Sanders Questions Vets Service Organizations On Cuts In Disability Benefits

[teejay53]

Thought this may be of interest.

---------------------------------------------

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Sanders Questions Vets Service Organizations on Cuts in Disability Benefits

WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 – As a Friday deadline neared in Congress’s latest budget showdown, Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today questioned veterans group leaders about a proposal that would cut the benefits of more than 3.2 million disabled veterans and more than 55 million Social Security recipients.

Sanders has led opposition in Congress to reducing benefits by adopting a so-called chained CPI changing how the consumer price index is calculated. “It would mean very significant cuts for Social Security beneficiaries as well as for disabled veterans,” Sanders said at a joint hearing of the Senate and House veterans’ affairs committees.

Sanders asked representatives of veteran service organizations for their assessment of the proposal.

Tom Tarantino, the policy chief for the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, called it “a terrible idea.” He added, “It astounds me that we keep asking veterans to sacrifice more and more.”

H. Gene Overstreet, president of the Non-Commissioned Officers Association, called it “a bad idea” and said “veterans have paid their due.”

“Unconscionable,” was how Charles Susino, the World War II veteran and national commander of the American Ex-Prisoners of War, characterized the proposal.

The proposed change in how the consumer price index is calculated would result in significantly lower annual cost-of-living adjustments for more than 3.2 million disabled veterans receiving disability compensation benefits from the Department of Veterans’ Affairs. Veterans who started receiving VA disability benefits at age 30 would have their benefits reduced by $1,425 at age 45, $2,341 at age 55 and $3,231 at age 65, according to the Congressional Budget Office. More than 55 million retirees, widows, orphans and disabled Americans on Social Security also would be affected by the switch to a so-called chained CPI.

The proposal has been advanced by House Republicans and embraced by some Democrats.
The White House has said that President Barack Obama would consider the chained CPI as a way to cut benefits by billions of dollars.

Link to article.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/02/28/sanders-questions-vets-service-organizations-cuts-in-disability-benefits/

[john999]

The real COLA attack will come at SSA because they lead the way for all other "earned benefits" such as federal pensions, VA, and SSI. Medicare is the real target with medicade as secondary. The government promised all Americans certain benefits and now that the bill is coming due they want to find a way out of their contract. If the COLA is somehow changed for SSA that would automatically affect veteran's cola's. Republicans are ardent cutters of medicare, medicade and SSA. Dems would go along with more sneaky cuts to both SSA and Medicare. Anyone under the age of 55 is probably at risk. They say SSA is third rail of American politics so the cuts to that program must be like drone strikes...out of the blue and unseen until they hit us. Both parties are guilty of this future crime. I listen to Cornell West and Paul Krugeman on this subject.

John

[Chuck75]

Let's see - - current "average" household income before? taxes. ~$46,000yr, according to some current government figures.

The by law purpose of the 100% scheduler VA payment is "to compensate for loss of income" as a result of service "connected" injury or condition(s).

It's not direct compensation for the service related disease, injury, pain, loss of life quality, life expectancy, or the other things that are typically part of civilian liability settlements for similar injury or disabling conditions.

The current 100% VA compensation amount? ~$36,000yr

In other words, $36,000 from the VA is supposedly equal to $46,000. It's true that the VA payment is not subject to income tax.

However, the majority of the "average households" $46,000 is also not taxed, due to exemptions, deductions, credits, and allowances.

Even so, the "middle class" (47%) still pays the largest % of income tax.

SSA retirement, on the other hand, is a result of at least "40 quarters" of payments by employees and employers. The payout per month

Is well below $2000 a month in all most all cases. 50% of the SSA payment may be subject to tax.

The CPI (consumer price index) was changed (reduced) decades ago. The government (Congress) decided that the more accurate CPI in prior use was going to cost too much,

and particularly so at the time, partially because there were many SSA recipients that paid nothing into the system, and were covered due to "grandfather" clauses.

(My great grandparent's generation fell into this category.) So today, the government wants to reduce it again, and hides behind a mass of misleading words and statements.

(And at a time when the upper 1%, on the average, pays less of a % of income in taxes than the middle 47%)

(Corporations supposedly pay about 6% of the income? taxes, a historically low rate.)

Some corporations are able to assign profits to overseas operations, and while making a profit, actually earn tax credits that are far in excess of any tax that would otherwise be due.

And the government (Congress) can't figure out why their "approval rate" is abysmal? All they need to do is get their head out of the political muck (a stronger scatological term is appropriate) and look around!

[john999]

Chuck

You are right on this for sure. A young person has to be a fool to put on the uniform during war time. A person who becomes 100% at a young age is going to be poor for the rest of their lives. I was able to work and get a federal retirement plus SSD and 100% VA, but for a family this is no big money. My federal retirement is about 1200 bucks a month for 30 years under FERS. You can't be truly middle class unless you make six figures these days. If you house costs 300,000 you are hard pressed to pay the mortgage on one income. My father was better off than I was at age 40. He could support a wife and three kids on one income. He bought a house for 12,000 bucks in a nice area. My mother stayed at home and never expected to have to work until he died young. We as a nation are going backwards I think. Most people now do not have pensions and are grossly underinsured. My father's VA life insurance paid off the house when he died. How many could do that today?