Veterans Running Up The Deficit

[BostonPirate]

I think that giving veterans full healthcare is a moral imperative for us. If we ask the men in uniform to risk their lives, then I think they earn having medicare permanently. No one gets medicare for free. everyone that gets it pays for it as an insurance just like any other health insurance. If the individual cannot afford medicare, the state they reside in covers the medicare premium through medicaid.

As it stands now, vets only get treatment for things that directly happen as a result of their injuries during the war they served in through the VA. I would be interested in knowing from Palemale

Ridiculous really. If it was different at one point, then the changes that were made only affect the soldiers that fought after the new law was passed.

My buddy that was in the first wave in afghanistan has had to live with a painful hernia now for three months while waiting for his new insurance to kick in, and if Obamacare hadn't outlawed not covering pre existing conditions, he would not even get help for that from them.

This is no way to honor the veterans of america's armed services.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yup! And both active soldiers and veterans should get every damn dime they have coming to them. Yet under the Bushies, while they waved the flag and talked the talk they cut veteran's benefits. So many Republicans, where it's nearly all of them, are nothing more than Chickenhawks, whereby they talk a big game, but when their nuts would have been on the line, they dodged the draft. Damn near every one!

Here you reveal the lie in this thread, showing that JB3 is right: the whole point made by the senators on the committee is that the "veterans should get every damn dime they have coming to them". The question is whether a lot of the money going out is actually deserved.

And that's an issue raised, please note, by two Democrats and one Republican on the committee -- according to the article in the OP.

So you use one-third of the people doing the questioning to damn one party and ignore the fact that the person actually responsible for the fact that this will get discussed is from the other party.

JB3's right -- you should read your own article.

 

[White Eagle]

I think that giving veterans full healthcare is a moral imperative for us. If we ask the men in uniform to risk their lives, then I think they earn having medicare permanently. No one gets medicare for free. everyone that gets it pays for it as an insurance just like any other health insurance. If the individual cannot afford medicare, the state they reside in covers the medicare premium through medicaid.

As it stands now, vets only get treatment for things that directly happen as a result of their injuries during the war they served in through the VA. I would be interested in knowing from Palemale

Ridiculous really. If it was different at one point, then the changes that were made only affect the soldiers that fought after the new law was passed.

My buddy that was in the first wave in afghanistan has had to live with a painful hernia now for three months while waiting for his new insurance to kick in, and if Obamacare hadn't outlawed not covering pre existing conditions, he would not even get help for that from them.

This is no way to honor the veterans of america's armed services.

you made me remember this. If you make under a certain amount in income then you considered No copay for your prescriptions. If you make over that amount then you pay "copay". I don't know what the amount is but it would be at least 10,000.But any surgeries I'm not sure of cause I'm still under the 10k. But I haven't had to pay for more than prescriptions. In fact I had a colonoscopy last month and no bill. My SS income is so low because of illness didn't work for 10 years other than a couple of temps at WalMart.

And this for loki81

loki81
Re: Veterans Running Up The Deficit
does wearing a uniform mean you should be forever immune and shielded from any and all fiscal realities?

Not for everyone, just for those who served in wars or conflicts, like Viet Nam, WWII, Korea, and all the ones in Afghanistan and Iraq and Kuwait.

 

[Kulindahr]

Up here in Canuckistan we've actually had conservatives note that it is fiscally desirable that soldiers are killed rather than injured because of the lifetime costs associated with the latter.



http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...e,+ombudsman+charges&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

I have to think it is one of the reasons that Rumsfeld loved the idea of letting contractors run a war; less responsibility to the people who get injured or die.

What's really eerie to me is that back when I was reading a bunch of Byzantine history, I came across an account where functionaries in their bureaucracy made the same observation....

To people whose main concern is money, and who delight in its flow and the calculations involved, the rest of the world becomes relevant only insofar as it pertains to that flow of money. That's been true for a long, long time -- probably as long as there have been accountants (I wonder if some priest in ancient Egypt made the same observation?).

 

[White Eagle]

Also keep in mind, those coming back from Iraq, Afghanistan and even in Kuwait that have been injured because of roadside bombs need more treatment than I could ever think of. And the guys from Viet Nam with ailments from Agent Orange.My illnesses are nothing compared to them. There are guys with ptsd and brain injuries that those congresscriters are wanting not to treat them. That is the most irresponsible, inhumane thing I can think of. My sister-in-law's sister's husband (we were a tight family) committed suicide because of Agent Orange. He was a close friend of mine.
But, any Vet of any war or conflict should be treated for anything, anytime!

 

[BostonPirate]

Vet of any war or conflict should be treated for anything, anytime!

ABSOLUTELY!

