Who pays for war wounds?

Who pays for war wounds?

There are 181 comments on the www.thenewstribune.com story from Mar 17, 2009, titled Who pays for war wounds? . In it, www.thenewstribune.com reports that:

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is considering making veterans use private insurance to pay for treatment of combat and service-related injuries.

The plan would be an about-face on what veterans believe is a longstanding pledge to pay for health care costs that result from their military service.

But in a White House meeting Monday, veterans groups apparently failed to persuade President Barack Obama to take the plan off the table.

“Veterans of all generations agree that this proposal is bad for the country and bad for veterans,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “If the president and the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) want to cut costs, they can start at AIG, not the VA.”

Under current policy, veterans are responsible for health care costs that are unrelated to their military service. Exceptions in some cases can be made for veterans without private insurance or who are 100 percent disabled.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.thenewstribune.com.

First Prev
of 10
Next Last

“VICTORY is Mine”

Since: Sep 07

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#1 Mar 17, 2009
I thought this was from the onion or something. I can not believe this at all. There has to be an agenda here with this and forcing govt healthcare down our throats.

Since: Jul 07

United States

#2 Mar 17, 2009
VA care is government health care dipshit. The point of this is the passing on to private health care instead of keeping the obligations the government has to veterans. If you have the responsibility to make war then you have the responsibility to care for it's victims. This bullshit would raise all healthcare costs in society to the point no one could afford it and the care would suffer as a result. We should instead be beefing up our VA system and finally treat vets with the dignity and care they deserve. There is a convoluted logic going on here that like the article said - will be dead on arrival. America wake up.
Eleanor

Vernon Hills, IL

#3 Mar 17, 2009
What are the chances of obtaining AFFORDABLE private health insurance for a PRE-EXISTING war injury? Most insurance companies make PRE-EXISTING conditions un-insurable or grossly expensive.

FTR

“Community Liar-in-Chief”

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#4 Mar 17, 2009
Obama should start by cutting the healthcare benefits of the politicians!!

"U.S. Congress. Representatives and Senators alike receive some of the best health care benefits in the country, much of it paid for with taxpayer dollars."

I wonder how many of these men and women's health issues are military service connected? Yeah, right!!!!
Plain Jane

Oakland, CA

#5 Mar 17, 2009
Obviously if they didn't have private insurance to cover their service connected injuries then VA would cover it. This is a matter of the government paying for services which could be provided by private health care insurance. Many people voluntarily use their private insurance already because they believe the standard of care is better in the private sector than at VA. If those who have private insurance billed their private insurance rather than seeking treatment through VA it would save a great deal of money and provide better care to those whose only option is VA. Although I have to agree with Wyojake, it's DOA if only because the private insurance companies will lobby against it.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#6 Mar 17, 2009
Depends on the angle...if private insurance is willing cover pre-existing veterans medical conditions without premiums then this would be patriotic and good thing that would bring synergy to soldiers going back to work in the civilian world...but the soldier should all ways be able to rely on VA benefits as a safety net. If Obama plans to go around taking away safety nets this will start a chain reaction of failure and more in likely would ping the party to a point citizens will lose faith leading to a surge of alternative party revolution…In other words both GOP and DEM’s would get the heave hoe in time to come…which there has been many rumors of starting a revolution. Not a time to play mickey mouse with politics or the economy.

“Down in the Bayou”

Since: Apr 08

Vancleave Mississippi

#7 Mar 17, 2009
Veterans fulfilled their contract to the people of the United States...the United States MUST fulfill their contract to the veterans...nuff said.
Miyamoto Musashi

Leitchfield, KY

#8 Mar 17, 2009
wyojake wrote:
VA care is government health care dipshit. The point of this is the passing on to private health care instead of keeping the obligations the government has to veterans. If you have the responsibility to make war then you have the responsibility to care for it's victims. This bullshit would raise all healthcare costs in society to the point no one could afford it and the care would suffer as a result. We should instead be beefing up our VA system and finally treat vets with the dignity and care they deserve. There is a convoluted logic going on here that like the article said - will be dead on arrival. America wake up.
You may have misunderstood his implication...

Historically, commie slug Democrats propose (or "keep on the table") matters that are so incredibly sickening and outrageous, that the citizenry are sleazed into allowing something (like universal health care), which is only slightly less disagreeable.

Watch out, Jake, your particular extended, milked PTSD may end up seeing communists for what they are and realize why we actually fought for freedom in Vietnam.
Really

Joliet, IL

#9 Mar 17, 2009
This is very disturbing, and I am not sure HOW this can possibly be a good thing!!! I think it is shameful to even think about doing this!! We need to take better care of our veterans.

