Attack On Sc

[john999]

Reading VAwatchdog I see there is a article on how vets are getting compensation for conditions that are minor and possibly age related. I think the Bush administration has been gearing up to attack many conditions as not really SC related. At the same time they are saying support the troops they are trying to undermine service connection for a host of conditions. The Watchdog is alerting us to this attack on our benefits that is coming from the VA and the administration in an attempt to reduce the budget in the wake of all the new claims from Iraq vets.

[Testvet]

I think that most Americans thought that veterans were cared for, yes they had heard some of the stories before this but it was always a "whiner" it took the Walter Reed story to get attention and for this wars veterans to show they were being short changed and the reaction was swift and quick we in the disabled veterans community know how they treat us, there are many veterans who do not use the VA hospital system and they did not know what we are facing it's not like the service organizations have been very loud or vocal in the abuses, they have been pretty much complicit in them for decades so yes people are mad and demanding accountability so we better hope and pray it gets fixed now because if it falls out of the news or we get another missing blonde woman it's all over the door has been opened to fullu funded health care can Congress get it passed this year is the question, that is what we need to push for action this year while this is still a hot issue for the most part Americans thought we were taking care of the disabled vets after all hasn't President Bush been bragging about how much he raised our pay and health care benefits?

[Ricky]

Was this the article produced by that crazy a$$ hooper lady? She is from some self funded think tank I think. There will be changes in the system I just hope they don't try to follow some of the ideals produced by idiots like this. Just to insure we win you guys and gals better start calling and writing your congress person NOW. Let them know that the veteran community is a large voting group and we are watching their actions. jmho

[Guest RickB54]

I think that anyone who is presently rated TDIU will be ok. The GOA report indicated that about about 65% of the TDIU cases approved since 1999 have been for veterans over age 60. Now I will agree that a small percentage of those claims took years to be granted but overall most were awarded within a year or two. We all have to admit that 65% is alot, but when you consider that most conditions worsen with age, perhaps it really isn't bad.

My understanding after reading the GOA report is that there will be less awards granted to veterans who retire and then after retirement request TDIU. I think this would be a valid move in most cases. After all, compensation is awarded to help offset lost wages, and if someone is already retired, and request TDIU what has he lost that he should be compensated? I don't see anyone already rated to lose the rating at 65 because most of us do not have any other retirement considerating we could not work for years.

I also think we are going to see a lot less awards for hemorrhoids, arthritis and any other condition that comes with the normal aging process, or were not actually caused by military service. As the report indicated VA compensation has evolved into something other than what it was initial intended. If we expect to receive disability awards our entire life, then something will have to give. At the present our government cannot hope to keep up the current cost of disability, unless there are cutbacks in some way. There are far to many veterans who would be homeless if not for va compensation, and there are far more veterans who would not be hurt to give up their 10% award for hemorrhoids. I do expect changes, but I think that the changes are only going to affect new veterans down way down the road. Right now it takes congress years to get anything done, so I would not expect to see changes any time soon.

I also don't see this as being the President's fault, but the fault of congress and veteran service organizations. The Veterans disability commission was created for the sole purpose of cutting disability benefits, when the laws changed concerning receipt of retirement pay and va compensation for those who have 20 or more years of service. The VDC was agreed to by the DAV, VFW and others, they knew what was going to happen when they agreed to this so who is really looking out for us.

[huskerfanfl]

I have no idea what the government may be up to. I have read in in another thread how they are trying to create a seperation or animosity between veterans. This is, to me, another way of doing just that. To argue that a veteran, who is retired, is in some way less entitled, or less in need of compensation for lost wages is wrong. Sure, that person may be drawing a retirement check, but that check is difficult, if not impossible for most retirees to live on. If a disability exists, then there is still the potential for a loss of earnings. This holds true for people who are drawing SSD and are receiving disability at the 100% rate as well.

[Ricky]

I agree with Rick. If you have TDIU you will be ok. However, if you are over 60 and apply I do not see you winning a claim no matter what. As I said below there will have to be changes but I believe the changes must be on both sides of the road. The VA is very wasteful - just read some of the GAO reports. Billions of dollars have been lost and mishandled by the VA.

As far as compensation is concened: I fully understand things such as clothing allowance, auto allowance, SMC, chapter 35 benefits etc...... However, I feel that if cuts are needed those are the programs that should go. Although I would love to have the VA pay for my kids college education if I ever reach 100 percent but why should they? VA benefits are for the veteran to insure he is not homless and to assist him in living (loss of wages). That is covered by the 2600.00 they will give me if I reach 100 percent. Same for the Auto and clothing allowance - why should the taxpayers pay me 15,000 to purchase a new auto then pay to have it convereted according to my disability? Yes it is a nice thing to do but I do not think that was the intent of the program which was to provide for loss of earning power due to your disabilities.

If they do adopt some of these way out ideals we better watch out. They are looking at things such as hypertension, DM and all of the other diseases. They fail to realize that if a veteran spends his early life in the military he gives up a lot. It is hard or nearly impossible for him to get such thing as disability insurance etc..... Have you ever went to the mess sergeant and told him that you needed him to prepare a special meal for you because you have a problem with high blood sugars? hahahahahaha he would kick you a$$ out of the mess hall. You could go on and on with this. Now you take Joe the civilian and most of his preventative care is in his hands. If the doc tells him that he is subject to DM and suggest a special diet - he just goes home and does it or does not do it. The point here is Joe the civilian has a choice where Joe the army guy does not.

One of the big issues that the wacko's base their argument on is hemmroids. They go on and on about this. Do you think they have ever had to ride in a tank for 12 hours that is jumping sand dunes? nope they have not. They have spent their life sitting in the Lazy Boy chair at home. Have they every had to convoy through the jungle or desert riding on wooden seats in the back of a Duce. NOPE.... These guys are simply one issue people. They pick an issue and hang on to it like a maggot on crap cause they can offer no useful benefit to society.

However, as I said below, call, call, call, write, write, write, congress let them know we are active and we are watching. THIS IS A MUST if we care about our EARNED BENEFITS. We must also bring the NSO's back into line, (supporting veterans) by the same actions along with our membership selections. If the DAV sits on their behinds and lets such things occur hurt them where it counts - membership. Not just ours but get the word out to the new troops coming home. Let them know what duds the NSO's are.

We the veterans have set on our behinds for too many years. Yep we complained, we cussed, we kicked the wall but we did it internally. Now is the time to let the country and our leaders know we ain't going to sit back and take this crap any more....JMHO

Edited March 30, 2007 by Ricky

[Chuck75]

Currently, the "normal" retirement age set by SS is 67 for most of us. Any earlier retirement penalizes the retiree. I was forced to retire at age 61, due to a combination of SC connected and potentially SC problems.

What most tend to ignore is that age is a facto, in that it tends to cause a medical problem to become more severe. The fact that the medical problem is service connected has nothing to do with age. With age a sc connected problem can and often does cause other medical problems as well. Since the SC problem is the "NEXUS" and age an aggrivating factor, logically, the SC problem (direct or indirect) should be compensatable at appropriate rates.

Reemember that the VA compensation, even at 100%, is far below similar compensation awards in the court systems.

Loss if life Military ~100,000 currently

Loss of life 9/11 1.5 Mil

Loss of life courts 10Mil?

John, I'd worry more about changes taking place when we reach 65yo. I foresee them trying to cut the receipt of both SSDI and VA Comp, together. I think they'll try to take one away, they'll try to do away w/65yo's getting TDIU because at 65 or 66 you'll be retired and therefore not in the job market. These are just my thoughts but I'm gearing myself for the cut in income should it happen, just in case.

pr