US House Budget Committee Betrays Warriors

March 31, 2006

A congressional committee has done it again...the House Budget Committee, along party lines, voted down an amendment that would have protected our under 65 warriors, spouses, and widows from a DoD TRICARE fee increase.

As you may recall, in another party-line vote, the Senate Budget Committee denied Senator Bill Nelson's (D-FL) amendment to end the deduction of VA survivor benefits from military Survivor Benefit Plan annuities in cases when the member's death was caused by military service." All twelve (12) Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee voted against "widows and orphans" and all (10) Democrats voted in favor of restoring earned and paid survivor benefits for survivors of military retirees.

Now all 22 Republicans on the House Budget Committee voted to kill Rep Chet Edwards amendment and all 15 Democrats voted for the amendment, which would have blocked DoD plans to double and triple TRICARE premiums for military retirees.

I simply don't have the words to describe my attitude toward DoD and the United States congress. Not one of the 22 Republicans on the House Budget Committee had the guts to buck the party apparatus and register a "it's wrong" to lay DoD and Congressional budget problems on the backs of our warriors. Congress is reflecting a "mafia" style operation...stray from the family and expect the ax.

Here's the sad and disgusting twist to the Republican vote to support DoD TRICARE fee increase. Rep Chet Edwards, D-TX introduced a Bill, HR 4949 which if passed will block any attempt by DoD to increase TRICARE fees. HR 4949 has 118 cosponsors as of March 31, 2006 and guess who two of the cosponsors of HR 4949 are? You guessed it, two of the Republicans, Rep Thaddeus McCotter R-MI and Rep Jeb Bradley R-NH are both cosponsors of HR 4949 but voted to side with DoD TRICARE fee increase in the House Budget Committee vote this week.........they are for it but also against it? Sounds like the Kerry vote on the Gulf War.

Not only does the Senate and House Budget committee votes confirm Republican partisan opposition to warrior benefits, it confirms two Representatives on both sides of the fence...what can be more despicable than playing political games on the backs of our warriors?

Seems to me the voters in Michigan and New Hampshire might want to ask these two fish which way they will flop tomorrow...

Rep Pelosi, the House Democratic leader said “It is unconscionable to impose a fee increase on the men and women in uniform who bravely sacrificed for our country, especially during a time of war,” “We must demonstrate our commitment to our troops and future veterans by assuring them that just as they protected us, we will take care of them when their service ends.” Now that it's said, what will she do about it?

Our government has sunk just about as low as it can get...I say again "Is there any wonder politicians are viewed as "bottom feeders", held in low esteem, generally as selfish, greedy and focused on themselves?" If politicians and bureaucrats won't honor commitments made to those that sacrifice their lives, is there any wonder other American time-honored rights are evaporating?

DoD's Under Secretary David Chu stated in a separate hearing on the same subject, "younger retirees should be willing to contribute more to sustain the program"...I ask Mr. Chu... life, body parts, and blood is not enough?

I ask myself, what the hell was all that fox-hole time for? What kind of a message is being sent to the troops on the battlefield?

Those in authority in Washington, D.C. are betraying our warriors, pure and simple...my prayer is the voters hold them accountable in November 2006.

Harry Riley, COL, USA, Ret

U.S. House Budget Committee Betrays Warriors

So what else is new?

After I had done my time for retirement the "congress" and government changed a 170-year old law in 1964 regarding how retired pay would be paid in the future and BETRAYED 432,000 cohorts and me. Of less than 20,000 of us remaining with most of these living in disgust, a nursing home, senile or computer illiterate I live or communicate amongst successors who did not and do not care about this betrayal while drawing from 1/4 - 1/3 more per month in retired pay throughout all 25 pay grades plus having served with high active duty pay and allowances. I served all my time under the low draft-era pay and allowances.

I was a party to a suit on this pay change that went all the way to the Supreme Court in which they quickly said "Congress can do what they want to do with the military." We followed this with a political action in 1968, and in effect elected the lying candidate, Tricky Dick, who, after election, had his SOD send us a swan letter in July 1970 acknowledging the injustice, but said, "We are studying the issue." That study has been ongoing for over 36 years.

Medicare did not even exist when I retired. I moved my family business in 1969 under the 1966 "legal" CHAMPUS, knowing of its limitation, only to see this taken from me or us on attaining age 65. Thus my wife of over 58 years who served with Patton's Third Army Field Hospital as a captain nurse in France, Germany and Austria, and, I, have each made over 200 such Medicare part B payments plus supplemental BC/BS. Worked hard for the original HR 2966 only to get a 'lemon' delivered in my region.

Face it, Harry, et al. With some 1.9 million retirees plus dependents of possibly six million we represent something less than 3% of the American population. Hardly any two retirees have the same issue yet with the recent TRICARE for Life and disability pays recently approved the government has to come up with some $50 billions annually. Crusading for 604, et al, for all retirees and their dependents will surely bring this cost to in excess of $75 billions annually now. What the hell does the other 97% of Americans live on? Wake up!

My wife and me would just like to have had what we had 'EARNED" under the "law" and forget "promises" which are also endless in our instance.

In my mid '80s do you think I want to pay the high retired pay and health care for a retiree down the road some three miles, of the same grade and length of service, who was not 40 years of age when he retired with a wife and three children? You got to be crazy.

Again, hardly any two retirees have the same issue. You want yours but I can wait. It has to stop!

W.D. Gray

Sumner, IL, 62466

Our people have been & still are sacrificing for this country. It is PAST time our military be treated fairly. They deserve medical benefits at the very least. They have endured many broken promises, medical care being just one of those. My brother-in-law lost his life because he served in Vietnam with Agent Orange. Nothing can bring that wonderful man back, but I'm sure he thought his widow would be treated fairly by the government he gave over 20 yrs. of his life to serve. My husband also served in Vietnam. Luckily, he only lost part of his hearing, which he is getting NO compensation for either

Sally

DOD,OMB and the administration conveniently forget that as far as TFL goes, it is supposed to be paid for out the the Treasury NOT DOD. Its time they started obeying the 2005 Appropriation Act instead of circumventing it.
It is not veterans fault that health care in the COUNTRY has ballooned thus causing the increase in military health care costs. Congress must look at its own inaction and the blame must be laid at their doorstep. IF DOD needs more money, then let them go to congress and ask for it like grown men and the leaders they perport to be. Quit using the worn out excuse that the veterans health care is taking money from weapons and supplies.
AC Pilger, USN Retired, Catonsville , MD

If you would like to comment, please click here Submit your ideas to us for posting to our site.