Posted on: Monday, July 1, 2002
Military Update
Disabled vets preparing to fight for retirement benefits
By Tom Philpott
Special to The Advertiser
By Tom Philpott
A House-Senate conference committee on the 2003 defense authorization bill that opens this month will decide whether some or all career military retirees with VA disabilities should begin receiving full retirement pay on top of tax-free VA compensation. Meanwhile, wary veterans groups are preparing strategies for a possible veto fight.
The Senate on June 19 approved an unfunded amendment to restore full military retired pay immediately to 500,000 career retirees who draw VA disability compensation. Under current law, their retired pay is reduced by the amount VA pays for injuries or illnesses tied to service.
The House defense bill would restore full retired pay over five years but only for retirees with VA disability ratings of 60 percent or higher. This initiative is funded. It would mean a sharp jump in pay for 90,000 retirees.
The Bush administration opposes both "concurrent receipt" initiatives, and lists them among reasons the president might veto the bill.
Current law requires retirees who receive tax-free VA disability pay to forfeit a matching amount of retired pay.
Retirees argue that the offset in retired pay, in effect, has them subsidize their own disabilities. They also point out that other disabled veterans can draw VA compensation while working as federal civilians, apply military years toward civil service pensions and, once retired, draw full annuities plus VA money.
Bush's veto threat, in a June 19 letter to Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, surprised veterans groups and Defense officials, too. The department had not advocated a veto over concurrent receipt, although Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his staff oppose it.
The letter doesn't commit to a veto, only that "senior advisers would recommend" it. Those advisers perhaps include Mitchell Daniels, director of the Office of Management and Budget and Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill.
Steve Strobridge, director of government relations for The Retired Officers Association, said he doesn't "believe the president would veto the authorization bill for the express purpose of taking retirement pay away from disabled retirees."
Bob Manhan, assistant legislative director for Veterans of Foreign Wars, agreed. Even if there is a veto, he said, 83 percent of senators and 90 percent of House members are co-sponsors of concurrent receipt legislation.
"If the co-sponsors stick to their guns," said Manhan, "those numbers could override the president's veto."
Some administration officials, surprised themselves by the veto threat, said Bush might be alarmed enough by projected costs of full concurrent receipt — $58 billion over 10 years — to take heat from disappointed vets.
Strobridge challenged officials for suggesting that retirees chose to serve while the century-old ban on concurrent receipt was in effect and are now seeking some sort of windfall.
"No military member was ever told, 'there are conditions under which your retirement can be taken away if you become disabled.' It was never in the fine print, much less the contract," Strobridge said.
Comments and suggestions are welcomed. Write to Military Update, P.O. Box 231111, Centreville, VA 20120-1111, or send e-mail to: milupdate@aol.com.
