Veterans benefits could increase

A compromise would mean full disability and retirement pay at the same time for some retirees.

WASHINGTON - President Bush and Republicans in Congress are working on a proposed $30-billion compromise that over the next decade would provide full retirement benefits to about half the military veterans who also receive disability pay.

While the deal falls short of what veterans groups want, it would go a long way toward eliminating a perennial complaint of retired disabled veterans, whose retirement pay is automatically trimmed to offset the disability payments they receive from the government.

Several members of Congress said the administration appears to favor a proposal that would provide:

Full retirement benefits, beginning Jan. 1, to military retirees with 20 or more years service who have combat-related disabilities.

Full retirement benefits, phased-in over a period of years, beginning Jan. 1, for retirees who are at least 50 percent disabled, meaning they're moderately or severely disabled.

Equal treatment for retirees of the Reserve and National Guard.

A presidential commission appointed in 2004 to study possible changes in disability pay for future retirees.

Bob Manhan, Veterans of Foreign Wars director of national security and foreign affairs, described the proposal as "a significant positive step forward." But he said the VFW and other veterans groups are still seeking full retirement pay for all disabled veterans.

The proposed GOP compromise would benefit only about half of the 700,000 veterans who receive both disability and retirement pay.

If adopted, the proposal would be a victory for Rep. Michael Bilirakis, R-Tarpon Springs, a leading advocate of the issue, known as "concurrent receipt," for the past two decades. Bilirakis said he is optimistic the issue can be resolved before Congress adjourns around the end of this month.

But many Democrats oppose the compromise.

"Veterans ought to get what they are due, and that's a full offset," declared Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democrat and a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "What's being talked about is throwing them a bone."

Asked if he would vote for the proposal, Nelson said he would defer to the wishes of veterans groups.

The issue of concurrent receipt is one of the last unresolved elements of the 2004 defense authorization bill, currently in the hands of a House-Senate conference committee.

Although veterans have sought concurrent receipt since it was first outlawed by Congress more than a century ago, it has gained momentum this year as a result of the war in Iraq and increased pressure from Democrats.

A so-called "discharge petition" signed by two Republicans and 201 Democrats in the House has brought the issue to the forefront. The discharge petition, which can be signed up until adjournment, would automatically bring the issue to a House floor vote with 218 signatures. It has been part of a strategy by Democrats to win the political support of veterans, traditionally a Republican constituency.

Democrats seized the issue recently after the White House put forward a compromise that veterans groups rejected. While offering full retirement pay to all disabled veterans, the controversial proposal would have completely revised the criteria for disability.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., reportedly is very angry that Democrats told members of the veterans groups about the original White House proposal, creating a firestorm of protest. As a result, Warner has not embraced the latest compromise proposal.

Last year, Warner was the architect of a program of special compensation for about 35,000 disabled retirees who earned Purple Hearts for war wounds or who have service-related disabilities of 60 percent or more. The latest proposal would eclipse that program.

Warner's staff did not respond to a request for comment.

Bilirakis said he was "a little disappointed" that Warner has not endorsed the new compromise proposal. "In general," he said, "Sen. Warner has always been supportive of concurrent receipt."

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said earlier this year that he would advise the president to veto concurrent receipt if it passes Congress, because it is too expensive. Bilirakis' original bill would have cost an estimated $58-billion over 10 years.

Although the House has never voted on Bilirakis' concurrent receipt bill, the Senate in August adopted a similar measure offered by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. In the House, it was Rep. Jim Marshall, D-Ga., himself a disabled veteran, who began collecting signatures on the discharge petition.

Rep. Jim Davis, D-Tampa, was among the signers of the discharge petition; but Republicans Bilirakis, Ginny Brown-Waite of Brooksville and C.W. Bill Young of Largo were not.

© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times 490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 Contact the Times | Privacy Policy Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright