ptsd Ptsd/advisory Committee On Disability Compensation

[Testvet]

This needs quick action to get your comments to Ersie Farber at the VA who is handling the correspondence for this commission.

Here they come again, please write your opinions on changes to the VA compensation for PTSD for 100% or TDIU veterans, one of their ideas is to stop IU payments when the veterans reaches retirement age at 65, my opinion is below, like most people I have opinions on most subjects but being rated 100% schedular for PTSD leaves me as one of the targets of this commission, they have had two recent commissions on this similar subject in the past 3 years the Dole/Shalala Commission and the VDBC Veterans Disability Benefits Commission chaired by the same man chairing this commission LTG Scott

Comments should be e mailed to Ersie.farber@va.gov

PTSD/Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation

On Sep 21-22, the Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation meets in Arlington. This committee is now chaired by the same LTG Scott who chaired the infamous Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission. While they intend to concede some items on PTSD, they are in fact attempting to recommend an end to TDIU and 100% disability. Please forward this to all concerned.

Kurt; Vet Advocate

kpriessman@yahoo.com

To the Members of the Commission; 19 September 2009

I just learned of this commission and it's purpose this morning, it is the first mention of it I had even seen, and I try and stay informed of veterans issues. I am a veteran of the Vietnam War Era active duty from October 31, 1973 - September 1982 leaving as a Staff Sergeant Promotable. I then joined the Army National Guard in Augusta Georgia, the local unit was an Engineer battalion, the 878th HHC in Augusta. I volunteered in November 1990 when the 878th was not going to be activated to transfer to the 48th Infantry Brigade that was being activated for Desert Storm and need infantry NCO's to fill out the units, I was assigned to HHC 1/121st Infantry as a Squad Leader in a 4.2 Mortar Unit.

I was diagnosed with PTSD by a team of psychiatrists and pyschologists by a VA PTSD team after four months of testing and interviews. The incident which the VA based my PTSD on was an attempted murder and robbery by 7 fellow soldiers at Fort Wainwright Alaska on Feb 6, 1975. Four of the men were sentenced by General Court Martial to 15 years in Leavenworth, the other 3 were reduced by Filed Grade Article 15 to PV1 and all were given Bad Conduct Discharges, I was transferred from the 9th ID at Fort Lewis, to the 2nd ID in August 1975 to get me away from the friends of the men found guilty of the attack. It was considered a racial incident and the Army's solution was to get me off Fort Lewis as soon as possible after the trials ended, I left within a week.

Needless to say there are other incidents that occurred over my Army career that would be considered "stressors" as well, the human experiments at Edgewood Arsenal, when I learned the full extent of what really happened at Edgewood Arsenal in October 2002, my life took a deep spiral. I was on the DMZ got the Operation Paul Bunyan, I knew CPT Bonifas and 1LT Barrett, and 1LT Charles Pigg although at JSA they made him wear name tags identifying him as 1LT Charles. I was assigned to Camp Lilberty Bell, which was located across the MSR on the DMZ itself. The men of Camp Liberty Bell used the PX at JSA frequently, I also knew 1LT Pigg at Fort Lewis when we were both in the 2/47 Infantry battalion.

I am not proud of the way I lived my civilian life after leaving the Army, like most NCOs of the time, I drank quite a bit, it was "normal" back then, Bosses nights at the NCO club where we brought the Officers and Right hand night at the Officers clubs where they brought the senior NCOs in the unit. Company parties used to provide beer from the unit funds, many NCOs hid their PTSD thru self medicating, admitting symptoms of PTSD was a career ender back then.

I then went to work for the Postal Service where many veterans worked and many of the Supervisors knew the symptoms of PTSD and they worked with the other veterans, one of my surpervisors was a 100% disabled Ranger 1SG Dale Curry, he knew I had problems as did a few other carriers with military histories, quite a few of us had problems self medicating, Dale got many of us into a Postal service program for couseling to help us keep our jobs rather than get terminated. I have four failed marriages, 2 DUI's and various other problems in my past, am I proud of this no, but it is what it is.

I was ashamed of being "weak" I spent years telling my troops to suck it up, be a man, you have to forget the men you lost, training accidents happened, we named places after them, but the job still had to be done, so we have the memorial service and then it's back to the mission. The mission always comes first, drive on. Be all that you can be.

