Veto Threat: Administration Wants to Hike Healthcare Fees for Military

[vfpreacher]

The audacity of the Obama administration never ceases to amaze. On Friday, they threatened to veto a defense appropriations bill because it, in part, does not include hikes in healthcare fees for members of the military. The House bill passed 299-120 in May. The official policy statement offers this objection:

TRICARE Fees and Co-Payments. The Administration is disappointed that the Congress did not incorporate the requested TRICARE fee initiatives into either the appropriation or authorization legislation. The Administration asks the House to reconsider the TRICARE fee proposals, which are essential for DOD to successfully address rising personnel costs. The $1.8 billion in savings are part of a carefully balanced FY 2013 Budget request.

The proposed increases in healthcare payments for members of the military members were reported by The Washington Free Beacon in February:

“The Obama administration’s proposed defense budget calls for military families and retirees to pay sharply more for their healthcare, while leaving unionized civilian defense workers’ benefits untouched. The proposal is causing a major rift within the Pentagon, according to U.S. officials. Several congressional aides suggested the move is designed to increase the enrollment in Obamacare’s state-run insurance exchanges.

The disparity in treatment between civilian and uniformed personnel is causing a backlash within the military that could undermine recruitment and retention.

The proposed increases in health care payments by service members, which must be approved by Congress, are part of the Pentagon’s $487 billion cut in spending. It seeks to save $1.8 billion from the Tricare medical system in the fiscal 2013 budget, and $12.9 billion by 2017.”

Of course, it all goes back to propping up ObamaCare…

“Administration officials told Congress that one goal of the increased fees is to force military retirees to reduce their involvement in Tricare and eventually opt out of the program in favor of alternatives established by the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.”

If the administration had their way:

"Significantly, the plan calls for increases between 30 percent to 78 percent in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. After that, the plan will impose five-year increases ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels.

According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048.

The new plan hits active duty personnel by increasing co-payments for pharmaceuticals and eliminating incentives for using generic drugs.

The changes are worrying some in the Pentagon who fear it will severely impact efforts to recruit and maintain a high-quality all-volunteer military force. Such benefits have been a key tool for recruiting qualified people and keeping them in uniform."

This just makes it abundantly clear how the administration regards those who serve this country and have already given so much.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbar...s_for_military

[ddregehr]

While I despise ObamaCare, I want to view this article objectively. I feel that we owe our military personnel a debt for defending our country, but at what cost?

I pay a bit over $13,000 a year in health insurance premiums for a family of four. Each of us has a yearly deducible of $1,000 before our insurance starts at 80/20 percent and then after $4500 more has been spent insurance is at 100% thereafter.

If a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048 a year seems unreasonable, I'll gladly switch. That would be a saving of $10,952 for my family or 84.2%.

People can bitch and moan, but this is more than a fair entitlement for someone who has sacrificed for our country. Getting an 84.2% break on health insurance from the rest of society seems fair in my opinion.

I am more than willing to see where I am wrong on this. I do appreciate our military and if I am missing something I am more than willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I don't want to screw over those who have served, but based on this article I don't see that.

[OldVetteFan]

Originally Posted by ddregehr

While I despise ObamaCare, I want to view this article objectively. I feel that we owe our military personnel a debt for defending our country, but at what cost?

I pay a bit over $13,000 a year in health insurance premiums for a family of four. Each of us has a yearly deducible of $1,000 before our insurance starts at 80/20 percent and then after $4500 more has been spent insurance is at 100% thereafter.

If a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048 a year seems unreasonable, I'll gladly switch. That would be a saving of $10,952 for my family or 84.2%.

People can bitch and moan, but this is more than a fair entitlement for someone who has sacrificed for our country. Getting an 84.2% break on health insurance from the rest of society seems fair in my opinion.

I am more than willing to see where I am wrong on this. I do appreciate our military and if I am missing something I am more than willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I don't want to screw over those who have served, but based on this article I don't see that.

I can understand and appreciate your viewpoint. I do have a couple of things I'd like to point out, though.

The first is that the agreement the retired veteran made with the government was a promise by the government to provide certain benefits at a predictable and reasonable cost. If the retired veteran is over 65, then the cost for their medical premiums is the same as the cost any retiree pays for medicare.

