Comp To Stop At

[Berta]

This is email from Ray B. Davis- well known vets advocate-

I am not commenting at all on Ray's letter to the Pres- it is just part of the email copy-and no reason to start some political ranting at all here-

I sure didnt see this idea in the Dole Shalala report-

SSA is earned by work credits for retirement-to include military service- and VA comp is due to SC sacrifice-

I cannot imagine why this is even an issue but appraently it is now---

Then again I have not checked this info out-and believe Philpott-not that Ray would put anything untrue on his site- it is just absolutely bizarre to me that anyone would even attempt to pull something like this:

(actually I just managed to delete what Ray said about Bush-if you want to read his letter to Bush go to his web site )

"The article further states that at age 65 all your VA compensation

would go away when you start to receive Social Security. FROM the

article:

" VA compensation likely would be raised under the plan to include a

quality-of-life allowance. But the portion of VA compensation now

provided, and intended only to cover reduced earnings capacity, would

stop at age 65 when social security begins. "

What this means is that if you current get a 50 percent rating and

are paid $712.00 per month (which is the current rate for lost

earnings); the VA may boost your pay for "loss of quality of life" by

10 percent to: $783.00; BUT AT AGE 65 THE LOSS OF EARNING AMOUNT, OF

$712.00 WILL BE TAKEN AWAY, AND ALL THAT WILL BE LEFT IS THE $71.20

FOR THE LOSS OF QUALITY OF LIFE.

(another part deleted by me- full letter at valaw.org)

Sincerely,

Your Editor,

Ray B Davis, Jr

http://www.valaw.org

(Ray's take on it all is interesting -to say the least-and I dont feel appropriate to put it all here but the actual article is the main point)

-- Article on losing Compensation --

Better Pay for Combat-Related Disabilities?

Tom Philpott | August 23, 2007

Bush Backs Separate Combat-Related Disability System

The Bush administration is preparing a legislative proposal to

present to Congress in September that would establish a separate and,

under most circumstances, a more generous disability package for

service members who are injured in war or while training for war,

sources said.

Under the plan, recommended by the Dole-Shalala commission, service

members found unfit for duty as a result of combat or combat-training

injuries, regardless of the number of years served, would qualify for

an immediate lifetime annuity from the Department of Defense.

Annuity amounts would be based on the formula used to calculate

regular retired pay: 2.5 percent of basic pay multiplied by years in

service. A wounded warrior with two years of service thus would get

five percent of basic pay. Likewise, a service member injured in

combat training who had served 10 years when found unfit would get 25

percent of basic pay.

These members also would be get lifetime TRICARE, the military health

and pharmacy plan. Separately they would get disability compensation

from the Department of Veterans Affairs for any and all service-

connected injuries or ailments. VA compensation likely would be

raised under the plan to include a quality-of-life allowance. But the

portion of VA compensation now provided, and intended only to cover

reduced earnings capacity, would stop at age 65 when social security

begins.

The legislation is being drafted by DoD and VA officials and they

continue to work out critical details. One issue outstanding is

whether the changes should be applied retroactively, perhaps to all

combat-related disabled members injured since the attacks of 9-11.

But the Bush administration has decided that these disability pay

changes should apply only to members with injuries from combat or

combat training. That, officials say, adheres to the theme of Dole-

Shalala, also known as the President's Commission on Care of

America's Returning Wounded Warriors. Because the commission's

charter focused solely on the needs of combat wounded veterans, its

recommendations do too.

Under the White House plan, non-combat disabled members still would

come under current service disability retirement, with percentage

awards based only on conditions that make the individual unfit for

service. Non-combat disabled members rated below 30 percent still

would get a lump-sum severance payment instead of an annuity and

would not qualify for TRICARE.

This point is expected to be vigorously opposed by advocates for

disabled members. Though they generally are excited about the changes

planned for combat-related injuries, advocates see stark inequities

in having separate disability packages, one for wounded warriors and

one for members with other service-connected injuries or ailments.

The White House position also seems to be in conflict with a

principle of the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission, which will

complete its two-year comprehensive study of disability benefits in

October. That commission already has voted not to treat disability

benefits differently based on whether an injury is received in

combat, advocates point out.

One administration official brought another warning. If the VA-

portion of disability compensation is not boosted as much as

envisioned by Dole-Shalala, then certain disabled warriors actually

might receive less in overall disability pay than non-combat disabled

peers with equal rated conditions.

Though advocates for disabled veterans see the Dole-Shalala

disability pay reforms as overwhelming positive for service members,

which is why they want Congress to apply the changes to all members

being separated as physically or mentally unfit, there are anomalies

to be addressed, they said.

For example, an E-4 with four years' service and a 30-percent rated a

disability that leaves him unfit for duty would get service

disability retirement today of $546.07 a month. Under Dole-Shalala,

if VA compensation remains at current levels, with no qualify-of-life

allowance, the same E-4 injured in war would receive longevity

retirement of $182.02 a month for his four years of service plus VA

compensation of $348. The total of $530.02 a month would be $16 less

than awarded to the non-combat disabled member.

