Reply
Mon 9 Jun, 2003 05:37 am
One of the perks promised to 20 year vets who signed on during WWII and the Korean War was free medical care for life, for them and their dependents. Looks like the government is not living up to its committment.
Quote:During World War II and the Korean War era, recruits were told they and their dependents would receive free medical care for life if they served 20 years.
That is "what I sold at high schools all over western Pennsylvania,'' Nichols said. "Medical care for you, your wife and your children.''
Marines and other services still promise care to enlistees. A current Marine recruiting pamphlet trumpets it.
"Should you remain in the Marine Corps through retirement, your health care benefits will extend throughout your lifetime and throughout the lifetime of your spouse,'' reads the recruiting brochure.
Not so, Nichols said. And a lawsuit sought to press the issue.
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear arguments in the class-action suit by military retirees. Nichols and 23,000 other plaintiffs now will lobby Congress.
Many WWII vets in my town (not career) signed up for VA care, when the private medical insurance issue became untenable. As a result, the VA became so overloaded that sometimes it took almost a year to get an appointment. Many did this because the cost of prescription drugs was $2, now up to $7 recently, but still a great deal.
I read a couple of weeks ago that the VA will no longer take any non-career service people from now on!
What do you think about this?
http://www.tampatrib.com/News/MGACU0HZPGD.html
I think the one term enlisted person ought to be treated as any other civilian, unless that person sustained the illness/injury on active duty. Multiple hitches ought to be given more consideration.
There are to many people with their fingers in the VA system. Certianly the government should back the promises that were made to these (now) senior citizens but right nbow the VA is open to anyone who served at least 180 days.
It used to be that you had to have a service related illness but that was changed in 1997 so now they are saddled with huge numbers of patients coming in for illnesses that aren't related to the military at all. The end result is legitimate users are getting pushed aside and the VA system is strained.
edgarblythe wrote:I think the one term enlisted person ought to be treated as any other civilian...
How about a one term officer? What is unique to the enlisted? I'm confused...
I'd be interested to know what has brought about the change (as in, whether or not this is a result of executive fiat). I rather suspect that the Shrub and Friends are as likely to screw their constituency as any other group.
Which change are you talking about Setanta?
Have you read the opening post, Fishin'?
Yes, I did.. But since the article in the opening post specifically mentions a change made in 1956 to "the promise" I thought perhaps you were referring to some other change since you seem to want to tie it to Bush...
Ah well, Fishin', regardless of the change made in 1956, when i worked in the Army Medical Corps, retired military and their dependents automatically recieved medical care--hence my confusion over the change. But your point is well taken, can't necessarily pin this one on the Shrub.
Retired military and their dependents still do Setanta. The change that was made in 1956 changed it from "guaranteed" to "space available" service though.
Retirees that don't have service related illness/injuries are also shifted over to MediCare when they hit age 65. That is what these guys are fighting in this suit. They want to stay in the military treatment system and not have to pay for or deal with MediCare.
I meant to include officers - just chose the wrong language.
As I remember it, one of the recruiting promises was that we would be eligible for VA benefits -- including loans and medical care. (I honestly never heard anything about family medical care.)
If it was promised -- it should be given. Period!
One termers -- when I served -- earned less than $100 per month for most of their enlistment. The promised benefits made a difference.
Reneging on the promise sucks.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace