Shameful!

[Preservation Parcels]

Obama wants our wounded military to take financial responsibility for their own medical treatment. First, they serve and sacrifice. Then, he wants them to sacrifice more.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20090316/pl_usnw/the_american_legion_strongly_opposed_to_president_ s_plan_to_charge_wounded_heroes_for_treatment

I'm speechless. And angry. And I'm not finished with this.:mad:

[yermom]

sounds like they want private insurance companies to cover expenses. i'm assuming that means they had coverage already?

if they have been paying premiums to an insurance company, why shouldn't they be taking care of some of the cost?

[Lott's Bandana]

I tried to read this article as carefully as possible. I think y'mom has a point.

If a vet has been paying premiums to a Tricare supplement private carrier and becomes injured, then it seems fair for the private carrier to reimburse what would otherwise been covered in a non-military casualty that didn't come under VA's umbrella.

The article is a press release from the American Legion and I support them as a retired veteran, however, there seems to be some important points not made in it that raised questions and makes me think y'mom grasped what the article doesn't explain very well.

[Frozen Sooner]

I'm in complete agreement that it would be the wrong policy to pursue. Injuries sustained in service to the country should be treated at the expense of the country.

If'n there's an online petition or something to state disapproval of this, I'd be happy to sign.

[Frozen Sooner]

sounds like they want private insurance companies to cover expenses. i'm assuming that means they had coverage already?

if they have been paying premiums to an insurance company, why shouldn't they be taking care of some of the cost?

1. Private insurance has a maximum lifetime benefit. I'm uncomfortable with the idea of a person who loses a leg serving our country exhausting 500k of his 2mm lifetime benefit because the VA wants to save money.

2. We have a moral obligation to treat the injuries of our wounded.

[yermom]

#2 goes without saying

i didn't really know about #1, but it's a bit of a gray area IMO

[Frozen Sooner]

The thing is I just can't see Shineski being on board with this if it's exactly as presented.

[Whet]

from the AL:

The American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for Treatment

Mon Mar 16, 5:49 pm ET
To: POLITICAL EDITORS
Contact: Craig Roberts of The American Legion, +1-202-263-2982 Office, +1-202-406-0887 Cell
WASHINGTON, March 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- 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.

[Curly Bill]

If this is as it sounds Brack is even more out of touch then I thought. If someone experiences a "service-connected" injury the only rational thing that can happen is for the injury to be paid for by the country. If nothing else I'd prefer my tax money go to supporting wounded service personnel then have it pissed into the wind for some dumas stimulus package.

[StoopTroup]

The Lifetime Maximum might not apply under the new Obama Health Plan. He might tell the Privates they will cover you till death.

If the maximum stayed...I'd be against it too.

Military Folks should be covered even for papercuts sustained in Battle IMO

[Lott's Bandana]

So as carefully as I tried to interpret this article, I took it to mean disabilities that occur to an active duty servicemember, not a middle-aged veteran who already has been receiving benefits.

If it is the latter, what will it matter under a socialist healthcare system?

[Okla-homey]

One thing to remember is "service connected injuries" is a very broad category. For example, if Airman Jones is badly injured in a car wreck while on his way to work at Tinker AFB, that's generally considered a "service connected injury." Under those circumstances, the government provides the necessary medical treatment at no cost to Airman Jones and seeks reimbursement from any policy of insurance Airman Jones may own (typically the automobile policy he is required to maintain in order to drive on base) and/or the person who hit him. I see nothing wrong with that myself.

[Okla-homey]

So as carefully as I tried to interpret this article, I took it to mean disabilities that occur to an active duty servicemember, not a middle-aged veteran who already has been receiving benefits.

If it is the latter, what will it matter under a socialist healthcare system?

Remember my story about the time a dog bit the end of my USAF retired nose off? Well sir, the gubmint paid my 6000.00 medical bill, less my 25 buck co-pay, then sent me a letter requiring me to state whether I owned any insurance policies that could possibly cover the accident, or was covered under any employer-provided health benefits. They then sought reimbursement from both.

[Frozen Sooner]

Hm. Homey has no reason to be an apologist for the current administration. He's a veteran AND works defense for insurance companies. If he's OK with this, then I guess this merits more study than what's on the surface.

Homey, don't most medical policies exclude injury resulting as an act of war? I know that the life insurers took a beating over this after 9/11.

[Okla-homey]

Homey, don't most medical policies exclude injury resulting as an act of war? I know that the life insurers took a beating over this after 9/11.

Probably, but, it depends on what the policy says. The simple fact is, I don't think the gubmint is contemplating an outright denial of health bennies to those injured in the line of duty after their separation from the military.