Even in this case, however, VA compensation of $348 a month is only

for the "unfitting" condition. The VA typically will base

compensation for any disabled veteran an average of 20 percent higher

than the rating used for service retirement because the VA considers

all service-connected conditions not just those that make the member

unfit for continued service.

Several military associations and veterans groups met July 31 with

Karen Guice, the Dole-Shalala commission's deputy staff director, to

clarify what commissioners intended regarding two military disability

systems. Retired Air Force Col. Mike Hayden, a benefits expert with

Military Officers Association of America, said Guice assured the

group that commissioners, if asked, would recommend that their

disability pay reforms extend to all disabled members not just the

combat injured.

That seems in keeping with the report's criticism of the confusion

and complexity that now exists with DoD and VA having separate

disability systems. Dole-Shalala would end that dual track, removing

DoD from the rating business. Yet the White House seeks to have

separate disability systems within DoD itself, citing the same

report. This has drawn criticism even within the administration as

concerns rise over the impact on morale of categorizing disabled

members based on where or when they are injured.

President Bush, during an Aug. 13 visit to the VA medical center in

Washington D.C., said the Dole-Shalala recommendations "make a lot of

sense, and we would ask for the Congress to pass those…as quickly as

possible, so I can sign them into law."

http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,146937,00.html

To comment, e-mail milupdate@aol.com, write Military Update, P.O. Box

231111, Centreville, VA, 20120-1111 or visit: www.militaryupdate.com

--end--

Edited August 24, 2007 by Berta

[Guest Dataman]

Berta;

I read this BS also. It's scarey and stupid. Like u can survive on VA pay. I hope we can raise a stink and get that part dropped.

Giving Retirement for Combat Injured is the way to go.

But i expect them to pass something along these lines oneday. Just now I don't think it will fly.

For now it's a Trial Balloon they sent up to see how much flack it gets.

I plan on writing my reps. If they put this in and it only applies for a few, it will expand and cover everyone oneday.

Better Pay for Combat-Related Disabilities?

Tom Philpott | August 23, 2007

Bush Backs Separate Combat-Related Disability System

The Bush administration is preparing a legislative proposal to present to Congress in September that would establish a separate and, under most circumstances, a more generous disability package for service members who are injured in war or while training for war, sources said.

Under the plan, recommended by the Dole-Shalala commission, service members found unfit for duty as a result of combat or combat-training injuries, regardless of the number of years served, would qualify for an immediate lifetime annuity from the Department of Defense.

Annuity amounts would be based on the formula used to calculate regular retired pay: 2.5 percent of basic pay multiplied by years in service. A wounded warrior with two years of service thus would get five percent of basic pay. Likewise, a service member injured in combat training who had served 10 years when found unfit would get 25 percent of basic pay.

These members also would be get lifetime TRICARE, the military health and pharmacy plan. Separately they would get disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs for any and all service-connected injuries or ailments. VA compensation likely would be raised under the plan to include a quality-of-life allowance. But the portion of VA compensation now provided, and intended only to cover reduced earnings capacity, would stop at age 65 when social security begins.

The legislation is being drafted by DoD and VA officials and they continue to work out critical details. One issue outstanding is whether the changes should be applied retroactively, perhaps to all combat-related disabled members injured since the attacks of 9-11.

But the Bush administration has decided that these disability pay changes should apply only to members with injuries from combat or combat training. That, officials say, adheres to the theme of Dole-Shalala, also known as the President’s Commission on Care of America’s Returning Wounded Warriors. Because the commission’s charter focused solely on the needs of combat wounded veterans, its recommendations do too.

Under the White House plan, non-combat disabled members still would come under current service disability retirement, with percentage awards based only on conditions that make the individual unfit for service. Non-combat disabled members rated below 30 percent still would get a lump-sum severance payment instead of an annuity and would not qualify for TRICARE.

This point is expected to be vigorously opposed by advocates for disabled members. Though they generally are excited about the changes planned for combat-related injuries, advocates see stark inequities in having separate disability packages, one for wounded warriors and one for members with other service-connected injuries or ailments.

The White House position also seems to be in conflict with a principle of the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission, which will complete its two-year comprehensive study of disability benefits in October. That commission already has voted not to treat disability benefits differently based on whether an injury is received in combat, advocates point out.

One administration official brought another warning. If the VA-portion of disability compensation is not boosted as much as envisioned by Dole-Shalala, then certain disabled warriors actually might receive less in overall disability pay than non-combat disabled peers with equal rated conditions.

Though advocates for disabled veterans see the Dole-Shalala disability pay reforms as overwhelming positive for service members, which is why they want Congress to apply the changes to all members being separated as physically or mentally unfit, there are anomalies to be addressed, they said.

For example, an E-4 with four years’ service and a 30-percent rated a disability that leaves him unfit for duty would get service disability retirement today of $546.07 a month. Under Dole-Shalala, if VA compensation remains at current levels, with no qualify-of-life allowance, the same E-4 injured in war would receive longevity retirement of $182.02 a month for his four years of service plus VA compensation of $348. The total of $530.02 a month would be $16 less than awarded to the non-combat disabled member.

