![]() |
Political Action Page | ![]() |
|
For
years I had said “I am a soldier not a
Politician” and it was that implied in-action that
would come to cause me heartburn latter in life.
Plus time to time I would receive messages about
this or that “Bill” or campaign that I felt
would merit action because it may affect many of us.
The problem was that I did not have a place
where I thought it would fit on this site. So I
created this page for those areas of interest.
RETIRED
PAY RESTORATION ACT (H.R.303 & S.170) Designed to rectify an 1891 law that requires Disabled Career Military Disabled Veterans to (waive) Pay out of retired pay an equal amount of their earned VA disability compensation. This effects over 400,000 RETIRED military disabled veterans. The bottom line is that Retired Military Disabled Veterans are the only group of people in the U.S. required to do this; Federal Employees, Civilians, Veterans and the Congress are not effected by this 100+ year old law. It is time to stand up and say “Enough”. Please contact your congressman and senator and ask them to support HR303 /S170.
EMAIL - SRSC see below
Please visit the USDR
web site!
History of the Military Pay Offset * Between 1790
and 1891 while everything came under the War Department, the military
retirees received both their retirement pay and disability compensation.
This was a benefit given to military members as an enticement for them
to stay until retirement. Further, the Civil War was during this time
frame and there were bitter feelings between the Union Army veterans and
Confederate Army veterans. This was attributed mainly due to the Union
veterans getting perks at the end of the war and the Confederate
veterans were told to go home with nothing. Also, during this period of
time while Benjamin Harrison was a Senator under President Grover
Cleveland's term in office he (Harrison) tried to get the new disability
pension change into the law. However, President Cleveland vetoed his
attempt and left it as a Military Retirement Benefit only. * During the
1890-1891 Congressional Legislative Session, Senator Benjamin Harrison
(who had been a Brigadier General in the Union Army) became President
and got his new law passed to provide pensions for disabilities incurred
by the Civil War veterans who could not work (this did not include
Confederate veterans). This was the beginning of everyone who sustained
injuries and/or illness as a result of active military service being
enabled to receive disability payments. However, Senator Francis Marion
Cockrell of Missouri (who had been a Brigadier General in the
Confederate Army.) publicly addressed opposition in the issue of
officers who were currently on the active duty list being allowed to
draw both a pension for disability and their active military pay. Using
these issues to get back at the Union veterans (who were getting
compensated) for not recognizing the Confederate veterans for
compensation. He successfully concluded his fight through using the
logic it would be a cost saving measure. When this law was passed the
Congress had many Senators and Representatives who had either been in
the Confederate Army or were sympathizers to their cause. Thus,
resulting in the amendment being added excluding active duty military
and disabled retired military for benefits under the new law. Now all
disabled retired military have to pay for a grudge payback between two
competitive entities in an effort to balance the score from days gone
by. The thought of how this would affect future generations was never
brought into consideration. The immediate gratification of victory was
the primary goal. (Ref: World Book on line and the Congressional
Research Service Report 95-469) In 1930
they brought the Veteran Affairs into existence and it later became the
Department of Veteran Affairs in the later 1930s. On May 27, 1944, the
US Congress then passed into law, Public Law 78-314 the requirement of a
dollar for dollar offset reduction of retired military pay for every
dollar of VA compensation received, and if the retiree is 100% disabled
they forfeit all of their retirement. This new law was placed in the US
Code, Title 38, Sections 5304 and 5305. Now it must be kept in mind
Veteran Affairs only funds in their budget for compensation received for
service connected injuries and/or illnesses. The VA has nothing to do
whatsoever with the budgeting of military retired pay. (Ref: Public Law
78-314 & US Code, Title 38, Sections 5304 & 5305) * Military
retirement pay was regulated by the War Department in accordance with
the US Code Title 10, Chapter 71. The US Congress passed laws directing
in Chapter 71 to use the directives set forth in Title 38 concerning
disabled military retirees. In 1949 the War Department became The
Department of Defense and all retired military pay continues to be
controlled by that department. (Ref: US Code, Title 10, Chapter 71) * In 1984 the US
Congress passed a bill "The Military Retirement Fund" these guidelines
were incorporated in US Code Title 10, Chapter 74, Sections 1461 through
1467. This placed the Secretary of Defense with the responsibility of
placing in the Department of Defense budget funding to pay all military
retirees. There is nothing in this chapter instructing the Secretary
to not draw down for those retirees who are reported as receiving
disability compensation. This results in a surplus that is sent back to
the US Department of Treasury, who places the overage into money
accounts and the surplus is spent as they see fit for items not included
in the budget. All others working with the US Military who are Civil
Service Employees in all branches of the Government, including The
Department of Defense, The Armed Forces, Senators, Representatives, and
Presidential Staff draw both their full retirement pay and full VA
compensation for service connected injuries and/or illnesses. Keep
in mind the US Congress also passed into law it is unlawful to
discriminate. However, this is clearly a case of discrimination in the
purest sense and definition of the word. (Ref: US Code, Title 10,
Chapter 74, Sections 1461 through 1467. Also, discrimination of any
veteran (treating one or group any different from any other veteran) is
addressed throughout Title 38 and is prohibited under penalty of
violation of the law.) Keep in mind discrimination laws did not exist
100 years ago. Through evolution and education many laws became outdated
and actually became an illegal act by the passage of new Congressional
law changes and this is one of those instances. |
||
EMAIL - SRSC
This E-mail
was sent to the OSD office on public information as well as the named service
organizations and the congressional offices senate and congress.
Suggested
story for DOD Armed forces News story
Subject: 10
U.S.C. 1413a. EO 9397. Combat Related Special Compensation.
The United States Department of Defense Special Compensation Program for severely Disabled Combat Related Military Retirees is inadequately staffed, poorly organized and over whelmed. As an example: A phone call to the USAF Special Compensation Office at Randolph AFB for severely disabled combat related retirees reports they have four staff members to process the hundreds of application they have receiving on a daily basis since 1 June 2003. They have not received the necessary cooperation from the Department of Veterans Affairs which is necessary to acquire the VA case files and disability claims codes necessary to process applications. This is just one example. The Army contracted out their CRSC to handle the 20,000 applications they have received to date. The services had by law six months to put into action the program and have failed to execute the task in a timely manner. NBC nightly news ran three special stories on the injustices on the prohibitions of concurrent receipt. This e-mail has been forwarded to NBC, VFW, DAV and MOAA for a follow up story on the DOD's failure to attend to their severely disabled retires in a timely manner. Poorly planned by the Armed Forces Services leadership and posture to hold at arms length the Veterans Service Organization have resulted in an important program falling on its face. The disabled retirees deserve more than the feeble and ineptly planned and staffed program, which is designed to have corrected a 100 years of unjust removal of earned longevity retired pay. The courageous civil servants working tirelessly cannot be held accountable for the failure of their superiors to accomplish the mission with out the necessary resources. Many military retirees believe that CRSC case review is a duplication of effort as the Department of Veterans Affairs has already documented the service connection and the events surrounding the claim as verifiable fact as required by law.
This might
be a better Story:
DOD moves
quickly to address the short fall in CRSC program implementation, as the braches
of each service are flooded with applications. Each Branch of service has
infused the necessary resources to process the applications. The DOD has pressed
the VA for more cooperation in case file information necessary to process
applications. Serious consideration is being given to a taskforce requesting for
manning assistance sending experience raters t to the DOD to being to assist the
CRSC staff for each branch of service. The DOD and the VA are committed work
together to avoid duplication of effort. DOD will give retiree the benefit of
the dough when granting CRSC to Retirees who meet the threshold for the Special
Compensation.
Respectfully Yours John J Navarro 727-480-7645 Major, Retired. USAF
This is a follow up to and E mail I request be posted on your web site.I intent to play hard ball. I have nothing to lose.