I don't know the right answers on how to "adjust" compensation for these totally disabled veterans with "PTSD" how can I be expected to change my lifestyle from my current VA compensation when I turn 65 "retirement age" to be reduced from 100% Scehdular to lets say 70%, as wel all know 70% rating is not 70% of the 100% pay it is less than half of the pay, how am I supposed to make my mortgage paymenst, pay my utility bills, car payments, insurance, buy groceries etc? What happens to the state benefits I get because I am a 100% disabled veteran, discounts on property taxes, free disabled license plates for my 2 vehicles, that would all be gone if the Commission recommends reducing retirement age disabled veterans from either TDIU or a 100% schedular rating.

Given the fact that I like many other veterans would have had out 100% schedular ratings for more than ten years what would be the basis for reducing us, because we have reached retirement age? Where is any type of historical basis for doing such an action, and besides what other than saving money for the government would even be the reason for this? Is this the PROMISE future veterans have to look forward to, if you are disabled we will compensate you at this higher rate until you turn age 65 and then we are going to reduce your compensation. Has the government proposed reducing the retirement pay of any other federal employees at age 65 or offsetting it against their Social Security payments? They shouldn't both are earned benefits, one thru work and other thru the SSDI payments each individual makes thruout their working years.

As I am sure you are aware most disabled veterans already receive SSD payments if they are rated either 100% schedular or TDIU and have been receiving these payments along with their veterans benefits. Both have been paid for and and due to the veterans one is the SSD is anm insurance program that each and every American is eligible for if they become disabled before regular retirement age, and the VA compensation is the payment each military member gets for losing part of themselves either physically or mentally thru their service to this nation commoningly known as the PROMISE.

Two previous commission the VDBC recommended a 25% immediate increase in compensation for quality of life issues that the commission felt the disabled veterans were not being properly compensated for. Despite this report being published over 2 years ago, nothing has been done, even the Dole/Shalala Commission recommended immediate raises in compensation, although that commission recommended higher benefits for the veterans of the 2 new wars, Iraq and Afghanistan, and ignore the veterans of the older wars, the Cold War, Gulf War One, Vietnam, Korea and WW2, Senator Dole made comments that creating a two tier veterans compensation was acceptable to him one that paid veterans of the new wars more money than veterans from the First Gulf War and past, that the veterans would accept it, if it meant that new disabled veterans would get better benefits.

That was an assumption on his part only, no two tier system is acceptable, we are all disabled veterans, and we all should be compensated equally based on our percentages, not which war we served in.

Mt step father was a WW2 Army Air Corp B 17 flight crew member, he stayed and retired from the Air Force in 1961, he then went to work for the Postal Service as Civil Service and then became disabled and drew SSD based on his military service, he was a "triple dipper" one of those that President Reagan went after in the 80's, but Dale was grandfathered in, he had earned and deserved all three benefit payments. But future retirees lost their SS benefits to their military retirements and Civil Service retirement benefits.

I am sure this action saved the United States a few hundred million dollars over the years, but they broke a lot of promises in this action.

Given that todays military is all voluntary, does the nation want to go down the road of telling future recruits that if you happen to become totally disabled by mental problems PTSD/TBI etc, we will pay you more money until you turn 65 and then we are going to reduce your pay level to barely above poverty level. How will this entice people to enlist in the service to learn that in their elederly years when they can not obtain a decent paying job, the veterans agency that is supposed to take care of them, is going to stick it to them, and reduce their income so the federal government can save some money, after all the veterans are older now, they shouldn't expect to live so well at 65 as they did at 55, now should they?

How many of this commission are going to have their retirement incomes adjusted down decades after becoming used to that certain level of income, and what would it do to your household to frop from 3,000 a month income to 1400.00 a month income, and you are not physically or mentally able to obtain work to replace that income, or lose your home because after years of not having to pay property taxes because you have been considered totally disabled by the VA, only to have the state send a tax bill of 5,000 a year that has never had to be paid before, ad valorem taxes for cars that had been exempt and now you owe an extra 1000.00 a year in vehicle fees?

You will not just be saving the federal governent a few dollars you will be totally destroying many people's lives. In some cases like mine my wife has not been able to work for the past 10 years, as I am unable to drive and it is not safe to leave me unattended for 8-10 hours a day, panic attacks, fall asleep witha lit cigarette due to being drowsy from the meds the VA shrinks have me on, to make me more compatible with other people, without the meds, I don't play well with others.

Please consider all of these factors when you make your decisions, I can live without a 25% immediate pay hike, I don't see how I could make it if at 65 you decide to reduce my income by half and then make my property taxable after the past 10 years of being tax exempt and having my lifestyle set to my income. Is it to much to expect the government to keep the PROMISE and care for us until we die, and our survivors with DIC benefits that was promise when we enlisted 10-50 years ago?

