Veterans groups angry at Obama

I think this is just bait and switch. Obama plans to create a goverment health plan as a lower cost option to private health care, as part of his health reform plans.

I think he wants to make private health care so expensive for veterans they will opt for the goverments plan instead. The more people Obama can get to opt for the goverment plan, the easier it would be to suggest that we have a single payer, goverment controlled health care system.

I would strongly question whether or not Obama's plan is even "doable". For instance, healthcare plans that I am familiar with exclude covering charges that would otherwise (and rightfully) covered by workers compensation or another party's insurance as a result of an accident caused by a policy member of that other party, like in a car accident. If are injured on the job, your company's or state's workers comp is responsible for paying expenses related to that injury. If you use your own insurance and they find out it was on a workers comp injury, they will seek repayment. Same if you go to the ER because you were in an auto accident that was not your fault. Your insurance will seek repayment from either you or the party causing injury's insurance.

I would think most private insurance plans already have exclusions due to injuries caused by acts of war. And if they don't already, I am sure they will quickly add clauses to exclude any injury/ailment that you incurred while enlisted in the armed forces of this country.

The one thing all Americans agree upon no matter their politics or how they feel about the wars going on is this: We need to support our troops and respect our Veterans. Any politician (Democrat or Republican) who votes in favor of legislation that includes this will never be able to get re-elected. Obama will never get support for this. Not even Pelosi would be brave/dumb enough to push for this. With Democrats who are rising in prominence like Patty Murray and Mike Michaud making strong statements to the effect that they would oppose any budget that included this plan, the President will have to back off from this quickly or face a stark reality that popularity isn't going to be enough to carry him through the next four years.

What happens to Veterans that use Tricare as their secondary insurance plan?

How dare he insult this nation's veterans and those who will become veterans. He's never served one day in the military, so how would he know what it's like to serve his country and/or suffer from a war casulty.

Hold on here Mr. President, I servied my Country and I am a 67 year old DAV.
Don't give it with one hand and then take it with the other. Don't go there, one day you will have to pay a heavy price for this action and if you are not careful it will mean you'll go down as a one term President. I won't vote for you a second time.

I agree with the logic of Heather and jeffhenson. I am a Vietnam Vet with a 90% disability rating and know how long it takes for administration to take action. I also am familiar with health care and health and disability insurance. The person that would be hurt the most during the time frame when the government concludes that somebody else should pay would be the veteran. Taking from "Peter to pay Paul" will only add cost to both the governemnt and an insurance company.

But, the other major question would be "Who would want to serve and protect our country knowing that the support for the military on this issue is gone?"
I never would have believed that this support would want to be taken away.

It is unthinkable that we would put our armed forces at risk like this. Obama yet again should be ashamed of himself. The federal government sends our military into harms way and the federal government needs to pay for their injuries. Bluecross did not send them to war!

Mike USMC 1963-1967
I can not believe what I am hearing. This is absolutly unbelievable that the commander in chief is even considering this issue. I feel real sorry for the young men serving right now. This must make them feel real good that the president thinks so much of their service. So it goes no where, it's the thought that he even thought about it. Mr. President we were let down in Viet Nam by DC, give these kids a break. Park a few of your planes to save money or fire congress. Where did you come up with this idea, from Jane Fonda or Aires.

I'm a veteran, and it's never occurred to me to use the VA system, much less that I shouldn't use my medical insurance for my own care. I have medical insurance for a reason. Why should we even have a completely separate medical system for treating veterans at all? It doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever.

It should also be pointed out that the VA is actually receiving an overall increase in funds, and that the Vietnam Veterans of America put out a press release saying that, with the exception of the health insurance question, this is the best budget proposal for veterans in the last thirty years. The press is so focused on this one policy scuffle they have completely abandoned the bigger picture.

It amazes that Veterans such as myself would think they are getting cheated out of something, when it really comes down to that fact that private insurers always get a few ride and if they(veterans) are paying some kind fees through employers or out their pockets and yet they are covered by the VA. Maybe they should consider dropping the outside insurance if they are going to use the VA , if the coverage is garanteed to the veteran in question. I think the bottom line here is not who provides or pays the benefit, the main issue is are you covered and do you have adequate medical benifits?

This is absolutely disgraceful....what should we expect from a man who couldn't even serve his country.

