Home › QuickNav › Local News
Congress looks at hiking health care premiums for veterans
STORY TOOLS
More Local News
- 17 indicted in San Angelo meth probe
- Mom brings back tales of Iraq, thanks to students
- ASU sets permanent student recruiter in San Antonio
Social Bookmarking
WASHINGTON - Military retiree advocates are open to increasing health care fees for retirees for the sake of the armed services at war or on base, a Pentagon health official said.
Under fire in a congressional hearing, Assistant Defense Secretary Ward Casscells added that advocates "I've spoken with" would accept gradual out-of-pocket increases to help the military keep costs down.
"They know that at some point, this will eat into theater care or force readiness," Casscells said.
Faced with a rising tab for Tricare, the military health insurance program, Pentagon officials are angling to raise out-of-pocket costs for retirees in the 2009 federal budget.
Many - but not all - veterans organizations have broken ranks on the heated issue of ratcheting up Tricare costs for retirees, Rick Jones of the National Association for the Uniformed Services said.
NAUS hasn't budged on its stand against fee increases, said Jones, the organization's legislative director.
Military retirees already sacrificed for their country and shouldn't be asked to give more out of their own pockets, he said.
"It is a cost of our service," Jones said.
Another group, the National Military and Veterans Alliance, is writing Congress to combat misconceptions that the organization supports raising fees, Jones said. Proposals on the table double or triple what retirees younger than 65 pay.
"It's sort of like, 'Here's your benefit. Here's your bill. Thank you for your service,'<0x00A0>" he said.
The veterans alliance is an umbrella organization made up of 31 military and veterans service organizations with 2.5 million members altogether.
But the Reserve Officers Association worries that the Department of Defense might find the program too expensive to sustain, said Capt. Marshall Hanson, ROA legislative director.
"On a practical side, if the benefit goes away, that's going to cost retirees more in the long run than trying to adjust to paying a fair share for a program that has a good basis for increases," he said.
Retirees don't want fee increases making up for 12 years of flat fees, Casscells testified before a subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.
But they'll accept increases tied to the cost of living, he said.
The Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care recommends raising out-of-pocket costs for health care on retirees younger than 65 and for prescription drugs, Dr. Gail Wilensky, co-chairwoman of the DOD task force, testified before the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
The changes would phase in over four years, Wilensky said. The task force doesn't recommend increases for active-duty members and their families.
"We mostly focused on under-65 retirees," she said.
Most of them work and have access to employer-sponsored health care plans, she said.
The administration has aimed to raise retirees' Tricare fees before, said U.S. Rep. Mac Thornberry, a West Texas Republican.
"My guess is that nothing much will change this year," said Thornberry, who is also a member of the House Armed Services Committee.
Congress squashed Bush's 2008 proposal to save an estimated $1.9 billion by increasing Tricare fees. His plan called for aligning Tricare out-of-pocket costs for military retirees younger than 65 years with private health insurance.
The moratorium on Tricare fee increases ends in October.
Posted by Purplesage on March 31, 2008 at 8:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Here they go again. DOD is trying yet again to raise the fees military retirees pay for the "free" healthcare, that was promised them for life, if they served their country for at least twenty years. Have these bureaucrats no shame? The current administration has surely been a disappointment in the way it has treated those that have honorably served this country, when it comes to health care issues. For some reason, the money is there to bail-out irresponsible investment banks and cut taxes while funding two wars. But, when it comes to Tricare, they come crying to Congress pleading poverty and asking permission to double, triple, or quadruple the fees retirees pay for Tricare. I guess each representative will have to face a barrage of letters and angry e-mails from military retirees, alerting them to the fact that the retired military population votes at a very high percentage, and will be watching for them to speak out against this fee increase. Are you ready Mr. Conaway?
Posted by JFREDDY on March 31, 2008 at 8:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Congress sticking to us again!!! I would recommend to young people today, NOT to make the military a carrer. Join, get the training and experience in a carrer field, then dump the military and get a job on the outside with higher pay and job you don't have to put your life on the line for. Do it while you are young, because there will not any benifits from a carrer in the military. The way Congress is going, you may even have to start paying for your family to have medical care at a military facility. Sounds a little like Congress wants medical for active duty only, all others have to find it elsewhere.
In my opinion, Congress is leading the pack when it comes to cutting retirement benifits. That's why big corportations are cutting benifits to their workers.
Posted by Shorebreak on March 31, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
People who serve in Congress receive the best health care program the tax payers can buy. But when it comes to those that have served this country, in a military career, I'm not surprised Congress will be looking at ways to make those fine retired military men and women pay more for the free health care for life, that was promised every time they re-enlisted. If Congress has any fortitude, which I doubt, they would tell the DOD taskforce to take their proposal and stick it.
Posted by cookie62k on March 31, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Part of the problem is that too few congressmen or women have ever served a day in the military. Another is that with their perks, they don't have to worry about health care.
Posted by tonto on March 31, 2008 at 10:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Good old George W. Bush yea fight fight fight
Posted by pricklypear on March 31, 2008 at 11:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Tonto - perhaps not so much GWB, but Congress.
Personally, I think the US Government should pick up the tab for all such costs for veterans. Always.
Posted by ThePhoenix on March 31, 2008 at 1:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Shoresy,
Absolutely 100% agree with you!
"Most of them work and have access to employer-sponsored health care plans, she said." This is what a congresswoman said refering to "most under 65 retirees". Well most of congress are filthy rich and don't need health insurance, they can afford to pay most medical costs out of their pocket. So let's do away with their health insurance.
Posted by jepysdad on March 31, 2008 at 1:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Leadership by example is long gone. But ths shifting of costs away from the employer/government to the individual continues. It manifests as greater premium sharing, higher deductibles/copays, and less benefits.
If a bipartisan group of insured Congressmen get their way, every worker will have to pay for their health insurance. It's called the Wyden Plan.
America's military veterans are the canary in the coal mine.
Posted by Shorebreak on March 31, 2008 at 3:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have taken Sage's post to heart and written letters to Rep. Conaway, and Senators Hutchinson and Cornyn, regarding this travesty. Hope everyone does the same and lets Congress know we citizens don't like the bureaucrats breaking promises to our military members, especially after serving twenty years or more for this country.
Posted by Purplesage on March 31, 2008 at 4:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The point whether military retirees younger than 65 have access to employer-sponsored health care plans is irrelevant to say the least. This Dr. Gail Wilensky is probably an ivory tower type consultant that has never spent a day in the military and probably has no idea what they do.
Posted by jepysdad on March 31, 2008 at 6:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dr. Gail Wilensky was the head of Medicare/Medicaid under President George H.W. Bush. She just grossed $2.6 million from the sale of ManorCare to the Carlyle Group, a politically connected private equity firm. Her capital gains savings (as much as $130,000) under the Bush plan won't make it into the federal coffers to pay for veterans healthcare.
Ms. Wilensky is also a board director of Cephalon, Inc.; Gentiva Health Services, Inc.; Quest Diagnostics Incorporated; SRA International; and United HealthCare Corporation.
United HealthCare is a huge health insurance company. Watch and see if they ever bid on retired veterans health insurance.
For more on the list of Bush insiders behaving badly go to:
http://peureport.blogspot.com/2007/11/st...
Posted by Purplesage on March 31, 2008 at 10:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks jepysdad. That probably explains the whole motivation behind this proposal. Dr. Wilensky is more tainted than I thought when it comes to offering an objective insight as to the Tricare program.
Posted by misanthrope on March 31, 2008 at 11:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Jetson speaks from a vast store of ignorance and ill-will on the subject. In my 23 years in uniform, I never once saw a physicians assistant. As a retiree, we have been encouraged to use civilian facilities so that the active duty people could use the base facilities. Even the active duty people are sometimes sent to civilian practitioners.
Having said that, Dr. Willensky is as full of BS as any of the politicians in D.C. - and all of them are tainted. And the ROA is the first I have heard of ANY retiree association accepting the fee increases. I am a member of MOAA and they are encouraging all of us to send letters to our Congressional representatives.
Something I learned as a young soldier:
"God and soldiers we adore, in time of trouble, not before. With peace restored and all things righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." A saying much older than me and still true.
Posted by GetALife on April 1, 2008 at 12:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dear American Servicemember,
For your years of sacrifice, dedication to duty and service to this great nation, and since you have retired, we have a BONUS deal for you and your family. Now that you have served your purpose and are a second class citizen within the military community and an obvious burden on the budget, it is once again time to show our appreciation. So, remember all that supposedly free health care we promised you (which you already pay an annual stipend towards as well as co-pays), you know, the money you pay in that the majority of the civilian population does not know about? Yes, those payments! Well, since you did such a fantastic job during your 20+ years in uniform during WWII, Korea, VietNam, the Persian Gulf, winning the Cold War, every overseas skirmish inbetween and now against the war on terror, we're going to change the program and allow you to sacrifice even more by limiting your benefits and increasing what you have to pay. By the way, since I have you on the line, do you have another relative or friend you know who might want to enlist? After all, we offer free medical benefits while active duty and even after you retire.
Thanks, as always,
Uncle Sammie
P.S. - I guess you're on your own now. If we wanted you to have a family, we'd have issued you one at boot camp.
Posted by vietnamvet on April 2, 2008 at 12:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Lets see, stiff the vets and that leaves a few dollars for our next pay raise.
My father (30 years military) was told when he went into the military during WWII that he would get free health, commissary, etc. He got stiffed too.
Posted by mrsdigger on April 2, 2008 at 9:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, Pearls, Getalife (you hit the nail on the head) and all - I agree. My hubby served 23 years in the Army. When he enlisted retirees got 100% healthcare. They were told they were going to be taken care of. We were told the same thing. Then Champus went to Tricare...we had to pick a plan. Prime was free and the stipulations were such we had to get referrals and co-pays were less. Why not chose prime? Retired 2 years we pay yearly for prime ($460.00 a year). We have a co-pay for everything we can't get done on base. They now want to increase our cost for what was promised to be free when he joined? Neither he nor I have access to insurance through our employers. There is NO option for us for secondary insurance. We don't have dental because at over $1000.00 a year for United Concordia coverage it isn't worth it. That, too, used to be taken care for retirees. Maybe they could save themselves some money and not send us mailings telling my husband to convince family members and friends to join the military. Yes, those mailings come about every 3 months. It is ridiculous. Those who serve in congress and such get FREE care and retirement for the rest of their lives, on top of the fact their pay far surpasses what the average military person makes...is that fair? I am going to write DC and let them know my thoughts on this issue. It was fine when they shipped him off all over the world and such but now that he's used up they could care less...what a crock.
(Requires free registration.)
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Help us police this site. If you see a comment that is defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy, please click the "Suggest removal" link next to the offending comment.
You must be a registered user to post comments. To register for a free account, click here