get a degree, and fin himself or herself working at McDonald's or Wal-Mart. Same thing for vets transitioning to the non-military workforce - a government who tells a vet that their veteran status isn't a factor dooms that vet's chances of finding a good paying job - no matter if that vet uses his or her G.I. Bill.

  Ken Hjerpe Posted May 23, 2008 8:16 AM
• 51181
  

  let's just forget about the disabled vets. The push to grant a huge boon to the new vets should not come before a full funding for concurrent receipt is paid for. It was estimated that it would cost 40 billion over 10 years, but it got little but lip service from the current administration and congress. Now we're expected to swallow this benefit for non-disabled vets to completely pay for a four year collage. Do you hear that hand slapping me across the face? So much for my sacrifice, and the promises of our "great leaders", who never had to sacrifice anything.

  let's forget the disabled vets Posted May 23, 2008 3:20 AM
• 51176
  

  What a joke you democrats are - send billions to Iraq and let us real American do without our unemployment benefits, I'll remember this in November in Ohio. (swing state)

  Gene Foister Posted May 22, 2008 8:11 PM
• 51174
  

  I think the idea of increasing educational benefits for veterans is a good idea, but let's not forget that all veterans are not 'created equal.' Too many non- veterans lump all veterans into the same deserving group. The truth is that very, very few members of the military ever face a real threat to life and limb. But many certainly did and do. But please do not equate someone who performed their honorable voluntary service to our Nation for 20-years safely serving as a desk-based bean counter or a doughnut maker (and yes, there are indeed plenty of bean counters and doughnut bakers and barbers and others performing safe and secure support roles in the military) with the sacrifices made by the real combatants, including 18 and 19-year old Marines and Army soldiers and Navy SEALS and others who volunteered to be and are in REAL harms way each and every day for all of us. It just disturbs me and I believe dilutes these sacrifices when articles or even legislation does not differentiate between the two.

  M. Smith Posted May 22, 2008 6:18 PM