While in the theater of war they were willing to die for their nation at any moment and we should repay that with healthcare for them for life, no clauses, no ifs ands or buts... just cover for them for anything anytime.

They earned it.

and if congress and the presidency wants to make so many wars that it is too expensive, then the rest of the nation either has to paythe taxes to cover the bill or elect people that are not fond of blowing up other nations.

 

[JayHawk]

You actually had an interesting thread here until you turned it into yet another partisan smear piece.

You know Laika I rarely take the stands you do because we dont share the same base beliefs BUT you are dead on here. Neither party has decided that making the sociral economic program. So turing into a political smear or attempting too simply displays one sided lack of thought and a comlete disregard for reality.

That said congrats MR for making a catchy yellow journalistic title and then posting a completely non supporting IP...

I do wonder if Rome will be there when this Centurian retires....

 

[BostonPirate]

You know Laika I rarely take the stands you do because we dont share the same base beliefs BUT you are dead on here. Neither party has decided that making the sociral economic program. So turing into a political smear or attempting too simply displays one sided lack of thought and a comlete disregard for reality.

That said congrats MR for making a catchy yellow journalistic title and then posting a completely non supporting IP...

I do wonder if Rome will be there when this Centurian retires....

let President Obama speak for himself.

heres an exerpt from a lengthy speech he made to the veterans.

At the same time, every American who has ever worn the uniform must also know this: Your country is going to take care of you when you come home. (Applause.) Our nation's commitment to our veterans, to you and your families, is a sacred trust. And to me and my administration, upholding that trust is a moral obligation. It's not just politics.

That's why I've charged Secretary Shinseki with building a 21st century VA. (Applause.) And that includes one of the largest percentage increases to the VA budget in the past 30 years. (Applause.) We are going to cut this deficit that we've got, and I've proposed a freeze on discretionary domestic spending. But what I have not frozen is the spending we need to keep our military strong, our country safe and our veterans secure. So we're going to keep on making historic commitments to our veterans. (Applause.)

For about 200,000 Vietnam vets who may have been exposed to Agent Orange and who now suffer from three chronic diseases, we're making it easier for you to get the health care and benefits you need. (Applause.)

For our Gulf War veterans, we've declared that nine infectious diseases are now presumed to be related to your service in Desert Storm. (Applause.)

For our disabled veterans, we've eliminated co-pays for those of you who are catastrophically disabled. (Applause.) We've kept our promise on concurrent receipt by proposing legislation that would allow severely disabled retirees to receive your military retired pay and your VA disability benefits. It's the right thing to do. (Applause.)

We've dramatically increased funding for veterans health care across the board, and that includes improving care for rural veterans and women veterans. (Applause.) For those half-million vets who had lost their eligibility -- our Priority 8 veterans -- we're restoring your access to VA health care. (Applause.)

And since the rumors continue to fly, even though they are wrong, let me say it as clearly as I can: The historic health care reform legislation that I signed into law does not -- I repeat, does not -- change your veterans benefits. (Applause.) The VA health care benefits that you know and trust are safe, and that includes prosthetics for our disabled veterans. (Applause.)

Thanks to advanced appropriations, the delays for funding for veterans medical care are over. And just as those delays were unacceptable, so too are long delays in the claims process. (Applause.) So Secretary Shinseki is working overtime to create a single lifetime electronic record that our troops and veterans can keep for life. (Applause.)

this speech is lengthy and so I am trying to get the snips from it that are relevent to this discussion

We're directing unprecedented resources to treating the signature wounds of today's wars -- traumatic brain injury and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. (Applause.) And I recently signed into law the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act. That's a long name, but let me tell you what it does. It not only improves treatment for traumatic brain injury and PTSD, it gives new support to many of the caregivers who put their own lives on hold to care for their loved one. (Applause.)

And as so many of you know, PTSD is a pain like no other -- the nightmares that keep coming back, the rage that strikes suddenly, the hopelessness that's led too many of our troops and veterans to take their own lives. So today, I want to say in very personal terms to anyone who is struggling -- don't suffer in silence. It's not a sign of weakness to reach out for support -- it's a sign of strength. Your country needs you. We are here for you. We are here to help you stand tall. Don't give up. Reach out. (Applause.)

We're making major investments in awareness, outreach, and suicide prevention -- hiring more mental health professionals, improving care and treatment. For those of you suffering from PTSD, we're making it a whole lot easier to qualify for VA benefits. From now on, if a VA doctor confirms a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, that is enough -- no matter what war you served in. (Applause.)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ed_veterans_of_america_conference_106574.html

He's done a hell of alot more for the veterans than the people who started the wars.

He ought to get that credit, even though I think he didnt go far enough will full medical coverage for life.

