previous post next post  

Post about a submarine...

By The Armorer on February 8, 2005 | | Comments (4)

...get linked by submariners! And get some traffic, too, especially from The Stupid Shall Be Punished. Another linker however, Unconsidered Trifles, (yet another blogging submariner) pointed me to Michelle Malkin and her post on 'cuts' to VA benefits, a new talking point for Democrats.

You can read the links for the details, I'll just offer this.

I am a disabled veteran, in the Priority 1 group (which means the VA takes me space-required, no charge, for life (unless my rating should drop for some reason). I don't have to pay a dime for anything. That was true last year, and will be true next year. As a Regular Army retiree, I'm still funding 80% of my VA disability payment out of my retirement check (that will drop 10% a year per year until I am no longer funding it at all based on legislation passed two years ago). The group in question under consideration for having to start paying a bit more are the more affluent veterans who joined the system during the VA expansion of services some years ago - who have no significant service-related disability rating.

In other words, people who were'nt even eligible a couple of years ago, and who have no significant service-connected disability, are being asked to pony up some bucks.

A $15 drug co-pay, and a $250 enrollment fee.

Compare and contrast: As a Regular retiree I participate in TRICARE Prime, the Department of Defense health care system. I pay $460 a year for my family. I would be paying $230 a year as an individual. Since I live near a military treatment facility I have no per-visit copays, but if I am referred to an off-post specialist, I pay $12 a visit. If I am not able to use the local military pharmacy, I would pay between 3-22$ in co-pays.

I choose to participate in TRICARE because the VA doesn't cover my family, and frankly, because I can afford to. If I were to rely on the VA for care I can afford to get under TRICARE, I would be one more space-required appointment that the really needy, but lesser-rated vets who get their care space available would have to wait on. Because I can, I choose to give up my access so those other guys can maybe get in a teeny bit faster.

But the bottom line is - no one is having a benefit cut that didn't get that benefit as an unexpected windfall anyway. The core group of VA's responsibility - the Priority 1 and 2 vets, are getting the same entitlements they were getting before.

The group being asked to pay a bit? They are the lowest priority participants in the system - who weren't even covered originally. They are being asked to pay comparable prices to what they would be paying for generally the same benefit (albeit space available, not required) that retirees are entitled to. Guess what? My access to the military treatment facility is also space-available. Should the commander of the local MTF decide his Active Duty population completely saturates his capacity - I start paying co-pays and costs similar to what the VA is charging. If anything, this particular benficiary class has been skating (assuming they live where they can get reasonable access) with a better individual benefit than the career retiree has.

Now, we can talk quality of care here and there in the VA system all day - that's a different issue, though I personally have no complaints in that regard when I have received VA care (nice thing about P1 is that I can use any facility anywhere, anytime - so if I'm out-of-region for TRICARE, I can use the VA, which I have done now, twice).

Share This Article:

Categories:

4 Comments

By AFSister on February 8, 2005 9:59 PM
They're complaining about a benefit for VA medical care, for veterans with little or no disability rating? And they're complaining about a $15 drug co-pay and $250 enrollment fee? Am I hearing this right? Our MONTHLY premium is more than that enrollment fee. Our drug co-pay ranges between $10 and $40. Now, granted, that is for private sector insurance through my husband's employer, and he's never put his life on the line for our country while on the job, but still. That's a TON more than those vets are being asked to pay. Vets who have no long-term physical or mental issues as a result of military service. Now, if I'm wrong about my understanding of this issue, I'll gladly eat my words and beg John to remove my comments, but I think I have it right. If someone is injured- mentally or physically- while on ANY job, that employer should pay the bills until the injury is resolved. Keep in mind that some injuries are never fully resolved and are to be considered permanent disabilities and should always be the responsibility of that employer to cover. Coverage may come at a cost, but the brunt of the cost should be covered by the employer. I smashed my finger on the job when I was 19, but does that entitle me to Workman's Comp every time I need to see a doctor now? NO! Was I injured on the job? Yes. But that doesn't entitle me to life-time medical benefits from the State of Ohio as paid for by my previous employer. No employer should be bound to cover an ex-employee's health care coverage beyond the date of full recovery. I don't care if that employer is the restaurant down the street or the US Government. If your employer is gratious enough to offer health care benefits post-employment, I see no reason why you shouldn't help pay for it (except in the case of permanent disability, as explained above.) This is just an extension of our welfare state reaching over into the military, IMHO, and costs us millions every year unnecessarily. That money could be spent a lot more wisely on things like military death benefits and outfitting our soldiers with the best equipment available. Anyway, that's my 2 cents (ok, more like a nickel, since I've ran on).
 
By WillyShake on February 9, 2005 10:05 AM
Thanks for the link; it's particularly gratifying to get noticed by a great blog. Also, thanks for posting on the USS San Francisco incident and further educating me about VA benefits issues! Sincerely, --Will
 
By Jeremiah on February 11, 2005 11:44 AM
Thank you for demonstrating once again how limited and anemic is america's concept of "freedom of expression". If I wrote some garbage about those pussyfags being "defenders of liberty" or some nonsense then my post certainly would have stayed up forever. But since it was a dissenting viewpoint that, by the way, you obviously could not even attempt to disprove, it got erased in 5 minutes, along with the whole thread (and picture of the kneepad-wearing douchebag)! Amazing! Looks like america's definition of "freedom" is "the freedom to express a cookie-cutter mainstream opinion that the rest of the sheep are expressing" but conspicuously does not include DISSENTING views! I can't think of a more COWARDLY, PUSSIFIED country than america!!! No wonder the world hates it!!! Fuck you and your pussy bully nation!!!
 
By Jeremiah on February 11, 2005 11:48 AM
P.S.- do the doctors truly cut off americans' balls at birth of do they simply shrivel up and fall off as they are utterly useless to you bunch of cowards?
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.