“It's 420 here.”

Since: Jun 07

cold comfort farm

#10 Mar 17, 2009
What about the unforseen wounds (Agent Orange, Depleted Uranium weaponry)? The government and military knew the consequences. They send good folks into battle and years later those brave souls suffer and in many cases their families are affected with horrific illnesses into the next generation.
Shame on Obama and all the pols!

“"I'm A Great American!"”

Since: Sep 08

Obama Nation! USA! USA!

#11 Mar 17, 2009
And just why should big insurance companies have a free ride at the VA? At the expense of taxpayers?

Coordination of benefits among insurers happens every day when both spouses have coverage. Of course the VA will carry the freight when there's no other coverage.

If I worked for an insurance company I would oppose this, and try to frame it as bad for veterans. But I'm a taxpayer. To me, it looks good.

“VICTORY is Mine”

Since: Sep 07

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#12 Mar 17, 2009
wyojake wrote:
VA care is government health care dipshit. The point of this is the passing on to private health care instead of keeping the obligations the government has to veterans. If you have the responsibility to make war then you have the responsibility to care for it's victims. This bullshit would raise all healthcare costs in society to the point no one could afford it and the care would suffer as a result. We should instead be beefing up our VA system and finally treat vets with the dignity and care they deserve. There is a convoluted logic going on here that like the article said - will be dead on arrival. America wake up.
If you were responding to than you are confused. Though I normally diagree with you I think we are on the same page on this one.
My beleif is the Military needs to provide Vet of wars and Members that retire from the service with continued health care. Even if it is not a war wound many that retire out end up with some kind of service related long term injury. A good example is Airbourne, many have leg and back issues. What I didn't understand is Obama wants to nationlize health care for the average American but put the military care in the private sector. What I think is Obama figures if there Nationlized health care we will have no need for the VA.
By the way yoo do know that members of the National Guard and Reserves only have military health benifits while on Active Duty. As soon as they go back to reserve status they lose it in 90 days. Now if you read the Congresional reports on Tricare they tried a few times to give health care to all militay members and can not afford it. If we can't even offer ALL of our Armed Forces health care and make it work how can we have a Nationalized Health Plan?
http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs//d...

Since: Feb 09

Nashville, TN

#13 Mar 17, 2009
This is ridiculous! Our war veterns should have their injuries from serving covered - no question.

I could see them saying use private insurance for flu, skin cancer at 70, whatever, completely unrelated. I don't necessarily agree, but I can see that being a consideration. But for war related injuries? Wow. It takes a real piece of work to come up with that one. Hmm, wonder if companies in the private sector can use this in regards to workers comp claims? Boils down to the same thing.

I'm absolutely disgusted that this would even be a consideration.
Miyamoto Musashi

Leitchfield, KY

#14 Mar 17, 2009
Plain Jane wrote:
Obviously if they didn't have private insurance to cover their service connected injuries then VA would cover it. This is a matter of the government paying for services which could be provided by private health care insurance. Many people voluntarily use their private insurance already because they believe the standard of care is better in the private sector than at VA. If those who have private insurance billed their private insurance rather than seeking treatment through VA it would save a great deal of money and provide better care to those whose only option is VA. Although I have to agree with Wyojake, it's DOA if only because the private insurance companies will lobby against it.
Problem is... With this end run for universal health nutz, we'll have wheelchair bound and other extremely war affected Veterans waiting in bureaucratic lines for approval to wait in another line for months to get care. Or, with Obama's attitude toward life from inception to euthanazia, we'll have managed systems of limiting, or simply denying care for the older Vets, when they happen to become a financial burden. The liberal views infecting our civil service guaranteed votes for slug commies have already applied that attitude toward the mentally ill.
Plain Jane

Oakland, CA

#15 Mar 17, 2009
Pudintain wrote:
<quoted text>If you were responding to than you are confused. Though I normally diagree with you I think we are on the same page on this one.
My beleif is the Military needs to provide Vet of wars and Members that retire from the service with continued health care. Even if it is not a war wound many that retire out end up with some kind of service related long term injury. A good example is Airbourne, many have leg and back issues. What I didn't understand is Obama wants to nationlize health care for the average American but put the military care in the private sector. What I think is Obama figures if there Nationlized health care we will have no need for the VA.
By the way yoo do know that members of the National Guard and Reserves only have military health benifits while on Active Duty. As soon as they go back to reserve status they lose it in 90 days. Now if you read the Congresional reports on Tricare they tried a few times to give health care to all militay members and can not afford it. If we can't even offer ALL of our Armed Forces health care and make it work how can we have a Nationalized Health Plan?
http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs//d...
Funny that you support socialized medicine for veterans even for non service related conditions but not for the rest of us. Why would anyone want socialized medicine if it is so much worse than private care? Are veterans not worthy of the best care available or are you admitting that socialized medicine is just as good if not better than private?
Plain Jane

