iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Veterans Benefits: Lawmakers Open To Changes In Military Benefits

By DONNA CASSATA   10/22/11 09:25 AM ET  AP

WASHINGTON -- The government's promise of lifetime health care for the military's men and women is suddenly a little less sacrosanct as Congress looks to slash trillion-dollar-plus deficits.

Republicans and Democrats alike are signaling a willingness – unheard of at the height of two post-Sept. 11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – to make military retirees pay more for coverage. It's a reflection of Washington's newfound embrace of fiscal austerity and the Pentagon's push to cut health care costs that have skyrocketed from $19 billion in 2001 to $53 billion.

The numbers are daunting for a military focused on building and arming an all-volunteer force for war. The Pentagon is providing health care coverage for 3.3 million active duty personnel and their dependents and 5.5 million retirees, eligible dependents and surviving spouses. Retirees outnumber the active duty, 2.3 million to 1.4 million.

Combined with the billions in retirement pay, it's no surprise that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta recently said personnel costs have put the Pentagon "on an unsustainable course."

Yet the resistance to health care changes is fierce.

Powerful veterans groups and retired generals are mobilizing to fight any changes, arguing that Americans who were willing to die for their country should be treated differently than the average worker. The American Legion has sent a letter to every member of the House and Senate pleading with them to spare health care benefits. The Veterans of Foreign Wars has urged its 2 million members, their families and friends to contact lawmakers and deliver the same message.

The two groups were unnerved when both parties' leaders on the Senate Armed Services Committee – Carl Levin, D-Mich., and John McCain, R-Ariz. – recommended that the special deficit-cutting supercommittee look at raising enrollment fees and imposing restrictions on the military's health care program, known as TRICARE. Current military members would be grandfathered in.

McCain and Levin also favored creating a commission to look at military retirement benefits and make recommendations for changes.

"Any changes to TRICARE that put the burden back on the beneficiaries is not supported by the American Legion," said Peter Gaytan, the group's executive director. He wondered about future benefits for his 19-year-old nephew who heads to Afghanistan in December.

The willingness in Congress to consider cost-cutting changes to the military's entitlement programs is shared by other senators, from members of the Armed Services panel to budget-conscious lawmakers in both the Republican and Democratic ranks such as Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Mark Warner, D-Va.

"I think we have to look at whether savings can be achieved, but we have to keep our promise to people who were recruited based on those benefits, and we also ought to look at whether there's ways to improve the benefit structure," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said in an interview last week.

That prospect has Joe Davis, a spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, fearful of the next step.

"All our worries are starting to come to fruition," Davis said.

The debt accord reached this past summer between President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans set in motion some $450 billion worth of cuts in projected defense spending over 10 years. It's a reality check for the Defense Department, whose budget has nearly doubled to some $700 billion in the 10 years since the Sept. 11 terror attack.

That amount doesn't include the trillion-plus spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 12-member, bipartisan supercommittee has a mandate to come up with at least $1.2 trillion in cuts by Nov. 23. If it fails to produce a plan or Congress rejects its proposal, automatic, across-the-board cuts of $1.2 trillion kick in, half of it from defense spending.

Panetta said $600 billion more in cuts over the next decade atop the $450 billion in cuts passed this summer would represent a "doomsday" for the nation's military. Republicans and Democrats have echoed his apocalyptic warning. In their separate letters to the supercommittee, Levin and McCain said they reject any deeper cuts in overall defense spending beyond the 10-year, $450 billion cuts.

Determined to avoid spending reductions that would hit troop numbers, aircraft, ships and weapons, Levin, McCain and other lawmakers are urging budget-cutters to scrutinize the military entitlement programs.

"I think they may be facing reality and want to soften the blow some," said former Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., who served as House Armed Services chairman. "They're both very responsible when it comes to the troops."

Levin and McCain support establishing an annual enrollment fee for TRICARE for Life, the health care program that now has no fee for participation. Obama had proposed an initial annual fee of $200.

Levin said future increases in fees should be tied to the same index used to determine hikes in the TRICARE Prime program, which has the lowest out-of-pocked expenses.

McCain also urged the supercommittee to consider restricting working-age military retirees and their dependents from enrolling in TRICARE Prime. The retirees could still enroll in other TRICARE programs. McCain pointed out that the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that such a move would save $111 billion over 10 years.

Active-duty personnel still would be enrolled in the program automatically.

In the House, lawmakers are less inclined to make any changes in health care benefits. Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, agreed to a slight increase in TRICARE Prime fees for working-age military retirees. The fees had been unchanged for 11 years at $230 a year for an individual and $460 for a family.

