Kryptonite
CNN is reporting that "Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama administration is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance."
Senators like Patty Murray have already said there's no way the proposal would win approval in Congress. But I'm hard-pressed to understand why the administration is considering this. It's a fairly basic tenet that if people get themselves hurt protecting our country, it's on the government to take care of that hurt. The CNN story gives very few details on why the administration is considering this, other than Shinseki's confirmation that it's under discussion. Perhaps this is part and parcel of a larger health care reorganization? Perhaps there will be a reorganization of how TRICARE is set up and paid for? None of this is clear.
But it's bad optics. Veterans' benefits are--and probably should be--a political third rail. But at absolute minimum, it would seem that if Shinseki's going to confirm this is under discussion, a good explanation of the change and the rationale behind it should be part and parcel of that confirmation.
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Staff Correspondent Alyssa Rosenberg takes a look at news affecting the management and operations of the massive federal bureaucracy.
will we see an end to federal disability retirement? making cs apply for Social Security and have to live on that like every other citizen
dan ketter Posted Wednesday, March 11, 2009 11:53 AMthere he goes again. The silly rants of a wannabe fed.
Wise Old Owl Posted Wednesday, March 11, 2009 4:44 PMThe VA already does this. I have health insurance and every visit to a VA facility or perscription I get from the VA, they also bill my health insurance. This has been a change in the past two years it seems.
disabled vet Posted Thursday, March 12, 2009 8:39 AMI am not sure I have a problem with the proposal. It is not denying vets VA health care coverage for service connected medical care, it is saying that if the vet has private health care insurance, the private insurance pays. I do not see the insurance companies denying coverage to vets. If I am wrong, and coverage is denied, then the policy must go. But what is most likely to happen is that the private health care companies will simply exclude from coverage costs for service connected medical care, and we will be back where we started.
wallyp Posted Thursday, March 12, 2009 4:09 PMI am surprised at ketter's post. He, of all the people who write here, should know that Social Security was never intended to be what what citizens "have to live on," and that it was always intended to be a supplement to retirement income such as, let me see, a CSRS pension.
wallyp Posted Thursday, March 12, 2009 4:12 PMWhy would any of Ketters comments suprise youwallyp? The man's a civil servant hating jerk and you should know that by know. If someone at govexc.com said "God is Great" Ketter would somehow find a way to post something negative about civil servants to it.
W D Jackson Posted Thursday, March 12, 2009 10:49 PMI am surprised at his post because it is inconsistent with the drivel he has written in the past.
wallyp Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:38 AM