Michael G Bailey

US Army Infantry SSG disabled

[jbasser]

It is usually introduced and then gets lost in commitee as Congress kicks it around.

That is the poroblem.

The VA has not ignored anything they dont have the power to touch it. It still rolls down hill.

J

[john999]

With health care reform and other budget busters looking us in the eye I think it is far fetched to believe that the congress is going to grant vets an extra 25% for quality of life. However, they were Johnny on the Spot to help bail out Wall Street. That's where the money comes from to finance their campaigns. You have to give money to get money from these politicians. Right and wrong has nothing to do with it. We have these dud VSO's who don't even have PAC's to send money to buy us some politicians.

[broncovet]

The VA has actually opposed the 25% QOL raise for Veterans, saying it needed "more study". I think we need to give "more study" into why VA employees are collecting $24 million in bonuses, when the VA claims backlog is the highest in history. I also think we need "more study" into why the VA has squandered at least $324 million. Further, I would like "more study" asking why it is that the VA got the largest budget increase in history, but Vetrans are still likely to get a zero percent COLA. That is, I want the VA to answer what they did with this extra money, and why it was not passed along to Veterans, especially disabled Vets?

[Commander Bob]

With health care reform and other budget busters looking us in the eye I think it is far fetched to believe that the congress is going to grant vets an extra 25% for quality of life.

We haven't heard much about the 25% "quality of life" grant, lately. Eventually the public will turn it's back on those who served during time of war. It seems to be a natural cultural process.

... Written on a wall of a Trenton NJ church that was used as a POW camp in 1776:

In times of war, and not before,

God and the soldier men adore;

When the war is over and all things righted,

The Lords forgot and the soldier slighted.

Edited September 21, 2009 by Commander Bob 92-93

[jbasser]

The VA has actually opposed the 25% QOL raise for Veterans, saying it needed "more study". I think we need to give "more study" into why VA employees are collecting $24 million in bonuses, when the VA claims backlog is the highest in history. I also think we need "more study" into why the VA has squandered at least $324 million. Further, I would like "more study" asking why it is that the VA got the largest budget increase in history, but Vetrans are still likely to get a zero percent COLA. That is, I want the VA to answer what they did with this extra money, and why it was not passed along to Veterans, especially disabled Vets?

I once heard a wise man say it takes money to make money.

I also heard a banker also say it makes money to take money.

With no COLA and an increase in medicare part B we will actually lose money.

I havent noticed the prices at the grocery going down either.

The whole thing is a Smoke and mirrors farce.

J

[Hoppy]

The idea that there is some logical reason to reduce service-connected compensation at the age of 65 and no longer compensate for TDIU needs to be identified by this commission. What happens at the age of 65 that offsets the need to continue TDIU. There is no law prohibiting a person who is not disabled from working until the day they die. A person can legally work to any age. It appears they are assuming that people cannot or do not work after the age of 65.

They might be assuming that Social Security retirement will offset the loss of TDIU. This will not be the case with many veterans who are disabled at an early age. The last time I received a statement from Social Security telling me how much I would receive for Social Security retirement it was less than $150 per month. Additionally, I think they now allow people to collect Social Security retirement and continue to work. I think the law changed about 10 years ago allowing people to collect Social Security retirement and continue to work.

About 10 years ago I recall a significant lobby that was trying to limit VA compensation to injuries and illnesses that were the direct result of military duty. If an individual was injured while snow skiing on the weekend they did not want this to be a service connectable disability. This lobby was unsuccessful in getting their ideas any support. I know I wrote letters explaining to people that many employers provide long-term disability insurance to their employees. I personally worked for several employers who provided long-term disability insurance. This insurance cover me for injuries that happened while I was not at work. Considering that I took a 75% reduction in pay at the time I was drafted by Uncle Sam, I figured the government could afford to throw in some long-term disability that covered me while I was in the military. I was of the opinion the people behind the lobby to disallow service connection of disabilities and illnesses for military personnel that would otherwise have been covered by private employers were probably hippies who hated the military or who had no idea what was going on around them in civil employment. In any event they were so far out of mainstream that their ideas did not go very far.

Until I hear the reasoning these people think TDIU should be terminated at age 65 I will take the position that they have not thought their position through and that their ideas are so far out of the mainstream that the intelligent people who make our laws will ignore the ideas they are advancing. In any event preemptive letters to legislators identifying the hardship that can be imposed on individuals who had they been healthy at the age of 65 could have continued to work and how these hardships are not justified. Additionally, there is no guarantee these hardships will be offset by the Social Security Administration or any other benefit available to the veteran.

Edited September 21, 2009 by Hoppy