 

[JayHawk]

I will agree that he has made moves in the right direction. I actually dont have any issue with his administration of veterans affairs. This is the first year I will receive a less than equal to inflation pay raise where we were already 15 to 23% behind our professional counterparts in the civilian world and they dont offer their lives and disciplined obedience to those whom for which they work.

And yet I still agreed with that or even no pay raise based on our countries economic troubles.

To say he has done a hell of a lot more for vets is pretty ridiculous in reality however. Over Bushes time in office the cost of a single military member serving has nearly doubled based on pay and residual benefits.

I undersatnd it is everyones focus at the moment but since it is my caeer i tend to keep up with how things are going week by week vice when i have a polictical message to deliver.

 

[BostonPirate]

I will agree that he has made moves in the right direction. I actually dont have any issue with his administration of veterans affairs. This is the first year I will receive a less than equal to inflation pay raise where we were already 15 to 23% behind our professional counterparts in the civilian world and they dont offer their lives and disciplined obedience to those whom for which they work.

.........

Rep Boehner recently said that civil servants made more than their counterparts in the private sector, but I heard on the tube, I think maddow, that comparatively, they actually made 22% less for their work.

this is one example.

I don't like it, because when it affects the military it gives people incentive to move towards private contracting security like blackwater and doesn't give any incentive to stay where they are.

It makes the US security dependent upon private companies that can sidestep the high level of honor that we require of our men in uniform.

I think that whatever the feild is, be it security or secretarial, the civil servants should get the national average paid in the private sector as a baseline, no more no less, and higher pay should be given for merit and work.

 

[JayHawk]

I wish i could find the Navy Times article that broke down the cost of an inividual service member. It also had to do with the fact that while we downsize from a 600, 000 to 150,000 personnel Naval Force the enlisted has been reduced by 53% while the officers have only lost 26%. Which is a huge disparate change in force structure... We do use a lot more oversite in this politically charged world of military service but the difference is huge. The hardest part to reduce are Flag officers because thy bottom line the decisions so similar to congress they wont cut into their own fat.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Sorry, but when it comes down to a doctor's word vs. the pit viper politicians in Washington DC, I'll take the doctor's side every time in this. This isn't just one rouge doctor making this crap up.

Why the "large increase" in diabetes cases being paid for? Because it wasn't until the year 2000, that it was covered by the VA. And to those saying "no links between Agent Orange exposure and diabetes exist" are dead wrong. Scores of doctors, including those from the Mayo Clinic, Harvard Medical, Duke, and others have confirmed the link.

An Air Force study has found a 47 percent increase in diabetes among veterans with the highest levels of dioxin in their bloodstream. The result is based on 1997 physical examinations of 1,000 Air Force veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange during the years that it was used as a defoliant and crop killer in Vietnam.

http://www.diabetesmonitor.com/dioxin.htm

Results from the 2002 physical examination support adult-onset diabetes as the most important health problem seen in the Air Force Health Study. They suggest that as dioxin levels increase, not only are the presence and severity of adult-onset diabetes increased, but the time to onset of the disease is decreased.

A 166 percent increase in diabetes requiring insulin control was seen in those with the highest levels of dioxin. This is consistent with the strong evidence found in animal studies.

http://www.defense.gov/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=8662

Since getting benefits requires at a minimum of two different doctors, and given the evidence that indeed the dioxin in Agent Orange is a toxic substance, I'm taking their words over politicians. This reminds me of those who complain all the time about welfare and the urban legend of a Cadillac driving welfare queen. Sorry, but I ain't buying that veterans en masse are out to "scam" the system, and their medical doctors are complicit in this "scamming the system" charge people are making.

War is expensive! If you can't pay for your soldiers who went and did their jobs, then don't go to war in the first place.

 

[BostonPirate]

I wish i could find the Navy Times article that broke down the cost of an inividual service member. It also had to do with the fact that while we downsize from a 600, 000 to 150,000 personnel Naval Force the enlisted has been reduced by 53% while the officers have only lost 26%. Which is a huge disparate change in force structure... We do use a lot more oversite in this politically charged world of military service but the difference is huge. The hardest part to reduce are Flag officers because thy bottom line the decisions so similar to congress they wont cut into their own fat.

that must be why gates recently froze upper level promotions recently saying that they were brass heavy and it was costing too much

 

[JayHawk]

He did and Bob Gates is possibly the only competent Cabinet member currently serving. He has been able to equally support the troops and cuts at the same time. I respect the man beyond any other Secretary we have had in recent years. He gets it and is trying to fix it.

 

[White Eagle]

Sorry, but when it comes down to a doctor's word vs. the pit viper politicians in Washington DC, I'll take the doctor's side every time in this. This isn't just one rouge doctor making this crap up.

