WTH is the Obama Administration thinking??!!

Status
Not open for further replies.

DVCKennyD

Mouseketeer
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
340
It has been obvious to anybody here how I feel about the current direction of our country under the new Obama administration, but I have always respected the man ,and more importantly, the office he now holds.

However, I just can't take it anymore and want it to be known here and now that I am glad that I didn't vote for or support this schmuck:mad:


When I heard about this "brilliant" idea to start offloading costs for wounded veterans to third party insurers, I came to the conclusion that it is indeed amateur hour in the oval office.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/200903...s_plan_to_charge_wounded_heroes_for_treatment

The American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for Treatment
Mon Mar 16, 5:49 pm ET

WASHINGTON, March 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The leader of the nation's largest veterans organization says he is "deeply disappointed and concerned" after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.
"It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan," said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. "He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it."


The Commander, clearly angered as he emerged from the session said, "This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate ' to care for him who shall have borne the battle' given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm's way, and not private insurance companies. I say again that The American Legion does not and will not support any plan that seeks to bill a veteran for treatment of a service connected disability at the very agency that was created to treat the unique need of America's veterans!"


Commander Rehbein was among a group of senior officials from veterans service organizations joining the President, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki and Steven Kosiak, the overseer of defense spending at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The group's early afternoon conversation at The White House was precipitated by a letter of protest presented to the President earlier this month. The letter, co-signed by Commander Rehbein and the heads of ten colleague organizations, read, in part, " There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran's personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties this country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable."


Commander Rehbein reiterated points made last week in testimony to both House and Senate Veterans' Affairs Committees. It was stated then that The American Legion believes that the reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate that VA treat service-connected injuries and disabilities given that the United States government sends members of the armed forces into harm's way, and not private insurance companies. The proposed requirement for these companies to reimburse the VA would not only be unfair, says the Legion, but would have an adverse impact on service-connected disabled veterans and their families. The Legion argues that, depending on the severity of the medical conditions involved, maximum insurance coverage limits could be reached through treatment of the veteran's condition alone. That would leave the rest of the family without health care benefits. The Legion also points out that many health insurance companies require deductibles to be paid before any benefits are covered.


Additionally, the Legion is concerned that private insurance premiums would be elevated to cover service-connected disabled veterans and their families, especially if the veterans are self-employed or employed in small businesses unable to negotiate more favorable across-the-board insurance policy pricing. The American Legion also believes that some employers, especially small businesses, would be reluctant to hire veterans with service-connected disabilities due to the negative impact their employment might have on obtaining and financing company health care benefits.
"I got the distinct impression that the only hope of this plan not being enacted," said Commander Rehbein, "is for an alternative plan to be developed that would generate the desired $540-million in revenue. The American Legion has long advocated for Medicare reimbursement to VA for the treatment of veterans. This, we believe, would more easily meet the President's financial goal. We will present that idea in an anticipated conference call with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel in the near future.
"I only hope the administration will really listen to us then. This matter has far more serious ramifications than the President is imagining," concluded the Commander.


What the hell are they thinking??!! The estimated savings would be about $540 million... That's "tip money" as far as the budget is concerned. Some friendly advice... Hey Obama, find somebody else! Not wounded veterans.

KennyD
 
It's all about creating more taxes, even if it means charging soldiers for ongoing medical care for battlefield injuries.

Not only will it raise the $540 million in new taxes, it will raise our insurance rates to pay for it. Or, veterans may be excluded from private insurance.

Regardless how you feel about the war, or Bush or Obama - this has to be stopped. These brave men and women give their bodies in service to our country and we sure as shootin better take care of them -- NOT Bill Them!!:mad: :mad: :mad: :sad2: :sad2: :sad2: :guilty: :guilty: :guilty: :eek: :eek:
 
Please raise your hand if you want to see such a policy successfully enacted.
 

The leader of the nation's largest veterans organization says he is "deeply disappointed and concerned" after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.

The administration isn't calling for the wounded vets to pay the costs, just their insurance companies if they happen to have private insurance.
 
The administration isn't calling for the wounded vets to pay the costs, just their insurance companies if they happen to have private insurance.

Who exactly do you think will be paying for it? The bottomless pockets of insurance companies? NO. It's the people who buy and pay for insurance. It's just another back-handed tax of people who have to pay for insurance -- US!
 
Who exactly do you think will be paying for it? The bottomless pockets of insurance companies? NO. It's the people who buy and pay for insurance. It's just another back-handed tax of people who have to pay for insurance -- US!

Who was paying for it before? The government through the VA.
 
The administration isn't calling for the wounded vets to pay the costs, just their insurance companies if they happen to have private insurance.


The only reason that vets with service related injuries or illnesses can obtain third party insurance now is because the insurance companies expect these illnesses to be covered by the VA.

Remove that coverage, and it will not only effect those currently enrolled, but will also make it much more difficult for future veterans seeking coverage. What insurance company would underwrite them:confused3

KennyD
 
Who was paying for it before? The government through the VA.