On 06-30-03 HQAFPC/DPPDS (CRSC)
section advised me the conditions, which I clearly provided both medical and
military documentation verifying my claim to just entitlement as required by
law for CRSC. The vague form letter sent me indicated the conditions, which
the CRSC case specialist denied my claim. Col Larry Van Buren USAF Chief of
the Physical Disability Division signed the form letter. I will composes my
appeal letter and submitted it with in the next week. I will fax your office
the application I sent the Air Force minus the supporting documentation as it
would by to cumbersome. My application is supported by documents, which I will
make available upon request. My application was tabbed for every section to
assist the case review examiners. Competent Air Force and Veterans
Administration legal and medical authority has determined these conditions are
service-connected conditions and have provided the supporting documentation.
This is a formal complaint, which Im lodging with your office. Please conduct
a congressional inquiry into my allegations that the Air Force CRSC process
has failed to meet the letter and sprit of the Law. Im so convinced that my
application was wrongfully denied that it reflects the gross dereliction of
duty by the staff and the officers charged with the Administration of this
congressional mandate. I'm considering another forum preferring formal charges
against Col Van Buren USAF. After legal consultation I my ask that an
investigation and article 31 hearing be conducted to address violations of
Article 31 the UCMJ related to hid failure to follow the orders, instructions
and policies policys set forth to a sure the success of CRSC. I grant you
permission to have axis to my entire record. The unlawful actions not to
follow the prescribed criteria as required by Law having knowing and willing
deprived me of and important government benefit. The appeals process is
conducted by the Secretary of the Air Force and will take many months. I may
formally move forward Via the Please process, GAO Complaint and the Uniform
Military Justice Compliant process. I would love to testify in front of the
Armed services Sub Committee regarding the failure to the Air force to
corrected 100 plus years of injustice. This was sold as a beachhead for
Concurrent receipt. My perception is they have follow the tried and true
method of filing a claim with government agencys denied the claim thus weeding
out the less committed. I want a congressional investigation in to the
specifics of my case. My documentation and claims were quite specific and well
supported to creditable medical and service records.
This weekend the CRSC
section via a vague form letter I was denied advised me.
My claim was 50% PTSD with a
VA award code verifying combat US Army Artillery and USAF Combat related
training activity. 30% Migraine Occupational stress related hazards duty and
combat related stress. Competent medical authority has secondarily demand an
interrelationship between stress and migraine heads. My military medical
records document the occupational stressors and connect to my combat related
stressors. 10% Tinnitus form Acoustical Trauma directly related to exposure to
explosion form the instruments of war thats a no brainier. Then 10 sinusitis
from my sinus lining burned by excessive exposure to tear gas as a combatant
and a combat readiness instructor during my career. The application was
replete numerous and tabbed medical and service records exceeding the criteria
set fourth in the law and Air force published stands. I will now move forward
with my appeal. I will also advises my congressman Bill Young, OSD office for
Force personal management using complaint Channels. My nest option is formal
charges under article 92 for dereliction of duty for having been derelict in
his duty to execute his responsibility as required by law and DOD and USAF
instruction. In my early E-mails I made some allegations about the DOD and
service leadership. In my case they denied my claim for CRSC in the face of
documentation extracted from my VA C file and additional documents to support
my claim. AS part of my job at the VA I help Veteran with the process of
putting together their claim. The VA and the VA C&P examiners along with USAF
medical doctors having supported my claim granted my Claim. I will now be
embroiled in 18 months or better appeals process. My assertion is the
inadequately trained case review officers and the chief of the Disability
section had a duty to follow the Laws and regulations guiding the program
execution and failed to meet the minimal standard as set fourth in the guide
lines. Just when I thought a 100 years of injustice where done the struggle
continues.
Respectfully
John Navarro Major (ret)
USAF 06-10-50
511 34th Ave
North
Saint Petersburg, Fl 33704 727 480-7645
This page best viewed in 600 x 800 screen size and last updated on 10/01/04
Page
views as of August 2001