Asked about the recommendations from Levin and McCain to the supercommittee, McKeon's office said the House has already made changes and suggested additional savings come from civilian rather military health care and retirement programs. The House vote to raise the annual TRICARE Prime fees by $2.50 for individuals and $5 for families.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Filed by Melissa Jeltsen  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 3,235
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (94 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LarryA
Rational & Intelligent - obviously a progressive
08:35 PM on 11/18/2011
This is as big of a disgrace as I have ever heard. A bi-partisan push to CUT VETERANS HEALTHCARE?

Really?? Our service men and women risk - and give - their lives to defend our country, for hardly any pay, and then both parties of our government want to cut their health benefits? While they all enjoy the cushiest insurance plan in the country?

Yeah, let's reduce veterans health care benefits. After all, we need to tighten our belts.

I'm sure the veterans won't mind, they are used to sacrificing for this country, and they will do anything they have to to protect the tax rates of the top 1%. Now THAT is something that can't ever be tampered with.

Disgusting.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ronniesbrain
man is the only animal that blushes, or needs to.
03:01 PM on 10/25/2011
Funny thing about this government. They promised us they would take care of us through the rest of our lives now they have changed their minds. if they were going to change their minds they should have done so before they sent soldiers off to be maimed. I wonder what the government would do if the soldiers just decided they don't want to take a chance with their lives anymore? Maybe soldiers should just refuse the next time some fat cat politician decieds we should go fight another meaningless war.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chatafergie
Sniffing out the lies.
10:25 AM on 10/24/2011
I feel like I'm going crazy! This truly despicable group of politicians wont raise taxes on the top 1% of Americans but are willing to cut promised benefits on people willing to defend this country? This NUTS! PLEASE GET OFF YOUR FAT BUTTS AND VOTE THESE PEOPLE OUT OF OFFICE. The only way to save us is to do our homework and get in a new group of people who truly want to help advance this country and solve our problems that are fair and balanced to all segments of this society.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
re-elect clinton
23 million jobs in 8 years!
09:58 AM on 10/24/2011
There gonna have to bring back the draft, because nobody is going to join willingly after this.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Atwill
Christian puppets scare me
01:48 PM on 10/24/2011
that is what they want
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Linda Edmondson
wounded warrior.org+ CLICK
03:09 AM on 10/31/2011
Dear Atwill, I've been almost wishing for it. I think mandatory service for everyone for 2-3 yrs.regardless of who your are should be the law of the land. Rich and poor no exceptions no deferments. 18 yrs old you go. Maybe medical defer if on oxygen. We would be very select in the wars we fight, and how long..
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:38 AM on 10/24/2011
If we had that "Socialist" single-payer plan, would this be an issue?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
re-elect clinton
23 million jobs in 8 years!
09:55 AM on 10/24/2011
If our elected officals had honor,this wouldn't be a issue.
09:31 AM on 10/24/2011
Everyone regardless of party affilations needs to write their congress person and senator and tell them to lead by exapmle and cut their benefits FIRST before touching the veterians benefits who fought for this greart nation...I have
photo
fugmo
Reality leaves a lot to the imagination.
08:30 AM on 10/24/2011
The angled blade of the guillotine is designed to make a cleaner more humane cut. I say we go back to the straight blade as we start dealing with these clueless 'cake eaters".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ronniesbrain
man is the only animal that blushes, or needs to.
03:05 PM on 10/25/2011
Here here, let's bring back the English headsman.......much nastier than the French Guillotine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bowloforanges
Je pense que, donc, je suis
08:03 AM on 10/24/2011
Occupy!

Big business has clearly decided that the economic crisis is too important to waste. While Washington debates how to create jobs and cut the budget deficit, major corporations — read major campaign contributors — are pushing Congress for an enormous tax cut on corporate profits. Lawmakers seem all too eager to grant their wish...........

............The corporations say a tax holiday would help to create jobs, mainly by giving them money to hire and expand. But the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Congressional Research Service, and private researchers concluded that the last tax holiday, enacted in 2004, largely failed to spur investment or job growth. Companies spent most of the repatriated $300 billion on dividends and stock buybacks, enriching executives and shareholders.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/opinion/no-tax-holiday.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:27 AM on 10/24/2011
Amazing!!!! They can find money for planes and jet engines that we don't need (our wonderful congress and senate voted for these), but they can't take care of the PEOPLE who put their bodies and lives on the line for our country!!! You all make me sick!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lisa Shields
Poet & Advocate For Special Needs Children
07:15 AM on 10/24/2011
Seems like now that the Haliburton types will not reap the benefit from Iraq NOW they talk about cuts---not to Defense Contractors, but the armed forces and their families. This is simply shameful. But it's not unexpected. I know too may people who served in Iraq, and can only imagine how they will feel about this back door bit of political horse trading.

