Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CBO Recommendation To Drop MS From VA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    CBO Recommendation To Drop MS From VA

    I encourage everyone to write their representatives to preclude CBO recommendation 21 from even being considered.



    Mandatory Spending—Option 21
    Function 700 - Veterans Benefits and Services
    Narrow Eligibility for Veterans' Disability Compensation by Excluding Certain Disabilities Unrelated to Military Duties

    Note: This option would take effect in October 2014.


    Veterans may receive disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for medical conditions or injuries that occurred or worsened during active-duty military service (excluding those resulting from willful misconduct). Disabilities that are deemed to be connected to military service in that sense range widely in severity and type, from the loss of limbs to migraines and treatable hypertension. VA also provides dependency and indemnity compensation—payments to surviving spouses or children of a deceased veteran whose death resulted from a service-related injury or disease. The Department of Defense (DoD) has a separate disability compensation system for those service members who can no longer fulfill their military duties because of a disability.

    Some medical conditions and injuries that are deemed to be service-connected disabilities were incurred or exacerbated in the performance of military duties, but others were not. For example, a qualifying injury can be something that occurred when a service member was at home or on leave, and a qualifying medical condition can be something, such as diabetes, that developed independently of military activities while the service member was on active duty. In 2012, VA paid 520,000 veterans a total of $2.9 billion, the Congressional Budget Office estimates, to compensate for seven medical conditions that, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), are generally neither caused nor aggravated by military service. Those conditions are chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, arteriosclerotic heart disease, hemorrhoids, uterine fibroids, multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, and osteoarthritis.

    This option would cease veterans’ disability compensation for the seven medical conditions identified by GAO. Under the option, veterans currently receiving compensation for those conditions would have their compensation reduced or eliminated following a reevaluation, and veterans who applied for compensation for those conditions in the future would not be eligible for it. The option would not alter DoD’s disability compensation system, which focuses on fitness for military duties rather than compensation for disabilities.

    By CBO’s estimates, this option would reduce outlays by $20 billion from 2015 to 2023. About 80 percent of the savings in the last year of that period (and an even larger share in earlier years) would result from curtailing payments to current recipients of disability compensation. A broader option could eliminate compensation for all disabilities unrelated to military duties, not just the seven conditions identified by GAO. For a condition such as arthritis, for instance, which may or may not result from military duties, the determination of whether the condition was related to military activities could be left up to VA. An option with that broader reach would generate significantly larger savings but would be more difficult to administer.

    An argument in support of this option is that the disability compensation system for military veterans should be more comparable to civilian systems. Few civilian employers offer long-term disability benefits, and among those that do, benefits do not typically compensate individuals for all medical problems that developed during a period of employment.

    An argument against this option is that military service is not like a civilian job; instead, it confers unique benefits to society and imposes extraordinary risks on service members. By that logic, the pay and benefits provided to service members should reflect the hardships of military life, including compensating veterans who become disabled in any way during the period of their military service.

    #2
    Wow, that's very underhanded of the government to try to do this. I hope it fails miserably.

    Comment


      #3
      Unbelievable.

      Comment


        #4
        Unbelievable!

        I just love it when I see those "Support the Troops" bumper stickers! Makes me feel like rear ending someone who has probably a good heart, but does not want to support programs that really "support the troops".


        Originally posted by Pirateghost View Post
        I encourage everyone to write their representatives to preclude CBO recommendation 21 from even being considered.



        Mandatory Spending—Option 21
        Function 700 - Veterans Benefits and Services
        Narrow Eligibility for Veterans' Disability Compensation by Excluding Certain Disabilities Unrelated to Military Duties

        Note: This option would take effect in October 2014.


        Veterans may receive disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for medical conditions or injuries that occurred or worsened during active-duty military service (excluding those resulting from willful misconduct). Disabilities that are deemed to be connected to military service in that sense range widely in severity and type, from the loss of limbs to migraines and treatable hypertension. VA also provides dependency and indemnity compensation—payments to surviving spouses or children of a deceased veteran whose death resulted from a service-related injury or disease. The Department of Defense (DoD) has a separate disability compensation system for those service members who can no longer fulfill their military duties because of a disability.

        Some medical conditions and injuries that are deemed to be service-connected disabilities were incurred or exacerbated in the performance of military duties, but others were not. For example, a qualifying injury can be something that occurred when a service member was at home or on leave, and a qualifying medical condition can be something, such as diabetes, that developed independently of military activities while the service member was on active duty. In 2012, VA paid 520,000 veterans a total of $2.9 billion, the Congressional Budget Office estimates, to compensate for seven medical conditions that, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), are generally neither caused nor aggravated by military service. Those conditions are chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, arteriosclerotic heart disease, hemorrhoids, uterine fibroids, multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, and osteoarthritis.

        This option would cease veterans’ disability compensation for the seven medical conditions identified by GAO. Under the option, veterans currently receiving compensation for those conditions would have their compensation reduced or eliminated following a reevaluation, and veterans who applied for compensation for those conditions in the future would not be eligible for it. The option would not alter DoD’s disability compensation system, which focuses on fitness for military duties rather than compensation for disabilities.

