How People Voted
86% For, 14% Against
152 votes cast
Take Action
 |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
 |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Organize | |
|
Start A Petition |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
S. 546, The Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2009 (30 comments ↓)
- This item is from the 111th Congress (2009-2010) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
S. 546 would amend title 10, United States Code, to permit certain retired members of the uniformed services who have a service-connected disability to receive both disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs for their disability and either retired pay by reason of their years of military service of Combat-Related Special Compensation.
()
[26 views]
Cost per :
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Retired In Jacksonville
March 13, 2009, 8:01pm (report abuse)Finally all retired disabled veterans will be able to receive concurrent receipt of retirement and disability pay. What a blow to the proponents of combat related injury only special category folks who view themselves as more worthy of compensation. Will definately hurt them to see non combat service connected folks who retired from the service receiving concurrent receipt. You have to hand it to Senator Reid who is a true advocate for veterans both retired and not retired. This bill has been a long time overdue, and only could come about by getting Dr. Chu out of the pentagon, and a real president who cares about veterans. Obama promised at the VFW speeches he have prior to being elected that he would end the veterans disability tax. This could not have been accomplished without true champions like Senator Reid. This would have happened earlier if the veteran organizations had not bought the logic of the worthy and not worthy classes of veterans receiving benefits.
J Cripps
March 16, 2009, 11:31am (report abuse)Whoa there. Reid has introduced this same bill before and, even though he was the Senate leader, it went nowhere. Lighten up on the political rhetoric and pay attention to what is happening.
SGM ROB
March 27, 2009, 3:56pm (report abuse)GET R DONE HARRY
Chuck Via
March 30, 2009, 8:16pm (report abuse)I retired August 1988 and I have sent many letters and e-mails in support of this inequity. Its about time that we get what we deserve.
CSM, Ret, Member American Disabled Veterans and MOPH.
THANK YOU SENATOR REID
Rick C
April 8, 2009, 5:35pm (report abuse)I too am a retired, disabled vet, July 1988. BUT because my disabilities are ONLY (??) 40 percent I am taxed currently $601 a month to pay my own disability. In 2004 they attempted to remedy this but only succeeded in creating a higher class of retirees - those rated at %50 or more are getting concurrent receipt, albeit phased in a bit at a time. Politics aside - Republicans and the vet's organizations really don't give a damn about us or this would have been resolved a long time ago. If I was a federal civil service retiree this would not be happening.
I might be against the Honorable Mr. Reid on a lot of things, but when it comes to honor and duty - I have to side with the Senator from Nevada.
Let's pray it goes away by the end of the year.
Rick C
Siox Falls, Sd
JOHN PETTY
April 10, 2009, 9:15pm (report abuse)I Too, have sent many letters regarding this inequity. My sincere thanks to you again Senator Reid. You are one of a few that have an interest in the veterans. Thanks again.
B G Brown
April 15, 2009, 5:17pm (report abuse)And we continue to wait...last action 3/9/09. Next action??? I'll see if it gets passed before giving kudos to Senator Reid
Herman Ackley SFC Ret
April 23, 2009, 12:15pm (report abuse)I also retired in 1988, am 40% disabled, and hope to live long enough to see this inequity fixed. Senator Reid 'Git R Done'
Bruce Youngbluth
April 23, 2009, 1:02pm (report abuse)Let's stay on top of this and get the word out to all the veterans groups. This has been on the books for years, the same bill in both the Senate and the House (H.R. 303,333,811) and never makes it to the floor for a vote. We all know our courts are tied up with litigation because the USFSPA and VA disability in divorce cases. If you want to know why this has not passed, ask the ABA and follow the money.
JrGil
(logged-in user) May 1, 2009, 1:30pm (report abuse)With the reintroduction of this bill several times over the past decade, nothing ever comes out of the committees and subcommittees.I have been sending letters to the Congressional members in the state of Florida at least twice a week. I recommend that all retirees contact their Congressional members and request that this be pushed. In the Senate the bill has 31 cosponsors and in the House only 60. Where are the other 68 Senators and 350 or so in the House? If we stand together and push this fact not only with Congress but also the White House we can get this accomplished. I agree that the Veterans Organizations have dropped the ball after the 50% or higher received the compensation. That explains where all Vets stand when it comes to the Veteran Organizations and Congressional members.