I guess "support the troops" is like "family values"...something they will pay lip service to, but never truly endorse.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rjhuntington
left is right and right is wrong
06:31 AM on 10/24/2011
You craven cowardly lawmakers in Congress better slash your own benefits before taking ANYTHING away from veterans.

End the wars abroad. Save money that way.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Mr Universe
Shiny, let's be bad guys
03:26 AM on 10/24/2011
Welcome home soldiers! And skreeew your benefits.

This is really pathetic.
12:21 AM on 10/24/2011
Good. Doing more of what will make things worse. And they're getting elected because...
12:15 AM on 10/24/2011
After 8 years of Bush tax cuts, Republicans are now reaping the benefits of a brainwashed nation thinking government spending is the problem. Bush cost this nation 8 trillion dollars, and yet it's our fault the government is out of money. Either the wealthy and corporations want to pay the price for being an American or maybe it's time to move on to China, India, Mexico, or where ever you can get cheap labor. See how much money you make without Americans buying. This country is moving in the wrong direction and if we put a Republican in office in 2012, then I too will start becoming selfish and quit handing out donations and stop spending and hoard all my money like the rich folks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Derrick
01:09 AM on 10/24/2011
After 8 years of Bush tax cuts, Obama also passed the same tax cuts; so LoyalDem4646 you can't rightfully cast blame in one direction. As for becoming selfish and your "quit handing out donations...", I doubt you even donate anything anyhow (with such a remark).
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
meinmd2
Obama/Biden 2012 - Let's Stay Together!!
08:01 AM on 10/24/2011
And you know Obama only signed because the middle class would have gotten screwed if the thugs didn't get their way. I know I see that the Republicans only care about the rich, because they are ready to throw the vets under the bus so as not to tax the elite.
11:04 PM on 10/24/2011
That's the problem with conservatives, you assume too much which makes you an a#s.
However, if people keep putting republicans in office, I'll have not choice but to stop donating since I'm already giving my salary back little by little. Yes, Obama did extend the Bush tax cuts but he was proving he was willing to compromise like he said in his platform. However, he's learned his lesson and he won't make the same mistake in 2012.
08:17 PM on 10/24/2011
Remember that mid-term election in 2006? Democrats have been in control of BOTH houses for 4 years. The koolaid is started to wear off as of 2010, Now they are left to living in a park and pooping on cop cars. If you can just try to understand free market economics, instead the"Give me what I didn't earn, just gimmy, gimmy, gimmy',and realize that poor people do not hire folks, things MAY start to get better . I would rather have 1,000,000 people paying in $1500 than 100 people paying in $1,000,000. More income and the rich people are still hiring.Your way, everyone is too poor to hire.
BTW: it took PRESIDENT Bush 8 years to do it, And Mr. Barry Soeto 3 years to spend 6,000,000,000,000. WHO'S the problem?
10:58 PM on 10/24/2011
Bush and if you can't see that you're a fool. Bush gave corporations 8 years to prove how the GOP system works. It works great for the wealthy but not the middle class unless you want minimum wage jobs where there's plenty to go around. Corporations aren't hiring fast enough. Bush lost 700,000 jobs a month during his last year in office and the only way out of this mess is to spend our way out which wouldn't be a problem with fair taxes. Obama is doing what he has to do to keep this country from falling into a depression but the Republicans are doing everything they can to force this country into one and blame it on Obama. Then the Republicans will come in and start drilling oil and destroying the environment and the oil companies and the wealthy will reap the benefits but not the middle class because unions will be outlawed and the Bush tax cuts will be extended for another 4 years which means the GOP will have to either borrow or cut but they'll cut so say good bye to social security, medicare, pensions, veteran benefits, police officers, firemen, teachers, social programs, and the post office to name a few and say hello to low paying jobs, ponzi schemes, and a higher crime rate. You won't have to worry about budgeting because most people will be too scared to leave their homes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
troberts1943
11:15 PM on 10/23/2011
They talk about cutting benefits for serviceman and woman, the teachers, fireman and policemen
but never talk about cutting congressional benefits. And the Dumb A$$'s are wondering why people are in the streets. Those people who put their lives on the line are part of the 99%, most of Congress are in the 1%.