Veterans Benefits To Get Cut?


What do you folks think about the proposed plan to force veterans to pay for their own health and disability insurance? IMO, an utter disgrace. I'm guessing none of them thought they were voting for that.

Your rating: None Average: 2.7 (3 votes)

I am a veteran of a peaceful time in our history - 1983 to 1986. I am not eligible for much if any veteran's benefits. that is just the way it worked for me I guess, but I am totally against short-changing any veteran from any period of service in this country.

We have an all volunteer force and those of us that have served made a decision to put our private lives on hold to provide a service to the country. (I also include draftees) Regardless of the reason for joining, to be shown this level of disrespect for the sacrifice of our lives, not to mention the above the call of duty sacrifice for those injured or killed is just par for the Obama course as I see it.

it is a shame that so many people only provide lip-service to supporting the troops!

The VA now does means testing for medical services. If you have the means, you can still get service, but now you have to pay for it. That seems fair.

While I am against the proposal, the plan calls for PRIVATE INSURERS to pay some or all medical costs, not the veterans. The Obama adminstration wants to play the same game as employers, which is to try and find someone else to pay medical bills.

BTW - your link is a press release from the American Legion, which is engaging in scare tactics with misleading headlines like "The American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for Treatment."

Potentially this might cause insurers to raise premiums, deductibles, or deny coverage to veterans, which is why I am aginst the plan, but this does not "force veterans to pay for their own health and disability insurance," as you claim. Uninsured veterans would still have full VA coverage.

This is how it works when any Americans have dual coverage, like Medicare and private insurance. The two insurers try to figure out who is primary and who is secondary.

But IMHO, any injuries sustained in active duty should be fully covered by the government, even if it is a lifelong disability.

Sir you are mistaken.

"but this does not "force veterans to pay for their own health and disability insurance," as you claim."

The service members would have to pay their private deductible for something that occurred while in service of the public. Thus costing them out of pocket money that they currently do not pay.

This is not at all like what private employers do. Medicaid acts as supplemental insurance when you are injured in a similar situation. The DoD insurance is and was never meant to be supplemental insurance. While on active duty it is your primary insurance.

BTW - Military family members who get private insurance already have to use their primary insurance first and then then use Tricare as supplemental. The new policy would be doing the same thing but for people injured during military work. Most servicemembers who have private insurance are either 1) Reservists or 2) military members who have supplemental insurance because of exceptional family members (physical or mentally handicapped) and this would make their private insurance run out faster than the current pace on an already financially strapped family.


The point in was making is that the proposed plan - which again I disagree with - would foist off onto private insurance companies costs that are now being paid by the VA. Yes, some vets might pay higher deductibles, premiums, or be denied coverage, as I indicated in the earlier post. There was some talk of attaching riders to prevent this from occurring, but the VA chief has yet to release a detailed plan (at least not that I have seen).

I do not support the plan, nor am I an Obama apologist. I just get irrtated when people post things without reading what they post.

The plan is more aimed at post-military insurance costs, like when veterans go into the private sector after their tour of duty, or when a spouse has health care coverage for the rest of the family. The VA wants to pass off the costs of injuries and disabilities to private insurers if they can get away with it.

If G-Man wants to put the smackdown on Obama, he would be better off arguing the hypocrisy of an administration that promotes universal health care while simultaneously trying to pass the buck for veterans onto private insurers. That argument would stick better than scare tactics about vets being forced to pay for war injuries, like the Ameican Legion press release indicated.

Once again, for those who only read 1/10 of what is posted (not you, MikeyA): I do not support the plan, and I fully recognize that a possible outcome of this poorly conceived plan is that some vets might face higher out-of-pocket costs.

The government SENT our troops into HARMS WAY, They get hurt, while here at home we shout slogans, like "I support the troops, but not the war", when those who shout the loudest-obviously support neither. They should have full health benefits-period! In light of the fact that congress has spent what, a couple trillion, that goes to support ACORN, illegal aliens, corporate bonuses, and God knows what else-it is a major DISGRACE-IMHO.

if these particular concerns offend you, you have the right, as an American Citizen, to apply those concerns in your campaign when you run for congress.

But make sure you get your facts straight. And whatever you do, don't allow your emotions cloud your judgement.

Also, make sure you don't make any blanket statements based upon your assumption that everyone agrees with what you feel.

Typing about it on a blog does nothing but garner you one bubble.

Why don't you worry about YOUR posts? I KNOW people think differently than I do-see what a fiasco happened last November? Elections have consequences, as the people will soon find out, when they see they're going to get nothing as a result.

According to one US mandate "to care for him whom shall borne the battle" the government now, as in the past is doing a rather poor job.

For example; Vietnam: Many of the returning veterans found out that their jobs were not held or available. In fact they were told that "the Vietnam war was a policing action and not a declared war, so their jobs did not have to be held, nor did the company or place of business have to hire them back.

Another problem during Vietnam was Agent Orange. Many of the returning veterans became ill due to the exposure to Agent Orange. The government would not accept Agent Orange as the cause, leaving them to pay out of pocket for medical testing and treatment not recognized by the government.

Next was the Gulf War Syndrome, again the returning veterans had to pay out of pocket for treatments and testing not recognized by the government. However, things have changed. Recently, the government has acknowledged that the Gulf War Sydrome was not a syndrome or "in their heads" but an actual illness or disease.

So "cuting into the veteran's benefits is not a surpirse to me, because of the shabby treatment that many of the veterans have received now and in the past.

I think the best way to save money is to prevent ever having a draft again, and for all the young men to refuse to go to war, unless the United States is attacked. Furthermore, I would like to see the president, senators, congressmen, and the war mongers who profit from war on the front lines doing what our servicemen do. If that would be the case, I don't think that we would enter into a war!

Mary Brandeberry

It is now a moot point.

Prior to making another mistake like this the administration should vet their ideas before taking them to the leaders of the organizations it will affect.


to make veterans pay out of pocket, is a travisty. its is a knife in the back of all who served to keep this country and other nations safe from their rights for freedom. This country should look at the ones who change their religions and become traitors and cowards. To keep for being called to duty to keep the country they live in, safe for terroistic threats and possible attacks. There are too many refugees getting into this country. So who pose as such. pose a threat to the USA

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.