JrY
Jay Seeley QMCS(SS) ret
May 1, 2009, 9:51pm (report abuse)I have no faith at all in our distinguished members of Congress. This bill has been introduced several times in the last few years in one form or another. It is referred to the Committee on Armed Services and never heard from again.
Terry C
May 7, 2009, 10:52pm (report abuse)Harry Reid is an honorable man with regards to this issue, but he has introduced this same legislation every year (a similar bill is introduced every year in the house). They always have tons of supporters, but they never make it out of committee. It's Politically correct to be on record as being pro-veteran, but the hard work of actually getting the legislation passed is another matter entirely. I for one am not holding my breath on this one. I'll probably never not have to pay for my own disability.
c3ccc
June 29, 2009, 8:30pm (report abuse)I was disabled and retired in 1987 with 100%. it was either a greater sum of non taxable dollars or a military retirement which was taxed and a lot less. I spent too many years in the service to just forget about what I lost and could have made. Its nice to see another attempt
retired 87
July 5, 2009, 4:18pm (report abuse)If America can bail out banks and the stock market,which is required by their greed and stupidity.
America can pay this far lesser amount to Americans that truly have earned such an addition.
John Wood
July 6, 2009, 10:15pm (report abuse)I am proud to say Sen. Nelson from Florida supports this bill, waht about the rest from FL/GA, we are not happy here as vets with your lack of support! Can anyone give an update on where this stands in the Senate Arned Forces Comm.?
Denny Rushing
July 23, 2009, 3:23pm (report abuse)I am 90% disabled so when can I expect them to do away with my CRDP so I can collect my military retirement and my VA disability. 2010?
MSG Ray Manzano USA retired
July 24, 2009, 7:12pm (report abuse)I’ve been in the Army from 1972 to 2007. I was medically discharge at 30% with 10.5 years active and the rest in reserve time. I’m VA rated at 70% now. So my retirement check from the Army is about $1500.00 a month but after they take out for SBP and the VA I get $17.00 for retirement. If I had retired from some where else I’d get my VA disability check and a full retirement check. I think it’s outrageous that I have to pay for my own disability. Why are all my years of service to my country worth only $17.00. We earned and deserve our retirement why are we penalized. I don't get CRDP or CRSC.
Wiser In Jacksonville
July 24, 2009, 8:50pm (report abuse)Senate Senator Reid did not even get his amendment for Chapter 61 retirees included in the 2010 NDAA. Reid talks about the issue of concurrent receipt each year just so he can get the publicity points for doing so. It gives the appearance that he really supports concurrent receipt. In truth letters, calls, to his office are ignored on the issue of concurrent receipt. With a Democratic President, House and Senate controlled by Democrats, they ignore the issue of concurrent receipt. When Republicans were in control they used the issue as a device to go against the Democrats who supported the issue. Democrats even had a discharge petition on the issue for HR 333. No discharge petition this year. In the end the Republicans are now strong proponents of concurrent receipt, now trying to get the issue passed, being stalled by the Democrats, just as the Republicans stalled the Democrats in the past. Concurrent receipt will never be passed for the any remaining group. Will not happen.
SFC WILLIAM E FAIR
July 31, 2009, 6:47pm (report abuse)i JUST RECEIVED A LETTER TODAY FROM SENATOR BURR IN nc SAYING HE SUPPORTS s543 retire pay and restoration act but all they do is talk and do nothing. i had 19 1/2 yrs 6 months 18 days active duty with a service connected rateing from the ARMY AT 80% AND 100 FROM va RATEDED AT IU BUT AM NOT ELIGIBLE FOR CRDP OR CRSC SO MY INJURES DON'T COUNT AT ALL FOR THE SERVICE I GAVE.
WeTheSheeple
August 1, 2009, 12:25pm (report abuse)Unfortunately part of the problem is the VA rating way too many people as 10%, 20%, or 30% disabled for very minor problems, often times for non-service related problems (acne, sports injuries, etc).
