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 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

Corporation Greed

Rate this question


rthomass

Question

SEE STRETCHES POST OF 9 SEPTEMBER 2007

THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS HAS SPONSORED A BILL S-2026 TO LEGISLATIVELY ALTER TITLE 38 THAT WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO AS NICHOLSON SAID HAVE "BOOTS ON THE GROUND IN VIETNAM FOR PRESUMPTIVE SERVICE CONNECTION FOR AGENT ORANGE. CLOSE ONLY COUNTS IN HORSE SHOES AND NUCLEAR BOMBS.

U.S. SENATE COMMITTEE ON September 10, 2007

VETERANS AFFAIRS

ATTTN: SENATOR AKAKA, CHAIRMAN

412 RUSSELL SENATE BUILDING

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510

SUBJECT: Sponsorship of Senate Bill S-2026

Senator Akaka: I have been a lifelong Democrat. I read with outrage your sponsorship of Senate Bill S2026. This would negate the decisions of the 9th Circuit Court Decision as well as that of The United States Court of Appeals Decision as regards Haas V. Nichoslson.

I can assure you that as a twenty year Veteran of the United States Air Force that Agent Orange was not only used on the land mass of Vietnam but in the Country of Thailand. I was assigned to Nakhon Phanom Thailand Royal Thai Air Base from August 1969 to August 1970. NKP is located on the Mekong River across from Laos and the Ho-Mihn Trail. The Air Force sprayed the trail with Agent Orange as well as NKP'S perimeter and other areas on base. It made it easy to see enemy insurgents since it was an excellent defoliant of the tropical jungle around us. I have a three year claim that is presently before the Veterans Administration for exposure to the Herbicide Agent Orange. I am presently in the fight of my life against Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma; one of the eleven presumptive cancers cited under 38 CFR 3-309(e).

I personally thought that of the two political parties that the Republicans were the "BAD" Guys but now you and the Democrats are stabbing the Vietnam Era Veterans in the back! Guess you never know who your enemy your enemy is!

Based on your sponsorship of Senate Bill S2026 I will not vote for any Democratic Party candidates in the 2008 National Election or any other election in the future. This statement galls me to write but when you are getting raped you are reluctant to give the rapist a round of applause for the heinous act.

Your assurance that you have re-considered sponsorship of Senate Bill S-2026 will give me reason to re-consider my declination to vote Democratic. Senator we put our lives on line for our country. Please help us and do no harm.

Just a Veteran that has been forgotten

Randall D. Thomas Sr.

Louisville, Kentucky 40250

THIS IS THE LETTER I SENT TO YOU AND EVERY SENATOR AND REPRESENTATIVE ON DECEMBER 7, 2007

December 7. 2006

Honorable Senator Daniel Akaka

US SENATE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS

412 RUSSELL SENATE BUILDING

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510

The United States Court for Veterans Claims in a decision dated August 16, 2006 “ Haas vs. Nicholson “ruled that the appellant on appeal from the Veterans Board of Appeals was entitled to a presumption of exposure to the herbicide specifically identified as Agent Orange. It further found that any veteran serving during the Vietnam Era (1962-1975) and who had been awarded the VSM “Vietnam Service Medal” was presumed to have been exposed to the herbicide commonly known as Agent Orange.

The desire of my fellow Vietnam Veterans who served during the Vietnam Era in Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia as well as their territorial waters who have one of the eleven diseases set forth in 38 C.F.R. 3-309(e). be presumed to have been exposed to agent orange and awarded 100% Veterans Administration Compensation.

I propose the decision of The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims “Haas Vs. Nicholson” be a guide to re-write those portions of U.S.C. 38; 38 C.F.R.; and the Veterans Administration Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 by means of new legislation promulgated by the United States Congress.

I have attached the U.S. Court Of Appeals for Veterans Claims decision Haas Vs. Nichoson; National Veterans Legal Services Program additional information on exposure to agent orange.

Randall D. Thomas Sr.

Edited by rthomass
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 4
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

Hadit members this is a very serious action that requires your serious attention. Your Veteran Brothers need your spport......so even if you never were exposed to Agent Orange....write a letter protesting the fact that we are all about to get the shaft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

I think that millions of Veterans who served in the 60's and 70's who never stepped foot in Nam were exposed to Agent Orange. I know I was down next to the Motor Pool where they stored the damn stuff.

Veterans deserve real choice for their health care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hadit members this is a very serious action that requires your serious attention. Your Veteran Brothers need your spport......so even if you never were exposed to Agent Orange....write a letter protesting the fact that we are all about to get the shaft.

Gentlemem of you you will write a letter supporting Agent orange claims and tell Senator Akaka to kill S-2026 I will go to bat for uou when uou need letters to be sent to Conrress. This is for our bothers that a dying of cancer dut to herbicide spraying against the blue water Navy but other Veterans in Thailand. Laos, and Camodia.

