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

Intro Of The Agent Orange Equity Act!

Rate this question


Berta

Question

"When: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at Noon

Who: Chairman Bob Filner, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

William G. Jeff Davis, Blue Water Veteran

Ron Abrams, National Veterans Legal Services Program

John Rowan, Vietnam Veterans of America

Where: Cannon House Office Building Terrace

The intersection of New Jersey and Independence Avenues, S.E."

email from Jerrel Cook-

Many of you VNVET blog members know who Jeff is and many of us here know Ron Abrams-

I think this is a just a press conference ???

There is nothing at the H VAC site regarding live video feed-

This is GREAT NEWS for ANY vet exposed to AO ANYWHERE who has adisability on the AO presumptive lists.

Any more info I can get on this will be posted at hadit.

It isnt a shoo in at all -but it is a big start-

one of our members at BWNVV (Blue Water Navy)site committed suicide when he learned that the Haas case was knocked down.

He had AO disabilities and the court's decision prevented him from receiving VA comp. WHat a tragedy- NVLSP is appealing Haas.

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 5
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

5 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

Berta said,

This is GREAT NEWS for ANY vet exposed to AO ANYWHERE who has adisability on the AO presumptive lists.

Berta, Seeing how the AO act of 2008 is written, I do not see any help for a veteran who was exposed to AO inside CONUS and has presumptive diseases. Could be that I am missing something here.

The stateside AO sites listed by the DoD as a result of Lane Evans request should have been addressed in the bill.

I do admit that this is a step in the right direction.

How long does a bill like this take to work its way through the system? Any ideas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Berta said,

This is GREAT NEWS for ANY vet exposed to AO ANYWHERE who has adisability on the AO presumptive lists.

Berta, Seeing how the AO act of 2008 is written, I do not see any help for a veteran who was exposed to AO inside CONUS and has presumptive diseases. Could be that I am missing something here.

The stateside AO sites listed by the DoD as a result of Lane Evans request should have been addressed in the bill.

I do admit that this is a step in the right direction.

How long does a bill like this take to work its way through the system? Any ideas?

I think to solve the AO Blue Water issue the VA must first address those thousands of vets who have apllied for a presumptive, actually had their feet on the ground and has documented the presumptive in their claim and been denied anyway, then they can move on and to maybe accomplishing the task of Blue Water presumptive claims. Both are equally deserving but until they solve the on the ground vets, it will be difficult to add the Blue Water vets.

Edited by danang_1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think to solve the AO Blue Water issue the VA must first address those thousands of vets who have apllied for a presumptive, actually had their feet on the ground and has documented the presumptive in their claim and been denied anyway, then they can move on and to maybe accomplishing the task of Blue Water presumptive claims. Both are equally deserving but until they solve the on the ground vets, it will be difficult to add the Blue Water vets.

Those issues were addressed in the AO act of 1991. If the vet had boots on the ground and one of the listed diseases, inside the time limit, then there is no problem with the claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

then there are those of us that were exposed while servicing,washing,and wrenching on aircraft that flew through and during the excercises.we are just as sick and deserving.i have nearly all of the presumptives,just my feet were in the wrong place.

<b>for sale.....1 used veteran.slightly broken.

understands very little when it comes to regulations.

please be gentle.housebroken</b> <b>,growls

but does not bite</b>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To Jamescript---As my post said-it isnt a shoo in- it is a big start.

I have been around this issue since the AO Settlement Fund came (about 1991 I think that was.)

And when the first 2 presumptives were determined as AO disabilities--

chloracne and Peripheral Neuropathy in the original AO regs were so difficult to prove under the regs that very very few vets were awarded these conditions.That hasnt changed unlesss to vet has DMII due to AO for the PN.

I have seen in the past 25 years many new regs added both to the AO regs as well as to the CFR because Copngressmen, Senators, and vets them selves hacked into the jungle of the legalize of passagages of bills that ultimately became regs that help vets.

Danang is correct-

there is absol;utely no reason for VA to continue any moratorium on Boot on ground veterans.

Rich Cohen- my SVR radio guest a few months ago (he is executive director of NOVA and came on the show as my guest when I contacted him about some of his testimony before the H VAC-

made good popint on the show- I posted it here-

here it is again-

any vet with boots on ground Nam and with any disability on the AO presumptive list shpw file a Writ of Mandamus with the CAVC asking the court to direct the RO to adjudicate their claim.

There is a long criteria before a bill can become a reg-

all veterans and anyone in the public will have ample chance for public comment if this bill even gets into the Fed Register for comment.When and if it does I will post the Federal Register link to it and anyone can comment on the final proposed regulation.

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Tell a friend

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

  • 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