I worked as medical liaison in the compensation office at the VA my last 3 years on active duty and personally witnessed the over-generous rating system.
This takes nothing away from all those with legitimate service-related disability, but it does help explain why it's hard to pass a bill to cover those with less than 50% disability- too much cost and too many abuses of the system.
SSG Mathis AR ARNG Ret
August 12, 2009, 10:15pm (report abuse)What I would like to see is the Guard and Reserve's to be treated the same as Active duty personal. I am eligiable for CRSC but due to the fact I was in the ARNG I recieve nothing.
Lets all hope that some day we all are treated equal
jose
August 16, 2009, 1:09am (report abuse)ARMY retired me in 2004 after 9 years of service (active and reserves) total of 5 active. I am 70% disable, do i get both checks?
SSG Mathis AR ARNG Ret
September 18, 2009, 10:14am (report abuse)@ jose no you will receive only the higher of the 2 be it VA or Army. And with CRSC at the rank of E6 with 5 active and 70% you would recieve about $8.00 a month
SSG Mathis AR ARNG Ret
September 18, 2009, 10:17am (report abuse)Also Jose I believe that you were retired before the change took effect.
E4 Ooley USN
November 17, 2009, 1:58am (report abuse)I was Temp Early Retirement.in 1973 and Fully Retired in 1978 after 3 years of active duty. Why am I not eligible
for CRSC? I am rated 100% IU but could be 100% service connected (long story) DAV suggested I stay at IU. I was Retired from Navy at 50% before being Temp Early Retirement.
bILL williams
December 17, 2009, 12:44pm (report abuse)WHAT IS PHONY ON ALL THE BILLS SO IS THE YEARS OF SERVICE PART THE ONLY WHY TO GET FULL RETIREMENT PAY AND FULL DISABILITY IS BY SERVING FOR 30 YEARS WAKE UP
Rick Ouellette
January 13, 2010, 1:48pm (report abuse)I retired in 1971 after serving 22yrs in the USAF. In 1951 I was exposed to Ioinized Radiation. In 2007, I lost my left kidney to cancer. In 2009, a tumor in the right kidney was frozen. The VA recently awarded me 40% disability and I too am paying for my own disability. Congress finds money for extensive travel and to fund Pork Projects but they can't seem to find any for veterans. They will tax you and I to provide health care for millions of illegals and the under-priveleged but exert very little effort to ensure fair treatment of military retirees with disabilities. I probably will not see any change in my lifetime but hopefully you younger vets will get some relief at some point.
Retired in Jacksonville
February 13, 2010, 11:12am (report abuse)The Obama Administration says it would take 45 billion to cover veterans over twenty years in the under 50% range. The VDBC report says the cost would be 19.26 billion. A report from the CBO says it would take 29 billion to cover Chapter 61 folks, and the 450,000 retired veterans under 50% disabled who are currently subjected to the veterans disability tax. Does anyone wonder where the difference in figures comes from? The answer lies in this administration finding itself in difficult situation having made a campaign promise to end the disabled veterans tax. The administration chose to overstate the cost of concurrent receipt to 45 billion, and then state they would help chapter 61 retirees, which were not even previously considered, because it only cost 5.4 billion. Now the administration figures they can claim that the kept their promise, when all thinking folks know it is just political game, calculated to achieve the maximum effect of giving the appearance of supporting vets.
Robert W. Gately, YNCS, Ret. USN
April 30, 2010, 6:07pm (report abuse)No where in this comments does it question the fact that they Tax the re-troactive of 100% disabilities. This means a large chunk of monies taken out of the payment. Their argument is that the VA is not paying the retroactive monies but is coming from DFAS and therefore taxable. Other laws state that disability monies are not taxable. Am I correct is stating this facts? I was hit with withholding TAX of over $16,000. and this comes out of one years tax due. WOW. Where do I start in trying to correct this injustice? All at once my income is more that I got paid in ten years of Active Duty.
weavo4
May 13, 2010, 8:26pm (report abuse)Robert, go to this link and they should have an answer to your question...
http://vets.yuku.com/forums/82/t/Retired-Military-Vets-Disability-Tax-Concurrent-Receipt.html