More benevolence for Veterans....
In the continuing story of how our lawmakers treat the very heart and soul of our society, the Veteran, we have the story of the disability squabble. Read as: how can we spend less money on Veterans than we promised.
I am not a retired veteran, nor a disabled veteran, but I spent over 17 years of my life in some form of the military, including ROTC, the Regular Army, the National Guard and the Army Reserves. I have many close friends who are in the retired, disabled or the retired and also disabled category. From the later I have been kept abreast of the government's campaign to short change the ones who have given the most to their country.
Under current mandate, if you are a retired veteran who happens to also be disabled, the total amount of your disability payment is deducted from your retirement pay. Some veterans who are 100% disabled, receive no retirement stipend at all, only disability. In other words, if you flew 100 deadly missions over Hanoi for your country's sake, but were shot down, spent 7 years as a POW, were tortured to the point that you ended up as a quadriplegic, all you could collect is your disability payment. A payment intended to help defray the cost of your injuries. You would kiss your retirement pay, based on 30 years of selfless service good-bye.
Now after years, and legions of veterans explaining how unfair this is, the Congress is prepared to rectify this injustice. And how do they propose to do this? As Joe Galloway explains in his current article Robbing Sgt. Peter to Pay Sgt. Paul the "honorable" men on the Potomac are set to pay current veterans what they are due by not paying future veterans what they might be due. I can see the volunteer ranks swelling when the potential recruit learns that losing a leg might be, according to the new philosophy, only a minor injury.
In the continuing story of how our lawmakers treat the very heart and soul of our society, the Veteran, we have the story of the disability squabble. Read as: how can we spend less money on Veterans than we promised.
I am not a retired veteran, nor a disabled veteran, but I spent over 17 years of my life in some form of the military, including ROTC, the Regular Army, the National Guard and the Army Reserves. I have many close friends who are in the retired, disabled or the retired and also disabled category. From the later I have been kept abreast of the government's campaign to short change the ones who have given the most to their country.
Under current mandate, if you are a retired veteran who happens to also be disabled, the total amount of your disability payment is deducted from your retirement pay. Some veterans who are 100% disabled, receive no retirement stipend at all, only disability. In other words, if you flew 100 deadly missions over Hanoi for your country's sake, but were shot down, spent 7 years as a POW, were tortured to the point that you ended up as a quadriplegic, all you could collect is your disability payment. A payment intended to help defray the cost of your injuries. You would kiss your retirement pay, based on 30 years of selfless service good-bye.
Now after years, and legions of veterans explaining how unfair this is, the Congress is prepared to rectify this injustice. And how do they propose to do this? As Joe Galloway explains in his current article Robbing Sgt. Peter to Pay Sgt. Paul the "honorable" men on the Potomac are set to pay current veterans what they are due by not paying future veterans what they might be due. I can see the volunteer ranks swelling when the potential recruit learns that losing a leg might be, according to the new philosophy, only a minor injury.
