As far as I am concerned, Republicans should not limit any benefits to a veteran, as is suggested in this article. here is the missing second page of the article: but we need to streamline these duplicative programs,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who requested the study. Coburn said Americans would find it hard to understand how someone making $86,000 a year in tax-exempt VA income qualifies for Social Security Disability Insurance. He noted that civilian workers are disqualified from the program if they make as little as $13,000 a year. Only 17 percent of those who received multiple forms of compensation had suffered a combat-related disability, according to the GAO. Louis Celli Jr., a Washington representative for the American Legion, said critics of multiple benefits are “misguided and uninformed.” He said the report “should simply be filed in the category of one of Sen. Coburn’s parting shots to loyal upstanding American patriots who have sacrificed so much for this country.” Coburn, a longtime critic of government spending, is retiring at the end of the year. He said the report raises questions about whether disability benefits are getting to those who truly need them. “This is billions of dollars a year in duplicative payments,” Coburn said. “We ought to reassess and say, ‘Are we doing more than take care of people in need?’ I’m not against the military. I don’t think they should be triple dipping.” Veterans have long been exempted from rules that deny Social Security benefits to anyone with other income exceeding $13,000 a year. Until the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, veterans were barred from receiving both military retirement pay and Department of Veterans Affairs’ disability benefits. Under a Civil War-era statute, the Pentagon docked retirement pay dollar-for-dollar up to the amount of disability benefits from the VA. Congress changed that law in 2002, restoring military retirement pay to veterans also drawing disability benefits. “Our nation’s status as the world’s only superpower is largely due to the sacrifices our veterans made in the last century,” Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in March 2002 when the bill was being debated. “Rather than honoring their commitment and bravery by fulfilling our obligations, the federal government has chosen to perpetuate this longstanding injustice,” Reid said. “Quite simply, this is disgraceful and we must correct it.” At the time, then-Sen. John Warner, R-Va., a former Navy secretary, posed a question to fellow senators: “How can we ask the men and women who have so faithfully served to sacrifice a portion of their retirement because they are also receiving compensation for an injury suffered while serving their country?” Warner acknowledged that the change would have “significant cost,” but added; “Is the cost too high? I think not.” The report did not recommend changes to the program. The VA said in a response that it “generally agrees” with the report’s conclusions.
Posted on: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 12:37:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015