More CHANGE you can count on America. Aren't you happy ? This is just sick. I know he is my commander in chief. But I seem to be getting a more desperate lost feeling in the pit of my stomach every day. A 70 year old vet just doesn't see any way out anymore. I don't remember feeling this hopeless even in Nam in 1969. At least we had some choice, freedom something to look forward to. What do we have now. What the hell is left. Getting off the boat in San Diego and being called a baby killer was bad enough. But now we have the president's right hand man Eric Holder calling us cowards just because we don't talk to blacks and discuss their problems. I have not had a single black stop me and ask why I am crippled how I got a piece of shrapnel in the leg while defending his damn right to protest. Yes a guess I am a little bitter. Cannot handle people biting the hand that feeds them. We shoot dogs for that, don't we ?

The Health Ins. Companys that I have delt with Have a Pre-existing I'llness that they will not cover. My Wife and I are classifeid as uninsurable because of pre-exsisting I'llness. I don't know how many others there are out there that are stuck in this classification. But I think that if your Injured have a long term care. No Insurance company is going to step up to Insure you. Now in this case Is Obama going to ask the Veteran for out of pocket Expence. I know that we have a fully Volunteer Armed forces now. There are still a lot of Drafted disabled Veterans that are getting treatment. These people didn't have a choice and were injured. I feel that if President Obama wants to put this plan in affect. That it should be known up front before People join the Armed forces. They shouldn't in mid steam say lets change the plan. I wounder How many people would inter the service knowing this. I also wonder if Health Insurance companys would actually insure a combat soldier.

To Dan,

I don't think you are reading the article correctly. It states that the Obama proposal would seek to make private insurance remimburse for "service related injuries and disabilities". No one is saying the VA is supposed to pay for a twisted ankle while playing pick-up basketball 10 years after you left the service. What Obama is saying is that if the VA treats you for a combat or active-duty injury or illness or disability, they are going to try to get your private (self-pay or employer paid) insurance to cover it. First, I don't think that is even doable under any plan I have ever come across. Secondly, the US Govt has a moral responsibility to our veterans to care for any injury or illness that was a direct result of their service.

To Joe about Tricare.

Since Tricare is already used as the secondary coverage for those that have other insurance, I would presume that would continue the same as it does today. I would think for those on Active Duty, Tricare would become primary for any service related healthcare, but in the bizarro world of Government and Insurance, you can never get too confident.

It was the CBO that floated this proposal not Obama-Biden...CBO eyes military retirees, vets for health cost cuts
Date: January 04, 2009
Topic: Benefits

By Tom Philpott

A new report from the Congressional Budget Office shows why some military retirees and veterans could face higher out-of-pocket costs if the Obama administration and Congress take bold moves to reform the U.S. health system and to make federal health programs more efficient.

Among 115 “options” presented, though not endorsed, in the CBO report, several focus on raising Tricare out-of-pocket costs for retirees and one targets families. Others would tighten access to VA hospitals and clinics, or raise VA health fees, for veterans with no service-connected conditions.

Working-age military retirees will find here some of those familiar cost-saving ideas endorsed by the Bush administration to raise Tricare fees, co-payments and deductibles for retirees under 62 and their spouses.

But other options are new and, if enacted into law, would raise health costs for Medicare-eligible military retirees and for active duty families. One option suggests having the VA health system disenroll millions of users who have no service-related injuries or ailments.

Every two years, the CBO presents daring options for Congress and the executive branch to weigh in trying to control federal spending. The new report, “Budget Options, Volume 1: Health Care,” is unusual in that it focuses entirely health care, an Obama policy priority, and its arrival is unscheduled.

It’s also significant that the CBO director who led this work was Peter R. Orszag, President-elect Obama’s nominee to be his director of the Office of Management and Budget. OMB is responsible for assembling the president’s annual budget request to Congress. How bold will his economic team be?

“We are going to go through our federal budget, as I promised during the campaign, page by page, line by line, eliminating those programs we don’t need and insisting that those that we do need operate in a sensible, cost-effective way,” Obama said in November as he announced Orszag’s nomination to join his cabinet .

“We’re also going to focus on one of the biggest, long-run challenges that our budget faces, namely the rising cost of health care in both the public and private sectors,” Obama continued. “This is not just a challenge but also an opportunity to improve the health care that Americans rely on, and to bring down the costs that taxpayers, businesses and families have to pay. That is what [OMB] will do in my administration.”

Obama added, “Peter doesn’t need a map to tell him where the bodies are buried in the federal budget. He knows what works and what doesn’t, what’s worth our precious tax dollars and what is not.”

Indeed, in the CBO report’s preface, Orszag gets “special thanks” for having “conceived” the report and being “instrumental in its development.”