Remember how Obama promised no new taxes for families making less than $250K? Well this is a new tax, to the tune of $540 million and it lands squarely on anyone who pays for health insurance, whether as a small businessman or as an employee.
 
The proposal applies to Vets with existing private insurance, and forcing those companies to cover, not exclude treatment. Currently private insurance companies refuse to cover Vets service-related injuries and put it on the VA.

The idea is that Vets already paying for private insurance should get the benefits that they pay for. No one would be left out in the cold. If a vet doesn't have private insurance, they get VA coverage...PERIOD. It wont make it in the bill anyway because of Insurance Lobbies.

If you would like to read the praise Obama is receiving from the Military, please read the article from "THE STARTS AND STRIPES".

From the article:

Obama’s VA budget outline, with full details promised by late April, would raise VA spending to $112.8 billion in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. That’s an increase of $15 billion, or 15 percent, over the current budget.

"This is the largest dollar and percentage increase ever requested by a president for veterans," Shinseki told lawmakers.

Obama never proposed denying coverage to VETS. In fact, he is fighting for VETS by saying if they already pay for insurance, the insurance should cover them.

His plan increases the VA budget by 15%, more than any President has done. Read it.

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=61312
 
Remember how Obama promised no new taxes for families making less than $250K? Well this is a new tax, to the tune of $540 million and it lands squarely on anyone who pays for health insurance, whether as a small businessman or as an employee.

540 million? That's less than $2 per person per year.

At the same time, it would reduce the cost of government. Isn't that what you conservatives want?
 
540 million? That's less than $2 per person per year.

At the same time, it would reduce the cost of government. Isn't that what you conservatives want?

It doesn't reduce the cost of government. That's just an insane statement. Obama is increasing VA spending by 15% while billing private insurance companies to cover care ongoing care for injuries received while in service to the country, an increase to insurance premiums of $540 million.

It's $2 per pserson in the country, including every man woman and child. So, those $100 ,illion that are children , poor or elderly will not be paying. It will be those who are working hard to pay their own dang insurance costs, without having the government increase their costs just because they are unwilling to spend less on junk like swine smell research in Iowa. Congress just spent $7 BILLION on worthless, poltical payback earmarks, but want to hang $540 million on the folks... Disgusting.
 
It doesn't reduce the cost of government. That's just an insane statement. Obama is increasing VA spending by 15% while billing private insurance companies to cover care ongoing care for injuries received while in service to the country, an increase to insurance premiums of $540 million.

It's $2 per pserson in the country, including every man woman and child. So, those $100 ,illion that are children , poor or elderly will not be paying. It will be those who are working hard to pay their own dang insurance costs, without having the government increase their costs just because they are unwilling to spend less on junk like swine smell research in Iowa. Congress just spent $7 BILLION on worthless, poltical payback earmarks, but want to hang $540 million on the folks... Disgusting.


For some vets this is a great thing. There are MANY vets that complain about their medical services. Many have to deal with VA hospitals being very far away, with inadequate services, etc. IMO, this just makes sense - particularly for Vets that live in rural areas. If a Vet is the bread winner of the family and has insurance to cover the family (of course he is IN the family) - why wouldn't the service that he is PAYING for cover him. Vets should be able to use both - whatever one doesn't cover the other does. It just makes sense to me. I didn't know that private insurances wouldn't cover Vets. That's what shameful. I agree. NO one should be rejected.
 
This whole thing is bologna...


Vets should have full insurance.
 
For some vets this is a great thing. There are MANY vets that complain about their medical services. Many have to deal with VA hospitals being very far away, with inadequate services, etc. IMO, this just makes sense - particularly for Vets that live in rural areas. If a Vet is the bread winner of the family and has insurance to cover the family (of course he is IN the family) - why wouldn't the service that he is PAYING for cover him. Vets should be able to use both - whatever one doesn't cover the other does. It just makes sense to me. I didn't know that private insurances wouldn't cover Vets. That's what shameful. I agree. NO one should be rejected.


Private insurance DOES cover Vets, just not for ongoing treatment for service and battlefield-related conditions.

If a vet lives in a rural area, they should be able to get treatment nearby, paid for by the VA, not by insurance companies.

Has anybody considered that the rate for a vet with a pre-existing battlefield/service condition would have to pay a HUGE premium to get coverage since the VA won't cover it? Because that's what we're talking about. If he has insurance, regardless of what it costs him, the VA will not cover it.

Any small businessman who has had to pay for their own coverage with a pre-existing condition knows EXACTLY what I'm talking about.
 
For some vets this is a great thing. There are MANY vets that complain about their medical services. Many have to deal with VA hospitals being very far away, with inadequate services, etc. IMO, this just makes sense - particularly for Vets that live in rural areas. If a Vet is the bread winner of the family and has insurance to cover the family (of course he is IN the family) - why wouldn't the service that he is PAYING for cover him. Vets should be able to use both - whatever one doesn't cover the other does. It just makes sense to me. I didn't know that private insurances wouldn't cover Vets. That's what shameful. I agree. NO one should be rejected.

Maybe so... However, these vets beg to differ:

http://iava.org/sites/default/files/2009 VSO Letter to President Obama SC 022709 Final.pdf

February 27, 2009
The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, DC
Dear President Obama:
On behalf of the millions of veterans represented by the veterans and military service organizations that have joined our effort, we write to express our serious concerns about a policy proposal that has been discussed this week in conjunction with the release of your first budget. We have been told that your Administration may be considering a proposal that would allow the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system to bill a veteran’s insurance for the care and treatment of a disability or injury that was determined to have been incurred in or the result of the veteran’s honorable military service to our country. Such a consideration is wholly unacceptable and a total abrogation of our government’s moral and legal responsibility to the men and women who have sacrificed so much for our freedoms.
As you know, the mission of the VA is “To care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan.” Similarly, the VA emphasizes that it will “provide veterans the world-class benefits and services they have earned—and to do so by adhering to the highest standards of compassion, commitment, excellence, professionalism, integrity, accountability, and stewardship.” Unfortunately, the proposal to bill veterans for the care of their service-connected disabilities ignores the most important aspect of this vision—that their care has been earned.
This proposal ignores the solemn obligation that this country has to care for those men and women who have served this country with distinction and were left with the wounds and scars of that service. The blood spilled in service for this nation is the premium that service-connected veterans have paid for their earned care.
We understand and accept that the VA bills third-party insurers of veterans who are treated for non-service connected conditions. However, we cannot and would not agree to any proposal that would expand this concept any further. There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran’s personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties this country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable. If in fact your Administration is considering this proposal, we would like to meet with you, as well as VA Secretary Eric Shinseki and Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Director Peter Orzag, to discuss this further.
We strongly urge your Administration to drop consideration of any proposal to bill third-party insurers for veterans’ service-connected conditions. We appreciate your continued emphasis on caring for the men and women who have served in defense of this country, as evidenced by the significant increase provided for VA programs in your FY 2010 budget submission. You can reaffirm this commitment by not allowing such a proposal to be carried forward. We stand ready to work with you, Secretary Shinseki, OMB Director Orzag, and others in your Administration to ensure that appropriate care and benefits are provided to those who have earned and deserve it.

The American Legion
1608 K Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 861-2700
www.legion.org
AMVETS (American Veterans)
4647 Forbes Blvd.
Lanham, MD 20706
(301) 459-9600
www.amvets.org
Blinded Veterans Association
477 H Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 371-8880
www.bva.org
Disabled American Veterans
807 Maine Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20024
(202) 554-3501
www.dav.org
Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America
308 Massachusetts Ave NE
Washington, DC 20002
(202) 544-7692
www.iava.org
Jewish War Veterans of the USA
1811 R Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 265-6280
www.jwv.org
Military Officers Association of America
201 N. Washington Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
(703) 549-2311
www.moaa.org
Military Order of the Purple Heart
of the U.S.A., Inc.
5413-B Backlick Road
Springfield, VA 22151
(703) 642-5360
www.purpleheart.org
Paralyzed Veterans of America
801 18th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 872-1300
www.pva.org
Veterans of Foreign Wars
of the United States
200 Maryland Avenue, N.E.
Washington, DC 20002
(202) 543-2239
www.vfw.org
Vietnam Veterans of America, Inc.
8605 Cameron Street, Suite 400
Silver Spring, MD 20910
(301) 585-4000
www.vva.org



KennyD
 
The administration isn't calling for the wounded vets to pay the costs, just their insurance companies if they happen to have private insurance.

Why in the world should a veteran be responsible for paying for his own medical care for wounds recieved fighting a war for his or her country, private insurance or not. It's not like they hurt themselves around the house. It's not theirs nor their insurance providers responsiblity, it's the government who put them into the situation in the first place. This whole plan boggles the mind and make me furious. The President needs to find his money somewhere else.
 
If I was a veteran, I'd be using my private insurance and getting better quality treatment someplace other than a veteran's hospital or clinic. The local Veteran's clinic missed my father's lung cancer-he was coughing up blood. They gave him an antibiotic. They also misdiagnosed my uncle's heart condition. Both men thought that their veteran status would get them good treatment. Riiiiiight! They are now closed. I drive by every day and salute the building with the all american bird. My advice to veterans is to go elsewhere for medical treatment if you can.
 
First I hear of this "plan".

And if it indeed does force Veterans to pay for medical that is a result of an injury suffered while in the Military, IT IS wrong.


I can see a VETERAN leaving the Military and working for a company with great benefits that would provide better care than any available from the VA. But there should be exemptions in the plan to insure that no Veteran would be forced to pay out of pocket for any Military related medical expenses.


It does indeed go both ways though, I am sure that the VA has provided care for plenty of non-military related illnesses and injuries. If there are any third party insurers in those cases, I would demand that they reimburse the VA.
 
My family makes $50k/year. We get by. We pay $500/mo for insurance- health/dental/vision/life. We can't afford the copays for some things so we suffer and get by somehow. If our rates increase we will have to drop it all. We keep paying for it because a major thing might happen. (I've had a few)

Honestly I'm lost. An extra $6k a yr would be nice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom