Jump to content

Ask Your VA   Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
 Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • homepage-banner-2024.png

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Comp To Stop At

Rate this question


Berta

Question

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 by Berta

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 38
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

Guest Dataman

Too soon for Bus Rides. Go visit your Rep in person when they are in Town. Bring this up (have info to give them printed out).

More than likely it won't fly. But the DoD Disability process is slow and stingy. It needs change. VA does a better joy of it.

I would like to see anyone hurt in Combat to get paid at rate they are getting paid until VA determines the disability amount. Keep them on Active Duty until then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder
http://www.pccww.gov/ I just found this website that includes committee and sub comittee reports. Interesting reads. Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors cg

For my children, my God sent husband and my Hadit family of veterans, I carry on.

God Bless A m e r i c a, Her Veterans and their Families!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what i see with this bill is he is offering a little money to the young guys and taking a lot more aways for the old guys... trying to pit the young vets against the old vets... sure more money for the combat vets and to pay for it take away the money from the older vets... how many guys are 65 already? Or maybe its just to confuse the public make he look like a hero helping the young vets but slipping in a poison pill for the old vets..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys the lump sum thing and the firing up of my own commission was a joke!!!! hahahahahahaha - I do not think this thing is going to fly unless they somehow convince the congress idiots that it will also make more and new money available for their pork projects - which is how they keep their power. Pork is how they maintain their power and control over us pork eaters. Bess go see your village idiot the next time he is in town. Just mention that such a move would be seen as unfair by the welfare crowd and he/she will surely can it. Face it, there are a lot more within the welfare crowd than us ole vets and widow/widowers.

Edited by Ricky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

Those who are not involved with SSA or SDI or the other "welfare" programs consider the whole package to be welfare or "on the dole". Many also believe that those "on the dole" are there somehow by their own fault.

Politicians have a major fiscal problem now, and it will just get worse. It seems that as the "babyboomers" retire, the cost of all the "welfare" programs climbs to levels that threaten the governments ability to:

Fund "Pork Barrel Programs/projects"

Borrow money from the SS funds. (And NOT repay it, as is the current policy.)

There is no current viable fiscal policy, just "Rob Peter to Pay Paul"

The only way to "pay" for the current war is to print more money. This was done to pay for the Vietnam war, and resulted in massive inflation.

The recent bridge collapse is just a minor example showing that the government has been spending money in other than the places that really need it.

SSA has been redefined as a TAX by the politicians. This allows them to "borrow" from the SSA fund without repayment. The SSA pension payments then become an "unfunded" entitlement obligation of the government.

"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 apparently it is now---"

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 didn't see this idea in the Dole Shall 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 apparently 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 don't 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 by Chuck75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

Won't happen-- The government has already used the money you paid in. Naturally, if the "lump sum" idea catches on, it will likely end up being an amount tied to one or two years of your income. Possibly average income for some period of time. In my case, what would happen is that the years chosen based upon current SSA rules would be a lower average than normal. due to loss of income due to disability.

SS is an insurance policy in which you have to pay in order to receive. I would gladly accept a lump sum payment of the money that I have paid into this system instead of monthly payments. Hmmmmmm VA disability and a lump sum reimbursement of my SS payments - thats a good ideal. I think I will start my own commission called the "Ricky Commission" and demand mandatory enactment of my recommendations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use