Even in this case, however, VA compensation of $348 a month is only for the “unfitting” condition. The VA typically will base compensation for any disabled veteran an average of 20 percent higher than the rating used for service retirement because the VA considers all service-connected conditions not just those that make the member unfit for continued service.

Several military associations and veterans groups met July 31 with Karen Guice, the Dole-Shalala commission’s deputy staff director, to clarify what commissioners intended regarding two military disability systems. Retired Air Force Col. Mike Hayden, a benefits expert with Military Officers Association of America, said Guice assured the group that commissioners, if asked, would recommend that their disability pay reforms extend to all disabled members not just the combat injured.

That seems in keeping with the report’s criticism of the confusion and complexity that now exists with DoD and VA having separate disability systems. Dole-Shalala would end that dual track, removing DoD from the rating business. Yet the White House seeks to have separate disability systems within DoD itself, citing the same report. This has drawn criticism even within the administration as concerns rise over the impact on morale of categorizing disabled members based on where or when they are injured.

President Bush, during an Aug. 13 visit to the VA medical center in Washington D.C., said the Dole-Shalala recommendations “make a lot of sense, and we would ask for the Congress to pass those…as quickly as possible, so I can sign them into law.”

Edited August 24, 2007 by Dataman

[Pete53]

Unbelievable. Is there any info that points to this being a fact? I can't beleive that Bush is that stupid?

This may be political but it involves the VA so as long as there are no personal attacks on Hadit Members say your piece.

[Guest Dataman]

www.moaa.org has a good writeup on it.

Part i liked:

Don't Build Combat-Unique Disability System

Our sources tell us the Bush Administration has directed the Defense Department to move out quickly and develop a legislative proposal to change the military disability retirement system. But the proposal would be strictly limited to people who are disabled by combat-related wounds, as recommended by the Dole-Shalala Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors.

MOAA agrees rapid action is needed, but believes strongly that we need to slow down this train just a little, and think twice before pushing an idea that might follow the letter of a Commission recommendation, but would completely violate its spirit.

We've talked to the Dole-Shalala commission members and staff, and they say in no uncertain terms that they never intended to propose a unique retirement system for combat-disabled members. They only looked at combat-disabled members because that's who their charter covered, so that's who's addressed in their report. But they'll tell anyone who asks that they think the same retirement and compensation rules should apply to all service-connected disabled members, not just those wounded in combat.

That view is echoed strongly by the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission, a separate group that's been studying the military and VA disability systems for two years and is due to report to Congress this fall (see below). They recognize that, if military service causes a disability, the impact on the servicemember is the same, whether it was caused by a bullet, a building fire, or a military vehicle accident.

Let's keep in mind that one of the purposes of the Dole-Shalala commission was to help find solutions to the maze of administrative roadblocks that kept disabled members and families from understanding their options and benefits. Proposing a new unique disability process that only applies to a relatively small percentage of disabled members will hardly make the system any easier to navigate, and will only create major new inequities.

As we try to expedite action on the valuable recommendations of these important commissions, we must make sure we listen to what they're actually saying.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disability Commission Nears Finish Line

This week, the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission moved closer to completing its October report to Congress, tackling a multitude of recommendations from the Institutes of Medicine (IOM).

Most of IOM's 40-plus recommendations were accepted by the commission, including those concerning the impact a disability has on a veteran's quality of life (QoL) and changes to individual unemployability (IU) determination and compensation. Here are some highlights of the commission-approved recommendations:

VA should compensate for work disability, loss of ability of useful life activities, and loss in QoL

VA should develop a tool for measuring QoL, including the effects of disability on family members

Congress should increase compensation rates 25% as an interim measure to address loss of QoL, pending development and implementation of a QoL measure.

VA should develop and test incentive models that would promote vocational rehab and return veterans to gainful employment

VA should require vocational assessments in determining "unemployable" eligibility

VA should gradually reduce the unemployability portion of disability compensation for those able to return to employment rather than abruptly terminating it

The Commission also developed two recommendations addressing the Center for Naval Analyses' testimony highlighting that members who become severely disabled at younger ages face a greater financial penalty because their earning careers are cut short, vs. those whose severe disabilities develop later in life.

The commission recommended increasing compensation rates for younger disabled veterans to help eliminate the disparity. It also proposed paying a "severely disabled stabilization allowance" during the first three years after leaving service, to better address out-of-pocket costs severely disabled servicemembers face in their transition to civilian life.

[Ricky]

You better write your congress and senate idiots NOW. This is just a simple sneak attack to cut benefits. This administration has a dozen of them in the fire hoping that one of them will flame up. Write now and let them know that if they support any action on the Dole-Shalala Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors it will be their last action.

[calnight]

I CANNOT WAIT FOR BUSH TO LEAVE OFFICE.

[Ricky]

I wrote my today. I called my congress idiot's office and set up an appointment for next week. I want to go face to face with someone.