        By CBO’s estimates, this option would reduce outlays by $20 billion from 2015 to 2023. About 80 percent of the savings in the last year of that period (and an even larger share in earlier years) would result from curtailing payments to current recipients of disability compensation. A broader option could eliminate compensation for all disabilities unrelated to military duties, not just the seven conditions identified by GAO. For a condition such as arthritis, for instance, which may or may not result from military duties, the determination of whether the condition was related to military activities could be left up to VA. An option with that broader reach would generate significantly larger savings but would be more difficult to administer.

        An argument in support of this option is that the disability compensation system for military veterans should be more comparable to civilian systems. Few civilian employers offer long-term disability benefits, and among those that do, benefits do not typically compensate individuals for all medical problems that developed during a period of employment.

        An argument against this option is that military service is not like a civilian job; instead, it confers unique benefits to society and imposes extraordinary risks on service members. By that logic, the pay and benefits provided to service members should reflect the hardships of military life, including compensating veterans who become disabled in any way during the period of their military service.

        Comment


          #5
          This is a stealthy way to find some ways to cut federal budget expenses but it comes on the backs of citizens who probably can't protect themselves or fight for 'entitlements' that they don't realize that they deserve. It is a sneaky, underhanded move that some politicians think that they can pull off. Unbelievable.

          Comment


            #6
            The CBO does not make recommendations.

            Comment


              #7
              @Pirateghost, I'm curious where you saw that this proposal would take affect in Oct '14? I found the actual CBO proposal on the web, but didn't see where it was enacted in law or other policy. I'm going to re-read the report because I thought it specifically said they were just proposals requiring the legislative process and debate.

              If you google "CBO report on 100 options" to address budget crisis you should get a link to a .pdf file on the CBO site.

              Of significant note is this sentence:
              "Under the option, veterans currently receiving compensation for those conditions would have their compensation reduced or eliminated following a reevaluation, and veterans who applied for compensation for those conditions in the future would not be eligible for it."

              Comment


                #8
                >milmser. That is on every one of the 100 points in that pdf because that is when the next fiscal year starts.

                We will have to wait to start seeing budget proposals to see what we need to scream about.

                Comment


                  #9
                  I re-read it and I see the note on each table that says when the option "would take effect" and I think that statement applies as an assumption for the basis of each of the financial calculations of resulting savings if the option were implemented. That's only my interpretation though. I'll be watching this issue for sure.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Milmser View Post
                    @Pirateghost, I'm curious where you saw that this proposal would take affect in Oct '14? I found the actual CBO proposal on the web, but didn't see where it was enacted in law or other policy. I'm going to re-read the report because I thought it specifically said they were just proposals requiring the legislative process and debate.

                    If you google "CBO report on 100 options" to address budget crisis you should get a link to a .pdf file on the CBO site.

                    Of significant note is this sentence:
                    "Under the option, veterans currently receiving compensation for those conditions would have their compensation reduced or eliminated following a reevaluation, and veterans who applied for compensation for those conditions in the future would not be eligible for it."
                    That date came from the CBO website. I cut and pasted the info.



                    Since I can't paste a URL yet.

                    **URL removed by Moderator in compliance with MSWorld Guidelines. This may be put in your Profile for all registered, logged-in members to see. Go to UserCP > Edit Details**

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Ceremony View Post
                      The CBO does not make recommendations.
                      Ok, perhaps, but they did put it on paper. What would you call it? They call it an option.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        My neurologist gave me the options after diagnosis, CRAB dmds at the time, or not taking one. These are Options.

                        Did she say "I think you need to be on xxxx drug"? No, because that would be a recommendation.

                        I think you need to research the roll of the CBO. Also, there are multiple options in the same report that would directly impact military MS patients, as well as civilian patients, that you do not mention. Try to find them.

                        Wait until the President releases his proposed budget, and then the congressional debate to follow. This will give a better picture of what we are up against.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Well undisclosed location, I think our govt considers us 3rd class citizens at best.

                          I also get a not so warm fuzzy feeling when I see thanks for your service. I expect many have good intentions, but nothing more.

                          gomer

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by gomer View Post
                            Well undisclosed location, I think our govt considers us 3rd class citizens at best.

                            I also get a not so warm fuzzy feeling when I see thanks for your service. I expect many have good intentions, but nothing more.

                            gomer
                            I'm not sure what this means to the thread topic, but I for one appreciate everyone who has served. This isn't about people in the military being third class citizens, its about what's coming in the next federal budget.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Ceremony View Post
                              ....snip.....
                              I think you need to research the roll of the CBO. Also, there are multiple options in the same report that would directly impact military MS patients, as well as civilian patients, that you do not mention. Try to find them.

                              Wait until the President releases his proposed budget, and then the congressional debate to follow. This will give a better picture of what we are up against.
                              I am focusing on this specific option for veterans. If you want to discuss other issues, open your own topic, thanks.
                              I for one do not intend to wait for the budget to come out. Someone right now is sitting down wondering how to reduce the budget and reaching for options. I prefer to control my destiny as much as possible by being proactive instead of falling back to defense.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X