View Full Version : American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan (merged)
Infantry44
03-16-2009, 20:07
I guess this (http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20090316/pl_usnw/the_american_legion_strongly_opposed_to_president_ s_plan_to_charge_wounded_heroes_for_treatment) is slipping past most people while they cheer at all the "Obama Berates AIG" headlines...
Just another example of the 'Change' that is being lifted from our pockets and into off to who knows where. :rolleyes:
Bordercop
03-17-2009, 07:14
Read this...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20090316/pl_usnw/the_american_legion_strongly_opposed_to_president_ s_plan_to_charge_wounded_heroes_for_treatment
and tell me what you think of our new Commander in Chief...
Ungrateful POS!!!
The headline appears to be misleading. The plan as described would not directly charge veterans, but rather bill non-VA or Tricare insurance programs, if the veteran has a policy. The article didn't seem to indicate whether vets would be required to buy primary or supplemental insurance, so its hard to determine if this plan would result in actual additional costs to vets for healthcare.
Several years ago, Tricare changed its Tricare For Life (TFL) policy, requiring any vets that qualified for Medicare A to purchase Medicare B coverage in order to be eligible for Tricare Prime. In other words, any seriously disabled vet has to pay almost $1200 a year (on top of Tricare premiums) in order to enroll his or her family in Tricare Prime. Before the start of OIF/OEF, this only affected elderly vets who became Medicare eligible after age 65, and a very small population of younger vets that were medically retired for significant disability, and hence were eligible for both Tricare and Medicare coverage. In light of ongoing combat operations, I suspect that this policy change is now affecting thousands of vets.
Warrior-Mentor
03-17-2009, 07:44
The American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan
to Charge Wounded Heroes for Treatment
Mon Mar 16, 5:49 pm ET
Contact: Craig Roberts of The American Legion,
(202) 263-2982 Office
WASHINGTON, March 16 -- The leader of the nation's largest veterans organization says he is "deeply disappointed and concerned" after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.
"It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan," said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. "He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it."
The Commander, clearly angered as he emerged from the session said, "This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate ' to care for him who shall have borne the battle' given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm's way, and not private insurance companies. I say again that The American Legion does not and will not support any plan that seeks to bill a veteran for treatment of a service connected disability at the very agency that was created to treat the unique need of America's veterans!"
Commander Rehbein was among a group of senior officials from veterans service organizations joining the President, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki and Steven Kosiak, the overseer of defense spending at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
The group's early afternoon conversation at The White House was precipitated by a letter of protest presented to the President earlier this month. The letter, co-signed by Commander Rehbein and the heads of ten colleague organizations, read, in part, " There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran's personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties this country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable."
Commander Rehbein reiterated points made last week in testimony to both House and Senate Veterans' Affairs Committees. It was stated then that The American Legion believes that the reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate that VA treat service-connected injuries and disabilities given that the United States government sends members of the armed forces into harm's way, and not private insurance companies. The proposed requirement for these companies to reimburse the VA would not only be unfair, says the Legion, but would have an adverse impact on service-connected disabled veterans and their families. The Legion argues that, depending on the severity of the medical conditions involved, maximum insurance coverage limits could be reached through treatment of the veteran's condition alone. That would leave the rest of the family without health care benefits. The Legion also points out that many health insurance companies require deductibles to be paid before any benefits are covered.
Additionally, the Legion is concerned that private insurance premiums would be elevated to cover service-connected disabled veterans and their families, especially if the veterans are self-employed or employed in small businesses unable to negotiate more favorable across-the-board insurance policy pricing. The American Legion also believes that some employers, especially small businesses, would be reluctant to hire veterans with service-connected disabilities due to the negative impact their employment might have on obtaining and financing company health care benefits.
"I got the distinct impression that the only hope of this plan not being enacted," said Commander Rehbein, "is for an alternative plan to be developed that would generate the desired $540-million in revenue. The American Legion has long advocated for Medicare reimbursement to VA for the treatment of veterans. This, we believe, would more easily meet the President's financial goal. We will present that idea in an anticipated conference call with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel in the near future.
"I only hope the administration will really listen to us then. This matter has far more serious ramifications than the President is imagining," concluded the Commander.
SOURCE The American Legion
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20090316/pl_usnw/the_american_legion_strongly_opposed_to_president_ s_plan_to_charge_wounded_heroes_for_treatment
We have nothing to fear. The Democrats are in charge. We know they support the troops and would do nothing to harm them, the military or the missions where troops are in harms way.
/s
Insurance is Insurance.
Your rates are set by the company's expectations of usage. Knowing that they will be billed more for some will require them to raise their rates for all in the same catigory.
Warrior-Mentor
03-17-2009, 07:52
Tacoma News Tribune
March 17, 2009
Who Pays For War Wounds?