Methinks all this is about is the gubmint trying to protect its interests by paying for the care, then requiring private insurers to kick-in benefits owed the policyholder pursuant to the insurance policy which are ultimately paid to the gubmint as a form of reimbursement. I say again, that makes sense. It's generally known as "subrogation" in the insurance biz and it's very common. In the classic subrogation situation, the first-party insurer "stands in the shoes" of the policyholder and can assert his rights against any third-party insurer. IOW, say you get in a wreck and file a claim against your policy. Your policy pays you, subrogates and goes after the guy who hit you for reimbursment of the benefits they paid you.

Here, if you have a private health insurance policy or health coverage through your civilian employer, and you were hurt on active duty back in the day, what's wrong with Uncle Sammy giving you care, then asking your private insurance to pony up?

That's not to say that the right-wing pundits won't try to make a lot of hay out of this by coloring it as some sort of anti-veteran dealio on the part of the BHO administration. I freely admit I'm a rightie and no fan of the Prez, but I'm not gonna pillory him over this if all that's happening is what I've described above.

[Preservation Parcels]

Okay, Homey. I rarely ever get angry, so I took a deep breath and read what you wrote. I trust your judgement. Thank you.

[Okla-homey]

Okay, Homey. I rarely ever get angry, so I took a deep breath and read what you wrote. I trust your judgement. Thank you.

There may be time yet to get angry, but we need more facts before we do so. I'd like to read the proposed DoD/VA regulation and/or legislation before I light the signal fires to summon help from Rohan...or is it Gondor? ;)

[Whet]

I see this as one of the foundations for Obama to "convince" us universal healthcare is necessary.

[OUHOMER]

I had to think about this for a minute. On the surface it sounded very shameful to me as well.

now if a full time member (or a retired member)of the armed forces get hurts on the job or even off the job, than I think it is up to the tax payers to foot the bill.

Now, if someone does their 3 to 5 year tour and moves on to the private sector, they need to get health care just like the rest of us. With the exceptions of any injury that may have occurred during their tour.


example: my brother did 5 years in the navy back in the late 70's than got out. He has used the VA for back problems and even had surgery. It had nothing to do with his military service. Should the tax payers pay for it, well it was a promised service when he joined. But I dont think the tax payer should have paid for it.

Now, he is a heavy drinker, his liver is about shot. he went to the VA and they said they could possibly do a liver transplant.

now, i love my brother even tho he has many faults, etc, and i do not give him any hand outs because it always goes to booze.

But there is no way in hell this should be paid for by the tax payer.

[VeeJay]

Has anyone else heard that Obama stands for:

One
Big
A$s
Mistake
America

[Rogue]

Whet's not far off. VA is, arguably, a decent model for national healthcare.
Check out VA preventive care measures, chronic disease management, and perfomance indicators versus private sector.

About the American Legion take...this was about the same reaction that the Veterans Service Organizations had when VA first started billing private insurance. As a vet, I'm fine with VA billing my Blue Cross. In fact, I'm more than fine with it. I want Blue Cross to help sustain my healthcare provider of choice.

Now, I'm a bit concerned about the part about billing insurance for "service connected disabilities." Those are disabilities that the VA agrees, through an adjuciation process, are the result of military service. Sometimes as obvious as a blown off limb, sometimes as nebulous as "my 'beetus got worse when I was called up to go to Fort Huachuca last summer for annual training, nevermind the fact that I'm morbidly obese and treat my body like a sewer so the VA should pay me for a disability."

I guess what I'm worried about is that it doesn't seem unreasonable for insurance companies to then gouge the heck out of military folk for having a dangerous lifestyle (my life insurance is higher if I smoke or make a habit of diving with sharks while covered in seal blood) or occupation since the same insurance company is going to be expected to cover the medical care for those employed in occupations where bullets and bombs are common.

[Rogue]

...
example: my brother did 5 years in the navy back in the late 70's than got out. He has used the VA for back problems and even had surgery. It had nothing to do with his military service. Should the tax payers pay for it, well it was a promised service when he joined. But I dont think the tax payer should have paid for it.


Doubtful, nay nearly impossible, that a current heavy drinker will get a transplant. If he sobers up, he's a better candidate, but users don't usually make the cut for the transplant lists.

Now, for me the part that matters is where you say, "it was a promised service when he joined."
For every one of these guys that seem questionable, I can give you 2 examples of a WW II vet who did what you said, took care of himself, and never asked the gubmint for a thing. Now, an octagenarian on a limited income just a skosh above the "means test threshold" he can't get enrolled for VA health care. Kills me. VA is expanding eligibliity to be a little higher than the typical "poverty line" they've used for years, but I say give the vets their healthcare. And bill their insurance. For NON-service connected treatment. Hell, some of us even pay co-payments at VA because we have insurance and an income. Fine. For NON-service connected treatment.

As a taxpayer, I don't object to any VA healthcare at my expense. It really is the least we can do.

[SoonerStormchaser]

It does make sense somewhat...but it's bound to be abused. However, look for all the veterans interest groups to hammer this BIG TIME.

