Department of Defense -- A Veteran's Worst Enemy
By Thomas D. Segel
May 30, 2005

Veterans, particularly those who retired from military service, seem to have more enemies these days than they have friends. While the Washington crowd makes cooing noises and pretends to support veteran issues, the truth behind those false gestures is politicos all view former warriors as expensive waste matter that should be quickly tossed into the nearest trash heap.

Who should be held accountable? At the top is the president of the United States, along with those of his administration who pay lip service to supporting the military, but only offer gestures of superficial support once a warrior leaves the field of battle.

Holding equal responsibility is the United States Congress. With fewer and fewer veterans in its ranks and an entire political party with an anti-military mentality, little has been, or will be done to reward or recognize those who were the defenders of this nation.

However, if veterans rank any individual or agency as the primary enemy, The Department of Defense holds that questionable honor. One needs only to pick a topic. If it supports a military retiree or any veteran, DoD has a spokesperson to deny there is any government responsibility or obligation. In most cases the DoD voice is in direct opposition to issues raised by American veterans.

What veterans' issue is the Department of Defense against? Just pick your topic. It spent years rejecting responsibility for everything related to the Gulf War Syndrome. It denied veteran charges that the government used service personnel as human guinea pigs during deadly biological and chemical tests of the '60s and early '70s. There is continuing denial and stonewalling on just about everything related to the thousands of veterans who participated in our nation's atomic testing program. The DoD remains a major obstacle in the hiring of mental health counselors to work with veterans facing serious emotional issues. And most of America is familiar with the case of World War II and Korean War military retirees seeking denied, but promised lifetime health care. Throughout the legal process the Department of Defense fought these old warriors. It battled against them all the way to the Supreme Court.

Now there are two important topics on the front burner. One involves only 1,000 veterans, but the other has serious consequences for a vast number of former American fighting men and women.

In the first situation, veterans living in the United States Armed Forces Retirement Home have filed a class-action suit against the government on behalf of more than 1,000 residents. The suit charges that the home, in northwest Washington no longer provides regular medical examinations or checkups and prescriptions are no longer available.

The complaint also claims these measures have taken place due to drastic funding cuts imposed by the Department of Defense and were put into practice following the agency placing new management on site.

Veterans charge these cuts are a violation of federal law. They claim the home is required to provide standard health care on the campus, but that a pharmacy and medical treatment facility have been closed. Even annual health examinations have been curtailed.

Because no on-site treatment is available, residents have been told to call 911 in any emergency. If they do take that course of action, they are required to pay for both the ambulance and the treatment at a civilian hospital. Residents must even find their own way to visit the pharmacy or obtain treatment at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. The home no longer provides any transportation. The residents also charge that because of the serious reduction in medical services the number of deaths at the facility has more than doubled.

The only answer to these charges from DoD is "We cannot comment on pending litigation."

The home in Washington and another in Mississippi are operated with money from a trust fund. This fund is financed by a 50 cent per week deduction from the paychecks of all enlisted personnel in the armed forces.

The Department of Defense ordered a cut in operating costs in 2002. Since that time ten percent of the staff has been terminated. Maintenance, food service and security are now handled through contracts and 75% of the medical personnel on staff have lost their positions.

The second problem area involves many thousands of retirees. The major issue is an ongoing dispute between disabled retirees and the department over payments received related to retired pay and disability compensation. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal year 2005 eliminated the phase-in period for Concurrent Retirement and Disability Payments (CROP) for veterans rated as 100% disabled by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

For more than 100 years, military personnel retired on disability had been forced to pay their own way. Though they had earned retired pay because of more than 20 years of military service, they were forced to give up one dollar of that retirement check for each dollar of disability compensation received. Military personnel were the only government employees forced to pay for their own disabilities.

After decades of battling the Washington establishment and particularly the Department of Defense, a partial solution was provided by Congress. Career military veterans with 60% or more disability would have their retirement pay restored. However, this would be done over an extended ten-year period. In 2005 that ruling was modified to give those retirees with 100 % disability full pay restoration at once.

Once again the anti-veteran crowd at the Pentagon found a way to attack those who were no longer able to contribute to the active duty force.

There are two different methods of determining the 100% disability status. The first is called a scheduled 100% rating by the VA. The second is called Individual Unemployable or IU. However, both methods result in the same total disability status.

The scheduled 100% disability rating is one given to a condition, which has been predetermined by the VA to be a total disability. Such as the case of a Navy officer treated for cancer, fitted with a colostomy and rated as a scheduled disability of 100% at retirement. That officer was granted full retired pay, full disability compensation and was also allowed to obtain a civilian job in a business setting that was not impacted by the colostomy.

An example of an IU rating can be understood by examining the case of another officer who experienced heart and degenerative joint disease while on active duty. The officer was retired at a scheduled rating of 60%, but was never able to work. Following extensive medical procedures related to these service connected disabilities, the Department of Veterans Affairs changed the rating to 100% extra-scheduler and Individual Unemployable (IU). Because of the serious medical condition and this specific classification, the retired veteran is not allowed to work. If some employment were possible and accepted, the VA would immediately terminate the Individual Unemployable (IU) status. This retiree, through some political misinterpretation of the law by DoD, does not qualify for full restoration of retired pay. Full disability compensation is received, but restoration of retired pay will be phased in over the ten-year period. In addition the officer is not allowed to hold any form of civilian employment.

The important thing to note is the law makes no distinction between "scheduled" or "individual unemployable" ratings. They are both considered total and 100% disabilities by the VA.

Even Undersecretary of Defense Charles S. Abell, after a DoD legal review of specific statutes and laws pertaining to disabilities rated by the VA and specific laws enacted by Congress in the 2005 NDAA states, "Based on the legal review of the relevant statutory authority and legislative intent language (10 U.S.C. 1414; H Rept. 108-767) we intend to consider these unemployable retirees/veterans covered by the exemption to the phase-in period and grant them full concurrent receipt payments beginning January 1, 2005."

Though a senior official in the department wrote in favor of those veterans who are in the individual unemployable status, the agency and the administration are still stonewalling payment of full retired pay and disability compensation. It is the position of DoD that those who did not hold a scheduled rating of 100% upon retirement do not qualify for restoration payment. Thus veteran retirees with total disability under the 100% IU classification draw disability compensation and have retied pay offset by a like amount, subject to a ten year phase-in period. In addition, these retirees cannot even add to their meager income with some form of additional pay producing labor.

So, the Department of Defense continues in its historic role of remaining the veterans' worst enemy. No other agency in the United States has a reputation of being this relentless in attacking the benefits our government has promised veterans, or obligations it must accept on behalf of those who sacrificed everything for their country. Not too long ago all veterans were told by the administration that promises made would be promises kept. It seems DoD never got that message.

--------------------

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.