How People Voted
 |
 |
32% For, 68% Against
Take Action
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
S. 67, A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability rated as total to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to travel on such aircraft (9 comments ↓)
- This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
- This bill, or a similar bill, was reintroduced in the current Congress as S. 66, A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability rated as total to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to travel on such aircraft.
S. 67 would amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability rated as total to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to travel on such aircraft.
()
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Bob Mulligan
October 8, 2007, 2:24pm (report abuse)How can anyone be against this bill. Veterans who served their county and were disabled as the result and unable to retire from Active Duty should be above those who were able to serve and fully retire.
I am not sure what the US Senate or House does not get about this. I gave my commitment to honor and serve my country and I was injured by the military in doing so.
I should have full benefits and the retired and active duty personnel should honor us and support this bill.
Anyone opposed to this bill is doing it for selfish reasons.
Remember we were INJURED or completely Disabled as the result of our service.
kell
October 13, 2007, 8:31pm (report abuse)!00% DAVs should have space A priviliges. We have a hard time making it on the compensation we receive. Air travel is too expensive for most 100% DAVs .We would like to have the option of being able to fly as military retirees already do.
Hector
November 13, 2007, 12:36am (report abuse)I'm 100% disabled. I would like this come true. By the same token, someone who is really non ambulatory or has some real major problems might pose a problem in flight to the craft commander. So I think they can give it to us who are 100% but are able to at least move about. The mission otherwise might get compromised and that's what they fear.
AnElena, GuamUSA
February 2, 2008, 9:34am (report abuse)They are serving, they have served, so they are deserving for the space available travel. All the 100% percent disabled veterans and their dependents should be afforded the privelege.
Joe
June 10, 2008, 4:06am (report abuse)I am 100% totally disabled Vietnam Veteran and it's beyond me why any American would oppose such a bill, especially those in Government. Those that fought during WWII and up to the present time and are classified as 100% totally disabled should be allowed to travel by Military Aircraft as well as their dependents. She called us and we went!
God Bless America!
Gale
June 13, 2008, 12:25am (report abuse)The ROTC cadets are eligible to fly space-A as CAT VI... And they haven't even "served" as have the disabled veterans (some of whom served and were injured in combat). Disabled veterans have EARNED the priviledge of utilizing military aircraft over young cadets(IMHO). How can anyone justify denying DAVs the right to take advantage of these flights? If the concern for their disabilities during flight is of such importance, then it would need to apply to ALL Space-A passengers whom may be disabled (including elderly/disabled retirees, disabled children and disabled spouses of military members and retirees). The only ones who are discriminated against are the ones who sacrificed their bodies in service.
-------------------
Beatty
June 25, 2008, 3:27pm (report abuse)Why can,t every one see what,S THE PROBLEM/ I am 100% service conmnected,. I GET A INCOME E I DISABLITY, Most people in congress think that is more than what i should get.. like free insurance ect; I am 73 now and i have giveing up any hope that congress will change. Now,, i have a grand doughter in the navy,,, God help her when she gets out,,
disabled vet also
August 17, 2008, 10:44pm (report abuse)why cant congress agree on disabled vets fly space a who is lining your pockets bill is stalled make it pass we elected officals to do want people voice of people for the prople also we can vote yall out office
Charlie
September 2, 2008, 1:41pm (report abuse)disabled vet also,
You may think this is a good idea, but don't presume to say you speak as "voice of people. I personally do not think you earned the benefit outlined in the bill. And it is certainly a fantasy for you to think you and your compatriots have the power to vote someone in or out of office. Most of you can't even put together a coherent sentance, much less organize anything like a voting block. Get over yourself and move on.