Oakland, CA

#16 Mar 17, 2009
Pudintain wrote:
<quoted text>If you were responding to than you are confused. Though I normally diagree with you I think we are on the same page on this one.
My beleif is the Military needs to provide Vet of wars and Members that retire from the service with continued health care. Even if it is not a war wound many that retire out end up with some kind of service related long term injury. A good example is Airbourne, many have leg and back issues. What I didn't understand is Obama wants to nationlize health care for the average American but put the military care in the private sector. What I think is Obama figures if there Nationlized health care we will have no need for the VA.
By the way yoo do know that members of the National Guard and Reserves only have military health benifits while on Active Duty. As soon as they go back to reserve status they lose it in 90 days. Now if you read the Congresional reports on Tricare they tried a few times to give health care to all militay members and can not afford it. If we can't even offer ALL of our Armed Forces health care and make it work how can we have a Nationalized Health Plan?
http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs//d...
The point you are missing, probably deliberately, is that if we had nationalized health care it would cover everyone, from veterans to children, workman's compensation cases, auto accidents, everything. There would be no such thing as denial for previously existing conditions. If we put all the money we currently spend on health care into one system we would have more than enough as is proven by every country that already has nationalized health care for a little over half what we spend per capita now and they achieve better results.
opinions

San Diego, CA

#17 Mar 17, 2009
Obama is president now. The people voted for him because they wanted change. Obama is putting changes in place. He is now the leader of the free world so he is free to do what he wants.

“Down in the Bayou”

Since: Apr 08

Vancleave Mississippi

#18 Mar 17, 2009
opinions wrote:
Obama is president now. The people voted for him because they wanted change. Obama is putting changes in place. He is now the leader of the free world so he is free to do what he wants.
TOO FUNNY...He is President Obama..not "King" Obama...he is free to do what we the people want..

“Common Sense Has Left America”

Since: Oct 07

Maryville, TN

#19 Mar 17, 2009
This proves that Obama hates the military. He would send these boys into combat and if they get injured in the line of duty they have to have their private insurance pay for the care of the injury. This is an outrage, Obama is STUPID and SELF SERVING. The thought of a solider having to take care of himself after an injury is a subhuman thinking. Any solider has more honor and respect than Obama. I did not like Obama from the start but I was willing to give him a chance. After Cap and Trade, Carbon Tax, and a 3.2 Trillion budget this was the cherry on the top. This insane government is out of control.
Miyamoto Musashi

Leitchfield, KY

#20 Mar 17, 2009
PooPoo Platter wrote:
And just why should big insurance companies have a free ride at the VA? At the expense of taxpayers?
Coordination of benefits among insurers happens every day when both spouses have coverage. Of course the VA will carry the freight when there's no other coverage.
If I worked for an insurance company I would oppose this, and try to frame it as bad for veterans. But I'm a taxpayer. To me, it looks good.
Perhaps you're just not lucky enough to have a mentally ill family member's premature death managed by a state sponsored care program to balance their books. Pay attention to Los Angeles County (alone, not to mention the myriad of similar bergs) Conservator care for the aging mentally ill and how the District Attorneys, Attorney Generals, local and State Police, nor the Coroner's Office ever find the courage to charge the (mis)attending Conservator with murder in the third degree. Do you actually think it won't be more prevalent with Vets needing nursing home care? Misapplied faith in a repeatedly shown foulness of human character is only made worse by a misapplied faith in the Communist Character, which view you as dispensable when THEY see fit.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

First Hill Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Seattle Old Spaghetti Factory closing in Decemb... Oct '16 Dawn 1
Review: I Love Kickboxing - Kirkland (Dec '15) Oct '16 Go Blue Forever 21
Saving!!! Discounted gift cards from various st... Oct '16 zyklon B giftgas 2
Mercer Island Music Emporium (Oct '12) Oct '16 zipperhead 16
News Continue reading this blog post (Mar '16) Mar '16 Elizabeth 3
News West Seattle Art Walk tonight! And more for the... (Mar '16) Mar '16 Elizabeth 1
News West Seattle Saturday: 14 possibilities, plus V... (Mar '16) Mar '16 Gingerich 1

First Hill Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

First Hill Mortgages