The Obama administration, as the article notes, is raising the cost of medical benefits for two reasons. The first is to provide some 'pain' from the veteran so they can feel good about helping knock down the deficit (we can laugh now, since we know that it really won't contribute to reducing the deficit since spending won't decrease). Secondly, the administration is attempting to increase the price enough to force the veteran to seek coverage elsewhere. I think that's the more diabolical reason, because I can just imagine this administration then pointing out that veterans like Obamacare so much that they gave up their military benefits to join it.

Another point is the stark contrast with the unionized civilian workforce. If this change in policy is such a great one, then why isn't the unionized civilian workforce being asked to do the same thing? That, too, sticks in my craw, as I see it as yet another manifestation of this administration's willingness to accommodate any union, any where, any time.

Is it reasonable to ask all members of the military and civilian workforce to contribute more to the costs of their medical benefits - yes. But I think that those increases need to be carefully considered and equally distributed across all government employees.

Additionally, given that the base pay of military volunteers is much less than the average private sector pay (and yes, I know that there are offsetting benefits), I think it's appropriate to subsidize the costs of their medical care.

Steven

[ddregehr]

I do understand your points and I can't argue with them. I do think that if you raise the rate on one set of individuals it should be equal distributed to all individuals and that should include the unionized workers. I think Obama is using this to move people to ObamaCare and this is a diabolical misuse of his power. I don't think that this will reduce the deficit one bit, because our government is out of control with its spending. You hear no arguments from me. My only point was that I don't think that raising the raises (if the care remains the same) is out of line. We must start as Americans drop our entitlement mentality and start paying our way. That INCLUDES our elected officials! It will hurt and we might lose things to enable us to start paying our debts, but if we don't we will be slaves to another country if we aren't already.

Our country is only as sovereign as we are self sufficient. When we rely on others for money, oil, and goods, we lose power and sovereignty. We can't blame any party or individual, we can only blame ourselves for letting this happen because of our selfishness and greed. The we want this now attitude has come back to bit us.

[OldVetteFan]

I agree with you -

1. This is purely political from the administration. They have no interest in protecting veterans.
2. Increasing the rates that veterans (and active duty) pay for health care is probably reasonable. However, given the paltry amount that the proposed amount raises, I think a more humane rate increase would be justified.
3. If these rates are raised, then the unionized and civilian workforce should pay the same proportional increase.

There. We solved it. Why can't the White House give a little? I'm so sick of their partisan politics and continued obfuscation and deceit. Time for a change.

Steven

[HardcoreABN]

Obama tried once already to move active duty military to a civilian style plan- only to have most of both parties rally against him. There is a reason we do not pay for health care while on active duty. The risk of injury during training is usually high. If I knew that if I was going to have to pay for injuries sustained while training, I would have to think twice about being willing to do anything.

[ddregehr]

Originally Posted by HardcoreABN

Obama tried once already to move active duty military to a civilian style plan- only to have most of both parties rally against him. There is a reason we do not pay for health care while on active duty. The risk of injury during training is usually high. If I knew that if I was going to have to pay for injuries sustained while training, I would have to think twice about being willing to do anything.

I have no problem for the US paying most of the health care for full time active duty military personnel. I do think they need to pay for family members. When it comes to retired military personnel, I think Uncle Sam needs to pick up the tab for all injuries incurred while in the military if it was military related. I think once out of the military a person needs to pay their way with their own health related issues. I am more than willing as an American citizen to cover the costs of those who put themselves in harms way!!!! Once their service is over, we need to take a balanced approach and that was where my comments were directed. I was comparing a retired colonel with a family.

[HardcoreABN]

Originally Posted by ddregehr

I have no problem for the US paying most of the health care for full time active duty military personnel. I do think they need to pay for family members. When it comes to retired military personnel, I think Uncle Sam needs to pick up the tab for all injuries incurred while in the military if it was military related. I think once out of the military a person needs to pay their way with their own health related issues. I am more than willing as an American citizen to cover the costs of those who put themselves in harms way!!!! Once their service is over, we need to take a balanced approach and that was where my comments were directed. I was comparing a retired colonel with a family.

as long as that is part of the promise made prior to enlisting.