Use the following letter as a guice: Pleas Help Us!

U.S. SENATE COMMITTEE ON September 10, 2007

VETERANS AFFAIRS

ATTTN: SENATOR AKAKA, CHAIRMAN

412 RUSSELL SENATE BUILDING

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510

SUBJECT: Sponsorship of Senate Bill S-2026

Senator Akaka: I have been a lifelong Democrat. I read with outrage your sponsorship of Senate Bill S2026. This would negate the decisions of the 9th Circuit Court Decision as well as that of The United States Court of Appeals Decision as regards Haas V. Nichoslson.

I can assure you that as a twenty year Veteran of the United States Air Force that Agent Orange was not only used on the land mass of Vietnam but in the Country of Thailand. I was assigned to Nakhon Phanom Thailand Royal Thai Air Base from August 1969 to August 1970. NKP is located on the Mekong River across from Laos and the Ho-Mihn Trail. The Air Force sprayed the trail with Agent Orange as well as NKP'S perimeter and other areas on base. It made it easy to see enemy insurgents since it was an excellent defoliant of the tropical jungle around us. I have a three year claim that is presently before the Veterans Administration for exposure to the Herbicide Agent Orange. I am presently in the fight of my life against Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma; one of the eleven presumptive cancers cited under 38 CFR 3-309(e).

I personally thought that of the two political parties that the Republicans were the "BAD" Guys but now you and the Democrats are stabbing the Vietnam Era Veterans in the back! Guess you never know who your enemy your enemy is!

Based on your sponsorship of Senate Bill S2026 I will not vote for any Democratic Party candidates in the 2008 National Election or any other election in the future. This statement galls me to write but when you are getting raped you are reluctant to give the rapist a round of applause for the heinous act.

Your assurance that you have re-considered sponsorship of Senate Bill S-2026 will give me reason to re-consider my declination to vote Democratic. Senator we put our lives on line for our country. Please help us and do no harm.

Just a Veteran that has been forgotten

Randall D. Thomas Sr.

PO Box 20761

Louisville, Kentucky 40250-0761

(502) 491-7864 rthomass@insightbb.com

VA Claim C-27-219-809

In addition write the following letter to you 2 Senators and Representaives. LET US BE LOAD AND VOCAL CONGRESS WILL RESPOND IT ENOUGH US APPLY PRESSURE

THIS IS THE LETTER I SENT TO YOU AND EVERY SENATOR AND REPRESENTATIVE DECEMBER 7, 2007December 7. 2006

Honorable Senator Daniel Akaka

US SENATE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS

412 RUSSELL SENATE BUILDING

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510

The United States Court for Veterans Claims in a decision dated August 16, 2006 “ Haas vs. Nicholson “ruled that the appellant on appeal from the Veterans Board of Appeals was entitled to a presumption of exposure to the herbicide specifically identified as Agent Orange. It further found that any veteran serving during the Vietnam Era (1962-1975) and who had been awarded the VSM “Vietnam Service Medal” was presumed to have been exposed to the herbicide commonly known as Agent Orange.

The desire of my fellow Vietnam Veterans who served during the Vietnam Era in Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia as well as their territorial waters who have one of the eleven diseases set forth in 38 C.F.R. 3-309(e). be presumed to have been exposed to agent orange and awarded 100% Veterans Administration Compensation.

I propose the decision of The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims “Haas Vs. Nicholson” be a guide to re-write those portions of U.S.C. 38; 38 C.F.R.; and the Veterans Administration Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 by means of new legislation promulgated by the United States Congress.

I have attached the U.S. Court Of Appeals for Veterans Claims decision Haas Vs. Nichoson; National Veterans Legal Services Program additional information on exposure to agent orange.

Randall D. Thomas Sr. rthomass@insightbb.com

PO Box 20761 3123 Spring Breeze Court, Louisville, Ky 40

Edited by rthomass
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • KMac1181 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Lebro earned a badge
      First Post
    • stuart55 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stuart55 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Lebro earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Our picks

    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
    • Welcome to hadit!  

          There are certain rules about community care reimbursement, and I have no idea if you met them or not.  Try reading this:

      https://www.va.gov/resources/getting-emergency-care-at-non-va-facilities/

         However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.  

         When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait!  Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?"  Not once.  Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.  

          However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.  

      That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot.  There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.  

      Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.  

          Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.344

       
    • Good question.   

          Maybe I can clear it up.  

          The spouse is eligible for DIC if you die of a SC condition OR any condition if you are P and T for 10 years or more.  (my paraphrase).  

      More here:

      Source:

      https://www.va.gov/disability/dependency-indemnity-compensation/

      NOTE:   TO PROVE CAUSE OF DEATH WILL LIKELY REQUIRE AN AUTOPSY.  This means if you die of a SC condtion, your spouse would need to do an autopsy to prove cause of death to be from a SC condtiond.    If you were P and T for 10 full years, then the cause of death may not matter so much. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use