[Rogue]

Some of this stuff gets complicated. Here are the current "priority groups" for vets when they enroll for VA healthcare. Not all vets are eligible for the same things. Some specialty care (dental care, nursing homes, etc) are only for service-connected disabilities, 100% SC disabled vets, and so on. (http://www.va.gov/healtheligibility/eligibility/PriorityGroupsAll.asp)

Income thresholds, you may want to increase the size to view this (http://www.va.gov/healtheligibility/Library/pubs/VAIncomeThresholds/VAIncomeThresholds.pdf).

[OUHOMER]

Doubtful, nay nearly impossible, that a current heavy drinker will get a transplant. If he sobers up, he's a better candidate, but users don't usually make the cut for the transplant lists.


heh, thats his problem that said they would not even consider doing anything until he was sober for 30+ days.

he has not been able to do that :mad:
if he can, i dont think tax payers should pay

[OklahomaTuba]

Obama just loves the military folks...

Two defense officials who were not authorized to speak publicly said Gates will announce up to a half-dozen major weapons cancellations later this month. Candidates include a new Navy destroyer, the Air Force's F-22 fighter jet, and Army ground-combat vehicles, the offi cials said.

More cuts are planned for later this year after a review that could lead to reductions in programs such as aircraft carriers and nuclear arms, the officials said.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/17/gates_readies_big_cuts_in_weapons/

Obama, making the country safer each and every day!!

[JLEW1818]

Has anyone else heard that Obama stands for:

One
Big
A$s
Mistake
America

Yes Sir !!!

[SoonerStormchaser]

Obama just loves the military folks...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/17/gates_readies_big_cuts_in_weapons/

Obama, making the country safer each and every day!!

Fine...then how about some $$ for some new ****ing tankers...or newer engines for my jet?

[soonerscuba]

Obama just loves the military folks...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/17/gates_readies_big_cuts_in_weapons/

Obama, making the country safer each and every day!!Robert Gates is really after them too. Comrade Gates clearly hates America.

[Lott's Bandana]

Scuttled:


Obama Heeds Vet Leaders
After meeting with MOAA President VADM Norb Ryan (USN-Ret) and other veterans' association leaders this week, President Obama agreed to drop a budget proposal to bill veterans' health insurance companies for the cost of treating their service-caused injuries.From the Military Officers Association of America newsletter.

Nice work, Norb.

Norb?

[Okla-homey]

Scuttled:

From the Military Officers Association of America newsletter.

Nice work, Norb.

Norb?

Although as stated above, I really didn't object to the proposed policy as I understood it, this Administration, like WJC's, must tread extremely lightly regarding veterans issues. Anything they do that may be spun as denying a penny to veterans would have huge implications.

Put another way, even amidst the current economic crisis, I guess this bunch can "belt-tighten" in any area but Veterans Affairs. Which is probably as it should be regarding "Those Who Have Bourne the Battle" by a Prez who never served.

[Rogue]

Last Prez that served was GHWB.

[Okla-homey]

Last Prez that served was GHWB.

I respectfully disagree. Notwithstanding his political opponents' attempts to portray W as an AWOL TANG draft-dodger, the simple fact is, he was a fully qualified F-106 fighter-interceptor pilot, and that's no mean feat. F-106's were one of the most unstable and therefore dangerous century-series fighters, eclipsed only by the F-104.

W's Sith Lord VP Dick Cheney is not a veteran, but he was a danged fine SECDEF during the GHWB administration. That, and he almost killed a Texas trial lawyer during a hunting incident. That orta count for something.;)

[Rogue]

Fair enough, Homey.

Simple fact is that back then the Guard, Air Guard, and no-show Guard was a way to dodge the draft. It became something different during his watch and yer butt is all but gay-ron-teed to get deployed at least once in the guard and reserve units now.

I respect his Dad's service immensely.

And W. took care of vets pretty well during his watch. But his trumped up guard service is a sham and I don't buy it.

[StoopTroup]

What's even worse is that he and his daddy weren't really texans but tried to act like one. That's even worse than being one IMO. :D

[Okla-homey]

Fair enough, Homey.

Simple fact is that back then the Guard, Air Guard, and no-show Guard was a way to dodge the draft. It became something different during his watch and yer butt is all but gay-ron-teed to get deployed at least once in the guard and reserve units now.

I respect his Dad's service immensely.

And W. took care of vets pretty well during his watch. But his trumped up guard service is a sham and I don't buy it.

As long as we're agreed those fake documents regarding W's TANG service Dan Rather lost his job over were indeed faked, we're cool.

[Okla-homey]

What's even worse is that he and his daddy weren't really texans but tried to act like one. That's even worse than being one IMO. :D

Have you guys seen Will Farrell's one man show on HBO yet?

At one point, all the Bushies take W to task for being the only one in the whole danged family with a Texas accent. Hee-larious.:D

[Rogue]

Farrell did a good job with that, but it was about 20 minutes too long.