|
|
|
|
||
|
||
|
|
||
| SEARCH | SUBSCRIBE | ||
|
 |
Vets
Urge Bush on Disabled Benefits Rule By
Jim Abrams, Associated Press September
5, 2003 WASHINGTON
- Four hundred and one retired generals and admirals have written
President asking him to change a century-old rule depriving disabled
veterans of part or all of their retirement benefits. There are signs
their argument is being heard. On
Friday key House Republicans met with veterans groups to discuss plans to
address changes in a system that has threatened to sour relations between
the president and veterans, normally some of his most loyal constituents. Participants
said both full and partial restitution plans are being considered as the
administration walks the fine line between alienating veterans and further
driving up the budget deficit. Full
adjustment, in which disabled vets would get all their retirement pay,
could cost the government $58 billion over 10 years. Cheaper partial plans
would link retirement benefits to the seriousness of the disability or
phase in changes over five or 10 years. The
401 generals and admirals, in their letter to the president, said they
were "profoundly concerned that the United States is penalizing
hundreds of thousands of disabled military retirees, including many who
are unemployable because of disability incurred in service to their
country, and many who exist at or below the poverty level." Retired
Army Lt. Gen. Billy Thomas, who organized the letter, said the rule, under
which the retirement benefits of disabled veterans are reduced by the
amount they receive in disability pay, was put in place in 1891 by
Southern legislators unfriendly to former Union soldiers. Eliminating it
has long been popular in Congress, but resisted by administrations because
of the costs. "It's
an ethical and moral issue," Thomas said. "It should not be
judged as a money issue." He added that Republicans are concerned
that they could be vulnerable on the issue and "want to see this
taken off the election-year plate." He estimated that 535,000
veterans are losing some of their retirement under the policy. In
addition to the generals, the administration is being pressed by House
Democrats who have organized a discharge petition, a way of forcing a bill
to a House vote by gathering half, or 218, the signatures of House
members. So far the effort, led by wounded Vietnam veteran Jim Marshall,
D-Ga., has 202 signatures, including one Republican, Rep. Tom Tancredo of
Colorado. Rep.
Walter Jones R-N.C., whose district includes the Marine Corps' Camp
Lejeune, said he will sign the petition if the issue isn't resolved by
next Thursday. "There's no question in my mind that there are some
very hard feelings" in his district, Jones said. "This is the
flag issue for all retirees and veterans." There
was strong support to include full benefits in last year's defense bill,
but the administration, balking at the price tag, negotiated a deal that
limited full benefits to veterans wounded in combat. The generals, in
their letter, said that covers less than 5 percent of disabled retirees. Jones
said a compromise in this year's negotiations would be acceptable to him
only if 80 to 90 percent of disabled veterans are covered. Sen.
Harry Reid, D-Nev., who with Rep. Michael Bilirakis, R-Fla., are the chief
sponsors of the current legislation, said Friday that a partial solution
would not be acceptable. Copyright
© 2002 Global Action on Aging
|
