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

[JohnM]

SS is an insurance policy in which you have to pay inorder 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 reimbursment of my SS payments - thats a good ideal. I think I will start my own commission called the "Ricky Commission" and demand manatory enactment of my recommendations.

A lump sum payment is a scam, once you recieve a lump sum payment you have forefit any future rights you may have had for illness or injurys that show up at a later date. A monthly check is better than a lump sum payment because you have assured income for a life time for you may live to be 100 years old. Your lump sum payment would not cover your live. I am 57 and have been on SSD for 3 years now, I at least know that I will have a monthly check every month to pay my bills and to eat. A lump sum payment would disappear in less than a year and then What. You are the Streets. No this is not Acceptable.

[Pete53]

I have been on SSD since 1991 or almost 16 years. If my estimate is right I have collected over 200,000 plus more from Medicare. Wonder what a lump sum would have been?

[john999]

When I became disabled I was in a pension plan and had a 401-K. I lost ability to make future contributions to my plan and my pension has been reduced since I got SSDI. If I lost VA compensation I would be an all around loser because I served my country. Is this what the USA wants to try and sell young people on to get them to enlist? I don't think the democrats will tolerate a reduction in compensation that makes millions of veterans poorer for serving their country. It is an insane plan that will be another Iraq right here at home. In order to build up our presense in Iraq we are going to impoverish millions of disabled vets? Are they crazy or just so cynical that they think no one besides us will care?

[JohnM]

If you believe this current administration cares about the Veterans, they are no better than the administration who used the Army against the Bonus Marchers.

[JohnM]

If we could of had a normal job, we would all had some type of retirement plan besdies SS. Disabled Veteran's will nevre get that chance, so I can't see how that can be justified to ake away pay at 65. Do Congress persons loose there retirment at 65? Yea right. If they even try to really pull this, we need to come out in the millions and go to Washingtion.

My Husband, Brother, Nephew, Sister-in-law and I would be one of the millions to go to Washington, We should get Bus Tours for all Vets who would go anyone have any ideas on this?

[Josephine]

You can count me in. Someone arrange and I will be there.

Inner ear or not. I am only about 4 hours away.

Keep me posted,

Josephine