By David Goldstein, McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is considering making veterans use private insurance to pay for treatment of combat and service-related injuries.
The plan would be an about-face on what veterans believe is a longstanding pledge to pay for health care costs that result from their military service.
But in a White House meeting Monday, veterans groups apparently failed to persuade President Barack Obama to take the plan off the table.
“Veterans of all generations agree that this proposal is bad for the country and bad for veterans,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “If the president and the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) want to cut costs, they can start at AIG, not the VA.”
Under current policy, veterans are responsible for health care costs that are unrelated to their military service. Exceptions in some cases can be made for veterans without private insurance or who are 100 percent disabled.
The president spoke Monday at the Department of Veterans Affairs to commemorate its 20th anniversary and said he hopes to increase funding by $25 billion over the next five years. But he said nothing about the plan to bill private insurers for service-related medical care.
Few details about the plan have been available and a VA spokesman did not provide additional information. But the reaction on Capitol Hill to the idea has been swift and harsh.
“Dead on arrival” is how Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington described the idea.
“When our troops are injured while serving our country, we should take care of those injuries completely,” Murray, a member of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, told a hearing last week.
“I don’t think we should nickel and dime them for their care,” she added.
In separate comments, Republican Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri said the nation “owes a debt to the veterans who fought and paid for our freedom.”
Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki said at the hearing where Murray spoke that the plan was “a consideration.” He also acknowledged that the VA’s proposed budget for next year included it as a way to increase revenue.
But Shinseki told the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee that “a final decision hasn’t been made yet.”
As I mentioned on the First Lady thread... I guess they really are showing how much they care about the military and military families. :rolleyes:
Moral issue aside... why should the DoD be any different than any other employer when it comes to paying for on the job injures? If I get hurt at my job, my employer's disability insurance would be responsible for covering any future medical bills related to my injury regardless of whether or not I continue with the company. The same should hold for government employees. Particularly considering that these men and women are injured while serving their country.
DbeforeD
03-17-2009, 08:34
I didn't know "hope and change" stood for- hope you have enough change to buy bandaids.
I need a beer.
Warrior-Mentor
03-17-2009, 11:22
“…to care for him
who shall have borne the battle
and for his widow, and his orphan…”
President Lincoln
- from the Gettysburg Address
As the nation braced itself for the final throes of the Civil War, thousands of spectators gathered on a muddy Pennsylvania Avenue near the U.S. Capitol to hear President Lincoln’s second inaugural address. It was March 4, 1865, a time of great uneasiness. In just over one month, the war would end and the president would be assassinated.
President Lincoln framed his speech on the moral and religious implications of the war; rhetorically questioning how a just God could unleash such a terrible war upon the nation. “If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses in the providence of God, ... and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offenses came.”
With its deep philosophical insights, critics have hailed the speech as one of Lincoln’s best.
As the speech progressed, President Lincoln turned from the divisive bitterness at the war’s roots to the unifying task of reconciliation and reconstruction.
In the speech’s final paragraph, the president delivered his prescription for the nation’s recovery:
“With malice toward none, with charity for all,
with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right,
let us strive on to finish the work we are in,
to bind up the nation’s wounds,
to care for him who shall have borne the battle
and for his widow, and his orphan,
to do all which may achieve and cherish
a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”
With the words, “To care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow, and his orphan,” President Lincoln affirmed the government’s obligation to care for those injured during the war and to provide for the families of those who perished on the battlefield.
Today, a pair of metal plaques bearing those words flank the entrance to the Washington, D.C. headquarters of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). VA is the federal agency responsible for serving the needs of veterans by providing health care, disability compensation and rehabilitation, education assistance, home loans, burial in a national cemetery, and other benefits and services.
Lincoln’s immortal words became the VA motto in 1959, when the plaques were installed, and can be traced to Sumner G. Whittier, administrator of what was then called the Veterans Administration. A document on VA medical history prepared for the congressional Committee on Veterans’ Affairs and titled, “To care for him who shall have borne the battle,” details how the words became VA’s motto. “He (Whittier) worked no employee longer or harder than himself to make his personal credo the mission of the agency. What was that credo? Simply the words of Abraham Lincoln, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow, and his orphan. To indicate the mission of his agency’s employees, Mr. Whittier had plaques installed on either side of the main entrance.”
President Lincoln’s words have stood the test of time, and stand today as a solemn reminder of VA’s commitment to care for those injured in our nation’s defense and the families of those killed in its service.
From the VA Website:
http://www1.va.gov/opa/feature/celebrate/vamotto.asp
Strongly opposed?
Why not freaking outraged?
Time for some letter writing, and thanks WM...I'm using Lincoln's quote from that last post you made.