This is exactly why I feel that any Vet that served in a war or conflict should be treated for any ailment any time. You can't know if it is connected to your service or it was something the vipers decided was not necessary.

 

[archive]

He did and Bob Gates is possibly the only competent Cabinet member currently serving. He has been able to equally support the troops and cuts at the same time. I respect the man beyond any other Secretary we have had in recent years. He gets it and is trying to fix it.

i dont know if you subscribe online and that gets you access to all the times (army air force navy)...but they had a breakdown a few weeks ago in the air force times

 

[MoltenRock III]

My Dad is a Viet Nam Veteran, and served entirely in Cambodia during that time, and yes, some of that war spilled over into Cambodia. I saw my Dad's Military papers, because he showed them to me. He's having one hell of a time getting what he needs.

Yup! That's a very common refrain these days. Hence why I find it so distasteful that now, once those guys went and did their job and their duty, no questions asked, we have a subset of people wanting to split hairs, parse words, and seek to ooze under the door to escape having to pay what these men are entitled to.

My best friend used to be an Army Ranger (jumping out of airplanes daily/weekly), was a Westpoint graduate with honors, and served in the military up until he got to the rank of captain, and then moved over to the private sector. (While he is str8, he and I are of a very similar nature.)

A few years ago he started having lower back / lumbar disc issues putting him into excruciating pain when it flared up, and left him stuck in a chair, unable to move, until it passed in a few days or weeks. The only way he could function normally was with large doses of narcotic pain medication, until the flare-up passed. Of course, his insurance company then sent him a letter stating that this was clearly a work related injury from his time in the Army and therefore, not covered under their healthcare plan. (Wellpoint, the worst insurance company in the country.) And of course the Army/VA said that it couldn't possibly be an injury from work since he's been out of their employment for years, nor ever filled out an injury report. So he's essentially screwed and in limbo as he fights to get the care he needs, which is tragic.

Given this forum's mainly young posters, its hard for them to fathom or understand just what exactly the US healthcare system is like given they've probably only been to their family doctor once or twice in the past few years. It's hard for them to comprehend what dealing with a huge red-tape, hurdle laden, organization like an insurance company or the VA is like.

 

[BostonPirate]

My Dad is a Viet Nam Veteran, and served entirely in Cambodia during that time, and yes, some of that war spilled over into Cambodia. I saw my Dad's Military papers, because he showed them to me. He's having one hell of a time getting what he needs.

This is exactly why I feel that any Vet that served in a war or conflict should be treated for any ailment any time. You can't know if it is connected to your service or it was something the vipers decided was not necessary.

well I mean...

there are secondary and tertiary illnesses that always develop with chronic illnesses, and if they are not covered then it is ridiculous.

And really?

I don't care about the medical reasons.... Morally we have an obligation to supply our men and women who serve in the armed forces with lifetime healthcare. If they put their life on the line for US we owe them good health for their risk.

It is just that simple.

 

[JB3]

well I mean...

there are secondary and tertiary illnesses that always develop with chronic illnesses, and if they are not covered then it is ridiculous.

And really?

I don't care about the medical reasons.... Morally we have an obligation to supply our men and women who serve in the armed forces with lifetime healthcare. If they put their life on the line for US we owe them good health for their risk.

It is just that simple.

No it isn't. If a vet has heart disease, and had a genetic predisposition for it, why should American taxpayers foot the bill for treating it? The same goes for any ailments that is not a direct (or even indirect) result of serving.

You can't complain in one thread about the healthcare congress critters receive (and they serve the government just like any civil servant does), and then in another advocate full no-questions-asked healthcare for vets.

I also find it interesting that Molten has completely ignored Kulindahr's post. I'm not remotely surprised, however.

 

[Jack Springer]

Let me see if I can help you guys out.
I am a Viet Nam Veteran. The last two years of my service was the first two years of the US involvement in Viet Nam.
The only medical services I am not eligible for is hearing, visual and dental. All my medical has been paid for by the VA. Now that I have Medicare the VA goes to them and what they do not cover, the VA does.
Now, my service the last two years was in Hawaii. Yes, I spent 2 years at a Naval Communications Station in Hawaii. The only way I might have been exposed to Agent Orange is if I tricked with a military person that just came back from Nam and I did trick. Hawaii was the special Rest & Recreation spot for all the military services.
Let's see what any of you have to say about my Veterans medical treatments and if I am entitled to them.

What does "trick" mean?

My father is a WWII vet -- he only qualifies for some prescription medicine but the hassle in getting in is not worth the effort for him and others I know like him.

Why would the VA cover your expenses? Were you injured in Vietnam?