Many of its options deal with adjustments to Medicare, Medicaid, private health insurance rules and the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan for federal civilians. Most ideas are aimed at cutting costs but some would enhance benefits. The 226-page report can be read on line at: www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9925/12-18-HealthOptions.pdf

Here are some options that would touch military people and veterans: Tricare for working-age retirees

Fees, co-payments and deductibles would be raised for retirees under 62 to restore the relative costs paid when Tricare began in 1995. Tricare Prime enrollment would be raised to $550 a year for individuals from $230. Retiree families would pay $1,100 versus $460 today. Co-pays for doctor visits would climb to $28 from $12 and users of Tricare Standard and Extra would pay an annual deductible of $350 for an individual and $700 for families. Congress has declined to support such increases for the past three years.
Fees for active duty families

Dependents of active duty members enrolled in Tricare Prime, the managed care network, would pay new fees equal to 10 percent of the cost of health services obtained either in military treatment facilities or through civilian network providers. Total out of pocket costs would be capped, however.

To help offset these costs, dependents would receive a $500 non-taxable allowance annually. Those who elect to use alternative health insurance, rather than Tricare, could apply the $500 toward their health insurance premiums, co-payments or deductibles.

CBO estimates these fees would save $7 billion over 10 years and encourage Prime enrollees to “use medical services prudently.” It also would entice more spouses to enroll in employer-provided health plans instead of Tricare. The downside, CBO said, would be financial difficulties for some Prime enrollees despite the cap on out-of-pocket costs. Also, CBO said, spouses induced to rely on employer health plans could see health coverage interrupted during military assignment relocations.
Tricare-For-Life fees

The military’s health insurance supplement to Medicare could see higher user costs. Under this option, beneficiaries would pay the first $525 of yearly medical costs plus one half of the next $4,725 of costs charged to Medicare. So the extra out-of-pocket cost for TFL users would be up to $2,887.50 a year. This amount would be indexed to rise with Medicare costs. The change would save $40 billion over 10 years. But CBO said it also could discourage some patients from seeking preventive care or proper management of chronic conditions. So it could negatively affect some patients’ health.
Tighten VA enrollment

The VA healthcare system would be directed to disenroll 2.3 million Priority Groups 7 and 8 – individuals who are not poor and have no service-related medical needs. Estimated savings would be $53 billion over 10 years but Medicare spending would rise by $26 billion in the same period as elderly among these vets shifted to Medicare.

CBO said 90 percent of these vets have other health care coverage. But this change could leave up to 10 percent unable to find affordable care.
pitbullstew

I can't believe that veterans are so slow that they don't get it. President Obama is proposing more increases in veterans benefits then any president in recent history and yet you're all crying about who pays your medical benefits, what difference does it make as long they get paid. Its a no-brainer, find something else to complian about like housing, and good jobs thats a bigger issue. Especially if your medical benefits are taken care of. Get a life the war is not over yet!

Pay attention Jimmie, the VVA praised Obama's budget for improving health care for vets. That's fantastic. However making the veteran pay for injuries and disabilities incurred during their time of service is what has everyone in an uproar. Rightly so too. To me it's morally wrong to make the vet pay for treatment of injuries incurred DURING time of service to the United States. Injuries outside of service terms are why there are secondary supplemental plans, which many have (ala Medicare). Improving health care for veterans is fantastic, but making THEM pay for it is just wrong.

I heard today from a Veterans Service Officer today that Obama plans now to have ALL Verterans Disibility claim files opened and reviewed for any possible DOWNGRADING. Even P& T 100% VETS. Has Anyone else heard this?

Kevin,
I think everybody is confused with what the real question is and that's whether or not a veteran with a service connected disability will have to pay for that treatment on his own and I still don't believe this is the case. As I said before, what's important is that somebody pays and there is no cost to the veteran.

I don't see what the problem is. For private insurance to pay for the care of vets if they have said insurance. I didn't hear a thing about cutting benefits from the VA just collecting from private enterprise what they are responsible for anyway and using the funds to expand the capabilities of the VA and reduce the cost to the public for care and treatment that is already covered from another quarter.

I'm a wife a a Desert Storm Veteran who has a service connected illness that is "undiagnosed". I carry the private insurance. My husband served his country. Like many other Americans who served. Our country is willing to give out free money to those who choose not to work and live off the system. Our Vets earned their VA benefits to keep our country safe and protect our freedom. I'm all for giving more benefits to the Veterans. We have troops overseas right now that are going to need those benefits. Private insurances won't cover pre-existing conditions -- Is this policy going to change?

I would like to hear the Presidents own words at the meeting with the Veterans group relating to private insurers covering war related injuries. I know someone has the minutes or video of this meeting. Did he actually say the things I have read?